| FTBL I don't know JACK

[Guest]

Hey Gang. By now most of us are used to hearing the name "JACK" thrown around. All I know is that the JACK is a "Hybrid" LB/DE player.

Can any of you expand on what the JACK is, or how it is intended to be used? If you have a good link, that will do as well.

 

[TerryP]

In a nutshell, it's an OLB that will line up along the defensive line in a 3-point stance at times, along the line in a stand up position, but can also play the LB'er position (specifically in pass coverage.)

Now, if you want specifics and details, here ya go. You'll want to save this .pdf for later...it's 336 pages long, from the 2001 LSU playbook.

Sabans's defense/playbook

 

[c5vetman]

Derrick Thomas played like this a lot for the Chiefs, but I think they called it the "hawk" or something else like that, but not the "jack". Right?

 

[c5vetman]

Of course, it is also a song from AC/DC about VD's.

 

[Guest]

Derrick Thomas played like this a lot for the Chiefs, but I think they called it the "hawk" or something else like that, but not the "jack". Right? .

-aight

Of course, it is also a song from AC/DC about VD's.

-Oooh. NOT aight
:shock:

 

[Guest]

In a nutshell, it's an OLB that will line up along the defensive line in a 3-point stance at times, along the line in a stand up position, but can also play the LB'er position (specifically in pass coverage.)

Now, if you want specifics and details, here ya go. You'll want to save this .pdf for later...it's 336 pages long, from the 2001 LSU playbook.

Sabans's defense/playbook

From what I knew, the JACK was a flex player that allowed the D to transition from the 3-4 to a 4-3 without a shift in personnel, as you pointed out Terry. But with a DE and a JACK, which would stretch the line wide to one side while thinning out the LB corps, the only benefits that I can see that it brings is to stiffen the outside run defense to the JACK side and/or create rush opportunities by over manning that end of the OL.

I suspect that I am missing plenty as even this knucklehead can see weaknesses in that approach (i.e. offside running plays, quick-slant passes to the hole left by the rushing JACK, or a Shuffle Pass).

 

[TerryP]

It's going to take you some time (and paper) but you might want to print that .pdf out and look at how the line shuffles when the JACK backer lines up on the line and how the LB'ers shuffle as well.

The biggest weakness I see in the scheme is it leaves the CB's in man coverage all the time. Thus, we're likely going to get burned once or twice in a game from a long pass.

On the plus side, even with the JACK on the LOS the QB doesn't know if he's going to be rushing or dropping back into coverage. It's a nightmare, when executed, for the QB to read where the rush is coming from.

What a lot miss is in the 3-4, ideally, you want your two ends and NG to take up at least 4 gaps, if not five. That frees the LB'ers up to create havoc.

 

[RollTidePGH]

Actually one of the biggest advantages to having a Jack type position along with defensive flexibility is the fact that the offense doesn't have the benefit of knowing what the LB/DE players role is for any particular play. For instance he may be lined up at the line so the QB will read that he's going to rush, the QB calls an audible to a passing play, because there appears to be 7-8 men in the box, just to find out that when the ball is snapped that the Jack drops into coverage, throwing the QB's read totally off.

Sabans version of the 3-4 is a read defense, and having a flexible player that can adjust to what the offense set is without a substitution is a pretty huge advantage. You won't get caught with personnel that doesn't fit the offensive set in a hurry up or on an audible. The Jack just shifts to his new defensive read. No timeouts, no defensive weakness due to personnel.

Overall the biggest benefit to a Jack is not what that player can do, it's that the offense can't get a read on what he's going to do. Which always gives a factor of uncertainty to the offensive reads and play calls.

edit: looks like TerryP beat me to the punch, I knew I shouldn't have spent the extra time to spell check!!

 

[RollTidePGH]

It's going to take you some time (and paper) but you might want to print that .pdf out and look at how the line shuffles when the JACK backer lines up on the line and how the LB'ers shuffle as well.

The biggest weakness I see in the scheme is it leaves the CB's in man coverage all the time. Thus, we're likely going to get burned once or twice in a game from a long pass.

On the plus side, even with the JACK on the LOS the QB doesn't know if he's going to be rushing or dropping back into coverage. It's a nightmare, when executed, for the QB to read where the rush is coming from.

What a lot miss is in the 3-4, ideally, you want your two ends and NG to take up at least 4 gaps, if not five. That frees the LB'ers up to create havoc.

You are right about the CB being the weak link in this type of D. Which I am certain is why CNS has spent a lot of time focusing on CB play.

But you'll notice that does have a bunch of different looks for the secondary other than just lock down man to man, there's a little bit of shifting zones and looks like some quarters and halves type looks in there. So the secondary can get a little tricky too.

 

[TerryP]

It's going to take you some time (and paper) but you might want to print that .pdf out and look at how the line shuffles when the JACK backer lines up on the line and how the LB'ers shuffle as well.

The biggest weakness I see in the scheme is it leaves the CB's in man coverage all the time. Thus, we're likely going to get burned once or twice in a game from a long pass.

On the plus side, even with the JACK on the LOS the QB doesn't know if he's going to be rushing or dropping back into coverage. It's a nightmare, when executed, for the QB to read where the rush is coming from.

What a lot miss is in the 3-4, ideally, you want your two ends and NG to take up at least 4 gaps, if not five. That frees the LB'ers up to create havoc.

You are right about the CB being the weak link in this type of D. Which I am certain is why CNS has spent a lot of time focusing on CB play.

But you'll notice that does have a bunch of different looks for the secondary other than just lock down man to man, there's a little bit of shifting zones and looks like some quarters and halves type looks in there. So the secondary can get a little tricky too.

True, true. We see threads about needing to recruit the type of players for this defense all the time. What we don't see is a lot of threads talking about how this applies to the secondary as well. If we would have had the players needed last season we wouldn't have spent so much time in our nickel packages.

I think we are still a year, maybe two, away from seeing this defense in its true form.

 

[BamaFan615]

It's going to take you some time (and paper) but you might want to print that .pdf out and look at how the line shuffles when the JACK backer lines up on the line and how the LB'ers shuffle as well.

The biggest weakness I see in the scheme is it leaves the CB's in man coverage all the time. Thus, we're likely going to get burned once or twice in a game from a long pass.

On the plus side, even with the JACK on the LOS the QB doesn't know if he's going to be rushing or dropping back into coverage. It's a nightmare, when executed, for the QB to read where the rush is coming from.

What a lot miss is in the 3-4, ideally, you want your two ends and NG to take up at least 4 gaps, if not five. That frees the LB'ers up to create havoc.

You are right about the CB being the weak link in this type of D. Which I am certain is why CNS has spent a lot of time focusing on CB play.

But you'll notice that does have a bunch of different looks for the secondary other than just lock down man to man, there's a little bit of shifting zones and looks like some quarters and halves type looks in there. So the secondary can get a little tricky too.

True, true. We see threads about needing to recruit the type of players for this defense all the time. What we don't see is a lot of threads talking about how this applies to the secondary as well. If we would have had the players needed last season we wouldn't have spent so much time in our nickel packages.

I think we are still a year, maybe two, away from seeing this defense in its true form.

Absolutely...I don't mean to bash Chavis, but I think right now he is probably a little undersized for this position from the standpoint of being able to rush the passer

 

[TerryP]

I don't recall where he weighs now...got to look that up. He's got the height, but needs 15lbs or more. Last years roster had him listed at @215. Ideally, he needs to be in the 235-245 range.

EDIT: All the rosters I've looked at still have him listed at last years weight.

That said, he may not have the weight to deal with a one-on-one matchup with a OT, but he's got the speed for and end rusher and the footwork to cover passing situations.

I have high expectations for him.

 

[bamafan4ever]

It's going to take you some time (and paper) but you might want to print that .pdf out and look at how the line shuffles when the JACK backer lines up on the line and how the LB'ers shuffle as well.

The biggest weakness I see in the scheme is it leaves the CB's in man coverage all the time. Thus, we're likely going to get burned once or twice in a game from a long pass.
On the plus side, even with the JACK on the LOS the QB doesn't know if he's going to be rushing or dropping back into coverage. It's a nightmare, when executed, for the QB to read where the rush is coming from.

What a lot miss is in the 3-4, ideally, you want your two ends and NG to take up at least 4 gaps, if not five. That frees the LB'ers up to create havoc.

For reference, see the LSU/Iowa bowl game four years ago.

 

[Guest]

Thank you all.

To paraphrase Shrek "[Football is] like Onions, [it has] layers". There are aspects at play that we just don't perceive as regular fans. Discussions such as this is were we grow, and separate ourselves from other school's supporters.

I see the advantage in the uncertainty; that is that the O has to account for the JACK as a rusher AND has to account for the JACK as a pass defender. From a play-calling perspective it is as if they have to plan against a team of 12 players vice 11. This leaves them with either writing off one blocker and one area to pass into, or they can gamble and hope that they are not playing into our area of strength.

There are more questions that I have, but I need to let the link that Terry attached answer all that it can.

 

[TerryP]

One area that hasn't been mentioned, but you just came close to it LBS, is the JACK position puts the offense reacting to the defensive line-up versus a defense reacting to the offensive scheme.

Coach Mac made the comment a few weeks ago that he wanted the opposing DC's to spend as much time watching film and working on games schemes as he will. If you take that statement and then compare it to this defensive scheme you would like to be a bug on the wall in some of the offensive meetings of our opponents. If we can get one player, just one, in the backfield of our opponents on a consistent basis it'll blow up a few of the offenses we'll face. LSU and Auburn quickly come to mind. UT as well as they'll be breaking in a new QB. Stafford and Dick are two that I don't see getting shaken up a lot even with constant pressure...too much maturity there.

We didn't get a true feel last season on just how much of a role the JACK can have in a defensive scheme. It was a position that you didn't hear the names of the players mentioned that often. They did hold their assignments, but didn't provide series changing plays.