The Air Raid Killer Defense: Why I think we're trying out so many safeties...

Ummm I'm going to say no , just going off on the personal

Originally posted by wailers15:
Ummm I'm going to say no , just going off on the personal

I agree.

Ras, after lining out the Whys of how Kyler torched us, esp with Those quick passes in the flats, and then your recommendations for a 3-3-5 and why...if Our D should open up like this vs AZ, we should honor you with the Ras 3-3-5 D. Against AZ for one play, anyway. After that it reverts to the 3-3-5.

Dang and our Wide 9s had worked so well during the first two playoff games. Then Andy and Mahomes.,,

Really nice posts Ras. Please keep 'em coming.

Originally posted by RasSuar:

Originally posted by thl408:
Thank you for making this thread . I love talking about this stuff, trying to arm chair coach. If we see Saleh employ a 3-3-5 personnel package and/or use a Tite front, I'll be sure to bump this thread again.
One way to stop all those little bubble screens is to play man, but that wasn't the 49ers in 2019. I do agree that ARI requires a somewhat unique gameplan. Just how much will it differ from what the 49ers usually do we'll see soon in week 1.

It was my pleasure to write it and engage with your wonderful critiques. My own feeling is that Kenyon Drake and Kyler Murray's feet, were the problem for our defense to stop in this scheme. I want that extra LB and S in the scheme to stop them.

Murray is too elusive - he's going to get his scrambling yards non the less.

Originally posted by thl408:
Thank you for making this thread . I love talking about this stuff, trying to arm chair coach. If we see Saleh employ a 3-3-5 personnel package and/or use a Tite front, I'll be sure to bump this thread again.
One way to stop all those little bubble screens is to play man, but that wasn't the 49ers in 2019. I do agree that ARI requires a somewhat unique gameplan. Just how much will it differ from what the 49ers usually do we'll see soon in week 1.

Originally posted by RasSuar:
It was my pleasure to write it and engage with your wonderful critiques. My own feeling is that Kenyon Drake and Kyler Murray's feet, were the problem for our defense to stop in this scheme. I want that extra LB and S in the scheme to stop them.

Great discussion!

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by thl408:
Thank you for making this thread . I love talking about this stuff, trying to arm chair coach. If we see Saleh employ a 3-3-5 personnel package and/or use a Tite front, I'll be sure to bump this thread again.
One way to stop all those little bubble screens is to play man, but that wasn't the 49ers in 2019. I do agree that ARI requires a somewhat unique gameplan. Just how much will it differ from what the 49ers usually do we'll see soon in week 1.

Originally posted by RasSuar:
It was my pleasure to write it and engage with your wonderful critiques. My own feeling is that Kenyon Drake and Kyler Murray's feet, were the problem for our defense to stop in this scheme. I want that extra LB and S in the scheme to stop them.

Great discussion!

Interesting to see reports from camp that we've been practising a lot more man coverage in the drills.

Murray is too elusive - he's going to get his scrambling yards non the less.

You want to contain him and Drake though. I think one of the most underrated aspects of the Air Raid offense is how it not only simplifies QB play but also in how simplifies things for RBs by stretching out normal 4-3 and 3-4 defensive fronts with outside zone plays and faster personnel on the outsides. The tite formation/big nickel combination in this Iowa State 3-3-3 defense is designed to take that away by concentrating the DL around the A and B gaps and using the combination of 3 LBs and a Joker safety to patrol the outside C and D gaps. In 2018, when Kyler ruled the Big-12, Iowa St. lead the conference in rush yards allowed with 115 per game.

I am currently watching their 2018 game vs. Oklahoma when Kyler started. Even though Kyler and that high-powered offense torched them, I felt the scheme was solid in doing two important things. First, ISU bottled the run by giving up just 4.4 yards per rush, which is actually 2.2 less yards than OU's season season average. Second, they often took away Kyler's first option in the pass game more times than not. Unfortunately, the 3-3-3 scheme was unable to overcome ISU's glaring lack of talent in comparison to OU. Lots of yards and points were a result of major chunk plays produced by Kyler, Marquise Brown and Cee Dee Lamb just being the best football athletes burning double coverage or making defenders miss open tackles.

Originally posted by RasSuar:

Originally posted by thl408:

Thank you for making this thread . I love talking about this stuff, trying to arm chair coach. If we see Saleh employ a 3-3-5 personnel package and/or use a Tite front, I'll be sure to bump this thread again.
One way to stop all those little bubble screens is to play man, but that wasn't the 49ers in 2019. I do agree that ARI requires a somewhat unique gameplan. Just how much will it differ from what the 49ers usually do we'll see soon in week 1.

It was my pleasure to write it and engage with your wonderful critiques. My own feeling is that Kenyon Drake and Kyler Murray's feet, were the problem for our defense to stop in this scheme. I want that extra LB and S in the scheme to stop them.

Like we saw on the first drive of the Superbowl, they'll exploit AA's size even out at the 9. He's just too big to not exploit ifccthe edge on the early downs with Murray. Saleh may need to use Ford out there more on early downs to guard against it or like you said, bring in an extra hybrid SS/LB.

Nobody has ever really come up with a fool proof way to stop a scrambling QB. That's why DCs hate facing them. You can line up in any number of ways to try and stop them but in the end they can still break containment or hit some wide open receiver that shakes off his defender. The hope is that the receivers don't get open and you can hem in the QB which can work for awhile but sooner or later they bust a run or make that throw. Personally, I like to try and force them to throw from the pocket since that's where most of them are the least dangerous but that's easier said than done.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Like we saw on the first drive of the Superbowl, they'll exploit AA's size even out at the 9. He's just too big to not exploit ifccthe edge on the early downs with Murray. Saleh may need to use Ford out there more on early downs to guard against it or like you said, bring in an extra hybrid SS/LB.

In our Wide 9 Arik isn't usually the DE, though. He plays the 4-Tech and would have to regularly line up the 7 and 9 Techs to be a DE. In the Tite Formation, Arik fits beautifully as a DE playing the 5 or 4i Tech. He's exactly what we'd want there occupying multiple blockers, similar to what we'd ask of a 3-4 DE.

Originally posted by RasSuar:

Murray is too elusive - he's going to get his scrambling yards non the less.

You want to contain him and Drake though. I think one of the most underrated aspects of the Air Raid offense is how it not only simplifies QB play but also in how simplifies things for RBs by stretching out normal 4-3 and 3-4 defensive fronts with outside zone plays and faster personnel on the outsides. The tite formation/big nickel combination in this Iowa State 3-3-3 defense is designed to take that away by concentrating the DL around the A and B gaps and using the combination of 3 LBs and a Joker safety to patrol the outside C and D gaps. In 2018, when Kyler ruled the Big-12, Iowa St. lead the conference in rush yards allowed with 115 per game.

I am currently watching their 2018 game vs. Oklahoma when Kyler started. Even though Kyler and that high-powered offense torched them, I felt the scheme was solid in doing two important things. First, ISU bottled the run by giving up just 4.4 yards per rush, which is actually 2.2 less yards than OU's season season average. Second, they often took away Kyler's first option in the pass game more times than not. Unfortunately, the 3-3-3 scheme was unable to overcome ISU's glaring lack of talent in comparison to OU. Lots of yards and points were a result of major chunk plays produced by Kyler, Marquise Brown and Cee Dee Lamb just being the best football athletes burning double coverage or making defenders miss open tackles.

Did ISU only rush 3, or did they bring one of the LBs as a 4th pass rusher? Were they able to get any pressure on the QB?

Originally posted by thl408:
Did ISU only rush 3, or did they bring one of the LBs as a 4th pass rusher? Were they able to get any pressure on the QB?

ISU disguised their pass rush all game long, sometimes rushing 3 while sometimes blitzing a LB or DB at Kyler.

They were able to generate 1 sack, 4 hurries, 2 deflections in 29 pass attempts.

It bears noting that OSU's offensive line is very tough.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by RasSuar:

Murray is too elusive - he's going to get his scrambling yards non the less.

You want to contain him and Drake though. I think one of the most underrated aspects of the Air Raid offense is how it not only simplifies QB play but also in how simplifies things for RBs by stretching out normal 4-3 and 3-4 defensive fronts with outside zone plays and faster personnel on the outsides. The tite formation/big nickel combination in this Iowa State 3-3-3 defense is designed to take that away by concentrating the DL around the A and B gaps and using the combination of 3 LBs and a Joker safety to patrol the outside C and D gaps. In 2018, when Kyler ruled the Big-12, Iowa St. lead the conference in rush yards allowed with 115 per game.

I am currently watching their 2018 game vs. Oklahoma when Kyler started. Even though Kyler and that high-powered offense torched them, I felt the scheme was solid in doing two important things. First, ISU bottled the run by giving up just 4.4 yards per rush, which is actually 2.2 less yards than OU's season season average. Second, they often took away Kyler's first option in the pass game more times than not. Unfortunately, the 3-3-3 scheme was unable to overcome ISU's glaring lack of talent in comparison to OU. Lots of yards and points were a result of major chunk plays produced by Kyler, Marquise Brown and Cee Dee Lamb just being the best football athletes burning double coverage or making defenders miss open tackles.

Did ISU only rush 3, or did they bring one of the LBs as a 4th pass rusher? Were they able to get any pressure on the QB?

Originally posted by RasSuar:

Originally posted by thl408:
Did ISU only rush 3, or did they bring one of the LBs as a 4th pass rusher? Were they able to get any pressure on the QB?

ISU disguised their pass rush all game long, sometimes rushing 3 while sometimes blitzing a LB or DB at Kyler.

They were able to generate 1 sack, 4 hurries, 2 deflections in 29 pass attempts.

It bears noting that OSU's offensive line is very tough.

Interesting stuff. If the 49ers employ this defense I'd be impressed at the willingness to deviate from their defensive tendencies and also worried that they are trying to do too much. Matt Barrows said that the 49ers defense is doing some different things in practice but that he can't write about it until after week 1. I wonder if it's specific to ARI.

Originally posted by thl408:
Interesting stuff. If the 49ers employ this defense I'd be impressed at the willingness to deviate from their defensive tendencies and also worried that they are trying to do too much. Matt Barrows said that the 49ers defense is doing some different things in practice but that he can't write about it until after week 1. I wonder if it's specific to ARI.

That is interesting information. I had a hunch we'd try some new things. Should Saleh veer this far off last year's script by miracle, I still wouldn't expect for us to run that 3-3-3 defense anywhere near as much as ISU does. I think it would be a nice wrinkle to add in certain situations. I do, however, think that Oden will have his fingerprints all over our secondary and we'll be seeing lots more 3 safety looks even if we don't go Tite formation along with it.