Turnovers came from man coverage

[DeadPoets]

We were in man coverage on all 3 turnovers. Just sayin

On the INT to Denzel we had a LB blitzing right at Rettig's face so he rushed the throw.

On Eddie William's strip Deon Bush blitzed and buried Rettig (Rettig threw off his back foot and just got lucky we blew the coverage.
... but nevertheless it had to be a good sign that pressure out of man coverage will work once the LBs get a better feel for play-action and who their man is on the particular play.

The only times in the game that we actually forced hurried throws from Rettig were from man coverage... we sent 5 and played cover 1 or 2 behind it.

 

[Shogungts]

We were in man coverage on all 3 turnovers. Just sayin

On the INT to Denzel we had a LB blitzing right at Rettig's face so he rushed the throw.

On Eddie William's strip Deon Bush blitzed and buried Rettig (Rettig threw off his back foot and just got lucky we blew the coverage.
... but nevertheless it had to be a good sign that pressure out of man coverage will work once the LBs get a better feel for play-action and who their man is on the particular play.

The only times in the game that we actually forced hurried throws from Rettig were from man coverage... we sent 5 and played cover 1 or 2 behind it.

I think you are stretching on this one; we might have pressured the QB, but he still got the ball out to a wide open receiver and then we got lucky/made a good play to strip the ball that had nothing to do with what coverage we were in.

 

[DeadPoets]

We were in man coverage on all 3 turnovers. Just sayin

On the INT to Denzel we had a LB blitzing right at Rettig's face so he rushed the throw.

On Eddie William's strip Deon Bush blitzed and buried Rettig (Rettig threw off his back foot and just got lucky we blew the coverage.
... but nevertheless it had to be a good sign that pressure out of man coverage will work once the LBs get a better feel for play-action and who their man is on the particular play.

The only times in the game that we actually forced hurried throws from Rettig were from man coverage... we sent 5 and played cover 1 or 2 behind it.

I think you are stretching on this one; we might have pressured the QB, but he still got the ball out to a wide open receiver and then we got lucky/made a good play to strip the ball that had nothing to do with what coverage we were in.

We got pressure and buried Rettig. He threw off his back foot. The only thing that needs to be corrected on that play is Eddie Williams picking up the TE.
We would have had a sack.

There were more encouraging plays out of man to man - that's my premise.

 

[pbcup]

The first play of the game that went for 36 and the 2nd TD were also against man coverage. Buchanon blew the coverage both times biting on the play fake, but it was man coverage. The 1st drive of the second quarter looks like it also included a blown man coverage by Armbrister on the 16 yard pass to the RB over the middle. Sure, you can grab a few plays and say you were encouraged, but you can just as easily go the other route. Fact is, we didn't cover well zone or man.

 

[GhostofVenice01]

Ok...we get it, you dont like Donofrio


Everyday you make a new thread pointing out his deficiencies. We get it.

 

[DeadPoets]

The first play of the game that went for 36 and the 2nd TD were also against man coverage. Buchanon blew the coverage both times biting on the play fake, but it was man coverage. The 1st drive of the second quarter looks like it also included a blown man coverage by Armbrister on the 16 yard pass to the RB over the middle. Sure, you can grab a few plays and say you were encouraged, but you can just as easily go the other route. Fact is, we didn't cover well zone or man.

Show me some encouraging zone plays? Only time they didn't pick up yards against our zone coverage was if they dropped the ball.
The man coverage hiccups can be corrected much easier than the zone being an absolute clusterfck.

 

[DeadPoets]

Ok...we get it, you dont like Donofrio


Everyday you make a new thread pointing out his deficiencies. We get it.

It's a message board - get used to it.

 

[GhostofVenice01]

Ok...we get it, you dont like Donofrio


Everyday you make a new thread pointing out his deficiencies. We get it.

It's a message board - get used to it.

Negs. Get use to them cause they comin


I find it ironic that a guy who admitted he never played the game all of a sudden now is second guessing a coach 4 days after the game and trying to break down x's and o's

 

[stat1124]

Why do people keep saying #45 RB blew the coverage on the first play. Its like the 4th time I have seen that typed. It was #34 - TA that let the FB release into the flats because he got tangled up with the Guard who I thought was holding a bit on that play. #52 DP sucked into the play action and there was noone left on the outside once #22 KR shifted to play the outer third with the motion shift. Look at the image for better illustration.

The first play of the game that went for 36 and the 2nd TD were also against man coverage. Buchanon blew the coverage both times biting on the play fake, but it was man coverage. The 1st drive of the second quarter looks like it also included a blown man coverage by Armbrister on the 16 yard pass to the RB over the middle. Sure, you can grab a few plays and say you were encouraged, but you can just as easily go the other route. Fact is, we didn't cover well zone or man.

 

[deleted1562]

All things considered, our defense wasn't that atrocious. We had a TON of young blood in there, going up against an extremely talented, and experienced O-Line, and a veteran quarterback (one of the best in the ACC).

If you can't get penetration up front, unless you have Darrelle Revis and his twin brother as your two CBs, you're going to have trouble stopping the pass, particularly with our youth. Give BC's O-Line some credit, though.

What did happen, which is why I'm not so upset, is that our defense came up with big turnovers at big points in the game. Perryman's pick 6 was HUGE. They were already up 14-0 and had the ball back just halfway through the 1st. If they score a TD on that drive, we're probably looking at a blow out and this board is in meltdown mode. Forcing turnovers is something last year's squad could not do. All in all, I think the future looks bright.

 

[DeadPoets]

Ok...we get it, you dont like Donofrio


Everyday you make a new thread pointing out his deficiencies. We get it.

It's a message board - get used to it.

Negs. Get use to them cause they comin


I find it ironic that a guy who admitted he never played the game all of a sudden now is second guessing a coach 4 days after the game and trying to break down x's and o's

It's not complicated to see where some of our issues stem from on defense.
And I might not have played... but I've been watching (and rewatching) Canes games for 20+ years.

For the record I was second guessing Coach D long before last Saturday.

 

[GhostofVenice01]

]Why do people keep saying #45 RB blew the coverage on the first play.[/B] Its like the 4th time I have seen that typed. It was #34 - TA that let the FB release into the flats because he got tangled up with the Guard who I thought was holding a bit on that play. #52 DP sucked into the play action and there was noone left on the outside once #22 KR shifted to play the outer third with the motion shift. Look at the image for better illustration.

View attachment 13345

The first play of the game that went for 36 and the 2nd TD were also against man coverage. Buchanon blew the coverage both times biting on the play fake, but it was man coverage. The 1st drive of the second quarter looks like it also included a blown man coverage by Armbrister on the 16 yard pass to the RB over the middle. Sure, you can grab a few plays and say you were encouraged, but you can just as easily go the other route. Fact is, we didn't cover well zone or man.

Because its easier to jus say he did so it fits there little rant they got going.


Strong post stat +rep

 

[GhostofVenice01]

Ok...we get it, you dont like Donofrio


Everyday you make a new thread pointing out his deficiencies. We get it.

It's a message board - get used to it.

Negs. Get use to them cause they comin


I find it ironic that a guy who admitted he never played the game all of a sudden now is second guessing a coach 4 days after the game and trying to break down x's and o's

It's not complicated to see where some of our issues stem from on defense.
And I might not have played... but I've been watching (and rewatching) Canes games for 20+ years.

For the record I was second guessing Coach D long before last Saturday.

:ibisroflmao:

Geez I guess that makes you a certified D-1 Coach now

I bet you got your degree from University of Phoenix Online too huh?

 

[DeadPoets]

Ok...we get it, you dont like Donofrio


Everyday you make a new thread pointing out his deficiencies. We get it.

It's a message board - get used to it.

Negs. Get use to them cause they comin


I find it ironic that a guy who admitted he never played the game all of a sudden now is second guessing a coach 4 days after the game and trying to break down x's and o's

It's not complicated to see where some of our issues stem from on defense.
And I might not have played... but I've been watching (and rewatching) Canes games for 20+ years.

For the record I was second guessing Coach D long before last Saturday.

:ibisroflmao:

Geez I guess that makes you a certified D-1 Coach now

I bet you got your degree from University of Phoenix Online too huh?

Don't have to be certified to know D'Onofrio isn't.

 

[Pennmed Canefan]

In the first half we played wuite a bit of both. However reality is that we got killed by errors in man and we had to back off. We couldnt cover them well (slant) and we blew coverages. Zone isnt perfect but it compensates better for these errors. For ksu i'd be shocked if we arent zone predominant because they will exploit these man errors. Our lb's can't play against play action whether it's 34 or 45--they both screwed up multiple times as did gaines for a near-td. They'll care more about the mistakes than turnovers because the turnovers were really gifts.

 

[pbcup]

I apologize to Buchanan for incorrectly stating he blew the coverage on the first play. The point was it was blown man coverage though, doesn't matter who it was. I'd prefer to play man too, but we don't have the talent/experience to exclusively play man right now. Either one will get picked apart by a half way decent QB with out any pressure though.

 

[AllbouttheU]

Ok...we get it, you dont like Donofrio


Everyday you make a new thread pointing out his deficiencies. We get it.

Man I was bout say same thing.

 

[GhostofVenice01]

Ok...we get it, you dont like Donofrio


Everyday you make a new thread pointing out his deficiencies. We get it.

Man I was bout say same thing.

Better be careful or hes gonna say your trolling now!