Was reading a little about his again yesterday and thought I ask again affter all of this time, is anyone running it.

If so, how are those teams doing?

The wide tackle defense is an even six man line with two linebackers making it an 8 man front and 3 deep diamond secondary against traditionally TE and two back offense. Usually defense guards play head up on offense guards. D ends were position outside shoulder of the TE's 1 to 2 yards. It is a containing and pursuing defense. It is an excellent stunting and blitzing defense.

 

Strengths of wide tackle defense:

1. Defense guard area is strong

2. It is relatively stronger outside than inside.

3. Eliminates the double team power block over the offensive tackle area

4. Hard to sprint out / toss sweep against.

5. Curl area and long pass are adequately covered.

6. Good stunting defense with many possibilities.

7. Can jump to defenses quickly and easily.

Weakness

1. Wide splits can hurt it

2. Outside veer kills it. This is why many teams in the late 70's stop running it.

3. Hard to cover flats

4. Vulnerable to traps.

5. Power and isolation at linebackers. Lb'ers better be tuff run stoppers.

6. Short middle zone over LB'ers is open

7. Against two TE's there is seven on six relationship for the offense end to end.

Wide tackle six is the Kenucky defense Jerry Claiborn ran in the early 80's.

John Hardin when they get in their 40 look against a TE run a form of the wide tackle six.

Failed to mention that another strength of the defense is tuffer angles for the offense. No 1 and 3 techniques. So guards can't down block you or fan out.

Good analysis. Most people don't realize the wide tackle 6 and a 6-2 aren't the same thing.

@tackle trap said about all that there is.

 

You don't see it near as much in its base for these days due to not seeing as many two tight end sets.

 

Claiborne had a very adjustable, complex, yet simple system. His base was what's already been stated above, but he'd get into a lot of combo/split fronts (odd front to one side & a wide tackle 6 look to the other, or an odd front to one and 6-2 look to the other and those are just a couple examples. )

 

The Split 6 is an old time defense that closer resembles the Wide Tackle. In it, you'd have two 3 techs, ILB's were in the A gap, two 6 techs (stand up) and two stand up 8 techs. Penn State used to run this.

 

WKU back in the 60'a had a guy most might recall by the name at Jerry Glanville on the defensive side (I THINK he became the DC for a bit). Glanville (from my understanding) took the Split 6 and Wide Tackle, and kind of morphed them into his own.

 

Something he did, whether they were in a Split 6 or their Wide Tackle 6 look, was that his 6 techniques were stand up OLB's, but his 8 techs were down and cocked (45 degrees) true defensive ends (that usually were the 6 tech players in other schemes). They'd stunt the house and like Claiborne, he/they were able to get in a myriad of different fronts with what were pretty simple calls for adjustments.

Positive-Very tough vs the run. Beamer at VT ran it at Murray and at VT when he first got there before modifying it to his "G" scheme and robber tech in the secondary.

 

Weakness-Flats...period!

 

Still a very good defense, I know North Hardin ran it back when Jaggers was there and they were pretty good defensively.

Unless those outside LB's are indeed studs and very athletic the defense is week in the flats and if the O can get around the corner they will run forever.

 

Your center better be a stud to wall off the BS ILB. When he reads pull his ONLY responsibility it fit right now. We have played a couple WT6 guys who play 2's over the years against heavy trap and option teams...it's a mother to try and trap those guys. It's all those 2's care about shutting down.

Positive-Very tough vs the run. Beamer at VT ran it at Murray and at VT when he first got there before modifying it to his "G" scheme and robber tech in the secondary.

 

Weakness-Flats...period!

 

Still a very good defense, I know North Hardin ran it back when Jaggers was there and they were pretty good defensively.

 

I know Mike Mahoney also ran it at Murray after Beamer left and got lambasted for it. Maybe he didn't have the right players or he didn't run it as well as Beamer, I don't know as I'm not schooled enough in it to say, but I do know it was very "un liked" while Mahoney was there.

Your center better be a stud to wall off the BS ILB. When he reads pull his ONLY responsibility it fit right now. We have played a couple WT6 guys who play 2's over the years against heavy trap and option teams...it's a mother to try and trap those guys. It's all those 2's care about shutting down.

Almost all defenses the Will is the most difficult to account for, a lot of the times they are their teams leading tackler.

Almost all defenses the Will is the most difficult to account for, a lot of the times they are their teams leading tackler.

 

Agree, but even more so due to his alignment and the alignment of the DT's, IMO. It's very tough to run between the tackles in this defense. Don't see it very often anymore with the spread teams exploiting it on the perimeter...but still a very good defense in it's day.

I know Mike Mahoney also ran it at Murray after Beamer left and got lambasted for it. Maybe he didn't have the right players or he didn't run it as well as Beamer, I don't know as I'm not schooled enough in it to say, but I do know it was very "un liked" while Mahoney was there.

 

I think we see that a lot in sports. Do what the guys did before you and it's not as successful. Wonder if that was due to not having the experience in it that Beamer had?? Not sure, but Beamer ran it well at Murray.

I would just screen you too death and send 4 verts.

Edited December 26, 201510 yr by RockinGa

For everyone that says they'll screen, run 4 vets or whatever do you think the team is going to stay in a 6 man front against 4 wide? What do you think a 425 turns into against double TE full house backfields? Or 353/335 going to line up against run heavy sets? The wide tackle six would just adjust to another front. There are a lot more teams that think they are good at 4 veers on a Friday night than teams that honestly are good at it.

For everyone that says they'll screen, run 4 vets or whatever do you think the team is going to stay in a 6 man front against 4 wide? What do you think a 425 turns into against double TE full house backfields? Or 353/335 going to line up against run heavy sets? The wide tackle six would just adjust to another front. There are a lot more teams that think they are good at 4 veers on a Friday night than teams that honestly are good at it.

 

I love our 4-4. It is our base defense and very similar to the wide tackle six. But, if we get 4 WRs and 1 RB, our 4-4 becomes a 3-5. As soon as a TE or RB gets added back to the box, we are back in our 4-4...... Most of the time.

For everyone that says they'll screen, run 4 vets or whatever do you think the team is going to stay in a 6 man front against 4 wide? What do you think a 425 turns into against double TE full house backfields? Or 353/335 going to line up against run heavy sets? The wide tackle six would just adjust to another front. There are a lot more teams that think they are good at 4 veers on a Friday night than teams that honestly are good at it.

Exactly, based on their personnel they might just walk out on your slots or #2 receivers and try to get hands on to prevent them from releasing up field and play Cover 3.

Or they walk out one lb on your #2 and the other falls back to safety and then they play a lot of games with their coverages.

 

 

But remember who ever has the marker at the dry erase board wins!