Another Defensive Thread - Trends

[Arehel]

This has been purely my mind analyzing this as opposed to using statistics, but it really had me thinking I was right.
Let's look at the offenses (offensive philosophy) our defenses have been successful against this year:

Louisville - Pro-style run first - L
Florida A&M - Spread pass-first - W
Arkansas State - Spread run-first - W
Nebraska - Spread run-first - L
Duke - Spread pass first - W
Georgia Tech - Triple option - L
Cincinnati - Spread pass first - W
Virginia Tech - First half spread pass first, second second half spread run first - W
University of North Carolina - Spread pass first - W

Now this is just me looking at it with subjectivity, but our team seems to do really well versus these spread pass first offenses. I only count those teams that are worht it, FAMU and Ark St. are trash so they'd be outliers no matter what they ran.
For comparative sake, we'll use Duke. Last year they beat us with the run, in a spread offense, this year they didn't have Connette (sp?) as they're running type QB and we beat them decisively.
Not sure if this is right or wrong but I thought it was a worthy discussion.

Looking at the trend here going up against FSU, they are this year, a pro-style pass first offense, so like people have said before I think we have a swingers chance, but they can and do have a strong running game as well. So with all this in mind, I'm like most of you and have no god dam clue what's gonna happen versus FSU, just want this team to be respected and this is a game we can do that with.

 

[Miami82]

We won the games where we applied consistent pressure on the O. Nothing more or less.

 

[OrangetieFatface]

Duke game was played in a monsoon. Can't put too much analysis into that one.

 

[rok]

I still can't believe how *** our gameplan was against Nebraska and GT. So passive and ***. Makes no sense because we've looked very good in every other game defensively.

 

[jerzeycane]

This has been purely my mind analyzing this as opposed to using statistics, but it really had me thinking I was right.
Let's look at the offenses (offensive philosophy) our defenses have been successful against this year:

Louisville - Pro-style run first - L
Florida A&M - Spread pass-first - W
Arkansas State - Spread run-first - W
Nebraska - Spread run-first - L
Duke - Spread pass first - W
Georgia Tech - Triple option - L
Cincinnati - Spread pass first - W
Virginia Tech - First half spread pass first, second second half spread run first - W
University of North Carolina - Spread pass first - W

Now this is just me looking at it with subjectivity, but our team seems to do really well versus these spread pass first offenses. I only count those teams that are worht it, FAMU and Ark St. are trash so they'd be outliers no matter what they ran.
For comparative sake, we'll use Duke. Last year they beat us with the run, in a spread offense, this year they didn't have Connette (sp?) as they're running type QB and we beat them decisively.
Not sure if this is right or wrong but I thought it was a worthy discussion.

Looking at the trend here going up against FSU, they are this year, a pro-style pass first offense, so like people have said before I think we have a swingers chance, but they can and do have a strong running game as well. So with all this in mind, I'm like most of you and have no god dam clue what's gonna happen versus FSU, just want this team to be respected and this is a game we can do that with.

Too much nuance

Too much depth

Does not compute

 

[Pennmed Canefan]

I think there's actually something meaningful fitted in there somewhere. When people talk about the style of our defense, they often bring up neb and gt. Those games (especially gt) aren't a great commentary on our defensive style whether we do great or poorly IMO. I think we've played UL, Duke, Vt, and UNC fairly similarly. There are two ways to look at that. One is to be happy conclude that we're doing much better and that we'll figure out the outliers. The other is to be unsatisfied that we still have no real idea of how to defend the spread option team or another stylistic outlier and we'll default to a base approach that's fairly conservative.

I think we're a lot better vs the traditional styles obviously but a team like an Auburn for instance is a scary prospect--for everyone but eapecially us.

 

[Arehel]

I think there's actually something meaningful fitted in there somewhere. When people talk about the style of our defense, they often bring up neb and gt. Those games (especially gt) aren't a great commentary on our defensive style whether we do great or poorly IMO. I think we've played UL, Duke, Vt, and UNC fairly similarly. There are two ways to look at that. One is to be happy conclude that we're doing much better and that we'll figure out the outliers. The other is to be unsatisfied that we still have no real idea of how to defend the spread option team or another stylistic outlier and we'll default to a base approach that's fairly conservative.

I think we're a lot better vs the traditional styles obviously but a team like an Auburn for instance is a scary prospect--for everyone but eapecially us.

Exactly my thought process. Oregon and Auburn, I think would pose a problem for us. Something like Texas A & M or Texas Tech, or any version of an air raid offense, I think we'd do real well, and blow them away.

With this in mind, this is the type of team we play in a bowl game, so it makes us look real good.

 

[daddacane]

I'm confused..Didn't we beat GT with a really crappy defense last year, but loose this year with our new and improved version..Maybe the thought process is off somewhere...

 

[tru2c]

Duke game was played in a monsoon. Can't put too much analysis into that one.

agreed. i think we give our defense too much credit for the duke game. the rain was ridiculous. also, people seem to think we absolutely dominated that game. yes, we looked the better squad, but aside from a 4th and 19 td which could very easily have been ruled incomplete, it was a very tight game that we easily could have lost. even with that it was a 12 point game for the majority of the 4th quarter and we failed to put the game away on offense. but like you said, that game was played in a monsoon so you cant take too much away from it. if it was normal weather our offense would have had a much bigger game as well...

 

[LuCane]

I think there's actually something meaningful fitted in there somewhere. When people talk about the style of our defense, they often bring up neb and gt. Those games (especially gt) aren't a great commentary on our defensive style whether we do great or poorly IMO. I think we've played UL, Duke, Vt, and UNC fairly similarly. There are two ways to look at that. One is to be happy conclude that we're doing much better and that we'll figure out the outliers. The other is to be unsatisfied that we still have no real idea of how to defend the spread option team or another stylistic outlier and we'll default to a base approach that's fairly conservative.

I think we're a lot better vs the traditional styles obviously but a team like an Auburn for instance is a scary prospect--for everyone but eapecially us.

\

What is it about the Nebraska and GTech games that doesn't serve as great commentary about our defensive style? If by "style" you mean philosophy, I think it illuminates the heck out of it. If by style you mean our alignments and narrower Xs and Os, sure, playing against a Triple Option team is going to be unique. That goes without saying.

 

[LuCane]

I'm confused..Didn't we beat GT with a really crappy defense last year, but loose this year with our new and improved version..Maybe the thought process is off somewhere...

We outscored them last year and got up on them to get them out of what they want to do. It's a different issue altogether.

 

[LuCane]

Duke game was played in a monsoon. Can't put too much analysis into that one.

agreed. i think we give our defense too much credit for the duke game. the rain was ridiculous. also, people seem to think we absolutely dominated that game. yes, we looked the better squad, but aside from a 4th and 19 td which could very easily have been ruled incomplete, it was a very tight game that we easily could have lost. even with that it was a 12 point game for the majority of the 4th quarter and we failed to put the game away on offense. but like you said, that game was played in a monsoon so you cant take too much away from it. if it was normal weather our offense would have had a much bigger game as well...

I'm not sure I fully agree with this. Mark me as the first in line to point out when our defense is in a bad position or plays poorly, but the Duke results had more to do with Cutcliffe somehow failing to adjust than it did with weather. They came out in virtually the same sets Nebraska ran successfully. Instead of spreading us out 3 by 1 and running inside, or spreading us out 4WR balanced and throwing at us (they did this a handful of times and were actually successful), they decided to keep their TE inside and it allowed us to securely roll a Safety down early and often.

We dared them to throw deep - probably because we weren't afraid of their ability to hit or their athletes - and they didn't hurt us. As much as I've been a detractor of what we did earlier on with our defense, that game was played with a Single high Safety most of the time and sufficient numbers in the box. Weather may have played a role, but Cutcliffe's failure was, I think, more significant.

 

[tru2c]

I'm confused..Didn't we beat GT with a really crappy defense last year, but loose this year with our new and improved version..Maybe the thought process is off somewhere...

we only beat GT last year because they shot themselves in the foot and our offense took advantage. they had us down 17-7 right before the half and were marching with ease, only to fumble inside our 20 or so. then we score a td before the half. thats a 14 point swing. the game was still a really tight game late, when our defense did finally step up once GT had to pass, and we got 2 picks, one for a pick 6 in the final moments. by no means did we shut them down.

i think donofrio is clueless against GT. "we own GT" is the biggest fallacy on the boards...everyone assumes we always dominate gt's ****** offense because shannon hired a DC that was great at it and we did shut them down for a few years. then scraped away a few victories in goldens first 2 years, but golden has never shut down gt (best performance was the first year with a bunch of nfl talent on defense). the following year was the mike james game where GT ripped off 36 unanswered against us and we miraculously beat them in OT, the next year was last years game, and then this years game we obviously lost. i dont know x's and o's well enough to know why, but we need serious help gameplanning GT. we always have an olb "reading" the option qb, rendering him totally useless. if the qb keeps it hes too late to react, and if he pitches it he has no chance against the rb. but again, i dont know x's and o's so maybe thats the right assignment and it falls on the cb to force the qb towards the middle and the mlb or de to shed a block and get the qb, who knows. we suck at it

 

[Canes2082]

I'm confused..Didn't we beat GT with a really crappy defense last year, but loose this year with our new and improved version..Maybe the thought process is off somewhere...

We outscored them last year and got up on them to get them out of what they want to do. It's a different issue altogether.

I think we were losing 17-7 to them early on as well....so we actually had to make some defensive stops. Once we got ahead we got them out of their game plan

 

[tru2c]

Duke game was played in a monsoon. Can't put too much analysis into that one.

agreed. i think we give our defense too much credit for the duke game. the rain was ridiculous. also, people seem to think we absolutely dominated that game. yes, we looked the better squad, but aside from a 4th and 19 td which could very easily have been ruled incomplete, it was a very tight game that we easily could have lost. even with that it was a 12 point game for the majority of the 4th quarter and we failed to put the game away on offense. but like you said, that game was played in a monsoon so you cant take too much away from it. if it was normal weather our offense would have had a much bigger game as well...

I'm not sure I fully agree with this. Mark me as the first in line to point out when our defense is in a bad position or plays poorly, but the Duke results had more to do with Cutcliffe somehow failing to adjust than it did with weather. They came out in virtually the same sets Nebraska ran successfully. Instead of spreading us out 3 by 1 and running inside, or spreading us out 4WR balanced and throwing at us (they did this a handful of times and were actually successful), they decided to keep their TE inside and it allowed us to securely roll a Safety down early and often.

We dared them to throw deep - probably because we weren't afraid of their ability to hit or their athletes - and they didn't hurt us. As much as I've been a detractor of what we did earlier on with our defense, that game was played with a Single high Safety most of the time and sufficient numbers in the box. Weather may have played a role, but Cutcliffe's failure was, I think, more significant.

that's a good point, i'm probably overvaluing the effect of the weather. but at the same time, and i havent rewatched the game, just going on memory here, i just remember their qb missing a ton of easy intermediate throws, missing throws in general, wr's dropping balls, etc. i would also think the weather played some part in us "daring them to throw it deep" and im sure cutliffe, since they had already turned the ball over, was hoping they could move the ball without going deep. but thats somewhat to your point that it was our defense dictating what their offense did and taking them out of their gameplan, so i see what youre saying. i just think when people say we dominated duke it doesnt paint the complete picture.

 

[Canesfan1899]

When we have dictated what we wanted to do to the offense we have been successful. When we sit back and play passively we get are **** pushed in.

What's the take away, align the defense with the right numbers in the box and allow your athletes to play aggessively and decisively.

 

[pb5cane]

LuCane you are absolutely on point re the defensive philosophy which, not to beat a dead horse, was exposed for the world to see against GT. We play them every year. We know what they do. Somehow we thought taking our best runstopper out of the equation would be a plus. The result: 3 offensive possessions in the entire 2nd half of the game; 0 adjustment.

That game and fans who find a way to ignore it still infuriates me.

 

[LuCane]

I'm confused..Didn't we beat GT with a really crappy defense last year, but loose this year with our new and improved version..Maybe the thought process is off somewhere...

We outscored them last year and got up on them to get them out of what they want to do. It's a different issue altogether.

I think we were losing 17-7 to them early on as well....so we actually had to make some defensive stops. Once we got ahead we got them out of their game plan

Right. 17-17 at Half. It's not like they weren't rolling up the yards. 24-23 (missed extra point) into the 4th quarter. We got up 31-23. Vlad Lee throws a bad pick to Jenkins on their ensuing drive. We go down and run the ball 6 straight times for 66 yards (capped by a Crawford 18 yard TD run). We got up 38-23. At that point, Justin Thomas throws a pick-6, as the game was virtually over.

It wasn't a blow out win or a controlled game, in my mind. They ran for 335 yards on over 5 yards per carry and had 400+ yards of total offense. They were neck and neck with us into the 4th. This is exactly why I despise when people, especially, of course, our own coach, look at or mention results without proper context. How we beat GTech last year doesn't mean we were likely to beat them this year if we are a little more talented and "just did the same things."

Very frustrating. Hopefully, some desperation and pressure changes that approach.

 

[caneaddict]

I'm confused..Didn't we beat GT with a really crappy defense last year, but loose this year with our new and improved version..Maybe the thought process is off somewhere...

We outscored them last year and got up on them to get them out of what they want to do. It's a different issue altogether.

I think we were losing 17-7 to them early on as well....so we actually had to make some defensive stops. Once we got ahead we got them out of their game plan

we turned them over, which grohlden seemd to think is a must have to beat GT, he may be right, never have looked it up

 

[supacane]

We have lost to spread and pro set teams over the years. Nothing to do with the offenses and more to do with our reactive passive scheme that we been seeing for 4 years. Nebraska and GT games are not outliers. Team want to run, we get outnumbered, no pressure, no run blitz, no 8 and 9,man fronts. Because all we care about was not getting bombs thrown on us. That's why we lost those games, not anything to with the offenses they are running. U don't have many teams running straight pro set offenses anymore. Its all variation