Warrior General Games

The juicy zone SA's that are trying to tempt people into trying zone require two things:
1) That the defender be in underneath Zone coverage
2) That there be help over the top.

So ideally you want the most amount of underneath defenders that fit this criteria. The play that immediately jumps out is Cover 2 Sink. 2 safeties over the top and 5 defenders underneath in intermediate zones present a lot of chances for Eyes On The Prize as well as Zone Shark to fire.

Unfortunately, just like all Cover 2's, it is very susceptible to certain play designs. And those are plays that attack the "Hole". Well, what is the "Hole"?

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Coaching-session-the-Cover-2-cornerback.html

Originally posted by
Protecting the “hole” in the defense: We hear it during every game, right? There is a “hole” (or target zone) in Cover 2 between the safety and the corner along the sideline. The 7 (or flag) route and the quick one-step fade are run to attack that area of the coverage. It is on the CB to jam No.1 and then sink (at a 45 degree angle) to protect the safety and take away those two routes. Whenever you see the quarterback complete one of those two throws vs. Cover 2 it is because the CB didn’t get enough depth. That isn’t the safety’s play to make.

Examples of the "Hole" being exploited (or almost exploited) in Cover 2.
Look at the BTE running free:
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/147916/3104245

Singleback Overload, which is designed to attack the "Hole" on each side. Watch WR1 and WR2 consistently be wide open.
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/134220/1766848
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/134220/1767346
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/134220/1767502
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/134220/1767811
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/134220/1768625 (CB1 got pumpfaked, but that doesn't mean WR2 isn't any less wide open if the QB chose to go there)
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/134220/1768555

3WR TE Drive, fades are also a prime exploit of Cover 2.
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/144191/2218651
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/144191/2219498
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/144191/2219718
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/144191/2218455
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/144191/2218726
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/144191/2218822

2WR plays against Cover 2
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/147129/2965708 (FL Hitch is designed to attack the "Hole")
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/147129/2965132 (Not the best playcall against Cover 2, but you see how the corner stays in for the RB instead of following the WR vertically)
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/134236/2155649

Defensive formations that have Cover 2 Sink:
4-3, 3-4, 4-4, 4-4 Big, 4-2, 3-3, 4-1, 3-2, 3-1, 5-2 (Every formation besides Goalline)

Defensive formations that have a Cover 3 Sink concept:
4-4, 4-2

Cover 3 Sink needs to be a necessary part of every defensive formation's playbook. Cover 2 Sink can be a great play, and it has it's uses. But it's an extremely bad match-up against certain schemes.

If a team is building a roster to take advantage of these Zone SA's, they'll look at the playbook and think they have to design a team for Cover 2 Sink since there aren't enough options for Cover 3 Sink.

Now I don't know if this change will actually help Galactic Empire, since his team might be built with corners as underneath and the SS as deep coverage. But future teams interested in trying out Zone, might be more tempted if there's a coverage with 4 or 5 opportunities for Zone SA's to fire, and a way to not be exploited by routes that attack the sideline vertically.

Examples:
4-3 Cover 3 Sink (enables 4 for EOTP and Zone Shark SA's)
http://i.imgur.com/gkw4yb9.jpg
3-4 Cover 3 Sink with blitzing LB (enables trash talk SA and 4 for EOTP and Zone Shark SA's)
http://i.imgur.com/qGttAgf.jpg
3-4 Cover 3 Sink (enables 5 for EOTP and Zone Shark SA's)
http://i.imgur.com/9ZFmip1.jpg
3-3-5 Cover 3 Sink (enables 5 for EOTP and Zone Shark SA's)
http://i.imgur.com/DUpByAc.jpg
3-3-5 Cover 3 Sink with blitzing LB (enables trash talk SA and 4 for EOTP and Zone Shark SA's)
http://i.imgur.com/NbRbvFx.jpg

And so on for every formation.

These are basic concepts that aren't in the playbook. Why would people choose Zone defense when basic concepts aren't even included?

Interesting. My team is/will be built for cover 2 mainly due to the SAs. If the CB has high enough footwork, quick and balance, he can can cover the hole. Or he can knock the ball loose if he gets there late. Pretty much how my corners are built.