Mike London for DC

[I'm Hurt Dawg]

He runs an aggressive for 3-4.

From canesmang1

In 2006, London was named by Virginia coach Al Groh as the team's new defensive coordinator to replace Al Golden. Virginia's defense under London was much more aggressive than it was under Golden.[3] Allowing just 289.5 yards per game, the Virginia defense under London gave up fewer yards than any Virginia defense had in the past 27 years. London developed first year defensive end Jeffrey Fitzgerald, who by the end of the season had more tackles than any freshman in the country. The Cavaliers finished the season ranked 6th in the nation in sacks with 40, and allowed the 19th-fewest rushing yards (106.7 yds/game) and the 16th-fewest points against (19.7/game) on the way to a 9-win season and a narrow loss to Texas Tech and Heisman Trophy candidate Michael Crabtree in the Gator Bowl.[5] At the end of the season, lineman Chris Long won the Ted Hendricks Award and was drafted second overall in the 2008 NFL Draft.

Pros- Will get a bunch of recruits from the 757 and everyone loves him in the 757
#1 DT Andrew Brown and #1 safety Blanding would give a strong look. Valentine and Brown would be amazing.
Next year top DT Tim Settle and #1 athlete Jaason Lewis

Keeps Blanding and Brown away from FSU and Uncle Odell

Cons
Everyone in the 757 loves so Virginia might fire him because of it.
1 year as DC

 

[nystateofmind]

He coached under Golden at UVA.

If Coach D goes and London gets fired it's very possible he's our DC.

 

[NVA CANE]

I would literally take anyone over dorito

 

[BlackKeysFan]

Never hire a coordinator for recruiting purposes. EVER. Hire position coaches sure, but not coordinators.

I think he would make an excellent DC here so that isn't me not endorsing the idea. But coach Nono is going anywhere, as long as we have Golden with will have Nono is my gut feeling on the matter.

 

[Dandycane]

Lol at the Shannon fanboys suggesting more SWAC coaches.....maybe more black coaches and more intelligent white players like stanford is the ticket.

 

[TexasCane90]

I would love some aggressive D... It sucks to see such a dumpster fire at D but when they don't even play aggressive but soft or lost its unbearable

 

[McGahee2TheHouse]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

 

[canesmang1]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

Well that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

if nick saban came here and wanted the 3-4 would you still say the same?

 

[JHallCanes]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

I very rarely disagree with you man but I think it's too soon for that. If you consider the types of guys we are recruiting, and have recruited on D, I think a versatile 3-4 could work pretty well.

I don't know what the **** I'm looking at right now though. Not a ******* clue.

 

[McGahee2TheHouse]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

Well that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

if nick saban came here and wanted the 3-4 would you still say the same?

Nick Saban isn't coming here so there is little point in entertaining that hypothetical. What if ******* Bill Parcells came here and wanted a 3-4? See I can be a moron too.

 

[McGahee2TheHouse]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

I very rarely disagree with you man but I think it's too soon for that. If you consider the types of guys we are recruiting, and have recruited on D, I think a versatile 3-4 could work pretty well.

I don't know what the **** I'm looking at right now though. Not a ******* clue.

Anything that requires us to play gap control isn't going to work, IMO. I don't mind you disagreeing with me because you have actual arguments.

 

[canesmang1]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

Well that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

if nick saban came here and wanted the 3-4 would you still say the same?

Nick Saban isn't coming here so there is little point in entertaining that hypothetical. What if ****ing Bill Parcells came here and wanted a 3-4? See I can be a moron too.

k.

 

[FullyERicht]

Mike London would be THE IDEAL hire. We could scrap the 4-3 zone 3 elements and run the 3-4 defense that actual works and stop wasting time with this hybrid nonsense.

 

[JHallCanes]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

I very rarely disagree with you man but I think it's too soon for that. If you consider the types of guys we are recruiting, and have recruited on D, I think a versatile 3-4 could work pretty well.

I don't know what the **** I'm looking at right now though. Not a ******* clue.

Anything that requires us to play gap control isn't going to work, IMO. I don't mind you disagreeing with me because you have actual arguments.

I gotta say though, I don't really have a counterpoint to stand on. I don't trust this ******* guy in charge of our D one bit. To sit there and talk about how we are still cutting guys loose and missing tackles tells me he isn't teaching these guys ****.

 

[McGahee2TheHouse]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

I very rarely disagree with you man but I think it's too soon for that. If you consider the types of guys we are recruiting, and have recruited on D, I think a versatile 3-4 could work pretty well.

I don't know what the **** I'm looking at right now though. Not a ******* clue.

Anything that requires us to play gap control isn't going to work, IMO. I don't mind you disagreeing with me because you have actual arguments.

I gotta say though, I don't really have a counterpoint to stand on. I don't trust this ******* guy in charge of our D one bit. To sit there and talk about how we are still cutting guys loose and missing tackles tells me he isn't teaching these guys ****.

To your recruiting argument: yeah we have some studs on the DL in this class...did they play gap control in high school? I am legitimately asking because I dunno. If they didn't then I just don't see them coming here and reaching their peak. It's literally a lifetime of coaching you are trying to reverse in a matter of a few years. It defies logic (to me)

 

[mavericksouth]

No more 3-4 schemes. It doesn't work at a school like Miami when most, if not all, of the kids we recruit have been groomed to play 4-3, one gap since pop warner.

 

[JHallCanes]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

I very rarely disagree with you man but I think it's too soon for that. If you consider the types of guys we are recruiting, and have recruited on D, I think a versatile 3-4 could work pretty well.

I don't know what the **** I'm looking at right now though. Not a ******* clue.

Anything that requires us to play gap control isn't going to work, IMO. I don't mind you disagreeing with me because you have actual arguments.

I gotta say though, I don't really have a counterpoint to stand on. I don't trust this ******* guy in charge of our D one bit. To sit there and talk about how we are still cutting guys loose and missing tackles tells me he isn't teaching these guys ****.

To your recruiting argument: yeah we have some studs on the DL in this class...did they play gap control in high school? I am legitimately asking because I dunno. If they didn't then I just don't see them coming here and reaching their peak. It's literally a lifetime of coaching you are trying to reverse in a matter of a few years. It defies logic (to me)

I think my point on recruiting speaks more towards the hybrid LB/DE types though I "think" the idea is finding a true NT type in the JUCO ranks and a frosh to groom.

The ******* part that just really ****es me off is the talent excuse is gone. Yeah we have plenty of JAGs on our D, but who the **** doesnt? We certainly have PLENTY of talent to at least slow down a mongoloid like Logan Thomas. How in the world are we even supposed to evaluate who is improving or could be effective down the road if our DC still blames the same sad *** **** he did 3 years ago?

 

[FullyERicht]

The issue isn't the 3-4......its that they run both the 3-4 and 4-3, one gap and two gap, and compound that by playing no pass rushers except on 3rd and long, and use a cover 3 shell.

London's defense would be more man coverage and blitzes, with guys being able to master their positions and play on all downs without having to wear multiple hats.

 

[JHallCanes]

I guess I should add that I am definitely not saying the 3-4 is or isn't the answer. I'm just ******* lost on how we evaluate it when it's clear the guy in charge is inept.

 

[Canesfan1899]

No. **** the 3-4 because if anything is obvious by now, it's that the 3-4 doesn't work here.

I very rarely disagree with you man but I think it's too soon for that. If you consider the types of guys we are recruiting, and have recruited on D, I think a versatile 3-4 could work pretty well.

I don't know what the **** I'm looking at right now though. Not a ******* clue.

Right now is just confusion. That and predictable blitZes.