Explanation of Auburn's 4-2-5 defense

[weagl1 1,813]

That 4-2-5 defense gave up big plays which in turn gave up lots of yards and a lot of points during 2013. Our defense couldn't hold them in the final 13 seconds. Cause if had, we could have won our 2nd national championship in 3 years.To come that close and lose still gets under my skin.

No mistakes like Chris Davis taking a bad angle and running into his teammate to give FSU a 49 yd pass to put them in game winning position is the reason why we didn't hold them.

Remember, going into the fourth quarter Auburn's 4-2-5 defense held the best offense in the country to 13 points. Nick Marshall throws a crucial interception which FSU capitalized on to make the score 21-20. On the next drive the offense couldn't get into the end zone so we kicked a field goal. 24-20 with just over 4 minutes left in the game. What happens next...?? The 100 yd kick return because Jonathan Jones pulls a hamstring and Brandon King (not sure) gets out of his lane to try to cover both lanes. 27-24. Tre Mason put us back on top with a great run and with a minute left in the game and FSU needing to go 80 yds the Chris Davis mistake happens.

Now my question becomes what was wrong in the defensive scheme?

Right . Nothing that happened at the end of the game had to do with scheme. First, Parkey had been landing virtually every kick all year out the back od the end zone but for whatever reason couldn't do it against FSU. This was critical. The interception, the injury on the kickoff that they should have never been in a position to return in the first place, and the missed tackle on the long play were the critical mistakes that got them in position to make that last play. The special teams failure to cover the fake kick in the first half was another critical mistake. I thought the defensive scheme against them that night was outstanding. That game could have and should have been put away early.

[1TexasTiger 55]

Thanks for posting this. It is a simple and straightforward look at the defense and the information contained within appears to be pretty accurate. I know others have done similar and more in depth breakddowns of the defense. I think something cool would be to have this or another breakdown Pinned for quick reference. I also wouldn't mind seeing a thread where all who wants takes a stab at breaking down the AU defense are collected in to 1 place. Have it locked except for people to post their overall breakdown of the 4-2-5 (no comments like I like/hate 4-2-5). I'm sure there are competing views as to what is the goal and responsibilities for the players so I would enjoy reading the competing views. Then we regular folk can have an open thread to discuss the differences people posted and how our personel fits and who we think is most accurate based on seeing the team play. I enjoy discussing the nuances of the game during the summer when there is little else to talk about.

More on topic with this thread I just want to say that the 4-2-5 is currently my favorite D in college football. I was very excited to see us go to this when Ellis was hired. One of the reasons is this defense is built to stop spread attacks which I feel are only becoming more prevalent in college football and will continue to do so. Spread teams kill the opposition with speed and this defense is the pefect counter for that. I also love the flexibility of this defense in that it can easily shift from a run stopping D to a pass stopping D as long as you have a versatile player to fill the "star" role.

Another not so obvious advantage this defense gives us is that it does not require a large number of LBs. Why is that good you ask? Because saban is apparently the pied piper of LBs and hoards them like trolls hoard shiney things. So instead of going head to head with Saban on trying to get these LBs this defense allows us to focus on DBs and we only have to get 1 or 2 solid LB prospects per year. Not that I don't think we can beat saban in recruiting but why go through them if you can go around them right? This is the same reason I loved seeing us go to Malzahn's offense. It just provides us a better nich as it doesn't require us to go against bama for all the players where we would be at a disadvantage since they are the state school and the we are not invisible to the NCAA like they are.

I think that s a good idea. I wouldn't mind adding the DLine responsibilities and going more in depth with the DB responsibilities if we were to do this.

[WarEagleAU 0]

Now if Mikey could just summarize the 0-11-0 defense that would also be helpful.

:poke:/>

Actually, it was 4-4-5.

Should've used that set in the final drive vs FSU...

Oh, I got Mikey's point.

[Slammer1 409]

That 4-2-5 defense gave up big plays which in turn gave up lots of yards and a lot of points during 2013. Our defense couldn't hold them in the final 13 seconds. Cause if had, we could have won our 2nd national championship in 3 years.To come that close and lose still gets under my skin.

No mistakes like Chris Davis taking a bad angle and running into his teammate to give FSU a 49 yd pass to put them in game winning position is the reason why we didn't hold them.

Remember, going into the fourth quarter Auburn's 4-2-5 defense held the best offense in the country to 13 points. Nick Marshall throws a crucial interception which FSU capitalized on to make the score 21-20. On the next drive the offense couldn't get into the end zone so we kicked a field goal. 24-20 with just over 4 minutes left in the game. What happens next...?? The 100 yd kick return because Jonathan Jones pulls a hamstring and Brandon King (not sure) gets out of his lane to try to cover both lanes. 27-24. Tre Mason put us back on top with a great run and with a minute left in the game and FSU needing to go 80 yds the Chris Davis mistake happens.

Now my question becomes what was wrong in the defensive scheme?

Right . Nothing that happened at the end of the game had to do with scheme. First, Parkey had been landing virtually every kick all year out the back od the end zone but for whatever reason couldn't do it against FSU. This was critical. The interception, the injury on the kickoff that they should have never been in a position to return in the first place, and the missed tackle on the long play were the critical mistakes that got them in position to make that last play. The special teams failure to cover the fake kick in the first half was another critical mistake. I thought the defensive scheme against them that night was outstanding. That game could have and should have been put away early.

I remember reading somehwere that Parkey had some sort of physical ailment that prevented him from getting the ball in the endzone. I was really shocked watching the game that this was a problem. Having watched FSU since the '60s, they ALWAYS have had trickery up their sleeve. Does anybody remember the Punt Rooski? That was a Bobby Bowden creation that worked to perfection. I could not believe we got fooled by the fake punt in our game.That was a big time failure by the special teams. If and when we play FSU again, they need to be on the lookout for a fake punt the WHOLE game. FSU has been getting away with it for decades. The hamstring pull by our guy on the kickoff runback was just bad luck. Seemed like it was just in the cards that we were destined to lose that game. I am really looking forward to the season this year. I know the team wants to atone for last year and has a score to settle. WDE!!!

[bikeriderga 135]

Another not so obvious advantage this defense gives us is that it does not require a large number of LBs. Why is that good you ask? Because saban is apparently the pied piper of LBs and hoards them like trolls hoard shiney things. So instead of going head to head with Saban on trying to get these LBs this defense allows us to focus on DBs and we only have to get 1 or 2 solid LB prospects per year. Not that I don't think we can beat saban in recruiting but why go through them if you can go around them right? This is the same reason I loved seeing us go to Malzahn's offense. It just provides us a better nich as it doesn't require us to go against bama for all the players where we would be at a disadvantage since they are the state school and the we are not invisible to the NCAA like they are.

Once we beat Bama again this year, the rose will come off the bloom with Sabear (or is it Cry baby Bear)?

Saban gets the recruits because Bama was winning. In terms recent of championships and trips to Championship games. Auburn is setting at # 2.

If it were not for Chizik's last year, the débâcle that was 2012, our stock would be even higher. After we win it all this year, AU not Bama, will be the hot team! Even now recruits want to ride the "Gus Bus"... Our brand is only going to get stronger!

No, I ain't afraid of no Cry Baby Sabear!

[yeaauburn 21]

Good analysis...thanks!

[meh130 1,059]

Our defensive weaknesses in 2013 were not due to the base scheme. We had average defenses in 2009 and 2010 and a weak defense in 2011 (CTR 4-3 Tampa-2), and a horrible defense in 2012 (CBVG 4-3). The 4-2 vs 4-3 schemes are irrelevant.

Also, for those who say "Our defense is bad, and Alabama's defense is good, so we should change to a 3-4 defense", just remember the recruiting of Rashaan Evans, We wanted to recruit this smaller, faster, good coverage HS LB as a Star. That is because the 4-2-5 is designed to defend against spread offenses and base 3WR sets. CEJ has evolved his 4-2-5 around specific positions with key players into a flexible defense that can provide 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, and 3-4 type fronts. The Star in CEJ's scheme is a hybrid safety/LB who can provide run support as well as pass coverage.

Bama wanted to recruit this smaller, faster, good coverage HS LB as a Sam LB in Bama's scheme. That is because Saban has evolved and tailored his 3-4 around specific positions with key players into a flexible defense that can provide 3-4, 4-3, and 3-3 type fronts. The Sam in Saban's scheme is a smaller, faster coverage focused LB.

Some 4-3 and 4-2 teams play one of their DTs as a Nose Tackle, like in a 3-4. Some even list one of the DTs as an NT. Some 4-3 and 4-2 teams have one "heavy" DE and one lighter, faster DE who sometimes starts from a two-point stance. Most college 3-4 teams specify a "Jack" OLB who is more defensive end than OLB and will sometimes start from a three-point stance

In other words, base schemes are not that relevant to modern defenses.

[Mikey 16,781]

Now if Mikey could just summarize the 0-11-0 defense that would also be helpful.

I'll settle for two competent linebackers. Name the last time we had two on the field at the same time that could grade better than "barely adequate"? Hint: They were both signed in 2007, that's eight years ago.

Until the position is shored up and they prove it on the field we'd best be signing around four a year.

[Rednilla 5,449]

Now if Mikey could just summarize the 0-11-0 defense that would also be helpful.

I'll settle for two competent linebackers. Name the last time we had two on the field at the same time that could grade better than "barely adequate"? Hint: They were both signed in 2007, that's eight years ago.

Until the position is shored up and they prove it on the field we'd best be signing around four a year.

2007 was seven years ago...

[Mikey 16,781]

Now if Mikey could just summarize the 0-11-0 defense that would also be helpful.

I'll settle for two competent linebackers. Name the last time we had two on the field at the same time that could grade better than "barely adequate"? Hint: They were both signed in 2007, that's eight years ago.

Until the position is shored up and they prove it on the field we'd best be signing around four a year.

2007 was seven years ago...

Excuse me. I should have said "Eight signing classes ago".

[Rednilla 5,449]

Now if Mikey could just summarize the 0-11-0 defense that would also be helpful.

I'll settle for two competent linebackers. Name the last time we had two on the field at the same time that could grade better than "barely adequate"? Hint: They were both signed in 2007, that's eight years ago.

Until the position is shored up and they prove it on the field we'd best be signing around four a year.

2007 was seven years ago...

Excuse me. I should have said "Eight signing classes ago".

If you wanted to belittle the position as much as possible (which has been your prerogative for quite some time now), then yes, you're right. Of course, one of those signing classes has yet to play for Auburn yet, because it was signed three months ago. Nevermind that Tubs slacked off recruiting quite a bit toward the end of his tenure at Auburn and the high profile players in Chizik's first makeshift recruiting class were basically all signing to play in Malzahn's offense. And it makes no difference that the projected starters for this year's team are both juniors, one of the redshirt variety, who have had to learn on the job due to the lack of veteran stars (those two underwhelming classes took a toll) to keep them off the field. It couldn't be that the combination of youth and three different defensive schemes had anything to do with that, now could it?

After the national championship season of 2010, everyone who knew anything about the makeup of Auburn's roster knew we were going to be in for a rough couple of years. I've always been the optimistic sort when it comes to Auburn football, so I saw the potential and hoped for the best, but only the disaster of 2012 was really surprising. I'd been pointing to 2013 and 2014 as the years to really start watching out for AU, and that is specifically because of the amount of freshmen and sophomores who were getting playing time in 2011.

Now, we have a far more balanced roster with regard to veterans and youngsters, and we finally have some real continuity on defense under Ellis Johnson. We saw significant improvement in key areas on defense last season, and I see no reason to believe we will not continue seeing improvement considering that Johnson is notorious for his defenses making a jump from year one to year two as they become comfortable with the scheme. We have two returning starters at LB who are both upperclassmen, a few backups who have shown at least a little potential, and two signees that you seem to think will be starting from day 1 because none of the others are athletically gifted enough for you.

Maybe I'm just a sunshine pumper, trying to make things seem better than they are. But then again, maybe you're just a negative nancy who refuses to believe anything good without seeing it first. Or maybe it's both, and the truth is somewhere in between (which is the more likely scenario). In any case, signing 4 linebackers a year until the position is shored up is asinine when there are only 2 linebackers on the field at any given time...especially when the current players have shown potential as underclassmen, and should be ready to step up at this point.

But hey, you've got this whole thing figured out already, right?

[adamszach54 0]

Once We have all the personnel that we want the defense will be just as successful as it was when Johnson ran it at South Carolina. While at South Carolina he consistently put out defense is that were in the top 10 in both categories. Injuries and lack of depth hurt our defensive backfield last year. We will be much improved in all areas on defense next season

[Mikey 16,781]

.....In any case, signing 4 linebackers a year until the position is shored up is asinine when there are only 2 linebackers on the field at any given time...

I suggest you drop Gus a note and tell him how asinine he was to sign four DE's in the 2014 class when there are only two defensive ends on the field at any given time.

[AUenginerd 16]

.....In any case, signing 4 linebackers a year until the position is shored up is asinine when there are only 2 linebackers on the field at any given time...

I suggest you drop Gus a note and tell him how asinine he was to sign four DE's in the 2014 class when there are only two defensive ends on the field at any given time.

I didn't know we rotate LBs like linemen.

[Mikey 16,781]

.....In any case, signing 4 linebackers a year until the position is shored up is asinine when there are only 2 linebackers on the field at any given time...

I suggest you drop Gus a note and tell him how asinine he was to sign four DE's in the 2014 class when there are only two defensive ends on the field at any given time.

I didn't know we rotate LBs like linemen.

We don't. The reason we don't is because we don't have enough talented depth to do so. Maybe this year and the next we can avoid the swings and misses, sign three to four heavy hitters at LB each year and correct the situation.

[gravejd 3,311]

I'd say the LBs probably graded out pretty good against Fl. St. That was a good offensive team and we shut them down the better part of the game. Special teams and secondary gave up 14 points at the end.

Defense didn't play terrible in the bama game either. They got basically 200 yards of offense in 2 pass plays and that's not on the LBs.

First three quarters of the UGA game were solid as well. It's true we haven't had a guy at that position dominate a game recently, but to act like we haven't gotten some good play and that the guys returning can't improve a lot just from being in the same defense 2 years in a row is a reach IMO.

[Rednilla 5,449]

.....In any case, signing 4 linebackers a year until the position is shored up is asinine when there are only 2 linebackers on the field at any given time...

I suggest you drop Gus a note and tell him how asinine he was to sign four DE's in the 2014 class when there are only two defensive ends on the field at any given time.

I didn't say that you never sign that many (even though one of the four DEs is big enough that he might play inside), but signing four DEs a year until the position is shored up, at least in the terms that you are using, is asinine, too.

We lost three DEs to graduation. Signing four in last year's recruiting class is just balancing things out, and you're grasping at straws because you don't like the fact that my counterargument about linebackers has been logically sound at every point.

Yes, I do think we wanted one more LB in February's class, but I rather doubt we would have taken four unless both of two add ons were special talents, while you were shouting from the rooftops that we were doomed if we didn't sign at least 4.

[Mikey 16,781]

I recommend that you go back and re-read DKW 86's excellent report on Gus's appearance in Huntsville. See if Gus's remarks lead you to believe that Gus feels as good about the linebacker position as he does other elements of the team. I see him believing other areas of the team will be solid and hoping the LB's will be adequate.

I never said we'd be doomed. I said the LB's are the weakest link on the team and will continue to be until the under-recruiting of the past several years is compensated for. Signing two a year when the failure rate at the position runs over 50% won't fix the situation.

[Stripe 5]

For the OP. Nice write up.

For Auburn4ever......umm the FSU game wasn't lost by the Defense actually.

If you go back and look the offense left 14 garenteed pts on The field in the first half. Had we capitalized on these pts we would have won.

Having said that there were many other reasons I feel like the main reason we lost was 1 key play. The fake punt. Special teams should have Known this was coming and stopped it. I was yelling At the TV at the top of my lungs before and through the play. I knew it was coming, everyone in the country probably knew it was coming. That was the key play that gave FSU life and hope. Had we got this stop I don't believe FSU comes out In the second half and even comes close to scoring more than 10 pts.

Second half mistakes on the offense killing drives over and over again.

FSU'S change to emulating The Patriots sissy 3-4 yard pass plays because their Oline couldn't block Auburn for more than 1 seconds each play had a lot to do with things. But the defense was not the reason Auburn lost.

If you think you can pin the loss on the defense and one bad play you really have ZERO CLUE as to how football is played much less the finer points of X's and O's.

Please learn something from this thread and stop making blanket comments out of the peanut gallery.

[McLoofus 35,182]

For the OP. Nice write up.

For Auburn4ever......umm the FSU game wasn't lost by the Defense actually.

If you go back and look the offense left 14 garenteed pts on The field in the first half. Had we capitalized on these pts we would have won.

Having said that there were many other reasons I feel like the main reason we lost was 1 key play. The fake punt. Special teams should have Known this was coming and stopped it. I was yelling At the TV at the top of my lungs before and through the play. I knew it was coming, everyone in the country probably knew it was coming. That was the key play that gave FSU life and hope. Had we got this stop I don't believe FSU comes out In the second half and even comes close to scoring more than 10 pts.

Second half mistakes on the offense killing drives over and over again.

FSU'S change to emulating The Patriots sissy 3-4 yard pass plays because their Oline couldn't block Auburn for more than 1 seconds each play had a lot to do with things. But the defense was not the reason Auburn lost.

If you think you can pin the loss on the defense and one bad play you really have ZERO CLUE as to how football is played much less the finer points of X's and O's.

Please learn something from this thread and stop making blanket comments out of the peanut gallery.

Bingo. Also, I don't understand why Chris Davis keeps taking all the heat for that one bad play at the end. It would seem that some folks have spent a lot more time bitching about that play than paying attention to what actually happened. Go to the :14 mark. Ryan Smith took an equally bad angle and he actually ran into Davis after the receiver had already beaten both of them.

[1TexasTiger 55]

For the OP. Nice write up.

For Auburn4ever......umm the FSU game wasn't lost by the Defense actually.

If you go back and look the offense left 14 garenteed pts on The field in the first half. Had we capitalized on these pts we would have won.

Having said that there were many other reasons I feel like the main reason we lost was 1 key play. The fake punt. Special teams should have Known this was coming and stopped it. I was yelling At the TV at the top of my lungs before and through the play. I knew it was coming, everyone in the country probably knew it was coming. That was the key play that gave FSU life and hope. Had we got this stop I don't believe FSU comes out In the second half and even comes close to scoring more than 10 pts.

Second half mistakes on the offense killing drives over and over again.

FSU'S change to emulating The Patriots sissy 3-4 yard pass plays because their Oline couldn't block Auburn for more than 1 seconds each play had a lot to do with things. But the defense was not the reason Auburn lost.

If you think you can pin the loss on the defense and one bad play you really have ZERO CLUE as to how football is played much less the finer points of X's and O's.

Please learn something from this thread and stop making blanket comments out of the peanut gallery.

Bingo. Also, I don't understand why Chris Davis keeps taking all the heat for that one bad play at the end. It would seem that some folks have spent a lot more time bitching about that play than paying attention to what actually happened. Go to the :14 mark. Ryan Smith took an equally bad angle and he actually ran into Davis after the receiver had already beaten both of them.

I had never seen that angle. Ryan White was out of position as well.

[ClaytonAU 4,606]

Why are we talking about the past? It's time to move on. Let's get excited about next season.

[McLoofus 35,182]

Why are we talking about the past? It's time to move on. Let's get excited about next season.

I can get on board with that! Heck, I can't remember ever enjoying an offseason as much as I am right now.

[gravejd 3,311]

I recommend that you go back and re-read DKW 86's excellent report on Gus's appearance in Huntsville. See if Gus's remarks lead you to believe that Gus feels as good about the linebacker position as he does other elements of the team. I see him believing other areas of the team will be solid and hoping the LB's will be adequate.

I never said we'd be doomed. I said the LB's are the weakest link on the team and will continue to be until the under-recruiting of the past several years is compensated for. Signing two a year when the failure rate at the position runs over 50% won't fix the situation.

I'm pretty sure I've seen you post that you expect Davis and Williams to be either starting or putting in major minutes in the Arkansas game. That to me indicates you do not think very much of the players we are returning at the LB position and have little expectation that they will improve enough to beat out true freshmen. You may very well turn out to be right but I just wanted to post why I do not agree with you on that front. I'm also of the opinion that having 2 true freshmen playing lots of snaps or starting in game 1 of their first season means we are pretty close to being doomed! lol

So agree to disagree I guess. WDE!

[Rednilla 5,449]

I recommend that you go back and re-read DKW 86's excellent report on Gus's appearance in Huntsville. See if Gus's remarks lead you to believe that Gus feels as good about the linebacker position as he does other elements of the team. I see him believing other areas of the team will be solid and hoping the LB's will be adequate.

I never said we'd be doomed. I said the LB's are the weakest link on the team and will continue to be until the under-recruiting of the past several years is compensated for. Signing two a year when the failure rate at the position runs over 50% won't fix the situation.

I'm pretty sure I've seen you post that you expect Davis and Williams to be either starting or putting in major minutes in the Arkansas game. That to me indicates you do not think very much of the players we are returning at the LB position and have little expectation that they will improve enough to beat out true freshmen. You may very well turn out to be right but I just wanted to post why I do not agree with you on that front. I'm also of the opinion that having 2 true freshmen playing lots of snaps or starting in game 1 of their first season means we are pretty close to being doomed! lol

So agree to disagree I guess. WDE!

Fairly well sums up my position. I wholeheartedly agree that linebacker is the position we are thinnest at. No doubt about that. It is the repeated downplaying of the linebackers we have on the roster and how assuredly Mikey predicts that only Cass McKinzy, of our current LBs, has any chance whatsoever of being any good. Sure, it's possible that will be the case...but I find it highly unlikely.