What's Golden's vision for this defense?

[OBLIVION]

and

 

[CanesAreAble]

I'm still not buying GT coming out in some strange formation. Johnson has been running the triple option for a century. How many wrinkles can he still have?

So they were making it up?

And like I said, they've had success against him before.

 

[drifters1234]

I hope so. If we do, there will be a slight change in philosophy. If we put AQM in Greens spot and McCord in Cornelius or visa versa, neither guy can handle what we currently ask Cornelius to do and would waste their talents.

Really curious to see what we do in the future. The recruiting points to something we aren't doing currently.

Also, not surprising a good thought provoking subject has little response.

I think guys like Cornileus will eventually be phased out. He's not strong enough to control gaps, fast enough to threaten from the edge, or instinctual enough to be effective in coverage.

Otherwise, he's a stud!

 

[Gamineal]

****.... We're gonna be loaded in a few years

I said that on 05, 09, 11.......when is the key

 

[LuCane]

I love the post and appreciate the discussion. I just think we have a more fundamental problem than what we're going to do with the players in a scheme. As I've been reluctantly repeating, I think our problem is WHY we choose whatever scheme we choose.

 

[NVA CANE]

I love the post and appreciate the discussion. I just think we have a more fundamental problem than what we're going to do with the players in a scheme. As I've been reluctantly repeating, I think our problem is WHY we choose whatever scheme we choose.

Lu, do you believe golden has a passive philosophy on defense or football in general or are some of us wrong in thinking that?

 

[LuCane]

I love the post and appreciate the discussion. I just think we have a more fundamental problem than what we're going to do with the players in a scheme. As I've been reluctantly repeating, I think our problem is WHY we choose whatever scheme we choose.

Lu, do you believe golden has a passive philosophy on defense or football in general or are some of us wrong in thinking that?

I think that's what the evidence shows. I have no idea what is the precise rationale for choosing to play that way. I think it's speculation either way. Maybe that's what his coaching roots dictate? Maybe he doesn't fully trust the talent on the roster yet? Maybe he thinks this style currently gives him the best chance to win? I think it could be a combination of all of those things. I also think some of those are inherently flawed either way.

What I know for sure is the guy is clearly obsessed with planning. The guy, as Able said, is a defensive coach. There's also evidence that the guy is a tireless worker and wants to win. It's a completely different situation than, say, Coker or Shannon or even other, more successful, coaches. Ask Able. What has always scared me about Golden or any coach is rigidity. I have a hard time reconciling that with him appearing to be a practical guy.

Without speaking to him, the coaches, etc., directly, all we can do is throw **** at the wall trying to explain his decisions. I will say one thing (that I've said in other threads): not all coaches or organizations have sharp processes or make decisions with elaborate analysis. I always say the story to illustrate this point, but when I sat in front of a former NFL Operations guy (who had been previously successful and was working with a legitimate football mind) and he explained that they selected a player because of "weather factors," I realized all these guys are just humans throwing darts. Some with more precision than others. Some with less. Some, like our previous coaches, without even looking at the dart board.

 

[NVA CANE]

I love the post and appreciate the discussion. I just think we have a more fundamental problem than what we're going to do with the players in a scheme. As I've been reluctantly repeating, I think our problem is WHY we choose whatever scheme we choose.

Lu, do you believe golden has a passive philosophy on defense or football in general or are some of us wrong in thinking that?

I think that's what the evidence shows. I have no idea what is the precise rationale for choosing to play that way. I think it's speculation either way. Maybe that's what his coaching roots dictate? Maybe he doesn't fully trust the talent on the roster yet? Maybe he thinks this style currently gives him the best chance to win? I think it could be a combination of all of those things. I also think some of those are inherently flawed either way.

What I know for sure is the guy is clearly obsessed with planning. The guy, as Able said, is a defensive coach. There's also evidence that the guy is a tireless worker and wants to win. It's a completely different situation than, say, Coker or Shannon or even other, more successful, coaches. Ask Able. What has always scared me about Golden or any coach is rigidity. I have a hard time reconciling that with him appearing to be a practical guy.

Without speaking to him, the coaches, etc., directly, all we can do is throw **** at the wall trying to explain his decisions. I will say one thing (that I've said in other threads): not all coaches or organizations have sharp processes or make decisions with elaborate analysis. I always say the story to illustrate this point, but when I sat in front of a former NFL Operations guy (who had been previously successful and was working with a legitimate football mind) and he explained that they selected a player because of "weather factors," I realized all these guys are just humans throwing darts. Some with more precision than others. Some with less. Some, like our previous coaches, without even looking at the dart board.

Good stuff as always Lu. Appreciate it.

 

[BlackKeysFan]

https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=634&q=*****&oq=*****&gs_l=img.3..0l10.574.1166.0.1341.5.5.0.0.0.0.88.379.5.5.0....0...1ac.1.31.img..0.5.378.A8hmb6bw4eQ#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=KosV1uZQa-Cz7M%3A%3BTP27clV1dZDWaM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fcurezone.com%252Fupload%252F_E_F_Forums%252FFeces%252Ffeces_1.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fcurezone.com%252Fig%252Fi.asp%253Fi%253D35557%3B963%3B493

 

[CANE4LIFE]

I love the post and appreciate the discussion. I just think we have a more fundamental problem than what we're going to do with the players in a scheme. As I've been reluctantly repeating, I think our problem is WHY we choose whatever scheme we choose.

Lu, do you believe golden has a passive philosophy on defense or football in general or are some of us wrong in thinking that?

I think that's what the evidence shows. I have no idea what is the precise rationale for choosing to play that way. I think it's speculation either way. Maybe that's what his coaching roots dictate? Maybe he doesn't fully trust the talent on the roster yet? Maybe he thinks this style currently gives him the best chance to win? I think it could be a combination of all of those things. I also think some of those are inherently flawed either way.

What I know for sure is the guy is clearly obsessed with planning. The guy, as Able said, is a defensive coach. There's also evidence that the guy is a tireless worker and wants to win. It's a completely different situation than, say, Coker or Shannon or even other, more successful, coaches. Ask Able. What has always scared me about Golden or any coach is rigidity. I have a hard time reconciling that with him appearing to be a practical guy.

Without speaking to him, the coaches, etc., directly, all we can do is throw **** at the wall trying to explain his decisions. I will say one thing (that I've said in other threads): not all coaches or organizations have sharp processes or make decisions with elaborate analysis. I always say the story to illustrate this point, but when I sat in front of a former NFL Operations guy (who had been previously successful and was working with a legitimate football mind) and he explained that they selected a player because of "weather factors," I realized all these guys are just humans throwing darts. Some with more precision than others. Some with less. Some, like our previous coaches, without even looking at the dart board.

I hear what you are saying, but ANY coach, to some extent, is going to go with what he has had success with, and he also has to play the hand he is dealt. AG inherited a SH*T show here. DL was nothing but JAGs with NOTHING in the pipeline. Shannon's recruiting when he got canned was attrocious, and the half @ss class AG was able to slap together was mostly garbage. Lets face it. He's really in year 2 of "his guys". I dont think he trusts the talent, and frankly, would you? There is almost NO senior leadership on this defense. DP is a good dude, but he's not Vilma. He's a very good LB, but he's not "elite" like we've had before. Ive been saying this all year. We have some real young talent in the secondary, and at DE, but beyond that, we are WAY thin. AG's comment the other night, which everyone dismissed as more "excuses" really DID tell the tale of this defense IMO.

Think about HOW MANY JUCOs and Transfers they went after for this Defense in the off season. Bond, Derosier, Renfrow, Gilbert, the OSU kid who also bolted. FIVE guys they went out and tried to bring in here at the 11th hour. That is how BAD or mismatched the personnel are from what they feel they need.

Im NOT saying AG may not be conservative, or have conservative tendencies. He played under Jo Pa. But there is also nothing to say that such a system cant work here to some extent. But you need to execute your scheme well, and you need the personnel to make it happen. Its not clear we have EITHER thing in place, and that is a BIG problem.

But we really dont know what we have yet. If you told me this team was loaded just the way he wanted it, and he was still playing conservative, well then I would say we can probably feel confidenet we know his tenancies. But with what he inherited here, and what his off seasons moves tell us about how he feels about the talent and depth on Defense, I dont think we can make any real conclusions about it. And MAYBE, just maybe, its worse than any of us could have imagined.

 

[CanesAreAble]

I love the post and appreciate the discussion. I just think we have a more fundamental problem than what we're going to do with the players in a scheme. As I've been reluctantly repeating, I think our problem is WHY we choose whatever scheme we choose.

Lu, do you believe golden has a passive philosophy on defense or football in general or are some of us wrong in thinking that?

I think that's what the evidence shows. I have no idea what is the precise rationale for choosing to play that way. I think it's speculation either way. Maybe that's what his coaching roots dictate? Maybe he doesn't fully trust the talent on the roster yet? Maybe he thinks this style currently gives him the best chance to win? I think it could be a combination of all of those things. I also think some of those are inherently flawed either way.

What I know for sure is the guy is clearly obsessed with planning. The guy, as Able said, is a defensive coach. There's also evidence that the guy is a tireless worker and wants to win. It's a completely different situation than, say, Coker or Shannon or even other, more successful, coaches. Ask Able. What has always scared me about Golden or any coach is rigidity. I have a hard time reconciling that with him appearing to be a practical guy.

Without speaking to him, the coaches, etc., directly, all we can do is throw **** at the wall trying to explain his decisions. I will say one thing (that I've said in other threads): not all coaches or organizations have sharp processes or make decisions with elaborate analysis. I always say the story to illustrate this point, but when I sat in front of a former NFL Operations guy (who had been previously successful and was working with a legitimate football mind) and he explained that they selected a player because of "weather factors," I realized all these guys are just humans throwing darts. Some with more precision than others. Some with less. Some, like our previous coaches, without even looking at the dart board.

I hear what you are saying, but ANY coach, to some extent, is going to go with what he has had success with, and he also has to play the hand he is dealt. AG inherited a SH*T show here. DL was nothing but JAGs with NOTHING in the pipeline. Shannon's recruiting when he got canned was attrocious, and the half @ss class AG was able to slap together was mostly garbage. Lets face it. He's really in year 2 of "his guys". I dont think he trusts the talent, and frankly, would you? There is almost NO senior leadership on this defense. DP is a good dude, but he's not Vilma. He's a very good LB, but he's not "elite" like we've had before. Ive been saying this all year. We have some real young talent in the secondary, and at DE, but beyond that, we are WAY thin. AG's comment the other night, which everyone dismissed as more "excuses" really DID tell the tale of this defense IMO.

Think about HOW MANY JUCOs and Transfers they went after for this Defense in the off season. Bond, Derosier, Renfrow, Gilbert, the OSU kid who also bolted. FIVE guys they went out and tried to bring in here at the 11th hour. That is how BAD or mismatched the personnel are from what they feel they need.

Im NOT saying AG may not be conservative, or have conservative tendencies. He played under Jo Pa. But there is also nothing to say that such a system cant work here to some extent. But you need to execute your scheme well, and you need the personnel to make it happen. Its not clear we have EITHER thing in place, and that is a BIG problem.

But we really dont know what we have yet. If you told me this team was loaded just the way he wanted it, and he was still playing conservative, well then I would say we can probably feel confidenet we know his tenancies. But with what he inherited here, and what his off seasons moves tell us about how he feels about the talent and depth on Defense, I dont think we can make any real conclusions about it. And MAYBE, just maybe, its worse than any of us could have imagined.

This is going to come off as excuse-making, but Golden is a pretty straight shooter, and he said that he was surprised that several aspects of the program were similar to Temple when he first got there.

I think Golden has confidence in what he's trying to build on defense. It's either going to eventually work, or it isn't. I think dramatically changing his philosophy would be a very troubling sign. Lu calls it rigidity and perhaps it is, but at some point there has to be a bedrock philosophy you believe in.

Bottom line: Golden has to find a way to get the defense fixed. Saying you're going to get it fixed only works for so long.

 

[nope44]

I'm still not buying GT coming out in some strange formation. Johnson has been running the triple option for a century. How many wrinkles can he still have?

So they were making it up?

And like I said, they've had success against him before.

Agreed. From what I remember, Johnson came out and employed the diamond formation heavy when not really using it all year until that point.

 

[LuCane]

I love the post and appreciate the discussion. I just think we have a more fundamental problem than what we're going to do with the players in a scheme. As I've been reluctantly repeating, I think our problem is WHY we choose whatever scheme we choose.

Lu, do you believe golden has a passive philosophy on defense or football in general or are some of us wrong in thinking that?

I think that's what the evidence shows. I have no idea what is the precise rationale for choosing to play that way. I think it's speculation either way. Maybe that's what his coaching roots dictate? Maybe he doesn't fully trust the talent on the roster yet? Maybe he thinks this style currently gives him the best chance to win? I think it could be a combination of all of those things. I also think some of those are inherently flawed either way.

What I know for sure is the guy is clearly obsessed with planning. The guy, as Able said, is a defensive coach. There's also evidence that the guy is a tireless worker and wants to win. It's a completely different situation than, say, Coker or Shannon or even other, more successful, coaches. Ask Able. What has always scared me about Golden or any coach is rigidity. I have a hard time reconciling that with him appearing to be a practical guy.

Without speaking to him, the coaches, etc., directly, all we can do is throw **** at the wall trying to explain his decisions. I will say one thing (that I've said in other threads): not all coaches or organizations have sharp processes or make decisions with elaborate analysis. I always say the story to illustrate this point, but when I sat in front of a former NFL Operations guy (who had been previously successful and was working with a legitimate football mind) and he explained that they selected a player because of "weather factors," I realized all these guys are just humans throwing darts. Some with more precision than others. Some with less. Some, like our previous coaches, without even looking at the dart board.

I hear what you are saying, but ANY coach, to some extent, is going to go with what he has had success with, and he also has to play the hand he is dealt. AG inherited a SH*T show here. DL was nothing but JAGs with NOTHING in the pipeline. Shannon's recruiting when he got canned was attrocious, and the half @ss class AG was able to slap together was mostly garbage. Lets face it. He's really in year 2 of "his guys". I dont think he trusts the talent, and frankly, would you? There is almost NO senior leadership on this defense. DP is a good dude, but he's not Vilma. He's a very good LB, but he's not "elite" like we've had before. Ive been saying this all year. We have some real young talent in the secondary, and at DE, but beyond that, we are WAY thin. AG's comment the other night, which everyone dismissed as more "excuses" really DID tell the tale of this defense IMO.

Think about HOW MANY JUCOs and Transfers they went after for this Defense in the off season. Bond, Derosier, Renfrow, Gilbert, the OSU kid who also bolted. FIVE guys they went out and tried to bring in here at the 11th hour. That is how BAD or mismatched the personnel are from what they feel they need.

Im NOT saying AG may not be conservative, or have conservative tendencies. He played under Jo Pa. But there is also nothing to say that such a system cant work here to some extent. But you need to execute your scheme well, and you need the personnel to make it happen. Its not clear we have EITHER thing in place, and that is a BIG problem.

But we really dont know what we have yet. If you told me this team was loaded just the way he wanted it, and he was still playing conservative, well then I would say we can probably feel confidenet we know his tenancies. But with what he inherited here, and what his off seasons moves tell us about how he feels about the talent and depth on Defense, I dont think we can make any real conclusions about it. And MAYBE, just maybe, its worse than any of us could have imagined.

This is going to come off as excuse-making, but Golden is a pretty straight shooter, and he said that he was surprised that several aspects of the program were similar to Temple when he first got there.

I think Golden has confidence in what he's trying to build on defense. It's either going to eventually work, or it isn't. I think dramatically changing his philosophy would be a very troubling sign. Lu calls it rigidity and perhaps it is, but at some point there has to be a bedrock philosophy you believe in.

Bottom line: Golden has to find a way to get the defense fixed. Saying you're going to get it fixed only works for so long.

Our bedrock philosophy right now is to win by making less mistakes than our opponent.

 

[CanesAreAble]

Our bedrock philosophy right now is to win by making less mistakes than our opponent.

That's probably true. Golden has said before (paraphrasing) that you win by eliminating the things that cause you to lose.

I think people want more savagery than that, but it is what it is at this point. One of three things will happen:

1. He'll change his philosophy (either due to improved talent or a new perspective).
2. His current philosophy will work, and we'll become contenders.
3. His current philosophy won't work.


Frustrating as it is, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[miamifan007]

Howard will not be here in 2015 and Deon won't be either if starts playing like he did as a freshman

This. Use these ****ers better now not later. This dropping back 10-15 yds **** has got to go. What happened to bump and run?

 

[nope44]

Our bedrock philosophy right now is to win by making less mistakes than our opponent.

That's probably true. Golden has said before (paraphrasing) that you win by eliminating the things that cause you to lose.

I think people want more savagery than that, but it is what it is at this point. One of three things will happen:

1. He'll change his philosophy (either due to improved talent or a new perspective).
2. His current philosophy will work, and we'll become contenders.
3. His current philosophy won't work.


Frustrating as it is, we'll just have to wait and see.

Part of the problem is that this team possesses no savagery in it anyway, so you can't really profile it into that. And you can't be savage while being full of mistakes, times have changed.

 

[CANE4LIFE]

Our bedrock philosophy right now is to win by making less mistakes than our opponent.

That's probably true. Golden has said before (paraphrasing) that you win by eliminating the things that cause you to lose.

I think people want more savagery than that, but it is what it is at this point. One of three things will happen:

1. He'll change his philosophy (either due to improved talent or a new perspective).
2. His current philosophy will work, and we'll become contenders.
3. His current philosophy won't work.


Frustrating as it is, we'll just have to wait and see.

Exactly. I think what AG is trying to do here is build a "system". From the ground up. Its not the high flying hot sh*t flash that Saban has at Bama, or Meyer had at UF, but rather a stable, fundemental foundation, more akin to what Beamer has done at VT, but with better athletes. Lets face it, if AG can develop a Beamer like program here, with the talent we can bring in, it should be enough to make this a consistent top 10 team that wil be competing for MNCs. The PROBLEM, is that to build something like that takes TIME, and patience, something most college coaches dont have, because fans dont have the latter. Everyone wants to win NOW. And that's great. I do too. But some programs can go out and buy their success, by dropping 10 million dollars on their coaching staff, and having boosters doing whatever it takes to make sure they get the best players they want. UM doesnt have that luxury. Miami fans want Alabama type success, on a VT budget, and with an alumni base the size of Vanderbilt.

Its not impossible, but its getting harder to do. I dont think people fully appreciate how tough it is for a small private school to compete with this goliath size programs. The only other private schools still competing at this level are ND and USC, both of which are MUCH bigger.

 

[Loafers]

Our bedrock philosophy right now is to win by making less mistakes than our opponent.

That's probably true. Golden has said before (paraphrasing) that you win by eliminating the things that cause you to lose.

I think people want more savagery than that, but it is what it is at this point. One of three things will happen:

1. He'll change his philosophy (either due to improved talent or a new perspective).
2. His current philosophy will work, and we'll become contenders.
3. His current philosophy won't work.


Frustrating as it is, we'll just have to wait and see.

Exactly. I think what AG is trying to do here is build a "system". From the ground up. Its not the high flying hot sh*t flash that Saban has at Bama, or Meyer had at UF, but rather a stable, fundemental foundation, more akin to what Beamer has done at VT, but with better athletes. Lets face it, if AG can develop a Beamer like program here, with the talent we can bring in, it should be enough to make this a consistent top 10 team that wil be competing for MNCs. The PROBLEM, is that to build something like that takes TIME, and patience, something most college coaches dont have, because fans dont have the latter. Everyone wants to win NOW. And that's great. I do too. But some programs can go out and buy their success, by dropping 10 million dollars on their coaching staff, and having boosters doing whatever it takes to make sure they get the best players they want. UM doesnt have that luxury. Miami fans want Alabama type success, on a VT budget, and with an alumni base the size of Vanderbilt.

Its not impossible, but its getting harder to do. I dont think people fully appreciate how tough it is for a small private school to compete with this goliath size programs. The only other private schools still competing at this level are ND and USC, both of which are MUCH bigger.

Don't forget Stanford and after their dismantling of vt a few weeks ago and the impending destruction of the canes duke.

 

[Big Sky Cane]

Our bedrock philosophy right now is to win by making less mistakes than our opponent.

That's probably true. Golden has said before (paraphrasing) that you win by eliminating the things that cause you to lose.

I think people want more savagery than that, but it is what it is at this point. One of three things will happen:

1. He'll change his philosophy (either due to improved talent or a new perspective).
2. His current philosophy will work, and we'll become contenders.
3. His current philosophy won't work.


Frustrating as it is, we'll just have to wait and see.

Exactly. I think what AG is trying to do here is build a "system". From the ground up. Its not the high flying hot sh*t flash that Saban has at Bama, or Meyer had at UF, but rather a stable, fundemental foundation, more akin to what Beamer has done at VT, but with better athletes. Lets face it, if AG can develop a Beamer like program here, with the talent we can bring in, it should be enough to make this a consistent top 10 team that wil be competing for MNCs. The PROBLEM, is that to build something like that takes TIME, and patience, something most college coaches dont have, because fans dont have the latter. Everyone wants to win NOW. And that's great. I do too. But some programs can go out and buy their success, by dropping 10 million dollars on their coaching staff, and having boosters doing whatever it takes to make sure they get the best players they want. UM doesnt have that luxury. Miami fans want Alabama type success, on a VT budget, and with an alumni base the size of Vanderbilt.

Its not impossible, but its getting harder to do. I dont think people fully appreciate how tough it is for a small private school to compete with this goliath size programs. The only other private schools still competing at this level are ND and USC, both of which are MUCH bigger.

If this isn't the most honest, take a look in the ******* mirror, post of the week I don't know what is. Everyone needs to take a ******* chill pill and embrace reality.

 

[LuCane]

Our bedrock philosophy right now is to win by making less mistakes than our opponent.

That's probably true. Golden has said before (paraphrasing) that you win by eliminating the things that cause you to lose.

I think people want more savagery than that, but it is what it is at this point. One of three things will happen:

1. He'll change his philosophy (either due to improved talent or a new perspective).
2. His current philosophy will work, and we'll become contenders.
3. His current philosophy won't work.


Frustrating as it is, we'll just have to wait and see.

Exactly. I think what AG is trying to do here is build a "system". From the ground up. Its not the high flying hot sh*t flash that Saban has at Bama, or Meyer had at UF, but rather a stable, fundemental foundation, more akin to what Beamer has done at VT, but with better athletes. Lets face it, if AG can develop a Beamer like program here, with the talent we can bring in, it should be enough to make this a consistent top 10 team that wil be competing for MNCs. The PROBLEM, is that to build something like that takes TIME, and patience, something most college coaches dont have, because fans dont have the latter. Everyone wants to win NOW. And that's great. I do too. But some programs can go out and buy their success, by dropping 10 million dollars on their coaching staff, and having boosters doing whatever it takes to make sure they get the best players they want. UM doesnt have that luxury. Miami fans want Alabama type success, on a VT budget, and with an alumni base the size of Vanderbilt.

Its not impossible, but its getting harder to do. I dont think people fully appreciate how tough it is for a small private school to compete with this goliath size programs. The only other private schools still competing at this level are ND and USC, both of which are MUCH bigger.

If this isn't the most honest, take a look in the ******* mirror, post of the week I don't know what is. Everyone needs to take a ******* chill pill and embrace reality.

I'm with you guys on that angle. Actually, my feelings haven't changed from before the game and from the threads last week. I guess that's somewhat sad, but it's reality. If you look through my posts before and after the game, you'll just find the same questions and concerns. I was hoping we'd win that game because I wanted to see a distinction from last season. A win wasn't going to prove anything more than that, so I don't think a loss should either.