The defense actually did what they needed to do to put us in a position to win in the first half, and by the time they started falling apart, it was because they had been on the field the whole **** game. I am NOT saying they looked awesome. But we stopped the run consistently, generated a safety, and held a good quarterback to three consecutive field goals. Would I have liked to see the D more aggressive like Louisville? Of course, but that being said, the D is not the reason we lost that game (despite the stats).
In my mind, the blame for this particular game falls squarely on the shoulders of the running backs (and consequently the O-line). Dallas Crawford played the worst game of his career here on Saturday. His running sucked (partly because of O-line play), but more importantly, his blocking was absolutely horrendous. Morris had little time to do anything and Crawford consistently failed to pick up his man, causing Morris to get out of his comfort zone, which we all know leads to disaster. In my eyes, the Running backs were the main catalysts leading to the failures in both the run and pass game. Duke was sorely missed. Gus was no better, unfortunately. Gus will never be a visionary runner, so he needs to become an elite blocker or he has little use on this squad. The new recruits coming in better be able to block, or it will be a long season next year for the not-so-mobile Ryan Williams (or even Olsen).
On a slightly tangential note, what I am saying is that a lot of you are taking the easy way out by singling out poor defensive scheme, when it is all relative. The truth of the matter is that schemes must match. A big play offense with short possession times will never have an elite defense because they are on the field too often. The onus in such a system is on the offense to score. On the other hand, a possession offense relies on the defense to make stops and keep the score low. We ran a big play offense that relied on the defense to make stops because the offense couldn't convert on third down. I think next year we will see improved defensive play in part due to a change in our offense, even if we remain with the current D scheme. Without Stephen (presumably with Williams), the offense will be less big-play oriented and more methodical, relying on dink-and-dunk with Duke running the ball and the occasional big play to Coley. The result will be an offense that takes up more clock-time, but probably won't score 41 points per game. However, we should see a more rested defense that can execute D'No's system consistently throughout the game. Instead of rotating less talented players, we could keep our best men in more often and they will still be fresh. Again, not a comment on whether our Defensive scheme (or players) are good enough - more of a commentary on the fact that our Defense was put in the worst possible scenarios all year long.
In my mind, the blame for this particular game falls squarely on the shoulders of the running backs (and consequently the O-line). Dallas Crawford played the worst game of his career here on Saturday. His running sucked (partly because of O-line play), but more importantly, his blocking was absolutely horrendous. Morris had little time to do anything and Crawford consistently failed to pick up his man, causing Morris to get out of his comfort zone, which we all know leads to disaster. In my eyes, the Running backs were the main catalysts leading to the failures in both the run and pass game. Duke was sorely missed. Gus was no better, unfortunately. Gus will never be a visionary runner, so he needs to become an elite blocker or he has little use on this squad. The new recruits coming in better be able to block, or it will be a long season next year for the not-so-mobile Ryan Williams (or even Olsen).
On a slightly tangential note, what I am saying is that a lot of you are taking the easy way out by singling out poor defensive scheme, when it is all relative. The truth of the matter is that schemes must match. A big play offense with short possession times will never have an elite defense because they are on the field too often. The onus in such a system is on the offense to score. On the other hand, a possession offense relies on the defense to make stops and keep the score low. We ran a big play offense that relied on the defense to make stops because the offense couldn't convert on third down. I think next year we will see improved defensive play in part due to a change in our offense, even if we remain with the current D scheme. Without Stephen (presumably with Williams), the offense will be less big-play oriented and more methodical, relying on dink-and-dunk with Duke running the ball and the occasional big play to Coley. The result will be an offense that takes up more clock-time, but probably won't score 41 points per game. However, we should see a more rested defense that can execute D'No's system consistently throughout the game. Instead of rotating less talented players, we could keep our best men in more often and they will still be fresh. Again, not a comment on whether our Defensive scheme (or players) are good enough - more of a commentary on the fact that our Defense was put in the worst possible scenarios all year long.
