I didn't just watch t game, I focused on the "Defense"

[Notsince1985]

which is not something I normally do. I'm not one of those fans who breaks down the plays or goes back and watches for specifics, etc. I did yesterday, and it made me even more sick to my stomach than normal. Here are some things I noticed.

On every 2nd or 3rd and 3 or less, our LBs are at the same depth that they are on 1st and 10 or even 3rd and 20. There was one play where it was 3rd and 1 and UVA had a "jumbo" package in with a FB and 2 TE and we only had 2 LB in the middle of the field. The DBs don't creep up, not on the WR, or in general, and safeties were still 15 yards off the LOS. Flip it to when we had 2nd or 3rd and short, and UVA had 10 men within 2 yards of the LOS.

What ****ed me off even more was Perryman having to cover WRs. There was one play where he dropped into coverage and was chasing a WR 30 yards down the field. The worst was on UVA's TD when it was 31-13. It's 3rd and7 from the Miami 10. UVA went 4 wide and split Taquan Mizzel, a 5-10, 180 scatback in the slot and we countered by putting DP on him in the slot. He abused DP with a double move for the TD. It was comical. Again, our LB are not put in a position to be successful.

Lastly, we never attack the blockers. We sit back and wait for them to block the **** out of us. It was never more apparent than on UVA's first TD where their lineman and WRs blocked 4 of our guys downfield for 7-8 seconds while Parks waltzed into the endzone untouched from 20+ yards out on a swing pass on 3rd down when everyone and their mother knew what play UVA was running. Either our guys are weak as **** and they can't shed blocks, which I don't buy, because we have DBs being blocked by smaller WR and LB like DP being taken out by WR and TE, not just OL, or we're taught to try and go around blocks, not fight through them, or we're taught to be passive and not try to avoid blocks. Whatever it is, we rarely seem to bust up screens or swing passes or any of these plays where blockers are out in front. The exception was Howard's INT, which was a great individual play.

 

[Angry Ibis]

With an untrained eye, I also watched the defense and saw that there were consistently plays that if the talent level is improved the outcome is better. I'm not trying to argue the scheme is good, but I am pointing out a possible reason why the coaches may think the processes will work with the right players.

Example:
- Not being fast enough to play side to side at linebacker to contain the edges or the upfield move
- Not being fast enough to get upfield --- I don't want to hear a gap analysis, I am talking about a play when the defensive lineman or LB has a line to the RB or QB and is just flat out too slow to get there for a TFL. So instead of a Bama or FSU play that blows up a first down in the backfield, we sit at 2nd and 6/7 because we are not making the play.

Even within this possibly crappy scheme, these pieces help produce 3rd and long.

Speaking of defense - the screen pass TD, Bush and Highsmith - what exactly were these two thinking?
- Bush - the lineman looks like a big teddy bear, let me give him a hug
- Highsmith - if I run where he is now, instead of where he is going to be, I will not have to tackle him and get a better view of the TD dance

 

[TexasCane90]

Nothing new and refreshing after reading both posts... The D sucks... Not talented enough.. And Dorito blows at putting guys in good positions...

 

[Notsince1985]

I never claimed this would be earth shattering or anything new. Just my observations after watching the game closely and just like a fan for once. We will be better when the talent improves, but from what I saw, its more philosophy and scheme. The 2001 defense would mask that, but we're not going to have that talent. A better scheme would also mask our talent deficiencies.

 

[Cuse2Miami26]

which is not something I normally do. I'm not one of those fans who breaks down the plays or goes back and watches for specifics, etc. I did yesterday, and it made me even more sick to my stomach than normal. Here are some things I noticed.

On every 2nd or 3rd and 3 or less, our LBs are at the same depth that they are on 1st and 10 or even 3rd and 20. There was one play where it was 3rd and 1 and UVA had a "jumbo" package in with a FB and 2 TE and we only had 2 LB in the middle of the field. The DBs don't creep up, not on the WR, or in general, and safeties were still 15 yards off the LOS. Flip it to when we had 2nd or 3rd and short, and UVA had 10 men within 2 yards of the LOS.

What ****ed me off even more was Perryman having to cover WRs. There was one play where he dropped into coverage and was chasing a WR 30 yards down the field. The worst was on UVA's TD when it was 31-13. It's 3rd and7 from the Miami 10. UVA went 4 wide and split Taquan Mizzel, a 5-10, 180 scatback in the slot and we countered by putting DP on him in the slot. He abused DP with a double move for the TD. It was comical. Again, our LB are not put in a position to be successful.

Lastly, we never attack the blockers. We sit back and wait for them to block the **** out of us. It was never more apparent than on UVA's first TD where their lineman and WRs blocked 4 of our guys downfield for 7-8 seconds while Parks waltzed into the endzone untouched from 20+ yards out on a swing pass on 3rd down when everyone and their mother knew what play UVA was running. Either our guys are weak as **** and they can't shed blocks, which I don't buy, because we have DBs being blocked by smaller WR and LB like DP being taken out by WR and TE, not just OL, or we're taught to try and go around blocks, not fight through them, or we're taught to be passive and not try to avoid blocks. Whatever it is, we rarely seem to bust up screens or swing passes or any of these plays where blockers are out in front. The exception was Howard's INT, which was a great individual play.

I don't understand this "why are our lbs covering wr?" From our fans. Not saying I disagree with a lot of what you say but why can't our lbs cover wrs? Are we supposed to go dime every single time they line up 3 wide? Dp got beat by a rb on that td. He can't cover a rb now? I thought he was leaving early because he's nfl ready now

 

[Notsince1985]

Yes, when teams go 4 and 5 wide you don't play a base defense. DP wasn't covering a normal RB, he was covering a guy they only throw the ball to. He's 5-10, 180 and runs a 4.5. Other teams look for mismatches. We don't. Armbrister was lined up covering a WR on at least 4-5 occasions. We refuse to move out of a base defense, whether a 4-3 or 3-4. We have to have 3 or 4 LB on the field at all times no matter the offensive personnel. Dorito is extremely stubborn. He lets the offense dictate the game to him, rather than the other way around.

 

[cane since birth]

im in agreement with everything you said except the play you mentioned with DP covering the scat back, usually when teams put the running back out wide the defense has to counter with a LB, they kinda have do choice, but everything else im in agreement with

 

[CINCYCANESFAN]

we just dont have the players to run a 3-4 specially at LB, we need to run a 4-3

 

[immars]

Agree with OP as we did something similar yesterday. Left game with such disappointment as a result. Talent IS an issue, no doubt. BUT the larger problem is philosophy. Watched DP the whole way on that TD and he had no chance because of his position relative to the line of scrimmage. At that point. He will lose every battle.
Our reasoning to stay base all season long is absurd. Sorry, but even when talent improves it will not mean we will be Alabama and fsu defensively. We do not attacks the line of scrimmage, we do not force te offense into a side of the field, in to a coverage, we don't force situations, we react to them. Hence our defense is spent and exhausted. Our philosophy is passive and reactionary. Absurd. We recruit and are in an area of the country that plays attacking defense all through out. So, instead of getting that 18 year old and enhancing his skill while maintaining that aggressive nature, we plan on essentially breaking down that player and re-programming him to so something "unnatural". Our players spend way too much time thinking and chasing. Even with talent, that is what they will do think too much because of the reads and chase. Even our dlinemen, they don't and can't attack the gaps even on obvious pass downs because they still have to maintain their initial gap responsibility. Result? Qb "just gets rid of the ball" and he places it at to the guy who found that amazing hole in the D.

Again, do we have inferior talent to fsu? Yes. Will out D look like fsu's in two years? HIGHLY unlikely due to philosophy. Talent gap does not exist against wake forest, Virginia and duke, and is comparable against Vtech. Those offense destroyed out defense. That is coaching. The problem is philosophy and it's all on the head coach. Listen to interviews of dbj, zagacki and they side step the issue. It's always on the players apparently.

 

[poncho0091]

With an untrained eye, I also watched the defense and saw that there were consistently plays that if the talent level is improved the outcome is better. I'm not trying to argue the scheme is good, but I am pointing out a possible reason why the coaches may think the processes will work with the right players.

Example:
- Not being fast enough to play side to side at linebacker to contain the edges or the upfield move
- Not being fast enough to get upfield --- I don't want to hear a gap analysis, I am talking about a play when the defensive lineman or LB has a line to the RB or QB and is just flat out too slow to get there for a TFL. So instead of a Bama or FSU play that blows up a first down in the backfield, we sit at 2nd and 6/7 because we are not making the play.

Even within this possibly crappy scheme, these pieces help produce 3rd and long.

Speaking of defense - the screen pass TD, Bush and Highsmith - what exactly were these two thinking?
- Bush - the lineman looks like a big teddy bear, let me give him a hug
- Highsmith - if I run where he is now, instead of where he is going to be, I will not have to tackle him and get a better view of the TD dance

Keep in mind, our players usually have more ground to make up because they are positioned 7-10 yards off the ball while other teams are playing much closer to the los

 

[sebastian91]

What ****ed me off even more was Perryman having to cover WRs. There was one play where he dropped into coverage and was chasing a WR 30 yards down the field. The worst was on UVA's TD when it was 31-13. It's 3rd and7 from the Miami 10. UVA went 4 wide and split Taquan Mizzel, a 5-10, 180 scatback in the slot and we countered by putting DP on him in the slot. He abused DP with a double move for the TD. It was comical. Again, our LB are not put in a position to be successful.

Which play are you talking about with DP chasing a WR 30 yds down the field? If it's the pass play to #85 for 35 yds, which occurred earlier in the same drive as the 10 yd TD pass to Mizzell, then you're wrong. DP was not covering #85. He was lined up in his usual spot, first took the short cross by the TE coming from the right, then chased the play after the throw. #85 was split wide to the left. DP got in on the tackle down the field because he was pursuing the play.

You're also wrong on the 10 yd pass to Mizzell, who was lined up in the backfield at the snap, not split out wide in the slot. Again, DP was in his usual position, immediately picked up Mizzell coming out of the backfield, bit on a fake to the outside, and got beat to the post.

If you're going to complain about the scheme, which is certainly a legit topic of complaint, at least don't make ***** up to support your position.

 

[Notsince1985]

I didn't make **** up. There was a play where DP was covering a WR 30 yards down the field. It wasn't the play you're talking about. As for the TD, fine, I made a mistake on that, but still, he has zero chance covering a FB let alone a guy who is basically a WR playing RB.

 

[CanesAreAble]

Since when do LBs have no coverage responsibilities?

Regardless of the defense, LBs have to cover something (or blitz on every play, I guess).

 

[sebastian91]

I didn't make **** up. There was a play where DP was covering a WR 30 yards down the field. It wasn't the play you're talking about. As for the TD, fine, I made a mistake on that, but still, he has zero chance covering a FB let alone a guy who is basically a WR playing RB.

DP can't cover a FB coming out of the backfield? But talent isn't an issue on this defense? I don't get it. DP is going to have to cover RBs coming out of the backfield all the time when he goes to the league. If he can't do it now, he'll never be able to. I don't recall DP covering a WR 30 yds down the field, but I certainly could've missed it. I mentioned the play I did because someone else brought that play up yesterday as an example of how the scheme sucks because DP was covering #85, which he wasn't. I'm interested in seeing the play that you're talking about, though, if you have it.

 

[Notsince1985]

Read my posts. I never said talent wasn't an issue. It clearly is. That's why I said we need a better scheme to mask the talent. Our talent is better than Ball State, Memphis, Troy, North Carolina Central and Marshall, all teams whose defenses had MUCH easier times against Virginia, Duke and VT. No one is asking for Bama or FSU defensive numbers, but we let offenses ranked in the 90s and 100s put up 500 yards week in and week out. That's not talent alone. If it was, the other teams with less talent than us wouldn't be able to hold them to 300 yards and 24 points.

 

[sebastian91]

Read my posts. I never said talent wasn't an issue. It clearly is. That's why I said we need a better scheme to mask the talent. Our talent is better than Ball State, Memphis, Troy, North Carolina Central and Marshall, all teams whose defenses had MUCH easier times against Virginia, Duke and VT. No one is asking for Bama or FSU defensive numbers, but we let offenses ranked in the 90s and 100s put up 500 yards week in and week out. That's not talent alone. If it was, the other teams with less talent than us wouldn't be able to hold them to 300 yards and 24 points.

Yeah, I get all of that, because it's been regurgitated 50,000 times here. But, you said that DP can't even cover a FB coming out of the backfield. DP is our best player on defense. Something isn't adding up if we can't even expect our best player to achieve the most basic of responsibilities in any defensive scheme. Personally, I think DP is perfectly capable of covering a RB coming out of the backfield. He bit on a fake and got burned on a play where the QB had a perfectly formed pocket to sit in, with no push from the middle of the DL.

 

[Notsince1985]

Read my posts. I never said talent wasn't an issue. It clearly is. That's why I said we need a better scheme to mask the talent. Our talent is better than Ball State, Memphis, Troy, North Carolina Central and Marshall, all teams whose defenses had MUCH easier times against Virginia, Duke and VT. No one is asking for Bama or FSU defensive numbers, but we let offenses ranked in the 90s and 100s put up 500 yards week in and week out. That's not talent alone. If it was, the other teams with less talent than us wouldn't be able to hold them to 300 yards and 24 points.

Yeah, I get all of that, because it's been regurgitated 50,000 times here. But, you said that DP can't even cover a FB coming out of the backfield. DP is our best player on defense. Something isn't adding up if we can't even expect our best player to achieve the most basic of responsibilities in any defensive scheme. Personally, I think DP is perfectly capable of covering a RB coming out of the backfield. He bit on a fake and got burned on a play where the QB had a perfectly formed pocket to sit in, with no push from the middle of the DL.

I was exaggerating about the FB, but he is pretty god awful in coverage

 

[UM58]

"Stop running around the block!"

 

[guccinikes]

so did we come up with the almighty answer yet? talent or scheme? lol
i hate how far off we play on short down plays also, and two years ago it was said we didnt have dbs to play press
last year, it was we needed to learn the scheme...this year, well its a, b, or c~all of the above

 

[Prince_Boll]

which is not something I normally do. I'm not one of those fans who breaks down the plays or goes back and watches for specifics, etc. I did yesterday, and it made me even more sick to my stomach than normal. Here are some things I noticed.

On every 2nd or 3rd and 3 or less, our LBs are at the same depth that they are on 1st and 10 or even 3rd and 20. There was one play where it was 3rd and 1 and UVA had a "jumbo" package in with a FB and 2 TE and we only had 2 LB in the middle of the field. The DBs don't creep up, not on the WR, or in general, and safeties were still 15 yards off the LOS. Flip it to when we had 2nd or 3rd and short, and UVA had 10 men within 2 yards of the LOS.

What ****ed me off even more was Perryman having to cover WRs. There was one play where he dropped into coverage and was chasing a WR 30 yards down the field. The worst was on UVA's TD when it was 31-13. It's 3rd and7 from the Miami 10. UVA went 4 wide and split Taquan Mizzel, a 5-10, 180 scatback in the slot and we countered by putting DP on him in the slot. He abused DP with a double move for the TD. It was comical. Again, our LB are not put in a position to be successful.

Lastly, we never attack the blockers. We sit back and wait for them to block the **** out of us. It was never more apparent than on UVA's first TD where their lineman and WRs blocked 4 of our guys downfield for 7-8 seconds while Parks waltzed into the endzone untouched from 20+ yards out on a swing pass on 3rd down when everyone and their mother knew what play UVA was running. Either our guys are weak as **** and they can't shed blocks, which I don't buy, because we have DBs being blocked by smaller WR and LB like DP being taken out by WR and TE, not just OL, or we're taught to try and go around blocks, not fight through them, or we're taught to be passive and not try to avoid blocks. Whatever it is, we rarely seem to bust up screens or swing passes or any of these plays where blockers are out in front. The exception was Howard's INT, which was a great individual play.

actually the former players, and other coaches, and other professionals ALL said we are too small. None of our LB's are big enough outside of DP... pretty much agree with everything in here, but LB size is not due to our scheme, they are just smaller