3rd Down Pass Rush

[IndayArtHauz]

I think the pass rush agenda from 2011 is more indicative of what the goal is than 2012. Yet even there, you're basing it on what they could mould from what they inherited, still not anything they built. The impetus of getting and growing the TM/AQM/Thomas/Jackson types should tell you where they are going.

 

[Dynasty]

I don't see us getting more than about 8 sacks out of these two. It's difficult to go from ZERO pass rush to something really good and I don't really expect that out of the front four. I still say that this pass rush will largely be decided by the performance of the back 7 and D'Onofrio's mind. That was the formula with a similar situation in the 99-2000 transition. The 2000 DL remained fairly mediocre as a pass rushing front four but they had a very good back 7 and Schiano's complexity got them their rush.

I agree completely. Unless we're transitioning from a bull rush technique to more of a jet or speed technique, I don't see the pass rush improving a lot. My hope is that our rush defense improves significantly and that translates into teams throwing into coverage where we get a bunch of interceptions and takeaways.

I think you'll definitely see more 9 this year, but a complete divergence from the "contain" technique would be surprising. The entire defense's improvement hinges on that supposed zone communication being patched up. I'd be lying if I said I won't hold my breath the first time we drop 7 on 3rd and 9.

If we continue gap and hold, I think we will struggle again defensively. Here's the thing...coach D/Golden are more likely than not to employ eight man fronts on early downs. Providing we get teams into third and long passing situations, I would prefer that they use a wide nine front to generate a pass rush. If they're going to keep that eighth man in the box on third and long it would take a lot of stress off the 'backers to close those wide gaps in the running game in the event the offense crosses up the defense with a draw/run/screen.

I just want to see the defense get off the field on third and long.

 

[LuCane]

I don't see us getting more than about 8 sacks out of these two. It's difficult to go from ZERO pass rush to something really good and I don't really expect that out of the front four. I still say that this pass rush will largely be decided by the performance of the back 7 and D'Onofrio's mind. That was the formula with a similar situation in the 99-2000 transition. The 2000 DL remained fairly mediocre as a pass rushing front four but they had a very good back 7 and Schiano's complexity got them their rush.

I agree completely. Unless we're transitioning from a bull rush technique to more of a jet or speed technique, I don't see the pass rush improving a lot. My hope is that our rush defense improves significantly and that translates into teams throwing into coverage where we get a bunch of interceptions and takeaways.

Yes. The rush d concerns me more than anything. Every handoff last year was an automatic 6, 8, 10 yard gain. Guys usually weren't touched until they were at least 5 yards downfield. It was absurd. When it's that easy to run, it opens up everything. Fix the run d and other things will fall in place. I actually have high hopes because 1. we have fortified our 2 deep with experienced upperclassmen (gilbert, kamalu, renfrow) and 2. the returning guys all seem to be bigger, stronger and in better shape. At the very least we shouldn't be getting blown off the ball like we did last year.

Our stated goal is to hold team under 125 yds rushing a game. It is part of the team goals in the new Schwartz Center. If we can do that, you have to assume that we will give up no more than 200 yds passing a game. 325 to 350 in total defense would be a huge jump for us.

That'd place anywhere from 15 to 25 on defense. If that happens, we're going to the 'ship?

 

[LuCane]

I don't see us getting more than about 8 sacks out of these two. It's difficult to go from ZERO pass rush to something really good and I don't really expect that out of the front four. I still say that this pass rush will largely be decided by the performance of the back 7 and D'Onofrio's mind. That was the formula with a similar situation in the 99-2000 transition. The 2000 DL remained fairly mediocre as a pass rushing front four but they had a very good back 7 and Schiano's complexity got them their rush.

I agree completely. Unless we're transitioning from a bull rush technique to more of a jet or speed technique, I don't see the pass rush improving a lot. My hope is that our rush defense improves significantly and that translates into teams throwing into coverage where we get a bunch of interceptions and takeaways.

I think you'll definitely see more 9 this year, but a complete divergence from the "contain" technique would be surprising. The entire defense's improvement hinges on that supposed zone communication being patched up. I'd be lying if I said I won't hold my breath the first time we drop 7 on 3rd and 9.

If we continue gap and hold, I think we will struggle again defensively. Here's the thing...coach D/Golden are more likely than not to employ eight man fronts on early downs. Providing we get teams into third and long passing situations, I would prefer that they use a wide nine front to generate a pass rush. If they're going to keep that eighth man in the box on third and long it would take a lot of stress off the 'backers to close those wide gaps in the running game in the event the offense crosses up the defense with a draw/run/screen.

I just want to see the defense get off the field on third and long.

Agreed. And, the reason is because of what we've talked about since last year: poor spot dropping. God help us all if the QB feels comfortable and that zone (picture attached) starts to fall apart.


My big concern is what we do this year when teams intelligently spread us out and specifically go trips.

 

[PowerIslam aka Sumdumgoy]

Unleash AQM & Tyriq=profit

 

[Dynasty]

I don't see us getting more than about 8 sacks out of these two. It's difficult to go from ZERO pass rush to something really good and I don't really expect that out of the front four. I still say that this pass rush will largely be decided by the performance of the back 7 and D'Onofrio's mind. That was the formula with a similar situation in the 99-2000 transition. The 2000 DL remained fairly mediocre as a pass rushing front four but they had a very good back 7 and Schiano's complexity got them their rush.

I agree completely. Unless we're transitioning from a bull rush technique to more of a jet or speed technique, I don't see the pass rush improving a lot. My hope is that our rush defense improves significantly and that translates into teams throwing into coverage where we get a bunch of interceptions and takeaways.

I think you'll definitely see more 9 this year, but a complete divergence from the "contain" technique would be surprising. The entire defense's improvement hinges on that supposed zone communication being patched up. I'd be lying if I said I won't hold my breath the first time we drop 7 on 3rd and 9.

If we continue gap and hold, I think we will struggle again defensively. Here's the thing...coach D/Golden are more likely than not to employ eight man fronts on early downs. Providing we get teams into third and long passing situations, I would prefer that they use a wide nine front to generate a pass rush. If they're going to keep that eighth man in the box on third and long it would take a lot of stress off the 'backers to close those wide gaps in the running game in the event the offense crosses up the defense with a draw/run/screen.

I just want to see the defense get off the field on third and long.

Agreed. And, the reason is because of what we've talked about since last year: poor spot dropping. God help us all if the QB feels comfortable and that zone (picture attached) starts to fall apart.


My big concern is what we do this year when teams intelligently spread us out and specifically go trips.

We will see what coverage calls coach D has for trips and floods routes out of cover three. I imagine there will be auto calls where they go man or Q/Q/H as well as roll coverage, rain/light.

Something I've been thinking about for awhile now has been the corners showing press technique when playing cover 3. I don't know if we have the type of corners to pull this off, but it would be a great disguise. It would give the appearance that the flat routes are taken away, but we still would be playing it as sky. That being said, it won't matter if the interior defenders can't squeeze the inside passing windows. The intermediate middle of the field was wide open last year. Gotta get that cleaned up.

 

[ghost2]

D, I saw exactly what you're describing (corners showing press in cover 3) in that 2004 UVA play book posted a while back, in one of the Cover 3/Fire Zone Blitz looks. Whether we use it is another matter, but disguising pressure is one of the selling points of that defensive scheme. In theory, of course...

 

[LuCane]

D, I saw exactly what you're describing (corners showing press in cover 3) in that 2004 UVA play book posted a while back, in one of the Cover 3/Fire Zone Blitz looks. Whether we use it is another matter, but disguising pressure is one of the selling points of that defensive scheme. In theory, of course...

Don't you dare talk to Dynasty about Fire Zone blitzing. He'll throw up in your cot**** face.

(I think we may see some of it - less than I'd do, probably)

 

[Dynasty]

D, I saw exactly what you're describing (corners showing press in cover 3) in that 2004 UVA play book posted a while back, in one of the Cover 3/Fire Zone Blitz looks. Whether we use it is another matter, but disguising pressure is one of the selling points of that defensive scheme. In theory, of course...

Don't you dare talk to Dynasty about Fire Zone blitzing. He'll throw up in your cot**** face.

(I think we may see some of it - less than I'd do, probably)

I willingly admit that I'm not a huge fan of FZB. However, it is has a function in the tool box, particularly against read option teams like the gator. The FZB can give a false read to the quarterback as he reads the DE. The run fits are strong with the blitz coming, so if you guess right as to which side to bring the blitz it shuts down the inside run.

Against standard pro set offenses, I don't recommend it. Just me. My feeling is, if your personnel who are accustom to playing in space have trouble defending zone areas, you are compounding the problem by asking defenders with less experience and mobility. This is especially true if the pressure doesn't get there.

 

[rudebuddha]

D, I saw exactly what you're describing (corners showing press in cover 3) in that 2004 UVA play book posted a while back, in one of the Cover 3/Fire Zone Blitz looks. Whether we use it is another matter, but disguising pressure is one of the selling points of that defensive scheme. In theory, of course...

Don't you dare talk to Dynasty about Fire Zone blitzing. He'll throw up in your cot**** face.

Qb's look great when they never get hit. Even Driskell would look good without pressure.
We need to put the fear of death in the opposing qb.
Send as many as it takes to hammer them.
We give up a few big plays, so be it.

 

[LuCane]

D, I saw exactly what you're describing (corners showing press in cover 3) in that 2004 UVA play book posted a while back, in one of the Cover 3/Fire Zone Blitz looks. Whether we use it is another matter, but disguising pressure is one of the selling points of that defensive scheme. In theory, of course...

Don't you dare talk to Dynasty about Fire Zone blitzing. He'll throw up in your cot**** face.

(I think we may see some of it - less than I'd do, probably)

I willingly admit that I'm not a huge fan of FZB. However, it is has a function in the tool box, particularly against read option teams like the gator. The FZB can give a false read to the quarterback as he reads the DE. The run fits are strong with the blitz coming, so if you guess right as to which side to bring the blitz it shuts down the inside run.

Against standard pro set offenses, I don't recommend it. Just me. My feeling is, if your personnel who are accustom to playing in space have trouble defending zone areas, you are compounding the problem by asking defenders with less experience and mobility. This is especially true if the pressure doesn't get there.

Which is part of the recent problems Manny Diaz is having at Texas. Not just pro set offenses, but spread offenses that take away the fire zone's advantages. If your LBs struggle, you're done. I still don't have deep faith in our LBs as complete players. There are some niche players there who do certain things extremely well. I really look forward to the day Grace is given a chance to show his stuff (probably if Perryman leaves after this season).

 

[Cribby]

Unleash Shayon Green, oops.......wrong thread.

 

[terdferguson]

I don't see us getting more than about 8 sacks out of these two. It's difficult to go from ZERO pass rush to something really good and I don't really expect that out of the front four. I still say that this pass rush will largely be decided by the performance of the back 7 and D'Onofrio's mind. That was the formula with a similar situation in the 99-2000 transition. The 2000 DL remained fairly mediocre as a pass rushing front four but they had a very good back 7 and Schiano's complexity got them their rush.

I agree completely. Unless we're transitioning from a bull rush technique to more of a jet or speed technique, I don't see the pass rush improving a lot. My hope is that our rush defense improves significantly and that translates into teams throwing into coverage where we get a bunch of interceptions and takeaways.

Yes. The rush d concerns me more than anything. Every handoff last year was an automatic 6, 8, 10 yard gain. Guys usually weren't touched until they were at least 5 yards downfield. It was absurd. When it's that easy to run, it opens up everything. Fix the run d and other things will fall in place. I actually have high hopes because 1. we have fortified our 2 deep with experienced upperclassmen (gilbert, kamalu, renfrow) and 2. the returning guys all seem to be bigger, stronger and in better shape. At the very least we shouldn't be getting blown off the ball like we did last year.

Our stated goal is to hold team under 125 yds rushing a game. It is part of the team goals in the new Schwartz Center. If we can do that, you have to assume that we will give up no more than 200 yds passing a game. 325 to 350 in total defense would be a huge jump for us.

Interesting. What other stated goals did you see in there?

 

[radiocane]

DE McCord SO
DT Pierre JR
DT Chick JR
DE Gilbert SR

LB AQM (pass rusher)FR
LB Denzel JR

CB Gunter ?
CB Howard SO
NB Crawford SO
SS Bush SO
FS Jenkins SO

Not sure if all of that is corect but if im close **** we are still pretty young on D

 

[Cash]

Gunter is a RS JR I believe

 

[UM58]

I agree completely. Unless we're transitioning from a bull rush technique to more of a jet or speed technique, I don't see the pass rush improving a lot. My hope is that our rush defense improves significantly and that translates into teams throwing into coverage where we get a bunch of interceptions and takeaways.

I think you'll definitely see more 9 this year, but a complete divergence from the "contain" technique would be surprising. The entire defense's improvement hinges on that supposed zone communication being patched up. I'd be lying if I said I won't hold my breath the first time we drop 7 on 3rd and 9.

If we continue gap and hold, I think we will struggle again defensively. Here's the thing...coach D/Golden are more likely than not to employ eight man fronts on early downs. Providing we get teams into third and long passing situations, I would prefer that they use a wide nine front to generate a pass rush. If they're going to keep that eighth man in the box on third and long it would take a lot of stress off the 'backers to close those wide gaps in the running game in the event the offense crosses up the defense with a draw/run/screen.

I just want to see the defense get off the field on third and long.

Agreed. And, the reason is because of what we've talked about since last year: poor spot dropping. God help us all if the QB feels comfortable and that zone (picture attached) starts to fall apart.


My big concern is what we do this year when teams intelligently spread us out and specifically go trips.

We will see what coverage calls coach D has for trips and floods routes out of cover three. I imagine there will be auto calls where they go man or Q/Q/H as well as roll coverage, rain/light.

Something I've been thinking about for awhile now has been the corners showing press technique when playing cover 3. I don't know if we have the type of corners to pull this off, but it would be a great disguise. It would give the appearance that the flat routes are taken away, but we still would be playing it as sky. That being said, it won't matter if the interior defenders can't squeeze the inside passing windows. The intermediate middle of the field was wide open last year. Gotta get that cleaned up.

Everything was wide open, because nothing was contested. That ND film is probably the worst defense I've ever seen. Also didn't help that Miami had some of the worst defensive players to ever come through here. I don't know if its coaching, dumb players, inexperience or all three.

 

[Gatorhater]

I don't see us getting more than about 8 sacks out of these two. It's difficult to go from ZERO pass rush to something really good and I don't really expect that out of the front four. I still say that this pass rush will largely be decided by the performance of the back 7 and D'Onofrio's mind. That was the formula with a similar situation in the 99-2000 transition. The 2000 DL remained fairly mediocre as a pass rushing front four but they had a very good back 7 and Schiano's complexity got them their rush.

I agree completely. Unless we're transitioning from a bull rush technique to more of a jet or speed technique, I don't see the pass rush improving a lot. My hope is that our rush defense improves significantly and that translates into teams throwing into coverage where we get a bunch of interceptions and takeaways.

Yes. The rush d concerns me more than anything. Every handoff last year was an automatic 6, 8, 10 yard gain. Guys usually weren't touched until they were at least 5 yards downfield. It was absurd. When it's that easy to run, it opens up everything. Fix the run d and other things will fall in place. I actually have high hopes because 1. we have fortified our 2 deep with experienced upperclassmen (gilbert, kamalu, renfrow) and 2. the returning guys all seem to be bigger, stronger and in better shape. At the very least we shouldn't be getting blown off the ball like we did last year.

I thought Donna self-imposed a "5 yard no contact" zone last year! You mean that was actually our base defense? I have an idea for this year, frigging HIT someone on the other team! Ball carrier would be best, but I'll take anyone. Delivery pain the first 30 or so plays, especially to the QB, and see if the other team really wants to play. Since they always get the 1st down anyway, does it really matter if it is by penalty? Hit somebody, please.

 

[ghost2]

D, I saw exactly what you're describing (corners showing press in cover 3) in that 2004 UVA play book posted a while back, in one of the Cover 3/Fire Zone Blitz looks. Whether we use it is another matter, but disguising pressure is one of the selling points of that defensive scheme. In theory, of course...

Don't you dare talk to Dynasty about Fire Zone blitzing. He'll throw up in your cot**** face.

(I think we may see some of it - less than I'd do, probably)

LOL I make no offer of judgement on the merits of the FZB, just that I saw it once in Golden's old playbook. Personally I don't care if we run the Buddy Ryan 46, the 3-3-5, or the defensive equivalent of the Annexation of Puerto Rico - just get us off the **** field on 3rd and 13...