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

Originally posted by RasSuar:

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.

This is from Barrows mailbag session last week (The Athletic)
----------------------------
Jeremy B. asks: How is the new defensive backs coach approaching the secondary? Are the 49ers simply teaching the overall scheme or did he bring new ideas to the position?

Barrows answer: The 49ers definitely have a new wrinkle(s) under new defensive backs coach Tony Oden. Again, this is the very thing the 49ers are most leery of revealing. But it's a good question and something that will be worthy of a story after the Week 1 game against the Cardinals.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

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.

Agree, and its just math. A pocket QB gives the defense a man advantage because the Pocket QB isn't expected to run for a first down generally. Whereas a scrambling QB like a Midget Wilson or Steve Young evens up the math and eliminates the man advantage a defense has, because the QB *can* run for a first down if he can't find an open reciever downfield. That, I think, gives the offense more of the edge in those short yardage situations. I think that was one reason Jim Harbaugh picked Kaepernick vs a more seasoned pocket QB. Personally, I can see the 3-3-3 defense have a lot of zone blitzing potential with additional safeties and cornerbacks that can use their speed to blitz vs a DLine or Linebacker blitzing and/or dropping back in coverage.

Originally posted by thl408:
This is from Barrows mailbag session last week (The Athletic)
----------------------------
Jeremy B. asks: How is the new defensive backs coach approaching the secondary? Are the 49ers simply teaching the overall scheme or did he bring new ideas to the position?

Barrows answer: The 49ers definitely have a new wrinkle(s) under new defensive backs coach Tony Oden. Again, this is the very thing the 49ers are most leery of revealing. But it's a good question and something that will be worthy of a story after the Week 1 game against the Cardinals.

Interesting...

Originally posted by Giedi:
Personally, I can see the 3-3-3 defense have a lot of zone blitzing potential with additional safeties and cornerbacks that can use their speed to blitz vs a DLine or Linebacker blitzing and/or dropping back in coverage.

To that end, here is how the 3-3-3 fared against Jalen Hurts last season. They totally shut him down in the second half doing just what you hypothesized:

I guarantee you the 49ers won't run this front. This is the antithesis of what Kocurek is trying to do. This is also a good way to waste Nick Bosa.

AZ giving us fit isn't because of the air raid. Air raid concepts have been in the NFL for a long time. The real problem is that guy wearing #1. He's good--real good.

Originally posted by RasSuar:
To that end, here is how the 3-3-3 fared against Jalen Hurts last season. They totally shut him down in the second half doing just what you hypothesized:

Originally posted by Heroism:
I guarantee you the 49ers won't run this front. This is the antithesis of what Kocurek is trying to do. This is also a good way to waste Nick Bosa.

AZ giving us fit isn't because of the air raid. Air raid concepts have been in the NFL for a long time. The real problem is that guy wearing #1. He's good--real good.

Kliff and Kyler are a good pair, but hopefully not as good as Kyle and Jimmy. That Kingsbury air raid offense is pretty potent - moving from dead last to middle of the road statistically on one year (or something like that). Mobile QB's, very hard to contain and to sack in the 4th QTR, but we managed to do it last year against AZ. I think a 3-3-3 zone blitz scheme can work against a guy like Murray because it gives him less time to make decisions and the coverages aren't predictable (or shouldn't be). Best you can do with mobile offenses like Mahomes, Wilson and Murray is to slow those offenses down and have your own offense control the tempo and play keep away. It really is offense vs offense. We lost that one in the super bowl last year.

I'm still learning about the Air Raid offense vs 3-3-3 defense. I like the matchup because of the Air Raid's focus on passing and the 3-3-3 defense putting more DB's out on the field vs LB's and DLinemen. If you have a good strong free safety that can thump on the run and cover against the pass, I think that goes a long way to make the 3-3-3 an air raid killer. As for Bosa, I think how the 3 down lineman work is simply to occupy the blockers (and you better double Bosa) which frees the Blitzer to clock the QB. Ideally the Blitzer is as fast or faster than the QB, in this case Murray has 4.3 speed. A DLineman like Arik or DJ Jones have no chance at catching a guy like Murray. Ford was barely able to catch him, and was worn out after that game and got injured in the next game. You have to have a pass rusher that can match Murray's speed, and that kind of speed comes usually from DB's.

The problem I see with 3-3-3 defense is, of course, against base offensive runs. It's a pass defense, and I'm sure, unless they overload the run -- it's not going to stop a two back attack very well.

Originally posted by Heroism:

AZ giving us fit isn't because of the air raid. Air raid concepts have been in the NFL for a long time. The real problem is that guy wearing #1. He's good--real good.

There were major schematic problems for why that offense beat us up front. They ran the ball 48 times in the two games we played them at 6.0 yards per carry. This wasn't just because Kyler is a real good player, which he certainly is. They exploited us horizontally all game long, particularly with Kenyan Drake and Murray beat us outside and then took advantage of our open gaps on the interior. I see the 3-3-3 defense has developed in Division 1 college as a remedy for it because of how it lines up the "Joker safety" between the linebackers and safeties to get a running downhill start to fit into any open gap a RB or running QB wants to fit into.



Here is an example in the 3-3-5 set for. Here is an example in a 3-2-6 set for when Murray throws those screens in the flat that Drake feasts upon. A defensive innovator like Bill Bellichick has already been using it, especially against the Chiefs for their Air Raid offensive sets. I don't see why we shouldn't be able to add it as a wrinkle in our defense with the personnel we have. Cyprien was made to play that hybrid Middle Safety role. Our SAM LB in Greenlaw is versatile enough

Originally posted by RasSuar:

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.

The point, again, is that whether he's lined up all the way out at 9 or pinched inside to 4i as a DE on base downs, he's easily exploited like in the first drive of the Superbowl where Andy Reid went right after him. And Murray is even more quick and mobile than Mahomes. No doubt, the DE's struggled containing the edges against Wilson, Murray, Mahomes and Jackson...hell, even Goff exploited them in the second game.

PS: No matter the DE, the mass majority of the time they're lined up at 9 whether base or nickel.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by RasSuar:

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.

This is from Barrows mailbag session last week (The Athletic)
----------------------------
Jeremy B. asks: How is the new defensive backs coach approaching the secondary? Are the 49ers simply teaching the overall scheme or did he bring new ideas to the position?

Barrows answer: The 49ers definitely have a new wrinkle(s) under new defensive backs coach Tony Oden. Again, this is the very thing the 49ers are most leery of revealing. But it's a good question and something that will be worthy of a story after the Week 1 game against the Cardinals.

Ward also got coy with the question. Said he didn't want to give anything away but you might see him everywhere this year.

Originally posted by Heroism:

I guarantee you the 49ers won't run this front. This is the antithesis of what Kocurek is trying to do. This is also a good way to waste Nick Bosa.

AZ giving us fit isn't because of the air raid. Air raid concepts have been in the NFL for a long time. The real problem is that guy wearing #1. He's good--real good.

This. Kocurek, and now with Kinlaw, has all the pieces and parts he wants to run his W9. That's not going to change. If anything, the real changes are going to be seen in the back 7. Not the front 4 or the rotation there. But I do appreciate the outside-the-box thinking here and won't fully rule it out against athletic ultra mobile QB's.

The problem I see with 3-3-3 defense is, of course, against base offensive runs. It's a pass defense, and I'm sure, unless they overload the run -- it's not going to stop a two back attack very well.

The appeal of this defense is that it is flexible enough to handle the run on base downs, especially when more and more offenses are running more multiple wide receiver sets and out of more shotgun formations. Like you mention, the defense is built upon confusing opposing offenses, especially those run by raw, young and aggressive QBs like Murray. Nearly every position at the second level (the linebackers) and the third level (the secondary) of the defense can be a potential blitzer, which means that pressure from a 3-3-5 defense can come from anywhere at any time. This not only creates confusion with receivers running passing routes and offensive linemen trying to identify blitzing players, but it also causes confusion for offensive players when they're trying to identify their blocking responsibilities in the run game.

In this sense, the greatest trick of the 3-Safety variation of the 3-3-3 defense is that the structure of the defense on the perimeter creates the illusion that it operates much differently from other nickel/dime defensive sets, but it doesn't. You can kind of see this structure as a updating 4-3 defensive principles in the era of spread Air Raid offense with two key innovations built into the design. Much like robber defenses of the past, the Sam LB is detached from the box and moved to cover down into space as the "overhang" defender. But now they replace what's traditionally the old 3-Tech DL in the B Gap with a Mike LB, whose responsibility is in turn replaced by the hybrid "middle/Joker" safety. All of it is to create a defense that is faster and athletic enough to cover the space that these spread pass offenses demand defenses play with 8 in coverage while being able to run some old 4-3 favorites like the Cover 2 and Cover 4.

Originally posted by RasSuar:

The problem I see with 3-3-3 defense is, of course, against base offensive runs. It's a pass defense, and I'm sure, unless they overload the run -- it's not going to stop a two back attack very well.

The appeal of this defense is that it is flexible enough to handle the run on base downs, especially when more and more offenses are running more multiple wide receiver sets and out of more shotgun formations. Like you mention, the defense is built upon confusing opposing offenses, especially those run by raw, young and aggressive QBs like Murray. Nearly every position at the second level (the linebackers) and the third level (the secondary) of the defense can be a potential blitzer, which means that pressure from a 3-3-5 defense can come from anywhere at any time. This not only creates confusion with receivers running passing routes and offensive linemen trying to identify blitzing players, but it also causes confusion for offensive players when they're trying to identify their blocking responsibilities in the run game.

In this sense, the greatest trick of the 3-Safety variation of the 3-3-3 defense is that the structure of the defense on the perimeter creates the illusion that it operates much differently from other nickel/dime defensive sets, but it doesn't. You can kind of see this structure as a updating 4-3 defensive principles in the era of spread Air Raid offense with two key innovations built into the design. Much like robber defenses of the past, the Sam LB is detached from the box and moved to cover down into space as the "overhang" defender. But now they replace what's traditionally the old 3-Tech DL in the B Gap with a Mike LB, whose responsibility is in turn replaced by the hybrid "middle/Joker" safety. All of it is to create a defense that is faster and athletic enough to cover the space that these spread pass offenses demand defenses play with 8 in coverage while being able to run some old 4-3 favorites like the Cover 2 and Cover 4.

On obvious passing downs, I would force ARI to adapt to the 49ers instead of the other way around. One of the drawbacks to spreading things out is that there will be five man protection. Sometimes they go empty, sometimes they keep in a RB to help out.

Check out what PIT did to combat ARI's spread on passing downs. They took advantage of ARI's 5 man protection.
TLDW: Since spread formations often result in five man protection, PIT used overloaded fronts to isolate their best pass rusher (TJ Watt) on a OT. The rest of the 3 DL rushed to contain Murray and not give him clear escape lanes, while also using a spy on occasion.


This adjustment does a better job at keeping the 49ers comfortable since they stay rooted with their defensive principles (4 man DL). With the feared edge rushers the 49ers have, they can force the offense to adapt to them.

On the backend, there was a very clear difference in the 49ers gameplan against ARI in game 1 compared to game 2. Game 2 had so many more split safety coverages (game 1 the 49ers played lots of Cover3). This is the adaptation Saleh used to help defend the ARI spread. When you look at Murray's passing numbers in game 2 it was pretty pedestrian. It was his legs that did damage. While removing a DL to get more speed on the field has its advantages, it also could give Murray more time in the pocket since Kwon/Warner as the 4th rusher is not as effective as the 4th rusher being a DLman. And rushing only 3 (not using a LB to rush) won't apply the same pressure as rushing 4. I'm not too worried about those quick WR screens since NFL defenders are generally better tacklers than college players. Also, the tighter hash marks in the NFL naturally helps to defend the quick screen game.

This adjustment does a better job at keeping the 49ers comfortable since they stay rooted with their defensive principles (4 man DL). With the feared edge rushers the 49ers have, they can force the offense to adapt to them.

Great video. We definitely need to adapt this overload tactic to get either Bosa or Ford 1 on 1 looks against one of Arizona's mediocre tackles. And looking at the game stats it seemed like strategy worked well. Murray committed 3 TOs and the run game was totally stymied.

While removing a DL to get more speed on the field has its advantages, it also could give Murray more time in the pocket since

Great point and I am glad you made it because I am reminded to mention another reason why I like the 3-3-3 ISU Defense for a guy like Murray. It's true that removing a DE and having a LB/DB as the 4th rusher isn't as normally effective in collapsing a pocket and constantly pressuring a QB as a a normal 4 DE front would. But I see any defensive approach that gives Murray any excuse to leave the pocket early as part of the problem as he was 24th in the NFL last year according to PFF among passers with a clean pocket. This aspect of his game is why I feel more comfortable using the 3-3-3 formation against him than I would a bonified pocket passer like a Russell Wilson or Pat Mahomes running an Air Raid oriented passing attack. I want 8 defenders out in space covering pass zones and running lanes, with the occasional blitzer coming from any angle to confuse Murray.

I'm not too worried about those quick WR screens since NFL defenders are generally better tacklers than college players. Also, the tighter hash marks in the NFL naturally helps to defend the quick screen game.

But its not just the screen game. That outside zone with Murray and Drake is a real problem. For as you rightly mentioned, it was Kyler's legs which really gave us fits in the second game. I just feel that the key to stopping Arizona is shutting a lot of how they work the inside and outside zone concepts in Kingsbury's offense off one another. It was Arizona's combined average of 6 ypr in our two games last season that was the constant killer regardless of how well Murray played. I feel concentrating our 3 best run defending DL to plug the interior A and B gaps so they can push the action outside for our 3 LBs and a middle safety to clean up will take away Arizona's number 1 weapon against us.

But, again, I am not married to this scheme, I only see it as a one way to address a pestering problem we could not account for in our past 2 games against the Cards.

Originally posted by RasSuar:

This adjustment does a better job at keeping the 49ers comfortable since they stay rooted with their defensive principles (4 man DL). With the feared edge rushers the 49ers have, they can force the offense to adapt to them.

Great video. We definitely need to adapt this overload tactic to get either Bosa or Ford 1 on 1 looks against one of Arizona's mediocre tackles. And looking at the game stats it seemed like strategy worked well. Murray committed 3 TOs and the run game was totally stymied.

While removing a DL to get more speed on the field has its advantages, it also could give Murray more time in the pocket since

Great point and I am glad you made it because I am reminded to mention another reason why I like the 3-3-3 ISU Defense for a guy like Murray. It's true that removing a DE and having a LB/DB as the 4th rusher isn't as normally effective in collapsing a pocket and constantly pressuring a QB as a a normal 4 DE front would. But I see any defensive approach that gives Murray any excuse to leave the pocket early as part of the problem as he was 24th in the NFL last year according to PFF among passers with a clean pocket. This aspect of his game is why I feel more comfortable using the 3-3-3 formation against him than I would a bonified pocket passer like a Russell Wilson or Pat Mahomes running an Air Raid oriented passing attack. I want 8 defenders out in space covering pass zones and running lanes, with the occasional blitzer coming from all angles to confuse Murray.

I'm not too worried about those quick WR screens since NFL defenders are generally better tacklers than college players. Also, the tighter hash marks in the NFL naturally helps to defend the quick screen game.

But its not just the screen game. That outside zone with Murray and Drake is a real problem - as you mentioned, it was Kyler's legs which really gave us fits in the second game. I just feel that the key to stopping Arizona is shutting a lot of how they work the inside and outside zone concepts in Kingsbury's offense off one another. It was Arizona's 6 ypr in both games against us that was the constant killer regardless of how well Murray played. I feel concentrating our 3 best run defending DL to plug the interior A and B gaps so they can push the action outside for our 3 LBs with a middle safety to clean up will take away Arizona's number 1 weapon against us.

But, again, I am not married to this scheme, I only see it as a one way to address a pestering problem we could not account for in our past 2 games against the Cards.

That's a good stat that he struggles throwing from the pocket - a clean pocket at that. He was just a rookie so let's see how he progresses but it makes sense that a 5'9 QB would have trouble seeing and throwing over his own OL. If this holds true then it does make sense to sacrifice pass rush pressure for more speed on the field. If he struggles from the pocket then keep him there by not applying pressure. Seems so backwards but he's an atypical QB.

I just checked out the majority of Drake's runs in both games against the 49ers and I'm impressed by the variety of runs ARI had. They found their success on inside zone, draws, and traps and they did it with spread as well as condensed formations. This supports the argument to use a Tite front to shore up the run defense up the middle, spill runs to the outside. The easy answer is for Kwon and Warner to be better at stepping up to clog up run lanes. Easier said than done when the defensive front is naturally spread horizontally due to the wide9. Again, I'm not arguing that what you suggest won't work, just that it is very different than what the 49ers did in 2019 from a schematic perspective.

All this talk about defensive gameplan to stop ARI has me hyped for week 1. Then throw in Hopkins and it's going to be a nice chessmatch between Saleh and Kingsbury.

Originally posted by RasSuar:

The problem I see with 3-3-3 defense is, of course, against base offensive runs. It's a pass defense, and I'm sure, unless they overload the run -- it's not going to stop a two back attack very well.

The appeal of this defense is that it is flexible enough to handle the run on base downs, especially when more and more offenses are running more multiple wide receiver sets and out of more shotgun formations. Like you mention, the defense is built upon confusing opposing offenses, especially those run by raw, young and aggressive QBs like Murray. Nearly every position at the second level (the linebackers) and the third level (the secondary) of the defense can be a potential blitzer, which means that pressure from a 3-3-5 defense can come from anywhere at any time. This not only creates confusion with receivers running passing routes and offensive linemen trying to identify blitzing players, but it also causes confusion for offensive players when they're trying to identify their blocking responsibilities in the run game.

In this sense, the greatest trick of the 3-Safety variation of the 3-3-3 defense is that the structure of the defense on the perimeter creates the illusion that it operates much differently from other nickel/dime defensive sets, but it doesn't. You can kind of see this structure as a updating 4-3 defensive principles in the era of spread Air Raid offense with two key innovations built into the design. Much like robber defenses of the past, the Sam LB is detached from the box and moved to cover down into space as the "overhang" defender. But now they replace what's traditionally the old 3-Tech DL in the B Gap with a Mike LB, whose responsibility is in turn replaced by the hybrid "middle/Joker" safety. All of it is to create a defense that is faster and athletic enough to cover the space that these spread pass offenses demand defenses play with 8 in coverage while being able to run some old 4-3 favorites like the Cover 2 and Cover 4.

Wow, there are a lot of great ideas people are coming up with. One idea I havent seen is putting the LB's a couple yards deeper to help fill in more of the zones behind them. If the Dline slows down a bit to focus on containment rather than rushing and dropping the LBers into the zones, it can cause many issues. The 49ers would give up more rush yards, but if AZ wants to throw, they will have to stay patient and run which they don't seem disciplined enough to do.