This defensive scheme makes no football sense to me
Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2014 12:14 am
First and foremost, as many have mentioned, it was great to get a win. Thought the offense and defense played much better than last week - even though it was a much weaker opponent.
Still, this defense makes no sense to me. I'll start out by saying I have never coached college football but I think scheme wise this is something I haven't seen much of - let me know what you guys think
- First of all, and most obvious, having corners 10+ yards off the ball on a down-by-down basis is a extremely conservative way to play football - a much different change of pace we've seen under that past coaching staff.
- Not only is it conservative, but it puts alot of pressure on your secondary to make 1-on-1 tackles in space - something we weren't good at against WKU but did better today - Hopefully we can tackle well against Indiana or its going to be another long night.
- We've been in nickel the majority of the game in both games, not sure if this is due to our opponents both playing spread style offenses or just the scheme itself. We've done a good job of this so far but again, it puts alot of pressure on your front 6 to stop the run. Having the secondary so far back creates an adverse effect in the secondary as well - One or two big runs and you get your secondary peeking into the backfield, opening up the big passing game.
- I can see double moves being a huge issue as well down the road - Our secondary is getting used to have to come screaming up to make plays against the short passes - and when you're only rushing 4 (minus colvin and now prbly DJ Lynch) you will have the time to throw those longer routes.
- We do bring pressure yes, but the majority of the pressure is coming from the outside from the nickel and outside backers, making it a much longer route to the QB. When you don't mix in much man blitzing schemes, opponents can begin to anticipate where the blitz is coming
- Our coverage these first two games has pretty much been exclusively cover 3 or cover 4. We ran man a few times on 3rd and short today but only 3-4 times from what I saw. Reason why those short passes are so wide open
- Last but not least, the biggest concern of mine and why I believe this makes absolutely no sense for us to run a conservative style defense is time of possession. Believe VMI lead us in TOP today. Running a up-tempo offense there is always a huge risk of having your defense on the field the majority of the game - even if you're scoring at will. Why not gamble more? If the whole point of our program is to get the ball back to our high powered offensive system why are we playing so conservative? Its a double edge swords and we will have a tough time beating teams that can force even a few 3 and outs and control the ball and put drives together.
If I was playing against our defense, the 10/15 yard short routes are there all day. Good teams will take advantage of this like WKU did. Boy, I'm nervous for the Indiana game.
Still, this defense makes no sense to me. I'll start out by saying I have never coached college football but I think scheme wise this is something I haven't seen much of - let me know what you guys think
- First of all, and most obvious, having corners 10+ yards off the ball on a down-by-down basis is a extremely conservative way to play football - a much different change of pace we've seen under that past coaching staff.
- Not only is it conservative, but it puts alot of pressure on your secondary to make 1-on-1 tackles in space - something we weren't good at against WKU but did better today - Hopefully we can tackle well against Indiana or its going to be another long night.
- We've been in nickel the majority of the game in both games, not sure if this is due to our opponents both playing spread style offenses or just the scheme itself. We've done a good job of this so far but again, it puts alot of pressure on your front 6 to stop the run. Having the secondary so far back creates an adverse effect in the secondary as well - One or two big runs and you get your secondary peeking into the backfield, opening up the big passing game.
- I can see double moves being a huge issue as well down the road - Our secondary is getting used to have to come screaming up to make plays against the short passes - and when you're only rushing 4 (minus colvin and now prbly DJ Lynch) you will have the time to throw those longer routes.
- We do bring pressure yes, but the majority of the pressure is coming from the outside from the nickel and outside backers, making it a much longer route to the QB. When you don't mix in much man blitzing schemes, opponents can begin to anticipate where the blitz is coming
- Our coverage these first two games has pretty much been exclusively cover 3 or cover 4. We ran man a few times on 3rd and short today but only 3-4 times from what I saw. Reason why those short passes are so wide open
- Last but not least, the biggest concern of mine and why I believe this makes absolutely no sense for us to run a conservative style defense is time of possession. Believe VMI lead us in TOP today. Running a up-tempo offense there is always a huge risk of having your defense on the field the majority of the game - even if you're scoring at will. Why not gamble more? If the whole point of our program is to get the ball back to our high powered offensive system why are we playing so conservative? Its a double edge swords and we will have a tough time beating teams that can force even a few 3 and outs and control the ball and put drives together.
If I was playing against our defense, the 10/15 yard short routes are there all day. Good teams will take advantage of this like WKU did. Boy, I'm nervous for the Indiana game.
