forums

How is Blake Baker viewed among the players?

Coach Macho said:
VT was able to sneak the same TE out for wide open catches THREE TIMES. (a long gain + 2 TD's)

One of them was a very clever play design where they sprinted the QB right and snuck the TE out left on a delayed release...and we were blitzing from the right so we had nobody over there to see the TE coming.
The other 2 TD's were simple play-action passes and we had NOBODY on the second level of the defense who was covering the TE. (on his second TD two guys were wide open) You can't give your LB's responsibility for covering TE's on play-action passes. They're in conflict. They're "run first" players thus they're going to step up on play-action. Once they do that, they lose the TE. Responsibility for covering TE's need to be placed on a box Safety. They're further back, can diagnose things better from that distance, and they're not "run first" players. Actually, their primary read is the release of the TE.

This is like...elementary **** though. Common sense. That's a lot to put on your LB's plate. Read run and cover the TE?
What do you even tell your LB's after that TD?
"You had the TE son!"
"Well coach, we got a run read."
As a DC, what's your rebuttal to that?

The most alarming thing is, why was there no adjustment? How was this same kid able to sneak out for THREE wide open TD's?
At what point do you say - "They're leaking the TE out on play action passes. We need to have a Safety cover that guy." ???



Also, you can miss me with the turnover excuses.
There's no rule in football that says your defense HAS TO GIVE UP A SCORE after the offense turns the ball over.
YOU CAN STOP THEM! Like our old (great) defenses did.

Good defenses don't fold when their back is against the wall. Nothing is more demoralizing to an opponent than when you keep stopping them even after they obtain turnovers. You intercept our QB inside the 35 yard line and we STILL stop you from scoring, or hold you to a FG, that's frustrating.
Some of yall clearly don't understand the concept of a "DEFENSIVE SLUG FEST".
Your offense turning the ball over is never an excuse to allow 28 points in one half or whatever it was. Nah. (especially to a team that got beat by Duke 45-10)
Click to expand...

Cross over, slam dunk, thread over.
 
Advertisement
Coach Macho said:
VT was able to sneak the same TE out for wide open catches THREE TIMES. (a long gain + 2 TD's)

One of them was a very clever play design where they sprinted the QB right and snuck the TE out left on a delayed release...and we were blitzing from the right so we had nobody over there to see the TE coming.
The other 2 TD's were simple play-action passes and we had NOBODY on the second level of the defense who was covering the TE. (on his second TD two guys were wide open) You can't give your LB's responsibility for covering TE's on play-action passes. They're in conflict. They're "run first" players thus they're going to step up on play-action. Once they do that, they lose the TE. Responsibility for covering TE's need to be placed on a box Safety. They're further back, can diagnose things better from that distance, and they're not "run first" players. Actually, their primary read is the release of the TE.

This is like...elementary **** though. Common sense. That's a lot to put on your LB's plate. Read run and cover the TE?
What do you even tell your LB's after that TD?
"You had the TE son!"
"Well coach, we got a run read."
As a DC, what's your rebuttal to that?

The most alarming thing is, why was there no adjustment? How was this same kid able to sneak out for THREE wide open TD's?
At what point do you say - "They're leaking the TE out on play action passes. We need to have a Safety cover that guy." ???



Also, you can miss me with the turnover excuses.
There's no rule in football that says your defense HAS TO GIVE UP A SCORE after the offense turns the ball over.
YOU CAN STOP THEM! Like our old (great) defenses did.

Good defenses don't fold when their back is against the wall. Nothing is more demoralizing to an opponent than when you keep stopping them even after they obtain turnovers. You intercept our QB inside the 35 yard line and we STILL stop you from scoring, or hold you to a FG, that's frustrating.
Some of yall clearly don't understand the concept of a "DEFENSIVE SLUG FEST".
Your offense turning the ball over is never an excuse to allow 28 points in one half or whatever it was. Nah. (especially to a team that got beat by Duke 45-10)
Click to expand...
Gospel. Somewhere along the way, in their zeal to cover for Manure's defense and make every discussion an "our defense was good enough to win" argument, UM fans lost track of the fact that you don't have to give up TDs after a turnover. There's no rule in place that says you have to give up TDs on a shortened field after a TO.
 
Canes Legacy said:
Thanks for that flashback of Eric Ebron doing us dirty.
Click to expand...

**** at least he’s an almost 10year nfl vet, I’m thinking about all the crappy algroh Virginia teams with a bunch of no bodies looking like all acc players. Man the days ofus out coaching and putting our players in position to succeed.
 
The Franchise said:
Gospel. Somewhere along the way, in their zeal to cover for Manure's defense and make every discussion an "our defense was good enough to win" argument, UM fans lost track of the fact that you don't have to give up TDs after a turnover. There's no rule in place that says you have to give up TDs on a shortened field after a TO.
Click to expand...

Two of them were thrown in VTs end zone while trying to score. VT went the length of the field
 
Advertisement
Coach Macho said:
Right. I'm familiar with the concept. Good design, hard to stop.

But that's something you have to game plan for. Heading into VT week, if you know they run "leak" you have to be prepared for it in certain situations, especially on 3rd and medium in that territory. Perhaps they didn't see Virginia Tech run leak on film, I don't know. But there's no excuse for allowing that kid to get out of the backfield wide open on 3 separate occasions. On 2 of the plays we didn't even account for him at all, like we didn't even think they had play action passes in their playbook.
Click to expand...
Oh absolutely. I can accept it happening once. And swallow it happening twice but three times is just pretending the problem isnt there.
 
The thing I don't get is...

Why do some of yall go so hard for these coaches, who are grown men making 6/7 figures, but then quick to put the blame on the 18-22 year old kids?

I want yall to be in the stands for some of my games. I need that type of blind support!

Any time you see a reoccurring issue on the field...on any level of football where you get to choose your players... IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER IT FALLS ON COACHING!

You either coached it, allowed it, or recruited it.

Why's the TE wide open?
"Blown assignments." = well get that dummy TF out of there and put someone else on him!
"Guys aren't athletic enough to cover him." = well recruit better athletes. Who the fvck are these short 4.8 Linebackers?

Or it's something scheme related, which again FALLS ON COACHES.

This isn't like being the DC at Cooper City and trying to stop STA's TE from catching passes.
These are athletic, fully capable, major D1 kids we have on our roster and we allowed a bum QB and some unknown H-back/TE to have a field day.
Duke beat them 45-10. Let that sink in. DUKE!

You're telling me this happened because 3 and 4 year players were blowing assignments? LOL
I don't think I have to say this cause it should be common sense, but 3 and 4 year players shouldn't be blowing any assignments. They should **** near be able to run the defense by themselves.

I can deal with guys getting beat one-on-one, that's why I don't get upset when/if a guy like Trajan Bandy gets beat for a fade ball. What I can't deal with is opponents being wide open because (1) players not knowing their assignments or (2) our scheme not accounting for it.
That's flat-out coaching, and there's no denying that.
 
Coach Macho said:
The thing I don't get is...

Why do some of yall go so hard for these coaches, who are grown men making 6/7 figures, but then quick to put the blame on the 18-22 year old kids?

I want yall to be in the stands for some of my games. I need that type of blind support!

Any time you see a reoccurring issue on the field...on any level of football where you get to choose your players... IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER IT FALLS ON COACHING!

You either coached it, allowed it, or recruited it.

Why's the TE wide open?
"Blown assignments." = well get that dummy TF out of there and put someone else on him!
"Guys aren't athletic enough to cover him." = well recruit better athletes. Who the fvck are these short 4.8 Linebackers?

Or it's something scheme related, which again FALLS ON COACHES.

This isn't like being the DC at Cooper City and trying to stop STA's TE from catching passes.
These are athletic, fully capable, major D1 kids we have on our roster and we allowed a bum QB and some unknown H-back/TE to have a field day.
Duke beat them 45-10. Let that sink in. DUKE!

You're telling me this happened because 3 and 4 year players were blowing assignments? LOL
I don't think I have to say this cause it should be common sense, but 3 and 4 year players shouldn't be blowing any assignments. They should **** near be able to run the defense by themselves.

I can deal with guys getting beat one-on-one, that's why I don't get upset when/if a guy like Trajan Bandy gets beat for a fade ball. What I can't deal with is opponents being wide open because (1) players not knowing their assignments or (2) our scheme not accounting for it.
That's flat-out coaching, and there's no denying that.
Click to expand...
I never understood the devout cult-like loyalty these dudes have to millionaire coaches while they are seemingly overly eager to dump on the players, who usually make very little.

It's always some dumb **** about execution. You know which teams have such consistent problems executing? The ones with ****** coaches.

Why don't you hear about Ohio Taint, Baga and Clemson always struggling to execute so often? Because they either recruit better, smarter, more dedicated players, or they teach them better. Or a combination of the two. Us? Every fcking year it's our dumb, lazy, "bad culture" players can't execute the genius plans laid out so masterfully by our proven stud coaches.
 
Advertisement
rokulika said:
Playing devil's advocate here:

Baker did not throw 3 first half INTs vs VT
Baker did not miss a game-tying FG vs NC
Baker did not throw multiple INTs vs FIU
Baker did not muff a punt vs UF
Baker did not punt 11 times vs Duke
Baker did not allow a def & ST TD vs GT
Baker did not get shut out vs LT
Click to expand...

Canes fans: We can't do worse than Richt!
Dan Enos: Hold my beer.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top