This incarnation of the AU defense will be strikingly multiple. Mason has always "based" out of the 3-4 alignment as a preference, but the variable power spread offensive schemes of modern football have relegated playing a 2-Gap defense with 2 high safeties and a 7 man box to a limited role. What now looks like the 3-4 is actually a roving 4-2-5/3-3-5, with players moving from alignments to strike points in order to take away one gap while limiting OL release points and blocking angles, and doing so from different optical alignments that put stress on offensive pre-snap reads. Think of it as the defensive version of the RPO, putting offensive players in "if-then" conflicts.
In the spring, which is always limited in terms of volume and in terms of exposition, we saw way more alignments than I expected. We know we will get Mason's base 3-2 base front with two hybrid edge players. Generally playing with a 4i-0/Shade-3tech front. A tight/Mint front that's double 4is and a slanting Nose and Over and Under fronts 5-1-3-9/9-3-1-5 DL alignments are commonly paired with the same DL personnel sans one switch at LB, swapping a hyrbid for a true "off-ball" linebacker or Slot Corner. We saw practice footage of a "Bull"/"Even" look with double 2's that slant and move with the play calls, and two loose 5 stand up edge players (this could only work against true zone 10 personnel spread teams). So, to consolidate those thoughts, don't expect there to be a true/static depth chart. Expect it to look a lot more like bama/uga in the ways that they will play 25+ different defensive players a game, in a multitude of looks to specifically attack personnel dictated offensive schemes.
All of that creates the necessity for VERSATILE depth in the secondary. Notice the length of the transfer/Juco corners brought in this summer. That's chess move recruiting to specifically match the big interior Slot receivers and Flex Y's teams (specifically AU's biggest rivals) are employing. Billingsly at bama, Washington and Gilbert at uga, and Widermyer at TAMU. Conversely, having a third corner like Simpson that can roll in and allow McCreary to play man in the slot vs a teams quick twitch guy is a huge advantage as well. Kaufman and Tennison give Mason a pair of perimeter defenders who can play in the box or on the back end, so when teams change the strength quickly with shifts or motions, they simply move on a pendulum instead of running across the formation.
In terms of pass rush, the base personnel guys will be improved (Hall, Wooden, Walker) and I expect Leota to be a slight upgrade, along with contributions from Height. However, in true pass situations I expect a "rabbits" or "cheetah"package with Pappoe and Willis or Riley on the edges with Tennison in as backer. Again, it's all part of a deeper tool box. The tools certainly aren't elite across the board, but if they are used variably and more intently, they could become very effective.
I don't think any of them will truly 2-Gap. I think from an alignment stand point you're dead on, but safety inserts and linebacker alignments will almost always create a hat for a gap in this current version of Mason's scheme.
Exponentially! The single high cover 1/cover 3 variants with a 2-gap nose and big backers died at the hands of Steve Spurrier and Gus Malzahn. Spurrier brought the speed in space concept to the SEC which redefined what an LB had to be, and how many defensive backs you needed on the field, as well as making you defend four verticals so often that leaving a one high safety in the middle of the field was committing hara-kiri by way of the slot fade and the smash concept. Teams commited to the 3-4 tried to maintain as much of their 50 roots as they could, like Saban, Boom, Pellini, etc..., converted to pattern match coverage schemes that worked but forced multiple 2-Gap defenders to be effective inside. Malzahn (and Urban Meyer) made the power spread concept with a moveable H back that could insert, arc,seal,wham, or kick out the weapon of choice that broke down the gap fits of 3-4 two gap teams. The football evolution continues and demands that defenses be able to match offenses on a much broader spectrum of levels.
TL; DNR; SIW
Last edited:
