Diaz D EXPOSED

[pyhooya]

He had hands down the worst game. He’s the reason our LBS looked like ****.

So what was the reason the other 8 games they looked like shlt. Our LBs were barely average this year(who was their coach) Constantly missing tackles, not filling gaps , LOST

 

[Trafficante]

Willis was very smart to not play tonight, getting pushed around would have pushed him back to 5 or 6 round. We all thought last year DTs were very good also and look what they have accomplished in the league.

There is no comparison between Willis, and the DT's of last yr. Night & Day difference.

 

[MainLineCane]

Diaz NEVER should have even been allowed to coach this game.

He was completely outclassed. As was Richt...again. They made 2nd half adjustments....we had NO answer.

Sure the offense sucked BUT the D didn't play well either in the 2nd half.

This was painful to watch on both sides of the ball

Today , sad to say,our team as a whole did not belong on the same field as Wisky

 

[Awsi Dooger]

Willis was very smart to not play tonight, getting pushed around would have pushed him back to 5 or 6 round. We all thought last year DTs were very good also and look what they have accomplished in the league.

I agree. Willis would have been pushed around also. I remember what Wisconsin did to McIntosh last year. Nullified.

Fans here will scream that Willis is a different level. Meanwhile he's a moody one-year wonder and hardly immune to frustration and getting worn down by a methodical offense the Canes simply do not like to face. Willis would have made some plays but steadily given way. The Canes were not fully invested in this game. That would spread to everybody.

Not 5th or 6th round though. I would say 3rd or early 4th is his floor.

Bottom line we can't miss out on targeted defensive tackles every year and somehow believe it doesn't matter. Bethel and that Illinois transfer should not be taking meaningful snaps for this program. Ford is big enough but not instinctive or relentless. At least he looked the part out there from a size standpoint. Nesta is going to look great on some plays and run himself out of other plays. I had to laugh when he got shoved around while playing the right side on one early play, then started mouthing off as if he accomplished something while playing on the left side on the next play.

 

[TheMatador]

As usual.....playing against above average offense and getting ******* beat like a red headed step child.

And for those slurpers that come in here and say the O sucks....the O didnt give up 300+ yards in less than 3 quarters. The O didnt give up almost 200 yards to Taylor. And dont forget this is with their backup QB

Don't agree. I saw JJ's defenses give up huge amounts of yardage (Pitt-'86) and we still win handily.

Our problem was the offense. It dealt the defense a terrible hand with poor field position and too much time of possession by Wisconsin.

Defense played heroically and well enough to win against a great running attack but we had no offense. And we kept turning ball over.

 

[TheMatador]

It was a typical Diaz defense performance tonight. Get torched in the opening drive, settle down as the game goes on but it doesn't matter cause the offense is dog ****

JJ's vaunted defense would often give up huge chunks. It's the nature of a high-risk attacking defense.

Diaz is fine.

The problem is the offense. Gift after gift to Wisconsin.

 

[mdpcane]

Don't agree. I saw JJ's defenses give up huge amounts of yardage (Pitt-'86) and we still win handily.

Our problem was the offense. It dealt the defense a terrible hand with poor field position and too much time of possession by Wisconsin.

Defense played heroically and well enough to win against a great running attack but we had no offense. And we kept turning ball over.

you better have an Oklahoma- type offense if you give up 300+ yards rushing . Miami had no answers on D even with Diaz and they were dominated.

 

[TheMatador]

Look at all the nut swingers making excuses for Diaz. Whiskey was gashing us on their first drive.

JJ's vaunted defenses used to get gashed a lot.

Not the problem. We need an offense.

We could win with our defense. And we played without a huge difference-maker.

 

[jjjrcanes]

You realize Wisconsin is playing with a backup QB. One fcking job...stop Taylor....200 yards later

If they give the ball to you with their time of possession you can fall forward for 100 yrs! OF and PRicht stink!! PERIOD!

 

[SonnyLong]

JJ's vaunted defenses used to get gashed a lot.

Not the problem. We need an offense.

We could win with our defense. And we played without a huge difference-maker.

When were the 86, 87 and 88 Defenses Gashed A LOT?

I'LL WAIT.....

 

[TheMatador]

you better have an Oklahoma- type offense if you give up 300+ yards rushing . Miami had no answers on D even with Diaz and they were dominated.

Nah. How much did we win by after giving up 200-plus to Ironhead Heyward in '86? And we had a one-dimensional offense that couldn't run the ball. We had Vinny and three outstanding receivers.

If we had a reasonably effective offense we could have kept the game close. The defense kept us close for over a half (14-3) after the gifts by Rosier and the uncharacteristic fumble by Homer.

In fact, we have a much better running attack with Homer than we had with Williams, Bratton and Highsmith in '86. But this year's team has no passing attack. We're only accurate right into multiple coverage. We seem to hit a Wisconsin DB right on the numbers. I cannot believe how bad our quarterbacking is---perhaps the worst since the '70's. Absolutely horrendous.

Our defense played heroically given the hand it was dealt. You can't keep putting a defense in such a hole again and again and expect us to hold up. And we are on a different level with Willis in there. We are so much less effective without Willis. Still, we played well enough to keep it close for over a half.

This is not on the defense.

 

[TheMatador]

When were the 86, 87 and 88 Defenses Gashed A LOT?

I'LL WAIT.....

Pittsburgh in '86 for one. That was the most memorable.

As I recall, FSU and Sammy Smith did too. A great passing attack kept us in the game.

I recall Michigan running a lot on us in '88. Again, a great game by Steve Walsh brought us back.

Typically, JJ's defenses we're susceptible to big running plays. It was also typical that his forcing defense (as Jimmy chatlracterized it) also made a lot of big plays (TFLs, sacks, fumbles, picks). Diaz did his job. He stopped a lot of drives with no points. He made a lot of TFLs.

Again, our offense produced nothing. Our defense played well enough. We could have been in the game had our defense produced something. It produced nothing. Even worse, it gave Wisconsin gift after gift.

 

[TheMatador]

Offense didnt give up 300 yards rushing with a backup QB. you had one job Diaz...stop Taylor

Again. Our problem was our own offense.

We handily beat similar production by Pitt in '86 because we had a great passing attack. Taylor produced very little by half in terms of points. Just 14-3. An effective passing attack could have overcome that.

Diaz did a good enough job, especially given that without Willis, who puts the defense on a different level.

It was obvious and painful to watch how much different the DL was without his ability to get off blocks and create havoc in the backfield. Still our defense did well enough to keep it close at least for a half.

What the ignoramuses here don't realize that a typical old-time Miami passing attack would have put our defense in a totally different position. A reasonable game strategy would have been an effective enough passing attack to pull Wisconsin out of running all the time. An effective passing attack would not have gift-wrapped the ball for Wisconsin and might have put us on the board with more than 3.

I recall Schnellenberger's statements before the big OB game against Nebraska. He said he would he "pleased as punch" (his exact words) if he could force Nebraska to pass.

Without an effective passing attack, we had no chance to force Wisconsin to go to the pass more often. It was a gift to Wisconsin.

Of course, all the message board "geniuses" here don't realize that because they emote rather than think.

 

[SonnyLong]

Pittsburgh in '86 for one. That was the most memorable.

As I recall, FSU and Sammy Smith did too. A great passing attack kept us in the game.

I recall Michigan running a lot on us in '88. Again, a great game by Steve Walsh brought us back.

Typically, JJ's defenses we're susceptible to big running plays. It was also typical that his forcing defense (as Jimmy chatlracterized it) also made a lot of big plays (TFLs, sacks, fumbles, picks). Diaz did his job. He stopped a lot of drives with no points. He made a lot of TFLs.

Again, our offense produced nothing. Our defense played well enough. We could have been in the game had our defense produced something. It produced nothing. Even worse, it gave Wisconsin gift after gift.

Really? Pittsburgh? LOL Try Harder, Loser.

 

[TheMatador]

Just pointing out facts....there are plenty of teams out there with shltty Os.....Our D is not like Oklahoma but its no where near being championship level

We could win championships with this defense if we had a superior offense.

 

[TheMatador]

Really? Pittsburgh? LOL Try Harder, Loser.

OK. Tell me what happened in the '86 Pitt game.

Waiting.

 

[TheMatador]

I give the D a D+ today. They played poorly and allowed the offensive line to control them.

But it is overshadowed by the F the offense earned.

Again, you show a lack of understanding of game strategy.

An effective performance by our offense could have forced Wisconsin to rely more on the pass. That negates the advantage of Wisconsin's running game.

 

[TheMatador]

What are you smoking? Totally irrational hate on the defense that was put in terrible position all night. What did you want, miami to win 3 to 0? D didnt play the best but your ignoring the whole part about our offenses historically bad performance.

And he shows a total lack of appreciation for what a dismal performance by our offense does to a defense. And the effect of the loss of a tremendous impact player like Willis. Best DL we've had in years. Won't be easily replaced.

 

[TheMatador]

Really? Pittsburgh? LOL Try Harder, Loser.

And don't call me loser. You're the one demonstrating ignorance. An historically typical Miami passing attack would have forced Wisconsin to pass more often. Advantage: us. Why Schnelly called the passing attack the "great equalizer."

Had we passed effectively and put some points on early--not just a single FG--the game could have been a lot different.