forums

For those wondering about Formations and Back 7 Depth

It all starts upfront as you know. If you can't get penetration and disrupt the QB or the lane/seam the RB is taking you have what we saw Saturday night. This isn't complicated. Golden is 20 yards from the action and he is ******* clueless on how to adjust.
 
Advertisement
TheSwagger1 said:
For all intents and purposes it's a conscious decision to cede 4 yards every single down so long as you don't burn us for 30 which seems absolutely insane but I'm not sure what other conclusion can be drawn when you watch games and see a breakdown like the one above.

You see this at the high school level a lot when smartly coached defensive teams, really mature programs, are playing offenses whose programs have gone to the spread but don't have the precision, consistency, and most importantly patience to take the 4 yard chunks. Inevitably those offenses lose patience, start chunking it deep, and/or make mistakes, playing into what the defense is designed to stop. That's where this defensive mentality flourishes and is at it's best - against poorly coached, inefficient high school offenses. You are 100% not trying to dictate to or press the offense, your entire success hinges on them making mistakes. That's been said many times, but Lu illustrated it perfectly.
Click to expand...

That is what is so infuriating. How can the staff not see the forest through the trees?

A bend don't break strategy is essentially an admission of failure.
 
Not sure how much "discussion" can be had... Very few can refute the pics and your analysis... :)
 
Every Saturday, I yell at the TV watching this pathetic excuse for a defense. I constantly tell my 14 year old son that this isn't how the Canes are supposed to play defense, it's as if this bozo was intentionally planted as our HC to ruin our once great legacy
 
How hard was everyone laughing when they kept bringing up us being one of the best run defenses statistically in the country?
 
Advertisement
LuCane said:
wacane said:
I dont understand how the coaches cant see stuff like this. It boggles my mind
Click to expand...

They see it. They know more Xs and Os than everyone on this board put together, I'd imagine. Like I said above, there is difference between what should work in theory and what is happening in reality. This, as I've said for 2 years, is a conscious decision. Ask your 280 pound DL to stack his OT, shed him and make the play. Sure, "player could have been stronger and made a better play." But, you're starting with a disadvantage.
Click to expand...

Right. So what does that mean? The only conclusion I can draw, other than that the coaches are sociopaths, is that they love the "theory" of the defense...the potential. It must be that they draw it up with Xs and Os -- on paper -- and it works perfectly, in theory. They're in love with the philosophy and what it could do if executed perfectly. They're convinced and they're stubborn. So they stick with the approach and when it doesn't work (pretty much always), we inevitably hear that we just didn't make the plays, we need to tackle better, etc. and that we'll continue to work our tails off until we do.

Except that the reality never matches the theory. And this is college, so even if Artie Burns, for example, is "growing up" and "starting to figure it out," by the time he'd actually have it figured out (if that's possible), he won't be wearing a Miami uniform anyways.

Ultimately, we choose to be defeated. It's that simple to me. Against Nebraska, we literally CHOSE to lose in reality in order to AVOID the possibility that we might lose in theory (i.e. stay back and play it safe in case they pass, even though they're running it down our throats almost every single play). I guess because they completed a long pass on the first drive, I don't know.

I'm exhausted.
 
As I look at the photos, it appears to me to be more about alignment than depth. Additionally, the scary part is how the offense so clearly can dictate an alignment to their advantage. In the trips and 4-wr sets, they are moving our OLB, guy who has to set the edge out 5+ yards past the TE. Its a guaranteed 4 yards and thats if we make the play.

It is amazing to me that we would allow a team, who is so unbalanced offensively to dictate these alignments to us. Why are we scared of the pass, why do we over react?

I wonder if someone ever said in a meeting, "You know, their QB is a much better runner than thrower, why not run blitz on every down, create pressure, rely on our athletes on the outside to cover and make him make a tough throw under duress."

It just seems so obvious to me. Going into the game all I saw in their passing game were screens and seem throws. With a single high safety you take away the seem, but we didn't do that. That cannot happen.

I am no expert, but it just seems to me that we are making very poor decisions when you look at what our advantages are on defense. We have athletes, not brute strength guys, let them run.
 
Advertisement
Excellent illustrations of why our defense is consistently failing.

I realize our coaches are smart guys and know the X's and O's but how can they blatantly ignore the results? Is it really possible they are so married to their beloved "scheme" that they will coach themselves out of a job?

In the immortal words of Johnny Cohran, "It defies credulity!"
 
It's what worked for them at Temple and they think it can work here but they are wrong. In the MAC they played teams on offense that were slow and plodding, no innovative offenses, which allowed their scheme, this read and react crap to stop plays in front of them. I don't think they had alot of team speed on defense so they used this defense to play safe and not get beat deep. They have miscalculated the effectiveness of this scheme and how it would work on the FBS level with speedy athletes at every position and more advanced offenses than what they were used to in the MAC. Some of the alignments are mind boggling to say the least. It makes you wonder how bad are the Offensive Coordinators are at the MAC level that they couldn't expose the flaws in this scheme.
 
6.4 yards per carry against Nebraska and we didn't even try to make an adjustment. I want to watch Golden get torn to pieces by a pack of wild dogs.
 
DFT31J said:
Excellent illustrations of why our defense is consistently failing.

I realize our coaches are smart guys and know the X's and O's but how can they blatantly ignore the results? Is it really possible they are so married to their beloved "scheme" that they will coach themselves out of a job?

In the immortal words of Johnny Cohran, "It defies credulity!"
Click to expand...

no
 
Advertisement
Well if you wanted him fired and more booster support for said firing, having duke as our next opponent is perfect timing.

They are going to use the same exact game plan as Nebraska and embarrass these defensive coaches for the second year in a row.

No way they make whole sale changed to the scheme in 4 days. It's gonna be the same **** we saw last weekend.
 
JHallCanes said:
How hard was everyone laughing when they kept bringing up us being one of the best run defenses statistically in the country?
Click to expand...

The sad thing is that the coaches are so dug in with this scheme, I think they genuinely think it's progressing and getting better.
 
LuCane said:
Iggcane said:
Lu, could you compare some screen shots of our old 4-3 defense (Schiano/Shannon) in the early 2000's. Just curious how the alignment and depth compares. I always remember our safeties playing very deep, although I believe our front was meant to penetrate, so it would be interesting to compare and contrast styles.
Click to expand...

Good idea. Just a quick answer as I have to get back.

Two things:

1) As I said in the OP and you stated above, different front. We were a big time upfield DL. Some would say guys like Mcdougle were too upfield and lost contain at times. It changes the flow and timing of a play, naturally.

2) Offensive formations have changed a lot. Zone-read is popular now. 4WR sets are as common, sometimes more, than 21 personnel groupings. The easiest way to compare is to compare how we look against 21 personnel in the original post (so picture #5 from the top), to the below:

View attachment 25868

Like I alluded to, the numbers aren't altogether THAT different. It's the style and broader philosophy. In the picture above, we're headed upfield. 2 of our LBs are standing up at the end of the LOS. The remaining LB isn't at 5+ yards. Our Safeties can be 30 yards deep and I wouldn't care because they're not being asked to fly down and set the edge for the defense. See some of the differences in theory? It's riskier, no doubt.
Click to expand...

Also note that we are in press coverage. Maybe it was press and bail but either way it is an aggressive formation meant to cause the offense to have to react rather than dictate.
 
Advertisement
rokulika said:
DFT31J said:
Excellent illustrations of why our defense is consistently failing.

I realize our coaches are smart guys and know the X's and O's but how can they blatantly ignore the results? Is it really possible they are so married to their beloved "scheme" that they will coach themselves out of a job?

In the immortal words of Johnny Cohran, "It defies credulity!"
Click to expand...

no
Click to expand...

Problem is other team's know our Xs and Os just as well.
 
DFT31J said:
Excellent illustrations of why our defense is consistently failing.

I realize our coaches are smart guys and know the X's and O's but how can they blatantly ignore the results? Is it really possible they are so married to their beloved "scheme" that they will coach themselves out of a job?

In the immortal words of Johnny Cohran, "It defies credulity!"
Click to expand...

Define smart? You have to be trolling...
 
Donofrio with the quote of the year/century:

D'Onofrio defends scheme by noting "Every call we make is designed to have somebody make a tackle."
 
Advertisement
Back
Top