This defensive scheme makes no football sense to me

[mc3022]

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.

[MarkL]

My hope is that McCloud has been keeping it vanilla because he's got something special cooked up for IU next week.

[mc3022]

My hope is that McCloud has been keeping it vanilla because he's got something special cooked up for IU next week.

Hope you're right...I was hoping they would make some adjustments today and work on playing the corners/safetys closer to the line of scrimmage against a weaker opponent.

IU has athletes similar to WKU - If not better...

[jpfalcon09]

My hope is that McCloud has been keeping it vanilla because he's got something special cooked up for IU next week.

Highly doubt that, no reason to run a scheme two weeks a row just to change it up in Week 3. Its obvious that McCloud feels the secondary can't make plays in press coverage. All its leading to are cheap yardage plays and easy first downs. The defense is also getting hurt because they're on the field for 90+ plays. I'm not looking forward to seeing how many plays Indiana gets off on us next week. At this point, it is what it is. Clawson's staff played a much more aggressive style that we grew accustomed to so this is a huge change to witness. The one common theme though in talking from fans is that they feel we're progressing back to the Gregg Brandon type of football, and that doesn't win championships. I'm still willing to give this staff a chance but thus far I've been less than impressed.

[kdog27]

My hope is that McCloud has been keeping it vanilla because he's got something special cooked up for IU next week.

Why throw away the first game of the season to help yourself in the third game? Indiana is going to do what they want. The good news is we've already seen a game where we gave up 700 yards and 60 points so it can't get worse.

[MarkL]

My hope is that McCloud has been keeping it vanilla because he's got something special cooked up for IU next week.

Why throw away the first game of the season to help yourself in the third game? Indiana is going to do what they want. The good news is we've already seen a game where we gave up 700 yards and 60 points so it can't get worse.

The operative word was "hope". My expectation and realization are far different. I also fear IU and Wisconsin will do whatever they want.

[factman]

Maybe our defensive staff spent time with the Browns staff over the summer!

[BGSU33]

My hope is that McCloud has been keeping it vanilla because he's got something special cooked up for IU next week.

What we're seeing is what we're going to get. We aren't sitting on anything that we are going to spring on Indiana that we could've already tried in one of these two games.

[gspointer]

My hope is that McCloud has been keeping it vanilla because he's got something special cooked up for IU next week.

What we're seeing is what we're going to get. We aren't sitting on anything that we are going to spring on Indiana that we could've already tried in one of these two games.

I am not buying that our DBs are that bad. They are just being put in terrible situations. Play 10 yards off and then have to cheat to get to the receiver before a quick throw. Then get burned deep as you are moving forward "cheating" a bit. At least playing on the line of scrimmage you know what you have in front of you. I would rather get beat on a slant in tight coverage than a pitch and catch in which you have no real chance of preventing a catch.

I am going to say this- If we continue with this crap I am giving me season tickets away. This is REALLY THAT BAD! 321 yards agains VMI.. Ridiculous. Seriously after saturday if we keep up with this s**t- let me know if you want my tickets. First one that wants them can have them. I hope I am wrong and don't have to give them away but this is simply torture and not real football. Too many other things I can be doing...

[kdog27]

I don't think there as bad as appears either. The current scheme along with little pressure gives them no shot to make a good play. We basically have 4-5 safeties and no cornerbacks.

[Class of 61]

Dont know if anyone noticed but late in game, with backups in, we had at least ONE corner playing press coverage. Young man's name is Clinton Stephens out of Fla. I noticed him because he not only was playing on LOS, but went with his man and just missed a pick. Perhaps we need to see more of him.

[mscarn]

Dont know if anyone noticed but late in game, with backups in, we had at least ONE corner playing press coverage. Young man's name is Clinton Stephens out of Fla. I noticed him because he not only was playing on LOS, but went with his man and just missed a pick. Perhaps we need to see more of him.

He was a late commit during the last signing class and had a *** rating as WR with lots of other offers. Seems to have a lot of potential.

The combination of soft coverage schemes and 90+ plays on the field is a recipe for disaster for any defense. The bargain was always that the offense will score enough to make up for it and the rest of the season hinges on whether they can deliver.

[AyZiggy97]

Coach Babers specifically said in the VMI post game that they pulled defensive backs out of the game for not challenging wide receivers. To paraphrase, if you're not going to challenge receivers , you might as well be standing on the sideline.

So, it's not the scheme.