Defensive Scheme: We provide the MONEY ZONE

[UM58]

I am starting to think that Golden is a great leader, but he's more of a CEO type and is lacking in the X's and O's department. The way he has run the program so far has been top notch, but the on field results just aren't translating.


Starting to believe he is going to need some really great assistants and coordinators to be successful here. He pretty much has run the program like a CEO since he has been here, and he has done it well.

And maybe it's just time that I realize that he's not some X and O guru or strategic mastermind. He's a CEO type who is great at managing and motivating players/coaches and getting the best out of them, but not necessarily strong as far as the gameday and in-game strategy and play-calling. He's not a Saban, or a Kelly. He's going to have to have a program running the way he wants it and then have great assistants who are creative and intelligent strategically to do the work for him.

This isn't a shot at Golden, it's a good thing and that's the reason why we hired him and why I still believe he can return us to respectability again. I just don't think he is as sophisticated strategically as other top coaches around the country. And he may not need to be if he's as good of a CEO as I think he can be.

Not saying he's a mastermind or anything, but he coordinated some solid defenses at UVA and learned from a guy who called plays for Parcells.

Exactly

He was running the defense under the guidance of a pretty good defensive coach. Much different than running the scheme as the top guy. Saban's DC does a great job also but we all know who's really in charge of that defense.

 

[UMJer026]

I am starting to think that Golden is a great leader, but he's more of a CEO type and is lacking in the X's and O's department. The way he has run the program so far has been top notch, but the on field results just aren't translating.


Starting to believe he is going to need some really great assistants and coordinators to be successful here. He pretty much has run the program like a CEO since he has been here, and he has done it well.

And maybe it's just time that I realize that he's not some X and O guru or strategic mastermind. He's a CEO type who is great at managing and motivating players/coaches and getting the best out of them, but not necessarily strong as far as the gameday and in-game strategy and play-calling. He's not a Saban, or a Kelly. He's going to have to have a program running the way he wants it and then have great assistants who are creative and intelligent strategically to do the work for him.

This isn't a shot at Golden, it's a good thing and that's the reason why we hired him and why I still believe he can return us to respectability again. I just don't think he is as sophisticated strategically as other top coaches around the country. And he may not need to be if he's as good of a CEO as I think he can be.

Great post. I'll add that based on what I have seen thus far, I do think Fisch can be that guy for the offense.

 

[UMJer026]

It's crazy how it took such an *** whooping like what UM received today to bring the best out of our posters. All solid posts and great discussion. Some of you have made great points about Golden and I hope they are accurate assessments. Today was the first time I ever really doubted Golden and asked myself if this is the guy to take us back to national prominence.

What I haven't seen anyone mention was the awful clock management at the end of the first half. We're down 24-3 and we have about 1:20 to go down the field and possibly score a touchdown to make it a respectable 24-10. We also would receive first in the 2nd half. Instead of calling a timeout we run an inexplicable 30+ seconds off the clock and of course when we get inside their 10 yardline we don't have time to go for the endzone and settle for a field goal.

This made me furious and reminded me of how I used to feel every game with Shannon's clock management and poorly called timeouts. It was just very frustrating to watch.

We talked about it during the game thread. My complete assumption is that he was literally scared to let KState get the ball back...again. They even ran the ball before they realized how easily they could move the ball down the middle of the field. My biggest fear is that they're afraid to look bad and allow others to perceive them as failures. The irony is that they looked terrible today using that exact approach. I hope he adjusts. We need more aggression. What's the big deal between losing 66-13 and 52-13? If it meant giving us a chance to be aggressive, like we were on the play that Mcgee got the INT (we forced a quicker throw), count me in.

Can you elaborate on this? What did we do to force a quicker throw? Was that the only time we did it? Was it successful at any other point?

 

[CanesAreAble]

It's crazy how it took such an *** whooping like what UM received today to bring the best out of our posters. All solid posts and great discussion. Some of you have made great points about Golden and I hope they are accurate assessments. Today was the first time I ever really doubted Golden and asked myself if this is the guy to take us back to national prominence.

What I haven't seen anyone mention was the awful clock management at the end of the first half. We're down 24-3 and we have about 1:20 to go down the field and possibly score a touchdown to make it a respectable 24-10. We also would receive first in the 2nd half. Instead of calling a timeout we run an inexplicable 30+ seconds off the clock and of course when we get inside their 10 yardline we don't have time to go for the endzone and settle for a field goal.

This made me furious and reminded me of how I used to feel every game with Shannon's clock management and poorly called timeouts. It was just very frustrating to watch.

We talked about it during the game thread. My complete assumption is that he was literally scared to let KState get the ball back...again. They even ran the ball before they realized how easily they could move the ball down the middle of the field. My biggest fear is that they're afraid to look bad and allow others to perceive them as failures. The irony is that they looked terrible today using that exact approach. I hope he adjusts. We need more aggression. What's the big deal between losing 66-13 and 52-13? If it meant giving us a chance to be aggressive, like we were on the play that Mcgee got the INT (we forced a quicker throw), count me in.

Can you elaborate on this? What did we do to force a quicker throw? Was that the only time we did it? Was it successful at any other point?

Rodgers came on a safety blitz from the field.

 

[Canesfan1899]

I think we have the wrong objective. At the University of Miami, no matter how far we've fallen, the objective should never be to "keep the game close." The objective is to win. If you lose big, you lose big. We played to keep it close today, and yet we still lost big.

I agree with this. Generally I don't have a problem with the scheme because it's been game-appropriate.

But today it just didn't work at all. We couldn't force punts or FGs, and the offense laid an egg as well.


But I still think the DL personnel is the biggest problem. It's just horrific right now.

Go down swinging, I would rather bring heat all day long and get beat a few times deep than the crap we are putting out there. Thanks for the breakdown Lu.

And let the CB's man up and jam some WR's at the LOS, Chick finally got a coverage sack on Sat so it's possible.

 

[CanesAreAble]

I think we have the wrong objective. At the University of Miami, no matter how far we've fallen, the objective should never be to "keep the game close." The objective is to win. If you lose big, you lose big. We played to keep it close today, and yet we still lost big.

I agree with this. Generally I don't have a problem with the scheme because it's been game-appropriate.

But today it just didn't work at all. We couldn't force punts or FGs, and the offense laid an egg as well.


But I still think the DL personnel is the biggest problem. It's just horrific right now.

Go down swinging, I would rather bring heat all day long and get beat a few times deep than the crap we are putting out there. Thanks for the breakdown Lu.

And let the CB's man up and jam some WR's at the LOS, Chick finally got a coverage sack on Sat so it's possible.

I think Golden and D are thinking long term with the defense. Playing zero coverage and **** MIGHT help short term (though I'm skeptical), but if we're ever going to win big, these guys need to learn how to play cover 2, cover 3, quarters, whatever. You can't give different looks if guys only know how to play one thing.

The problem is the implementation is painful.

 

[Canesfan1899]

I think we have the wrong objective. At the University of Miami, no matter how far we've fallen, the objective should never be to "keep the game close." The objective is to win. If you lose big, you lose big. We played to keep it close today, and yet we still lost big.

I agree with this. Generally I don't have a problem with the scheme because it's been game-appropriate.

But today it just didn't work at all. We couldn't force punts or FGs, and the offense laid an egg as well.


But I still think the DL personnel is the biggest problem. It's just horrific right now.

Go down swinging, I would rather bring heat all day long and get beat a few times deep than the crap we are putting out there. Thanks for the breakdown Lu.

And let the CB's man up and jam some WR's at the LOS, Chick finally got a coverage sack on Sat so it's possible.

I think Golden and D are thinking long term with the defense. Playing zero coverage and **** MIGHT help short term (though I'm skeptical), but if we're ever going to win big, these guys need to learn how to play cover 2, cover 3, quarters, whatever. You can't give different looks if guys only know how to play one thing.

The problem is the implementation is painful.

I was ready for a painful season, but that went beyond my expectations Sat. They need to get kids who are able to disguise looks and dictate what the offense is going to do, at least a little bit.

 

[Joecane]

This thread makes me sad.

Goddamnit, I hope Al reads the board.

 

[DaU83]

we're too scared of giving up the big play.... which I understand, but I don't agree with.

 

[razrcane]

This thread makes me sad.

Goddamnit, I hope Al reads the board.

Smh..if something doesn't change we are in for a long season.

 

[nope44]

Although I hate the fact that we don't have an aggressive scheme, it doesn't matter. Can't make chicken salad out ofchicken ****. Our dline is horrible. I haven't seen one that bad here in a while. And for all the praise our o line got this offseason, they have no heart. They got man handeled. And when they cheap shotted Morris, they didnt react. They should have headhunted that backer and knock him out of the game at least.

 

[bigpurk45]

reason why we wont do that well this year is due to our youth... plain and simple... last year we had a lot of upperclassmen... we need that... but don't have that... guys are not physically ready in the trenches... they need that mustache... we dont have depth issues... we have depth issues in class... upperclass... Another thing i dont like is the constant rotation of players... players need to be in and only be sub-ed when players are tired or injured or if we are blowing teams out. no need for DP to ever come out unless he tells the coach i need a break...