Manny era defensive numbers

[DTP]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but one thing nobody mentions when throwing out the "our defense is great, what if we only had an offense" argument, is "what happens to our defense if our offense actually does start scoring points? Is there any chance our defensive production actually goes down? Do the offense and defense live entirely in a vacuum, except to the extent that people argue a bad offense is bad for the defense, statistically?

Is there any chance that an offense that puts up more points will actually encourage the other team to try and score more points?

The only time you will see a team purposely slow down their own offense and TRY to not score more points is if they have a huge blowout lead and they just want to run out the clock. As bad as Miami has been at times recently, they don't really get blown out often. For example, I don't think Louisiana Tech was like "**** their offense sucks, lets not bother trying to score more points" while they were up 7-0 a majority of the game. The opponent is ALWAYS looking to score more points unless it's a late game, bleed the clock scenario.

Now, is it possible a faster, higher scoring offense will give the opponent more possessions and thus increasing their total yardage and even point total? Sure but you have to look at it objectively. Playing at a faster pace will probably assure that the defense doesn't perform as well in the more traditional defensive metrics (total defense/scoring defense) simply because you're giving the opponent more possessions. LSU won the National Championship with a defense that was statistically much worse than it has been in recent seasons. So instead of grinding out 17-10 games They were winning a lot of 45-25 games. It's not that their defense was all of the sudden bad, it's that the faster pace on offense meant giving their opponents more possessions, thus more yardage and points. Modern defensive metrics will get away from stats like total defense and scoring defense because they're not a correct representation of the defenses' overall success. Efficiency statistics like yards per play or points per play are more indicative of how well a defense plays because they're not influenced by outside factors like offensive time of possession or offensive turnovers.

 

[DTP]

Until this defense passes the eye test and proves me wrong, I'm going to keep assuming that they'll fold when the game depends on it. They'll commit some stupid penalty to keep a drive alive, or miss a tackle, or not cover a receiver, or crash the wrong gap, or get to deep on the pass rush, or.....

I hope they fix their issues, some of which have nothing to do with an inept offense (but some that are certainly affected by an inept offense), but they've yet to show me that they're capable of being 'very good'.

So I'm assuming you missed Central Michigan, Virginia, and Pittsburgh games where the offense did a whole bunch of nothing for a majority of the game but the defense kept answering the bell over and over? Or maybe the Florida game where the defense shut down a very good rushing attack and gave the offense multiple turnovers only to watch them do nothing with them? Or was it the defenses' fault for giving up the touchdown after Jeff Thomas fumbled inside his own 5 yard line? Or maybe the bowl game where they held Louisiana Tech to seven points until late in the fourth quarter when they finally gave up a second touchdown after being exhausted from being on the field the whole game? If the defense wasn't as good as it was, they would have lost every single game outside of Bethune Cookman and Louisville. It's really hard to expect a defense to just completely shut every single team out. Especially with an offense that struggled to get even one first down a possession and had multiple games of 3 or more turnovers.

 

[brock]

You could have easily predicted which posters would be in here saying our defense isn’t good or is overrated.

You didn’t predict me in saying that there are some obvious problems. I may Be a positive poster most of the times but Ima keep it real too. I love What Diaz has done for our defense but we have some issues to correct in my opinion too. Nothing’s perfect

 

[1LuvCane]

You didn’t predict me in saying that there are some obvious problems. I may Be a positive poster most of the times but Ima keep it real too. I love What Diaz has done for our defense but we have some issues to correct in my opinion too. Nothing’s perfect

I approve this message...
Optimism with a side of caution.

 

[Rellyrell]

Outside of a handful of SEC teams everyone’s schedule sucks. Every conference has 1-2 great teams and the rest is a garbled mess of mediocrity with another 1-2 teams occasionally breaking out.

Not even remotely true.
Let's talk about the ACC for a second, and I'm only going to focus on the ACC Coastal b/c if I focused on the ACC Atlantic, there would be no argument, literally.

2016: Miami only played one top 25 team in the reg season. Let's compare that to our division foes:
-Duke played 3 ranked teams in the reg season
-UNC played 3 ranked teams in the reg season
-VT played 3 ranked teams in the reg season
-Pitt played 2 ranked teams in the reg season
-GT played 4 ranked teams in the reg season
-Pitt played 2 ranked teams in the reg season

I've already highlighted that 2017 was our hardest season. Matter of fact, per the SOS index, we had the 8th hardest schedule and 2nd hardest behind Clemson in the ACC

2018: Miami played two ranked teams in the top 25 in the reg season. Again, let's compare that to our division foes:
-UNC played one ranked team (** their game with UCF was cancelled, otherwise they would've played 2 ranked teams)
-UVA played one ranked team in the reg season
-Duke played one ranked team in the reg season
-GT played two ranked teams in the reg season
-VT played three ranked teams in the reg season
-Pitt played four ranked teams in the reg season

2019: Miami played two ranked teams in the the top 25 in the reg season. Last snap shot of our division foes' schedule:
-UNC played one ranked team in the reg season
-VT played two ranked teams in the reg season
-UVA played two ranked teams in the reg season
-GT played two ranked teams in the reg season
-Pitt played two ranked teams in the reg season
-Duke played one ranked team in the reg season

When we look at our talent level, compared to what we've done with our schedule in comparison to what our division rivals have done w/ equal or harder schedules is quite appalling and it can be said that Diaz's defense have feasted on a lot of inept teams. The defense also tends to look elite to start the season, and show chinks as the season prolongs (Could be a combo of fatigue, frustration, and the smoke and mirrors no longer work as more footage is available for opponents).

Again, I'm a Canes fan; cut me open and you'll find Orange and Green blood oozing out of my veins, but the Canes have forced my hand to become an overall CFB football fan, and I can unequivocally tell you that we've had pound for pound the softest schedule out of all the P5 teams for a while now. I believe 2013 was another time we had a solid SOS schedule, but typically, our SOS have sucked donkey balls (play one, no more than two ranked teams, coupled w/ some G5 teams and FCS teams)

 

[Rellyrell]

View attachment 111577

These unis were so dope and underappreciated. We need this mentality again.

 

[JAYBLAZE]

These unis were so dope and underappreciated. We need this mentality again.

?

 

[Hurracanes]

If I didn't know any better, I'd think this was rational, intelligent dialogue in response to an analytical thread and discussion. Holy Christ.

Now that my eyebrows have been blown off, a couple thoughts to what you (very intelligently) laid out:

1. I don't think the defense is great. I think it's very good, and it's sustained that level for 4 years, pretty consistently giving the team a very good chance to win just about every single time they took the field with a 50+ game sample size. I just want the credit given where it's due. Manny may turn out to be a complete abortion of a HC, but his defense has been very good (at times great, more infrequently average) for 4 years now. I just think it's important to realize that if the offense was even as close to as good as the defense has been, this team would be a 10+ win team every single year

2. There is absolutely a chance that the defensive metrics change if the offense starts exploding. You're 100% correct, if you change a variable (offensive performance, in this example) you cannot assume that nothing else will change. There very well may be some trickle down to the defense, but I'd love to see it just to see how much. But I think if you assume, at worst, close to as good a defense as we've seen, and pair that with a comparable offense, the bottom line will be more wins. It may not be better defensive metrics, but it'll make for a much better overall football team.

3. 100% correct on the collapses late this year by the defense. They did not get stops late in games, when perhaps 1 more would have resulted in a win. So those are tough to stomach, but I've said dozens of times on here, a TD in the 4th quarter is not worth any more points than a TD on the first drive of the game. They're both worth 6. So, yes, the defense didn't bow up late when we really needed them to a few times this year. And that can't just be ignored. But if the offense did much of anything in any of those games, or in the case of VT, if the offense didn't just gift points to them basically the entire first half, you may not need those stops late in games. They might have been garbage time TDs rather than game winning drives.

Great points, and great dialogue. But how bout we just field a Top 25 offense this year, and I'll take my chances with the defense reacting to the offensive improvement. I think we'll all be really happy.

A Top 25 Offense this year? Absolutely no shot in that happening with our OL. I’ll take a Top 50, at this point.

 

[brock]

A Top 25 Offense this year? Absolutely no shot in that happening with our OL. I’ll take a Top 50, at this point.

You are not accounting for how much a spread offensive system and getting the ball out quicker does for an offensive line group. That’s a massive help in addition to already having a qb like king too

 

[Hurracanes]

You are not accounting how much a spread offensive system and getting the ball out quicker does for an offensive line group.

Ask FSU how it helped them the last 2 years. A spread doesn’t mean our OL will magically improve drastically.

 

[brock]

Ask FSU how it helped them the last 2 years. A spread doesn’t mean our OL will magically improve drastically.

Miami is not fsu and they didn’t have the talent Miami has at a number of positions offensively or have what Miami has defensively to complement that. Completely incomparable situations

 

[Cribby]

Who's Iowa's comp? Who's Clemson's comp? Who's San Diego State's comp?

Such a lazy rebuttal. 12+ teams show up on the schedule every year, for every team. Of all those teams playing all those games, Miami has the 14th best scoring defense since Manny arrived. 14th out of 130 is top 11%. Not too bad.

And, if the take about the defensive success is that "the comp is trash", then that's even MORE of an indictment on the offense. The defense is inflated because the competition is trash, but the offense still can't crack the top 80 in any metric. Even more embarrassing.

Exactly.

I’ve never got the competition thing, it’s the stupidest counter I’ve ever seen. We’ve had a good defense since manny has been here. There’s no debating that.

 

[AllAboutTheU]

Ask FSU how it helped them the last 2 years. A spread doesn’t mean our OL will magically improve drastically.

Their offense improved substantially and they had a worse QB situation than us, as hard to believe as that is. Briles system is also different than Lashlee's.

 

[AllAboutTheU]

Again, I'm a Canes fan; cut me open and you'll find Orange and Green blood oozing out of my veins, but the Canes have forced my hand to become an overall CFB football fan, and I can unequivocally tell you that we've had pound for pound the softest schedule out of all the P5 teams for a while now.

You're unequivocally telling us something that every SOS metric around disagrees with. Just because you want it to be true doesn't make it true.

 

[sebastian91]

So I'm assuming you missed Central Michigan, Virginia, and Pittsburgh games where the offense did a whole bunch of nothing for a majority of the game but the defense kept answering the bell over and over? Or maybe the Florida game where the defense shut down a very good rushing attack and gave the offense multiple turnovers only to watch them do nothing with them? Or was it the defenses' fault for giving up the touchdown after Jeff Thomas fumbled inside his own 5 yard line? Or maybe the bowl game where they held Louisiana Tech to seven points until late in the fourth quarter when they finally gave up a second touchdown after being exhausted from being on the field the whole game? If the defense wasn't as good as it was, they would have lost every single game outside of Bethune Cookman and Louisville. It's really hard to expect a defense to just completely shut every single team out. Especially with an offense that struggled to get even one first down a possession and had multiple games of 3 or more turnovers.

No, I saw all of those games. Like I said, the inept offense contributes to defensive issues, too, and I don't expect the defense to shut every single team out. But, for me to consider them 'very good', I have to think that they'll be able to rise to the occasion, whatever that occasion may be. It says little about a defense to be awesome on 1st and 2nd down, only to do something stupid on 3rd or 4th down to extend a drive (or worse, lose a game). This whole thing is a circular argument anyway. Just like the offense not being able to extend drives has an impact on the defense, the inability of the defense to get off the field in critical moments disrupts offensive rhythm (not that our O was capable of that anyway). It goes both ways, but I do know that the balance of the 'both ways' in this case was strongly in favor of the defense. They were a lot better than the offense, but they have problems that need fixing, too.

 

[DTP]

No, I saw all of those games. Like I said, the inept offense contributes to defensive issues, too, and I don't expect the defense to shut every single team out. But, for me to consider them 'very good', I have to think that they'll be able to rise to the occasion, whatever that occasion may be. It says little about a defense to be awesome on 1st and 2nd down, only to do something stupid on 3rd or 4th down to extend a drive (or worse, lose a game). This whole thing is a circular argument anyway. Just like the offense not being able to extend drives has an impact on the defense, the inability of the defense to get off the field in critical moments disrupts offensive rhythm (not that our O was capable of that anyway). It goes both ways, but I do know that the balance of the 'both ways' in this case was strongly in favor of the defense. They were a lot better than the offense, but they have problems that need fixing, too.

I agree they’re not perfect. I’d consider them very good but not great. I just took issue with your first post where you said you would assume they’re going to fail whenever it matters which is just not true.

 

[Dwinstitles]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but one thing nobody mentions when throwing out the "our defense is great, what if we only had an offense" argument, is "what happens to our defense if our offense actually does start scoring points? Is there any chance our defensive production actually goes down? Do the offense and defense live entirely in a vacuum, except to the extent that people argue a bad offense is bad for the defense, statistically?

Is there any chance that an offense that puts up more points will actually encourage the other team to try and score more points?

I'm just saying, we can't just assume that changing one variable in a positive direction won't change other variables in a negative way.

What we do know, is that this defense gave up 4th and 17, where a stop would have won the game. It gave up a drive the full length of the field to VT, where a stop could have won the game. It gave up a long drive against UF, where a stop could have won the game. We lost a lot of close games last year where, yeah, the offense didn't do it's job, but the defense also had chances to win the games, and didn't. The opponent doesn't need to score as many points as they possibly can in order to win the game. They just need to score more than we do. That bit doesn't change whether we score 20 ppg, or 30.

Time will tell, but I'm not sure our D has been as good as some of us would like to think it has.

Great post

 

[Hurracanes]

Their offense improved substantially and they had a worse QB situation than us, as hard to believe as that is. Briles system is also different than Lashlee's.

Yes, their Offense improved but their OL didn’t, which is what Brock tried to argue.

 

[TruCane81]

Like I said, no offense has sabotaged their defense more than ours over the last three years.

Started at the bottom and stayed here:

YIKES!

 

[sebastian91]

I agree they’re not perfect. I’d consider them very good but not great. I just took issue with your first post where you said you would assume they’re going to fail whenever it matters which is just not true.

Well, sorry. My assumption remains that they'll ***** up, because that's what they often do. If they don't in some cases, great. Good for them. But, I still don't trust them until they come through more often than not, and I don't think they're there yet.