Enhancing Coverage
Flexibility with a Double
I would like to thank the AFCA for this
opportunity to contribute to the Summer
Manual. On behalf of our entire staff at
Coverage System Wartburg College, it is a great honor to
share some thoughts about our defensive
coverage system. Hopefully, some of the
ideas presented in this article will be bene-
ficial to your program.
One of the dilemmas defensive coor-
dinators face is controlling coverages
and pressures vs. a variety of formations
and situations. At Wartburg, we use our
double coverage call system to give the
play caller a simple method to utilize mul-
tiple coverage calls in situations where
many defenses are locked into a single
check.
This system is based on grouping for-
mations into categories and assigning calls
to each category. The most common
approach is to differentiate two back sets
and one back sets. Two coverage calls
would be signaled into the huddle. In this
case, the first coverage call is played to all
two back formations. The second coverage
call places our defense into a coverage or
a category of calls to be played against all
one back formations.
Rick Willis In theory, all coverages can fit into this
system. Teaching your players to under-
Head Coach stand the system will allow you to place
any of your coverages into a specific cate-
Wartburg College gory. While the first coverage call is typical-
ly a singular call, the second call often puts
Waverly, Iowa the defense into a category of calls. These
categories are zone, pressure or a specific
coverage. For example, if the huddle call is
four/zone we would play cover four vs. all
two-back sets. Against each different one
back set we would check to the appropriate
zone coverage. For instance, our zone
check against trips might be cover three
and our zone check against a balanced
one back set might be cover two.
Advantages of the Double
Coverage Call System
This system allows you to take advan-
tage of opponent tendencies while main-
taining variety and simplicity in your calls.
The ability to play different calls to a forma-
tion produces variety. This system does not
lock you into a specific check for each for-
mation. Simplicity exists because the play-
ers are not forced to memorize multiple
checks. The check is spoken in the huddle
prior to every play. This also allows the play
caller more control. The key component in
the execution of this system is precise for-
• AFCA Summer Manual — 2001 •
mation recognition by our two signal
callers. Our signal callers are the free safe-
ty and middle linebacker.
In our weekly preparation we use for-
mation breakdowns to tailor the categories
used as the basis of double coverage calls.
The basis of the system could be two-
back/one-back as explained above, I/offset
backfields, tight end(s)/no tight ends, no
trips/trips, etc. For the purpose of this arti-
cle we will focus on using two-back/one-
back as the basis for the double coverage
call.
Each week we strive to place prominent
run formations as the basis of the first call
and group passing formations for use with
the second call. Obviously the more distinct
the tendencies the more advantages are
gained. Once this task is accomplished,
then we attempt to enhance our system
through the use of down/distance tenden-
cies and personnel groupings.
The First Coverage Call
As previously mentioned, we typically
use the first coverage call vs. two-back run-
ning formations. This allows us to play our
best run support coverages to these forma-
tions. In a passing situation, we could play
any coverage vs. these same formations
by changing the first coverage call.
The Second Coverage Call
The second coverage call places us into
a category of defense rather than a specif-
ic coverage. As we take into account many
factors, such as down/distance, personnel
tendencies, and field zones, we determine
the appropriate category of defense to use
for the situation. Our call sheet is organized
to reflect this. One important component to
our defensive philosophy is the use of
extreme defensive measures, such as
maximum coverage or maximum pres-
sures, in long yardage situations.
Obviously, in long yardage situations there
are times when we will substitute personnel
to use a variety of nickel defenses. When
we choose this option we have typically
abandoned our double coverage call sys-
tem. However, there are many long-
yardage situations where we have normal
personnel in the game and use the double
coverage call system to place us in a max-
imum coverage or maximum pressure call.
O as a Second Coverage Call
If we decide we want to be in a pressure
mode vs. a one-back passing set, we
would make 0 the second coverage call
(Ex: 4/0). Not only does the zero call lock
us into man coverage, it also places our
front into a blitz mode. Our middle line-
backer knows that when zero is the second
coverage call and a one-back set shows,
he must check to a specific blitz for that for-
mation. This is typically a seven-man pres-
sure but would vary in design depending
upon the type of one back formation pre-
sented.
Five as a Second Coverage Call
If we decide to maximize our coverage
without substitution, we would make five
the second call (Ex: 4/5). In our scheme,
cover five is a man under, two-deep cover-
age. Our middle linebacker knows that
when five is the second coverage call and
we get a one back set, he has the flexibility
to check our front into one of three pass
rush games. We believe this category puts
us in our best coverage and our best four-
man pass rush calls.
Zone as the Second Coverage Call
In situations where we do not want to
pressure or play maximum coverage we
make “zone” the second coverage call (Ex:
4/zone). This places our coverage in an
appropriate zone call for each formation.
This is commonly used in down and dis-
tance situations that do not present strong
tendencies for run or pass and would be
viewed by the signal caller as more neutral.
A common example of the zone call would
be to play cover two vs. a one back bal-
anced set and cover three vs. trips.
The double coverage call system is not
something that must be utilized at all times
or in every situation. There are times where
the double coverage call system is not
advantageous. If we want to pressure two
backs then we would simply call the
desired pressure in the huddle. When one-
back is presented, our defense would use
the standard zero checks. There are also
times when we want to play cover four to all
formations. In this situation we would call
cover four in the huddle and play it vs.
everything. There may be a time in long
yardage situations where we would want to
play cover five vs. all formations, not just
one back. Cover five would be called in the
huddle.
Real Game Situations
The following three examples will
demonstrate how the double coverage call
system enhances the quality of our defen-
sive call in a game situation.
Situation 1: It’s third and eight and the
ball is on the +26 yard line. Our breakdown
indicates that this is likely option or a max-
imum pass protection situation in two
backs. In one back the breakdown reflects
over 80 percent of the snaps are dropback
passes. A good coverage call in our
scheme for this situation would be 4/0. In
this case we would play standard quarters
coverage vs. all two back sets. This would
allow for good run support vs. the option
and double coverage vs. all in-breaking
routes by the No. 1 receiver. Against one
back, this would put us in a pressure mode
with man coverage. The pressure would be
determined by the specific one back forma-
tion. In most situations this would be a
seven-man pressure which should either
force a hot throw or give us a sack oppor-
tunity, knocking the offense out of field goal
range.
Situation 2: It’s third and four and our
breakdown indicates that this is a prominent
three-step situation with a two back set, and
heavy tendencies toward screen/three-step
in one back sets. In our scheme, a good cov-
erage call would be 2/5. This would put us in
cover two vs. any two back formation and
cover five (man under, two-deep) vs. any one
back formation. Cover five also puts our front
into one of three pass rush games.
Situation 3: It’s first and ten. The break-
down shows that it is over 80 percent run
out of two-back and 50 percent run out of
one-back. In this situation our most com-
mon call would be 4/zone. Against two
backs we would play cover four; our best
run support coverage. Versus one back, we
would play the appropriate zone coverage
for the specific one back set. This would be
our most sound call vs. run and pass. The
zone coverages might change from week
to week for each formation.
As mentioned earlier, there are situa-
tions where we would simply make a single
coverage call. The three examples above
illustrate favorable situations for the double
coverage call system. In many cases, a
large percentage of the game snaps would
be similar to the example shown in the third
situation. We are able to take full advantage
of extreme tendencies by using calls shown
in the first two examples. At times, person-
nel groups make the double coverage call
unnecessary, but the double coverage call
is a very valuable tool when personnel
groupings are not possible or reliable.
Conclusion
In summary, we feel the double cover-
age call system allows us to take advan-
tage of high tendency situations, while min-
imizing risk, enhancing flexibility, and main-
taining simplicity. We have found this sys-
tem easy to implement and it has been
instrumental to our defensive success at
Wartburg College.
We hope this article has provided you
with some ideas that can benefit your cover-
age system. We appreciate the opportunity
to contribute to the AFCA summer manual
and would be happy to discuss any ques-
tions you have concerning our double cover-
age call system. Best of luck in the fall.

NCAA Position on Gambling

The NCAA opposes all forms of legal and illegal sports wagering. Sports wagering has the potential to undermine the
integrity of sports contests and jeopardizes the welfare of student-athletes and the intercollegiate athletics community.
Sports wagering demeans the competition and competitors alike by a message that is contrary to the purposes and
meaning of ‘sport.’ Sports competition should be appreciated for the inherent benefits related to participation of student-
athletes, coaches and institutions in fair contests, not the amount of money wagered on the outcome of the competition.

For those reasons, the NCAA membership has adopted specific rules prohibiting athletics department staff members and
student-athletes from engaging in gambling activities as they relate to intercollegiate or professional sporting events.

• AFCA Summer Manual — 2001 •