State of the Defense
by FrankWhyte on Oct 9, 2011 3:50 PM EDT
Email
Print
We are now 5 games into the season, and the defense has been non-existent in 4 of them (they have only "showed up" against an anemic Ohio St. offense). Yes, even in a game where we won by 31 points to an FCS school, the D was not impressive. We continue to get shredded by our opponents' rushing attacks, no matter how vanilla the play calling is or how poor their offensive linemen play. Please help me understand why..
It is not just our players that are underperforming either. D'Onofrio has come up with no answers with whatever product he has on the field. People were optimistic after the Maryland game because our offense played really well and we were "getting our talent back on D." Why do the defensive schemes look worse? At least in the Maryland game, players were in a position to be successful. Yesterday, on the Thomas backbreaking run, how the heck do you call a play where your backers are flushing the outside lanes? The outside lanes? On 3rd and 1? On your end of the field? Up 3? With a minute left? There is literally 1000 things wrong with that play call. If D'Onofrio has Spence hitting the center gap instead of "spying" wide and then having to recover we win the game.
I don't mean to get on our guys but we could easily be 4-1 and 2-0 on the ACC and I am just frustrated. Go Canes.....
we at TSF are not responsible for the content posted in this section. i mean, we're responsible for the good stuff that gets posted in this section. that was totally us. beyond that, we take no responsibility whatsoever.
10 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Frustated
is putting it mildly. The D is NOwhere to be found. Say what you will about depth and talent, but the cupboard was not left bare on defense but it sure is playing like it. We could not adjust all game yesterday, why? Play after play they kept moving on us. I kept saying as the O clawed its way back in it, s@#% our defense now has to hold and it can’t… and it didn’t.
And let’s face facts, coaching in college and the pros is a buddy system. Golden brought Donofrio with him and will to the next place he goes, its now what you know it is who
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. -- the dude
by my friend bob sacamano on Oct 9, 2011 7:50 PM EDT reply actions
i'm gonna be writing about this for tomorrow but
needless to say there is an insane lack of talent/experience on the defense, and that’s not the fault of anyone on this staff
by rayrayrayrayrayrayrayray on Oct 10, 2011 12:45 AM EDT reply actions
If the talent/depth is as thin as it looks...
then why not use a more aggressive/exotic style that “underdog” programs use to compensate for lack of star recruits? I acknowledge that these schemes expose you in certain ways, but I’d rather put up with a few big plays from opposing offenses in exchange for even a miniscule possibility that our Defense creates a sack, TFL, INT, sack-fumble, etc.
I am not asking rhetorically and claiming to know this is the answer. I am asking/wondering. It just seems like or current approach gives us no chance to stop a team from executing their gameplan.
by Chester Copperpot on Oct 10, 2011 12:50 AM EDT reply actions
Michigan used this approach
for three years under Rich Rod. At time it is successful, but sooner or later the opposing coaches light you up. And that was across the board conservative coaches. Sure, it was Greg Robinson as DC in the end there, but they would run “schemes” and “blitzes,” all to no avail, simply because they had no talent/all their D were underclassmen.
If we could somehow in a vacuum take these same players, with the same play-calling schemes, and see how they would do two years from now against the same teams, the only random variables being their experience and growth, the results would be much more positive.
by avendittelli on Oct 10, 2011 1:44 AM EDT up reply actions
the answer isn’t as simple as “be more aggressive”, unfortunately. d’onofrio did his fair share of blitzing on saturday, and VT still hit passes (the 60 yd td to boykin, that pass to the TE on the first drive that perryman couldn’t knock down). the linebackers were really aggressive in trying to stop the run, but the got themselves out of position a lot.
i think the answer is a lot more difficult and a lot more fundamental than “play tighter coverage” or whatever. these kids don’t even understand what they’re seeing most the time.
by rayrayrayrayrayrayrayray on Oct 10, 2011 4:30 AM EDT up reply actions
+1
“these kids don’t even understand what they’re seeing most the time.”
That’s the whole problem in a nutshell.
"Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect."
FUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!!!!!!!
So frustrating!
"Hold your mouth for the war. Use it for what it's for." - P. Anselmo
"Without spirits the men cannot support the fatigues of a long campaign" - Maj. Gen. Nathanael Greene
thetwitter
by TheDutchWonder on Oct 10, 2011 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Well that's the point
No matter how aggressive you are, big plays are a direct correlation to how talented and experienced your players are. When you have Ed Reed and Sean Taylor back there, you can play a single safety 15 yards deep (5+ more than normal) knowing they won’t let something behind them or are fast enough to get it in front of them.
Michigan now with Mattison is doing incredible, something like 4th in D after being over 100 last year. Most would point at it as Mattison >>>>>>>> GERG, and of course, that is true. But if you look closer at just a small example, you see their starting walk on white “John Lynch” safety is now a 3rd year starter, instead of a walk on freshman or sophomore. And on down the line.
Overall, I think D’Onofrio is fine for the gig. I trust Golden, he’s rode with this guy for years, so I therefore trust D’Onofrio.
by avendittelli on Oct 10, 2011 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
