Attacking the CMU 4-2-5 defense

[Crusty]

CMU runs a 4-2-5 defense: 4 man front, 2 inside linebackers, 2 corner backs and 3 safeties. This defense is specifically designed to be flexible so as to be able to handle anything that a hurry-up or no huddle offense throws at it. With its 5 DBs (3 safeties) it is also built to defend spread offenses.

I'm no coach, but everything I have read indicates that a strong inside running game will pull them out of their base defense or at least make them play more like a 4-3.
Other suggestions that seem to make sense.

• Big packages where you can get TE's blocking on the LB's that leave you only having to beat the DB's with your RB work great.
  
• Against man coverage, use change of direction routes.
• Against zone coverage run either weak or strong floods and play-action. If you can get a LB or DB to move out of his zone or flood it with multiple options and they can only cover one works really well.
• Play action - bunch formations.

Love to get some thoughts from any coaches out there.

 

[Doctor44]

Agree = you have to run the ball. At best, you have 3 LB types if one safety is a Ronnie Lott type. Let AAM run it up the middle, or use the QB zone read. We're not gonna be able to throw down the field with 3 safeties and they should have the speed to respond to bubble screens (read DO NOT RUN BUBBLE SCREENS EVERY 3 PLAYS!)

Pop Passes and TE passes on the seam or over the middle should work too with only two true middle LBs.

 

[orangenauburn]

which means our bubble love fest falls into their plan

pessimist by nature - would not be surprised to see an L ( not predicting an L though)

 

[007]

CMU runs a 4-2-5 defense: 4 man front, 2 inside linebackers, 2 corner backs and 3 safeties. This defense is specifically designed to be flexible so as to be able to handle anything that a hurry-up or no huddle offense throws at it. With its 5 DBs (3 safeties) it is also built to defend spread offenses.

I'm no coach, but everything I have read indicates that a strong inside running game will pull them out of their base defense or at least make them play more like a 4-3.
Other suggestions that seem to make sense.

• Big packages where you can get TE's blocking on the LB's that leave you only having to beat the DB's with your RB work great.
  
• Against man coverage, use change of direction routes.
• Against zone coverage run either weak or strong floods and play-action. If you can get a LB or DB to move out of his zone or flood it with multiple options and they can only cover one works really well.
• Play action - bunch formations.

Love to get some thoughts from any coaches out there.

Quick thoughts...

To make things simple, the 4-2-5 base philosophy is typically not to give up big plays, and don’t let the team run it down your throat. I am guessing we will see a lot of quick passes and curl routes, some play action, hopefully some pump fakes and double moves, sweeps, and yes, some bubble screens to keep the extra DB/Will out of the box - to set up inside zone read running game.

Success for Hunt/GM this week will depend on Hunt getting a good pre-snap read and checking into correct play. They have had 2 weeks to prepare for this, so I expect to see the O have some success.

 

[upperdeck]

they also have 2 weeks of film to review. CMu has about 6 plays of Hunt this year, the rest they have to assume.

 

[ImperialOrange]

Pump fakes and misdirection plays would be ideal. Not just vs the 4-2-5 but in general. We have had a nasty tendency to allow opposing defenses to get too comfortable with reading our plays.

 

[SmilinBob]

If the SU OL steps up a lot of options can be used. They are the key to this game.