For those wondering about Formations and Back 7 Depth

[LuCane]

Completely outnumbered, Armbrister in never-never land, 7 (running QB) vs 5 in the box. At best, 6 blockers vs 5 and you just run QB sneaks all night. This is a formation I would use against us at least 30% of the time. It's a simple, balanced 4WR set. Our defense ends up looking like they're spread across the nation.


A big stop on 3rd and short because their HBack/TE blew a block. We were outnumbered 9 to 7. Pierre made a good play inside and allowed Armbrister to fill.



Our Safeties in outerspace.



Here's another formation I'd use approximately 20% of the time against us. Trips. I expect David Cutcliffe to run WR screens out of something like this on Saturday. Pound us inside with a numbers advantage and then keep us loose with the WR screens. Not really different than what he and others have done.



Any offensive Coordinator who consistently runs 21 personnel (2 RBs and an inline TE) against us should be fired. If you want to give us a shot to *safely* bring up an 8th defender into the box, this is how you do it. I don't really understand why anyone would other than to PA us and go over the top to an athletic TE. In the run game, we'll typically stop you to 2-3 yards on these.



Ball has been snapped. Safeties and LBs still flatfooted, waiting to react. No run blitz. No dictation of flow. 9 yard gain.



There's more. I just made myself feel bad again. Please remember that it all starts with what we're doing up front. I could live with some of these things if we were a disruptive, attacking front. But, our front is essentially locking up guys who are simply bigger than them. In College, even the biggest 3-4 DEs are around 275-280. If you're locking up with a guy 320, you're going to get a stalemate most of the time, at best, and likely end up 1 yard deeper into your defensive formation. That is one reason a team can run 50+ times and not have a net loss on any of them. Also, please remember that this will work sometimes against some sets and teams. As soon as a team goes to this type of attack, we will be at a disadvantage.

Maybe I'll continue after lunch and once the discussion gets going.

 

[Canesfan1899]

It hurts so much to see the evidence of incompetence running our team.

 

[HurricaneU]

We rarely show pressure in the gaps much less attack them. We create almost zero pre-snap confusion. Never show a different look. Etc.

It doesn't matter to me 3-4 or 4-3 (though I admit I tend to favor a base 3-4) or any other derivative we run as a base. Its the variability in pre-snap looks and enabling the defense to make plays rather than take a wait-and-see approach that is killing us.

 

[#26-MEAST]

No excuse by this comment but I believe this is partially the blame for our poor tackling by our safeties. 90% of the time they have to make a play one on one when the running back is untouched with 8+ yards gained going full speed with no one deterring their running lane. Why put so much pressure all game on the safeties. Once again I'm not making an excuse of their play it's just almost impossible to play solid at their position for a full game.

 

[Canesfan1899]

We rarely show pressure in the gaps much less attack them. We create almost zero pre-snap confusion. Never show a different look. Etc.

It doesn't matter to me 3-4 or 4-3 (though I admit I tend to favor a base 3-4) or any other derivative we run as a base. Its the variability in pre-snap looks and enabling the defense to make plays rather than take a wait-and-see approach that is killing us.

You're right, we are alway blitzing from the outside.

 

[wacane]

I dont understand how the coaches cant see stuff like this. It boggles my mind

 

[LuCane]

We rarely show pressure in the gaps much less attack them. We create almost zero pre-snap confusion. Never show a different look. Etc.

It doesn't matter to me 3-4 or 4-3 (though I admit I tend to favor a base 3-4) or any other derivative we run as a base. Its the variability in pre-snap looks and enabling the defense to make plays rather than take a wait-and-see approach that is killing us.

Part of my point with the images above. I think it's evident that we react in virtually the same way to the same things. So, think about it: if you're an O-Coordinator and you know where our defenders will go and what they'll do, won't your offensive players look faster with an advantage? There are definitely plays where our guys are taking bad angles, missing an arm tackle, etc. But, this is fundamentally not working in real life. On paper, we can debate till we're blue in the face as to whether this should or shouldn't work. Can't argue with what's actually happening, though.

 

[D.L.I.N.K.D.A.GR8]

Please. ...no more..... I've been tortured enough already and it's just the 4th game.... it pains me to go thru this once again

 

[AllAboutDaU]

At this point it feels like Golden is purposely trying to lose. These defensive formations dont even make sense. Either that or he's simply retarded.

 

[LuCane]

I dont understand how the coaches cant see stuff like this. It boggles my mind

They see it. They know more Xs and Os than everyone on this board put together, I'd imagine. Like I said above, there is difference between what should work in theory and what is happening in reality. This, as I've said for 2 years, is a conscious decision. Ask your 280 pound DL to stack his OT, shed him and make the play. Sure, "player could have been stronger and made a better play." But, you're starting with a disadvantage.

 

[Iggcane]

Lu, could you compare some screen shots of our old 4-3 defense (Schiano/Shannon) in the early 2000's. Just curious how the alignment and depth compares. I always remember our safeties playing very deep, although I believe our front was meant to penetrate, so it would be interesting to compare and contrast styles.

 

[88]

Lu, is there something about our scheme and two gap that makes disguising what we're doing more difficult? I can count on one hand how many times I remember our defensive trying to confuse the offense with disguising their coverage/blitzes.

 

[Engel114]

It ain't getting any better

Barry Jackson ‏@flasportsbuzz 25s

Theme from Mark D'Onofrio today is execution must be better. "Talent is not enough," he said. No indication of scheme changes

 

[drifters1234]

it's just the same drill every week. We've been kicking this rotted horse corpse for over a year.

I just don't see how Donofrio and Golden can continue to ignore the FACT that the Al Groh-defense does not work at the college level. It is worthless.

I suppose they may have had deluded themselves for the first two years that our talent deficiency was the problem But we've had more than enough talent over the last two seasons not to give up 500+ yards/game to even mediocre teams. How can they continue to ignore that their defensive scheme does not work?

 

[RaiseCane]

Most of these pictures make me sick, but the ones that are the most egregious are the first picture (with us against 4 WRs), how we defended trips, and the last picture, which is a picture that captures what it looks like to read and react.

The first picture is alarming because of how simple it is to run the ball against us here, either with the QB or RB. We're severely outnumbered, we have no ability to set the edge against the run (to expect Armbrister to do so from 10 yards out is absurd) and there is so much space available that it's almost impossible for us to stop a run for less than 5 yards. Nebraska used this to get to the edge on us over and over, and we generally didn't make contact with AA until 7 yards down the field.

The trips formation is maybe even worse, since like you said, running quick bubble screens to the slot receiver (middle receiver) on that side will get teams 5+ yards at a minimum any time, and really, that receiver looks to have the most ability to find wide open space against either an LB or safety.

The last picture is what passiveness looks like. How can we expect our LBs and safeties to use their athleticism to come down hill and make plays when they are flatfooted after the snap and are 10 yards from the LOS after the play has started.

I'm not pretending to be an Xs and Os expert, but I simply can't understand how any of our alignments in these pictures can reasonably be expected to be effective. We're outnumbered against the run, have the wrong types of guys in coverage, and have DLs that are told to simply hold a gap and are not suited (other than our rush end) to rush the passer.

 

[TheSwagger1]

For all intents and purposes it's a conscious decision to cede 4 yards every single down so long as you don't burn us for 30 which seems absolutely insane but I'm not sure what other conclusion can be drawn when you watch games and see a breakdown like the one above.

You see this at the high school level a lot when smartly coached defensive teams, really mature programs, are playing offenses whose programs have gone to the spread but don't have the precision, consistency, and most importantly patience to take the 4 yard chunks. Inevitably those offenses lose patience, start chunking it deep, and/or make mistakes, playing into what the defense is designed to stop. That's where this defensive mentality flourishes and is at it's best - against poorly coached, inefficient high school offenses. You are 100% not trying to dictate to or press the offense, your entire success hinges on them making mistakes. That's been said many times, but Lu illustrated it perfectly.

 

[LuCane]

Lu, could you compare some screen shots of our old 4-3 defense (Schiano/Shannon) in the early 2000's. Just curious how the alignment and depth compares. I always remember our safeties playing very deep, although I believe our front was meant to penetrate, so it would be interesting to compare and contrast styles.

Good idea. Just a quick answer as I have to get back.

Two things:

1) As I said in the OP and you stated above, different front. We were a big time upfield DL. Some would say guys like Mcdougle were too upfield and lost contain at times. It changes the flow and timing of a play, naturally.

2) Offensive formations have changed a lot. Zone-read is popular now. 4WR sets are as common, sometimes more, than 21 personnel groupings. The easiest way to compare is to compare how we look against 21 personnel in the original post (so picture #5 from the top), to the below:



Like I alluded to, the numbers aren't altogether THAT different. It's the style and broader philosophy. In the picture above, we're headed upfield. 2 of our LBs are standing up at the end of the LOS. The remaining LB isn't at 5+ yards. Our Safeties can be 30 yards deep and I wouldn't care because they're not being asked to fly down and set the edge for the defense. See some of the differences in theory? It's riskier, no doubt.

 

[Robbymoto]

Excellent post. Photographic evidence confirming what we already know. We are ridiculously easy to exploit. Any competent OC must be giddy when Miami comes up on the schedule.

Golden continues to believe in and defend the scheme. He is going down with the ship. Nothing can save him now.

Completely outnumbered, Armbrister in never-never land, 7 (running QB) vs 5 in the box. At best, 6 blockers vs 5 and you just run QB sneaks all night. This is a formation I would use against us at least 30% of the time. It's a simple, balanced 4WR set. Our defense ends up looking like they're spread across the nation.
View attachment 25862

A big stop on 3rd and short because their HBack/TE blew a block. We were outnumbered 9 to 7. Pierre made a good play inside and allowed Armbrister to fill.

View attachment 25863

Our Safeties in outerspace.

View attachment 25864

Here's another formation I'd use approximately 20% of the time against us. Trips. I expect David Cutcliffe to run WR screens out of something like this on Saturday. Pound us inside with a numbers advantage and then keep us loose with the WR screens. Not really different than what he and others have done.

View attachment 25865

Any offensive Coordinator who consistently runs 21 personnel (2 RBs and an inline TE) against us should be fired. If you want to give us a shot to *safely* bring up an 8th defender into the box, this is how you do it. I don't really understand why anyone would other than to PA us and go over the top to an athletic TE. In the run game, we'll typically stop you to 2-3 yards on these.

View attachment 25866

Ball has been snapped. Safeties and LBs still flatfooted, waiting to react. No run blitz. No dictation of flow. 9 yard gain.

View attachment 25867

There's more. I just made myself feel bad again. Please remember that it all starts with what we're doing up front. I could live with some of these things if we were a disruptive, attacking front. But, our front is essentially locking up guys who are simply bigger than them. In College, even the biggest 3-4 DEs are around 275-280. If you're locking up with a guy 320, you're going to get a stalemate most of the time, at best, and likely end up 1 yard deeper into your defensive formation. That is one reason a team can run 50+ times and not have a net loss on any of them. Also, please remember that this will work sometimes against some sets and teams. As soon as a team goes to this type of attack, we will be at a disadvantage.

Maybe I'll continue after lunch and once the discussion gets going.

 

[duppy03]

Stack the box and let them go over the top. I'll take my chances over the top.

the way I see it, its better to be burnt for 40 yds on one play than to be nickeled and dime to death 5 yards at a time.

At least we get the ball back quicker.

 

[AUcane]

It ain't getting any better

Barry Jackson ‏@flasportsbuzz 25s

Theme from Mark D'Onofrio today is execution must be better. "Talent is not enough," he said. No indication of scheme changes

Get this guy out of my face. Sickening.