in the NFL.
"How Mike Macdonald has NFL offenses guessing and defenses following his lead"
Ted Nguyen
May 13, 2024
Summary:
(1) Seattle Head Coach Mike Macdonald (the guy who replaced Wink as D.C. in Baltimore) "isn’t doing anything particularly unique schematically."
(2) Unlike Wink, Macdonald most often utilizes two-deep safeties.
(3) Usually does not rush more than 4 defenders, but he'll disguise which 4 are coming, including dropping a lineman into coverage while rushing either a LBer or DB.
(4) Macdonald does NOT use the traditional approach by starting with how his D-line & LBers should line up when they blitz. Instead, he frequently utilizes a variety of pressure packages in the context of various fronts.
(5) To confuse offenses, Macdonald does not utilize numerous fronts and pressures, but rather he changes what they actually do from a given number of defensive formations. A lot of it looks the same to offenses. But who exactly is coming and who is dropping into coverage is difficult to discern.
(6) Macdonald also has created a simplified naming system for his different packages which cuts down on confusion.
(7) In the end, his system is about simplicity, flexibility while creating maximum confusion for the offense.
Link - (
New Window )
In a nutshell, they tend to rush four and play coverage, but you don't know which four will be coming. This is going to drive many on BBI crazy because they will see Thibodeux or Burns drop into coverage at times while others rush. It also tends to be more zone based coverage rather than Wink's risky Cover 0 man coverage. In particular, the Giants will likely play a lot of 2-high and split safety coverage (really plays to the strength of Tyler Nubin).
The devil will be in the details... a lot of Titans fans were done with Vrabel/Bowen in Tennessee, but the Titans had huge talent/injury issues on defense and their defense kept them in most games while their offense really struggled.
As someone who was happy when we hired Wink originally, I'm not convinced that the only reason he is gone was the crap he was pulling behind the scenes. His defense here last year was not good, and was atrocious against the run. You can't win the NFC East that way.
So the "philosophical shift" may be true in Baltimore, but it's been here in the NFL for a long time. Patrick Graham was this style too.
Two good excerpts from article:
“They used to be so much more multiple with Wink (Martindale),” one offensive coordinator who had to game plan against Macdonald told The Athletic. “Now, they’re probably more simple, but they play faster. From what I’ve heard, they’ve really simplified some of the verbiage so that they can just use those pieces and move guys around, and put certain guys in different spots … where a safety’s playing the nickel, the nickel’s playing safety, and kind of use some of those athletes they have. I think that’s where it’s kind of transformed to.”
Though there are schematic hallmarks to Macdonald’s system, it’s really a system of teaching that allows the defense to be as flexible as possible. It’s based on keeping the teaching simple and inexpensive for the defense while forcing offenses to feel like they must prepare for the bar exam.
Also including a link below to a recorded segment of Mike MacDonald explaining his system during an online coaching clinic. He describes how they simplified their terminology to make it easier to be multiple and make changes week to week without confusing the players.
Twitter Mike Macdonald coaching clinic video - ( New Window )
So the "philosophical shift" may be true in Baltimore, but it's been here in the NFL for a long time. Patrick Graham was this style too.
Yep and if it doesn't work, you're messing with your offense because it is hard for them to get into a rhythm. Every defense has risk to it. It is just a matter of philosophy. I actually prefer Wink's style to what Graham was putting out there. I just remember with Graham you give up like an 8 minute drive and hold the O to 3 points and they were happy about that. Imo, it is a horrible pairing for an offense that needs reps to get going. Defense is about flying around, doing your job, and getting 12 hats to the ball regardless of scheme. Offense is about rhythm, timing, and execution. If you do not have a good offense, then it is hard to get it going when they are sitting for long stretches. I'm curious to see how this all unfolds.
In a nutshell, they tend to rush four and play coverage, but you don't know which four will be coming. This is going to drive many on BBI crazy because they will see Thibodeux or Burns drop into coverage at times while others rush. It also tends to be more zone based coverage rather than Wink's risky Cover 0 man coverage. In particular, the Giants will likely play a lot of 2-high and split safety coverage (really plays to the strength of Tyler Nubin).
The devil will be in the details... a lot of Titans fans were done with Vrabel/Bowen in Tennessee, but the Titans had huge talent/injury issues on defense and their defense kept them in most games while their offense really struggled.
As someone who was happy when we hired Wink originally, I'm not convinced that the only reason he is gone was the crap he was pulling behind the scenes. His defense here last year was not good, and was atrocious against the run. You can't win the NFC East that way.
When you have Thibs and Burns lining up as DEs, it seems you are giving up a lot if you drop one or both into coverage. It isn’t like having JPP out there. He could actually make plays as a LB. I’m not sure Thibs or Burns have that same ability.
It could be okay on early downs when they are being subbed out, but you lose the “surprise” factor.
I think you pretty much nailed it. Also, didn't Thibs just mention the other day about how he feels more in tune/plugged-in with what the LBers are doing... or something like that?. I think this may coincide with Macdonald's scheme which calls for more coordinated rush schemes between the D-line & LBers (and DBs.) Also, maybe a player like Isaiah Simmons will benefit a lot as the Giants take advantage of his ability to rush from the EDGE or drop back in coverage.
That video you added really fleshes out what Macdonald has in mind in terms of simplifying his defensive schemes.
That video you added really fleshes out what Macdonald has in mind in terms of simplifying his defensive schemes.
Glad you liked. As other have mentioned, his scheme is more in line with the rest of the league, including Bowen: more shell coverages to limit big plays, blitzing enough to keep offenses guessing, simulated blitzes to get confusion and pressure without actually bringing more rushers. But the two things in the video/article that are different with him are his simplified terminology and also the way he ties the entire defense together when teaching so everyone knows everyone else's responsibilities and "the why" of the defense.
I liked this other quote from the article:
ADVERTISEMENT
“He’s doing a unique job. … I’ve kind of never experienced it,” Ravens cornerback Marlon Humphrey said at minicamp during Macdonald’s first season as defensive coordinator. “He’s really having everybody understand the whole philosophy of mainly just the group of coverages, as opposed to: ‘You got this call. How do you play this call?’ He’s kind of saying, grouping these calls all together, like, ‘What is the whole idea of this call?’ So I think he’s done a really good job of kind of really helping us all be smarter, to where I know what the D-line’s doing. I also know what the linebacker is doing. I also know what the safety’s doing — because ‘The reason why I call this defense is because of this.'”
Thibs is a linebacker, not the classic edge rusher. And his play shouldn't be judged by sack count.
Thibs is a linebacker, not the classic edge rusher. And his play shouldn't be judged by sack count.
I suspect Thibodeaux is going to like this system a lot more than he did under Wink (he's already said publicly it is closer to what he did in college).
Wink also had him drop (every DC in the NFL would). But I just remember all the "zone blitz" hysteria on BBI. Fans forget but there was a time when even Spags was heavily criticized as a DC here.
Five concepts to steal from the National Championship Game - ( New Window )
If I remember correctly, the article contained stats to support the success of those defensive schemes as well as the lack of success from the highly aggressive schemes.
Now that I think about it, I believe it was in the run up to Wink's first year with the Giants, because I recall thinking, "Uh oh".
Martindale’s defense didn’t stop long drives. Occasional sacks and tackles for loss only slow offenses down if they can’t execute on third and long. A good, long drive doesn’t get too many third and long opportunities.
you have to be strategic.
these systems are good enough against the bottom 80% of the NFL QBs but you have to be able to play man and blitz and get home when you are playing elite.
If the O isn’t looking good or you’re playing a more talented team then shortening the game on both sides of the ball may be the best plan (a la SBs 25 and 42).
not sure why macdonald is getting so much credit for this, looking at the some of the info below it seems like Spags has done this the last 2 years and been a big reason that defense has been so good and won 2 sbs.
some league trends - ( New Window )
Rotate the 4th rusher....
and sprinkle in a 5th rusher when Thibs and the other 2 don't
I was at the Atlantic City coaching clinic a few months ago, and creeper/simulated blitzes were a big part of one of the defensive sessions by one of the top public High school programs in Alabama. We have "show" blitzes in our defensive arsenal where I coach, but don't often employ them. Our DC takes a ton of coverage concepts and DB techniques from Nick Saban.
As far as the Giants go, most of it will come down to best utilizing the talent Shane Bowen has on the field.
Quote:
You hit the nail on the head with the phrase "simulated blitzes"... again, as far as I can tell, this is what Bowen/Vrabel did, and what much of the NFL does now too. I believe it's a huge part of Nick Saban's defenses too. You'll also hear the phrase "creeper blitz". Five concepts to steal from the National Championship Game - ( New Window )
I was at the Atlantic City coaching clinic a few months ago, and creeper/simulated blitzes were a big part of one of the defensive sessions by one of the top public High school programs in Alabama. We have "show" blitzes in our defensive arsenal where I coach, but don't often employ them. Our DC takes a ton of coverage concepts and DB techniques from Nick Saban.
As far as the Giants go, most of it will come down to best utilizing the talent Shane Bowen has on the field.
As far as I can tell, much of this goes back to Saban, but if you read the link I posted above, the real grandfather of much of this may be Arnsparger.
Regardless, Saban's schemes seem to permeate the NFL now.
This is the tradeoff.
But what I'm really looking for is someone who can stop the run on 1st and 2nd down. Weird thing is Wink's defenses did that in Baltimore, but not here. The Titans had excellent run defense.
Bend but don't break can work... if you have the right personnel who can pass rush. One of the things that frustrated me about Graham was with the edges; nobody seemed to know any other moves other than bull-rush. They kept getting stonewalled and then once their initial move petered out, they played keep-away with the quarterback, lather, rinse, repeat. And Judge was proud of that. It was as if they weren't trying to get to the quarterback.
So the "philosophical shift" may be true in Baltimore, but it's been here in the NFL for a long time. Patrick Graham was this style too.
Quote:
I can't see they article because it is behind a pay wall, but most of the NFL tends to play this style now. Don't take risky chances, play coverage, don't allow big plays and keep things in front of you. Make your opponent drive the length of the field without making mistakes, The downside is you can get dinked and dunked to death.
So the "philosophical shift" may be true in Baltimore, but it's been here in the NFL for a long time. Patrick Graham was this style too.
I am trying to be optimistic about the new D. As you said Eric ,Winks D was horrible against the run. So yep something had to change. But when you mentioned Patrick Graham I wanted to vomit. Because that's what I'm most fearful of. I hope it was because of slow lacking talent or bad call at the time not the philosophy of the system. Graham didnt last long with the Raiders and I was glad he moved on from the Giants.
I've said it dozens of times, but my big problem with Graham centered around him not being able to defend a 2-minute offense.
Quote:
I can't see they article because it is behind a pay wall, but most of the NFL tends to play this style now. Don't take risky chances, play coverage, don't allow big plays and keep things in front of you. Make your opponent drive the length of the field without making mistakes, The downside is you can get dinked and dunked to death.
So the "philosophical shift" may be true in Baltimore, but it's been here in the NFL for a long time. Patrick Graham was this style too.
Yep and if it doesn't work, you're messing with your offense because it is hard for them to get into a rhythm. Every defense has risk to it. It is just a matter of philosophy. I actually prefer Wink's style to what Graham was putting out there. I just remember with Graham you give up like an 8 minute drive and hold the O to 3 points and they were happy about that. Imo, it is a horrible pairing for an offense that needs reps to get going. Defense is about flying around, doing your job, and getting 12 hats to the ball regardless of scheme. Offense is about rhythm, timing, and execution. If you do not have a good offense, then it is hard to get it going when they are sitting for long stretches. I'm curious to see how this all unfolds.
Astutely put
Graham is still the defensive coordinator of the Raiders and they had a top 10 defense last year.