1. Welcome to Georgia Tech Swarm! JOIN US and be a part of the SWARM! GO JACKETS! THWg!

Nickel vs. 4-2-5 D

Discussion in 'Georgia Tech Football' started by Ibeeballin, Mar 25, 2014.

  1. Ibeeballin

    Ibeeballin GT Athlete

    Messages:
    4,573
    I decided to make this thread because I saw folks on the TOS flipping out that this will be our point of emphasis Defense this spring. So I wanted to explain why this should be a focal point, differeniate the 2 sub packages and ease some posters nerves.

    1) From a personnel standpoint, they are the same Defense ( 4 DL, 2LBs, 5DBs). They differ from the standpoint that instead utilizing 3CBs and 2 Safeties, a 4-2-5 or "Big Nickel" utilizes a hybrid instead of a 3rd CB. Most call that hybrid the $pur, Whip a la VT, or in Dave Wommack case the infamous "Wolf". This guy must be beast! Willing to stick his nose in run support and have ability play in space.

    2) Schematically, you can do the same things out of both sets as you would out of a true 4-3. Where they differ is in adaptability. Most DCs would substitute in their Nickel D when offenses come out in 11 personnel (1 RB, 1 TE) and sometimes 10 personnel (1 RB). A 4-2-5 gives defenses the ability to matchup vs. most run/pass personnel while still being in a position of strength.

    3) With CFB being in the era of the 11 personnel Spread and hurry-up/uptempo offense. It is absolutely vital that you are good to great in these sets. These sets eliminate having to mass substitute just to match up with offenses.

    I stated after the bowl game, I would love to see Paul Davis in the "Wolf" type of role because you don't lose anything in the run/pass game, you don't have to worry about him vs. hurry up/uptempo teams, and I believe he would be great in slot blitzes.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2014
  2. SidewalkJacket

    SidewalkJacket Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    1,583
    Like your thoughts on Davis... He was a safety in HS, after all. Just get the best 11 on the field!
     
    bat_082994 likes this.
  3. Longestday

    Longestday Helluva Engineer Featured Member

    Messages:
    2,742
    Thank you for the overall setup information
     
  4. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,173
    For reference, Denzel Nkemdiche brother of the famous #1 overall recruit Robert Nkcmdiche, played the Wolf position for Ole Miss. Denzel is just 5'11 and made SEC All Freshmen from that spot.
     
  5. Ibeeballin

    Ibeeballin GT Athlete

    Messages:
    4,573
    Denzel played the Stinger LB aka Will LB (Wommack rationale of naming the weak side backer with an "S" word is still baffling). I believe Tony Connor was the Wolf for Ole Miss
     
    vamosjackets likes this.
  6. ATL1

    ATL1 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,377
    Many 3-4 Defenses are playing this sub package a lot as well. Pruitt at UGA from FSU I believe utilitzes this package almost the majority of the time. Harvey Clemons was to be the Wolf guy.
    I'm not sure but l I believe Auburn's defense plays with this package as a base.
    Paul Davis could be a Wolf
    Corey Griffin has great measurables for the role
     
  7. forensicbuzz

    forensicbuzz Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,261
    Which player would cover the TE coming off the line in this package? Would that be a tough assignment for PD? Assuming he's 5'9"-5'10" covering a 6'5"-6'6" TE might be tough. (I know Jemea covered Ebron well, so it can be done)
     
  8. ATL1

    ATL1 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,377
    I've seen OLB's & DE cover the flats and TE's in this package.
     
  9. Ibeeballin

    Ibeeballin GT Athlete

    Messages:
    4,573
    The nickel/Spur/Wolf would cover the TE. Its not that hard
     
  10. DuckGT

    DuckGT Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    595
    Cooper Taylor was suppose to be wolf for Wommack
     
  11. 00Burdell

    00Burdell Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    1,097
    I'm sorry... did you just say "cover the flats and TE?"

    There must be some mistake, my friend - we're from Georgia Tech we can't do that. :cry:
     
  12. AE 87

    AE 87 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,968
    Did Roof call it a nickel?
    Link

    Then again, Ken could have just mis-translated Roof's ref to a 4-2-5 as a reference to nickel.
     
  13. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,173
    Ah...you are correct. For some reason I remember the recruiting article about Robert mentioning Denzel as the Wolf...but it seems I remembered incorrectly.

    I thought the Wolf position was a great idea if we had the athletes. We did not. You need those types of athletes (guys who can flex to multiple positions on the same play) with today's offenses. Defenses are like offenses...it works if you know how to teach it, and if you have the right pieces.
     
  14. vamosjackets

    vamosjackets GT Athlete Featured Member

    Messages:
    2,126
    I really enjoyed watching our defense play well against the run the majority of the time last year. The worst vision of GT football to me is seeing our defense out there getting gashed by the run. So, as long as we can still make stopping the run a priority and be successful at that, I'm fine with whatever base package or alignment or personnel. I will admit that this worries me a bit, but I think Roof knows what he's doing with this.

    I would imagine a guy like Marcordes at the Whip rather than a guy like Davis. I would envision putting Davis in that front 6 and just letting him focus on making plays against the run, running sideline to sideline for the most part. Brandon Watts would've been perfect for it, in my mind.
     
    Whiskey_Clear likes this.
  15. IronJacket7

    IronJacket7 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,388
    Not sure if CTR is going for the traditional Nickel but if not, I prefer the 4-2-5 over the nickel. We could have Jamal Golden (or any of the smaller safeties) at FS. Then your hybrids or wolfs at your two SS spots could be guys like Isaiah Johnson and Paul Davis.
     
  16. Ibeeballin

    Ibeeballin GT Athlete

    Messages:
    4,573
    IJ has the size but I don't trust him run support.

    @Techster we had the athletes but communication was just bad and more often than not a few of our DBs made "business decisions" on run support.

    @vamosjackets we were in a 4-2-5 with Watts a lot of the time when teams went to 11 personnel. So we saw the ideal fit. With Marcodes I get flashbacks of MTSU picking on him.
     
  17. GTRanj

    GTRanj Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    333
    Didn't ij lead the team in tackles 2 years ago when our run defense was atrocious. I remember him constantly having to worry about a loose running back. He was pretty good at tackling IMO. I think he could fit the wolf role pretty well actually.
     
  18. CornerBlitz

    CornerBlitz Ramblin' Wreck

    Messages:
    160
    Unless he is flexed, it seems we should be jamming the TE at the LOS most of the time. For some reason this seems to be a lost art in modern defenses, which is why I think you have seen such a resurgence in this position over the last few years.

    Wish we would figure out a way to get a TE in our offense..a good TE causes a lot of problems.

    JMHO.
     
    ATL1 likes this.
  19. Ibeeballin

    Ibeeballin GT Athlete

    Messages:
    4,573
    Correct. He should be jamming the TE
     
  20. dressedcheeseside

    dressedcheeseside Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    13,614
    Trey Klock seems to think we will.
     

Share This Page