Thoughts on the D

[sstcane]

Do you think Alabama and LSU are running simple defenses? The difference is many players are in the system for 3 years and start getting on the field as RS So and Jr's.

As far as the substitutions last year, I agree that it was too much and I hope that Cornelius, Armbrister, Highsmith and Rodgers are special teamers and don't see the field on D except for blow outs.

Even in the NFL it takes 3 years to have your defensive system take hold.

Our DL did look much better this spring than last year, against ao better offense than what we had.

Hopefully the D steps up and D'Onofrio can get the most out of our roster.

 

[DaU83]

From what I saw of this defense, I thought there were two major coaching errors. One was the desire to do too many things as has been discussed in this thread. The second is a desire to play too many guys. Donofrio seems to be hellbent on being multiple defensively which is fine by me. However, I do consider it fairly mandatory to be good at *something.* Whether that's Stoops' spin zone or Saban's cover 1 or Shannon's 2 deep man or quarters or whatever you want, you need *something* that you can apply week to week and rely upon as a base. If you don't have that, you have nothing and offenses will spin you out of control while you call more and more crap. Donofrio didn't have that last year--I guess the closest thing to it seemed to be cover 3 which was painfully stoic and bland because guys weren't that good at it. Had they really focused on this as their primary defense, they probably would've gotten better at reading route combinations and squeezing lanes making it harder on the offense through repetition. Regarding the latter issue, it's fairly inexplicable why every game featured mass substitutions **** near all the time, and it likely stunted the growth of some young guys that could've used the reps but instead were watching the Cornelius and Highsmith's and Telemaque's of the world toil around. I understand the idea of subbing in for tired players, but that is not what we did. We subbed massively even in the first couple drives of the game, indicating that we were subbing because we WANTED to and not because we NEEDED to. There's not a great rationale for that IMO.

This is not to say that we should've had some top 20 defense absent the coaching--talent was the biggest problem. But, I would've liked to have seen some improvement such that by the end of the year teams like Duke weren't scoring 50 on our defense. As we move to this year, it's the same old thing. I think that it's an error to try to apply more and more and more things because the guys are "experienced" because they still haven't proven to be good at anything. Last I saw it our defense sucked, so I can't figure how we can start doing a bunch more things. I would also hope that they shorten the rotation. Guys like Perryman and Bush and their #1 corner and Pierre don't need to come off the field every 2 downs just because it looks pretty.

I don't mind the desire to do too many things, though i agree we should have something that we're really good at. I'm with you on the substitutions though.. but i think they've already said that they're going to shorten the rotation this year.

 

[LuCane]

From what I saw of this defense, I thought there were two major coaching errors. One was the desire to do too many things as has been discussed in this thread. The second is a desire to play too many guys. Donofrio seems to be hellbent on being multiple defensively which is fine by me. However, I do consider it fairly mandatory to be good at *something.* Whether that's Stoops' spin zone or Saban's cover 1 or Shannon's 2 deep man or quarters or whatever you want, you need *something* that you can apply week to week and rely upon as a base. If you don't have that, you have nothing and offenses will spin you out of control while you call more and more crap. Donofrio didn't have that last year--I guess the closest thing to it seemed to be cover 3 which was painfully stoic and bland because guys weren't that good at it. Had they really focused on this as their primary defense, they probably would've gotten better at reading route combinations and squeezing lanes making it harder on the offense through repetition. Regarding the latter issue, it's fairly inexplicable why every game featured mass substitutions **** near all the time, and it likely stunted the growth of some young guys that could've used the reps but instead were watching the Cornelius and Highsmith's and Telemaque's of the world toil around. I understand the idea of subbing in for tired players, but that is not what we did. We subbed massively even in the first couple drives of the game, indicating that we were subbing because we WANTED to and not because we NEEDED to. There's not a great rationale for that IMO.

This is not to say that we should've had some top 20 defense absent the coaching--talent was the biggest problem. But, I would've liked to have seen some improvement such that by the end of the year teams like Duke weren't scoring 50 on our defense. As we move to this year, it's the same old thing. I think that it's an error to try to apply more and more and more things because the guys are "experienced" because they still haven't proven to be good at anything. Last I saw it our defense sucked, so I can't figure how we can start doing a bunch more things. I would also hope that they shorten the rotation. Guys like Perryman and Bush and their #1 corner and Pierre don't need to come off the field every 2 downs just because it looks pretty.

Agree that we need to be good at something, and that something should be Cover 3 if they plan to run this scheme. Everything should be based out of that coverage and change-up looks can easily be rolled into from 3.

I think the reason they had mass substitution patterns last year was because they knew they were weak, lacked overall talent and experience, and wanted to get as many players on film as possible. You could really see that at the end of the year when they simply gave up trying to play Telemaque, for example.

 

[JHallCanes]

If you run every scheme don't all players fit your system?

I know it's a rebuilding process but D'Onofrios defense is fvckin god awful. Downright terrible.

Only reason it even improved at Trmple is because 1) Temple moved to the MAAC and 2) they had a really good RB that helped them move the chains and burn time of possession.

We score fast. But we scored fast in the 80s and early 00s as well (usually as a result of our defense, not in spite of it)

Dorito sucks.

In the college game you can literally rebuild in one season, excuses and bull**** be damned. It won't take much for even the most casual viewer to be able to see improvements this year since we set the bar so low last year. Rebuilding excuses are gone this year. People point to the inadequacies we have across the line but in reality, how many college teams can call themselves "complete"? At some point it becomes recruiting and coaching failures and this year I will be hard pressed to blame anything else, if we don't see major improvements of course.

 

[DaU83]

If you run every scheme don't all players fit your system?

I know it's a rebuilding process but D'Onofrios defense is fvckin god awful. Downright terrible.

Only reason it even improved at Trmple is because 1) Temple moved to the MAAC and 2) they had a really good RB that helped them move the chains and burn time of possession.

We score fast. But we scored fast in the 80s and early 00s as well (usually as a result of our defense, not in spite of it)

Dorito sucks.

In the college game you can literally rebuild in one season, excuses and bull**** be damned. It won't take much for even the most casual viewer to be able to see improvements this year since we set the bar so low last year. Rebuilding excuses are gone this year. People point to the inadequacies we have across the line but in reality, how many college teams can call themselves "complete"? At some point it becomes recruiting and coaching failures and this year I will be hard pressed to blame anything else, if we don't see major improvements of course.

It depends on what the goal is.. not many teams can call themselves complete.... but what are those team's goals? If they're trying to win their division/conference/bcs bowl... it may not be as realistic.. .. If that team is trying to win 8 games and a random bowl.. then it's do-able.

 

[jakeman1]

They can run any scheme they want, but if the DL doesn't come through this year, it will be another long year. Hopefully Hoilett and some of the new guys can come in and get some pressure, and hopefully Porter can stay healthy. Watching ND not have to pass the ball one time, and just run it right down their throats, was painful.

 

[FullyERicht]

LSU runs the same front and gap concepts all game. There may be many plays out of that, but they aren't asking their DL to be both Warren Sapp and Sione Pouha. Bama the same thing but out of the 3-4.

Pick a front and recruit and develop for that front.

 

[DeadPoets]

LSU runs the same front and gap concepts all game. There may be many plays out of that, but they aren't asking their DL to be both Warren Sapp and Sione Pouha. Bama the same thing but out of the 3-4.

Pick a front and recruit and develop for that front.

South Florida breeds 1 gap linemen & press corners.

It's the most obvious scheme to run at Miami.

 

[[]_[]Fan2010]

From what I saw of this defense, I thought there were two major coaching errors. One was the desire to do too many things as has been discussed in this thread. The second is a desire to play too many guys. Donofrio seems to be hellbent on being multiple defensively which is fine by me. However, I do consider it fairly mandatory to be good at *something.* Whether that's Stoops' spin zone or Saban's cover 1 or Shannon's 2 deep man or quarters or whatever you want, you need *something* that you can apply week to week and rely upon as a base. If you don't have that, you have nothing and offenses will spin you out of control while you call more and more crap. Donofrio didn't have that last year--I guess the closest thing to it seemed to be cover 3 which was painfully stoic and bland because guys weren't that good at it. Had they really focused on this as their primary defense, they probably would've gotten better at reading route combinations and squeezing lanes making it harder on the offense through repetition. Regarding the latter issue, it's fairly inexplicable why every game featured mass substitutions **** near all the time, and it likely stunted the growth of some young guys that could've used the reps but instead were watching the Cornelius and Highsmith's and Telemaque's of the world toil around. I understand the idea of subbing in for tired players, but that is not what we did. We subbed massively even in the first couple drives of the game, indicating that we were subbing because we WANTED to and not because we NEEDED to. There's not a great rationale for that IMO.

This is not to say that we should've had some top 20 defense absent the coaching--talent was the biggest problem. But, I would've liked to have seen some improvement such that by the end of the year teams like Duke weren't scoring 50 on our defense. As we move to this year, it's the same old thing. I think that it's an error to try to apply more and more and more things because the guys are "experienced" because they still haven't proven to be good at anything. Last I saw it our defense sucked, so I can't figure how we can start doing a bunch more things. I would also hope that they shorten the rotation. Guys like Perryman and Bush and their #1 corner and Pierre don't need to come off the field every 2 downs just because it looks pretty.

Great post pennmd. It was really frustrating that the defense hasn't developed more than what we've seen so far. I think a lot of that can be attributed to the fact we haven't been able to recruit any stud dt's yet.

As far as the rotations go. I can't help but wonder if they weren't also done in part to help prevent injuries. Bush was clearly our best safety but there's a big difference in the amount of abuse an 18 yr old body can take vs a 21

 

[Coach Macho]

LSU runs the same front and gap concepts all game. There may be many plays out of that, but they aren't asking their DL to be both Warren Sapp and Sione Pouha. Bama the same thing but out of the 3-4.

Pick a front and recruit and develop for that front.

South Florida breeds 1 gap linemen & press corners.

It's the most obvious scheme to run at Miami.

Indeed.

IMO a college team's schemes should always be a reflection of their main recruiting ground. You have an area that's full of high school defenses who play press coverage, run "even" fronts (4-man fronts) and let their D-linemen pin their ears back.

Now, I don't have a problem with playing a wide variety of coverages. Go ahead, mix it up. Play some Cover-3, some loose man, some press man, some hard Cover-2, some Cover-1, some Cover-2-Sink, Quarters, etc etc etc...but up front I wanna see us getting after people. (using speed)

This is why I don't get too excited when I see Miami sign kids like AQM, McCord, Bond, Michael Smith, etc. Yeah, as high school players they were great at pinning their ears back but what are they gonna be asked to do when they get to Miami? Stand-up? Engage? Pin their ears back every few series?