forums

Talent level on defense

Bpayne32 said:
It's not Doritos fault we bite on play action every time
It's not Doritos fault when we go man to man our guys manage to leave a receiver wide open
It's not his fault when we sent 5 and 6 we never got to the quarterback !!!!!
It's called lack of talent and execution
Click to expand...

Right.
 
Advertisement
Coaches deserve the benefit of the doubt when their unit plays well most of the time but occasionally struggles against great opponents. That's not the case though. We've seen this SAME STUFF for the last 3 years, no matter who we play.
 
Can't believe anybody watches this defense and comes to the conclusion that talent is the sole problem. LOL
 
Advertisement
Bpayne32 said:
It's not Doritos fault we bite on play action every time
It's not Doritos fault when we go man to man our guys manage to leave a receiver wide open
It's not his fault when we sent 5 and 6 we never got to the quarterback !!!!!
It's called lack of talent and execution
Click to expand...

So it's not the Defensive coordinators fault that the same glaring problems have persisted throughout his tenure here, no matter who we throw out there on defense?

Uh, ok. I was under the mistaken belief that the D-coordinator was also responsible for identifying and correcting his defensive players' mistakes and bad habits in addition to his play calling duties. Thanks for setting the record straight...
 
It's not the DC's fault that play-action continues to work against us but VT's DC had his players ready for that same exact play when Miami ran it.
 
Pennmed Canefan said:
The talent is quite bad but as I said elsewhere the biggest problem is execution. And if you can't get a veteran to execute, there's no reason to think that a younger more talented guy will. We can't defend VT as well as Duke can. We don't have worse talent than Duke, but our guys clearly have no idea what they are doing on defense. You get the feeling the coaches are always chasing bad execution instead of backing up and asking the fundamental question of why guys aren't executing.
Click to expand...

I saw multiple instances last night where a guy knew exactly what he was doing, but was in a very tough spot.

Figs, as one example, got caught in the left curl/flats area with a basic high-low. Because our philosophy is to wait for our opponent's mistakes, we were playing contain w/ our D-line and dropping hard w/ our DBs. The result, of course, is that the QB had a bunch of time and was comfortable enough to let the play develop. Because we had been hit by WRs sitting down in the deep dig area, Figs intentionally got tremendous depth to the point where he slipped down when he tried to recover to the flats in front of him.

Logan Thomas, one of the worst decision makers and inaccurate QBs I've watched on video (I watched every single VTech play before this game), used Figs' responsibilities against him. He moved his eyes to the "high" WR, got the result he wanted from Figs, and just dumped down below. The play didn't go for a huge gain, but it went for an important enough gain. That is a problem of execution, sure, but only because execution is really difficult when there is a philosophical flaw. There isn't a "scheme" that calls for that situation, which is why I said last week there is a "definition" problem b/w "scheme" and "philosophy." There is quite obviously a philosophy that calls for our players to be dictated by offenses, though. We have core issues.
 
LuCane said:
Pennmed Canefan said:
The talent is quite bad but as I said elsewhere the biggest problem is execution. And if you can't get a veteran to execute, there's no reason to think that a younger more talented guy will. We can't defend VT as well as Duke can. We don't have worse talent than Duke, but our guys clearly have no idea what they are doing on defense. You get the feeling the coaches are always chasing bad execution instead of backing up and asking the fundamental question of why guys aren't executing.
Click to expand...

I saw multiple instances last night where a guy knew exactly what he was doing, but was in a very tough spot.

Figs, as one example, got caught in the left curl/flats area with a basic high-low. Because our philosophy is to wait for our opponent's mistakes, we were playing contain w/ our D-line and dropping hard w/ our DBs. The result, of course, is that the QB had a bunch of time and was comfortable enough to let the play develop. Because we had been hit by WRs sitting down in the deep dig area, Figs intentionally got tremendous depth to the point where he slipped down when he tried to recover to the flats in front of him.

Logan Thomas, one of the worst decision makers and inaccurate QBs I've watched on video (I watched every single VTech play before this game), used Figs' responsibilities against him. He moved his eyes to the "high" WR, got the result he wanted from Figs, and just dumped down below. The play didn't go for a huge gain, but it went for an important enough gain. That is a problem of execution, sure, but only because execution is really difficult when there is a philosophical flaw. There isn't a "scheme" that calls for that situation, which is why I said last week there is a "definition" problem b/w "scheme" and "philosophy." There is quite obviously a philosophy that calls for our players to be dictated by offenses, though. We have core issues.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. We have talked about this in past, I laughed when VT came out with 3 wide and then split everyone wide on early downs because I remember you saying as an OC this is what you would do against us. We stay in Base D and its just soo easy. We put our D players in tough positions and hope for mistakes by the D, adn we give up chunks of yards anyway. We are scared or atleast coach like it of the big play and give every freaking team whatever they want underneath, even the wake forest of the world. Against FSU those are 7-8 yards gains.

Thats why I say even if we have all 5 *, philosophically we will still have guys in tough positions because of what we ask them to do, we will obviously play better aginst terrible talent but in big games, Dorito will routinely have his skirt pulled. We make every QB feel comfortable and make our defense uncomfortable in everything we ask them to do, combine that with some players who get more burn for whatever reason and you get said result.
 
Advertisement
Lol only a true dug in D'onofrio slurper will continue to say the talent is the issue on this team....

Most of the talent on this defense were recruited at schools where they would be balling at by now. GTFOH w/ the talent excuses.
 
LuCane said:
Pennmed Canefan said:
The talent is quite bad but as I said elsewhere the biggest problem is execution. And if you can't get a veteran to execute, there's no reason to think that a younger more talented guy will. We can't defend VT as well as Duke can. We don't have worse talent than Duke, but our guys clearly have no idea what they are doing on defense. You get the feeling the coaches are always chasing bad execution instead of backing up and asking the fundamental question of why guys aren't executing.
Click to expand...

I saw multiple instances last night where a guy knew exactly what he was doing, but was in a very tough spot.

Figs, as one example, got caught in the left curl/flats area with a basic high-low. Because our philosophy is to wait for our opponent's mistakes, we were playing contain w/ our D-line and dropping hard w/ our DBs. The result, of course, is that the QB had a bunch of time and was comfortable enough to let the play develop. Because we had been hit by WRs sitting down in the deep dig area, Figs intentionally got tremendous depth to the point where he slipped down when he tried to recover to the flats in front of him.

Logan Thomas, one of the worst decision makers and inaccurate QBs I've watched on video (I watched every single VTech play before this game), used Figs' responsibilities against him. He moved his eyes to the "high" WR, got the result he wanted from Figs, and just dumped down below. The play didn't go for a huge gain, but it went for an important enough gain. That is a problem of execution, sure, but only because execution is really difficult when there is a philosophical flaw. There isn't a "scheme" that calls for that situation, which is why I said last week there is a "definition" problem b/w "scheme" and "philosophy." There is quite obviously a philosophy that calls for our players to be dictated by offenses, though. We have core issues.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this.

Felt bad for Jenkins and Perryman late in the game because they were put in impossible situations to succeed covering WRs
 
LuCane said:
I saw multiple instances last night where a guy knew exactly what he was doing, but was in a very tough spot.
Click to expand...

THIS

How can talent succeed in those conditions last night against a team w/ no talent on offense, WOAT QB, yet our safeties are playing so far off that they cant even be seen on the field?..... our LBs are 7 yards off the D-line, and drop back 5 more yards when the ball is snapped.

all this is going on even though Logan Thomas is the QB and it's raining heavily. smh what DC would make a game plan like that against VT in that weather?

Our safeties have to come from 30 yards up the field sliding in the rain to make a tackle, Our LBs are playing in space in the rain it was the worst gameplan i've ever seen.

What Defensive coordinator is going to have their entire defense play off against Logan Thomas.... its raining and its VT, they are going to have to run the ball or call quick pass plays, which they did all game to the tune of 42 points and 549 total yards of offense.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top