No better sign of a well-coached D than ...

Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
335
an absence of busted coverages and missed tackles.

Remain optimistic with Coach Diaz and this defensive staff.

But we need to be very SOLID on that side of the ball Friday night versus a very crafty offense.

What do you expect to see when Duke has the ball?
 
Advertisement

Notsince1985

Retired staff
Premium
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
16,103
I'm confused. We had a lot of missed tackles and blown coverages....so, is this thread saying we're a poorly coached D.
 

AutoCANE

My name is my name.
Premium
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
3,724
I'm confused. We had a lot of missed tackles and blown coverages....so, is this thread saying we're a poorly coached D.


Yeah I am trying to figure this one out myself....I'm thinking the sarcasm here must really be well shrouded.
 

rok

Great Poster
Purgatory
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
22,264
Were our players even able to watch film on Toledo?

Were we expecting a shutout?
 

ChosenOne

Band
Banned
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
Messages
2,621
Bad coaching is...
- Refusal to adapt schematically
- Refusal to scheme around personnel
- Play Calling
- Ability to disguise blitz and coverage
- Poor/Useless technique (At least for the defensive position coaches)

To me bad tackling has also been on players and partly the S&C. Unless they played offense their entire HS career these players should already know how to tackle or at least the basics IMO. College Coaches are suppose to just sharpen it so they aren't trying to hit stick every tackle they attempt.
 

TheUuuuu

Junior
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
1,239
We didn't play the best defensive game, but slow the **** down before calling for heads and yelling "failure".

Let's not forget the abortion of a system we left before. I know we expect perfection, but had No D been running this it would've easily been a lopsided game in favor of Toledo.

People forget how much better we have it now compared to 2015.
 

No_Fly_Zone

Rogue Gone Maude.
Maude
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
8,123
Upvoted for correctly using "than" (instead of improperly using "then") and hyphenating "well-coached."
 
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
335
I'm confused. We had a lot of missed tackles and blown coverages....so, is this thread saying we're a poorly coached D.

Yeah, poorly worded on my part – sorry.

Obviously, as we all saw and Notsince1985 reiterated, we were sloppy and discombobulated on defense against Toledo.

I am going to attribute it (staying optimistic) from dealing with the storm.

I'm expecting to see a much crisper and cohesive performance against Duke because I still think our coaches can get us there by Friday night.

I know we need it.
 
Advertisement

Jax Cane

Junior
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
1,275
I'm laughing at all of the people getting twisted. I was also pretty upset going into half time but I came to the rationalization that Diaz would go in settle the boys down and do his best to make adjustments. I didnt even bother to check the boards during the game because I knew there would be bunch of panties all over the ground.

You guys need to settle down and see how this plays out. For you not to take the hurricane, the time off and the rust into consideration is just foolish. Not to mention that the Toledo QB led the nation in TDs last season (Meaning he wasnt a jabroni) and we were going up against a very good passing attack is short sighted. Im just happy the sisters of the poor arent running it down our throat like Doritos defenses.
 

jakeman1

Junior
Premium
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
2,187
I am hoping that Diaz simplifies things to just let the guys play. He did that for the LB's last year, and needs to do it again now. The WR's in both games have been open so fast that the DL had minimal chance most of the time to make an impact.
 

Bigtip

All-ACC
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
5,937
I'm laughing at all of the people getting twisted. I was also pretty upset going into half time but I came to the rationalization that Diaz would go in settle the boys down and do his best to make adjustments. I didnt even bother to check the boards during the game because I knew there would be bunch of panties all over the ground.

You guys need to settle down and see how this plays out. For you not to take the hurricane, the time off and the rust into consideration is just foolish. Not to mention that the Toledo QB led the nation in TDs last season (Meaning he wasnt a jabroni) and we were going up against a very good passing attack is short sighted. Im just happy the sisters of the poor arent running it down our throat like Doritos defenses.

The problem is that we've seen the same trash defense for both games vs the worst teams in our schedule. It's extremely concerning and likely indicates that we will struggle all year
 

CFLCane

Junior
Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
8,362
I'm laughing at all of the people getting twisted. I was also pretty upset going into half time but I came to the rationalization that Diaz would go in settle the boys down and do his best to make adjustments. I didnt even bother to check the boards during the game because I knew there would be bunch of panties all over the ground.

You guys need to settle down and see how this plays out. For you not to take the hurricane, the time off and the rust into consideration is just foolish. Not to mention that the Toledo QB led the nation in TDs last season (Meaning he wasnt a jabroni) and we were going up against a very good passing attack is short sighted. Im just happy the sisters of the poor arent running it down our throat like Doritos defenses.

The problem is that we've seen the same trash defense for both games vs the worst teams in our schedule. It's extremely concerning and likely indicates that we will struggle all year

The secondary was just overhyped in the offseason, Diaz hasn't found the combination of CB's yet and the Safeties can't be trusted to clean up the back end like last year. Bandy and Young look like our best CB's but if you're running a base 4-3 with Bandy, Young, Johnson , Redwine you're essentially playing a 4CB backfield with no true safeties. The scheme is questionable on the slots, but the personell is a bigger problem. We need Delaney to play as advertised.
 

simplycanes

Senior
Premium
Joined
Aug 3, 2012
Messages
6,712
I think that perhaps, Diaz got a little bit too complicated versus what he asked of this defense last year. I have a suspicion that he will dial some of this back and get back to some simplicity in what hes calling. Improvement in fundamentals will soon follow.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

Coach Macho

aka Beardy Ryan
Joined
Oct 11, 2012
Messages
12,711
I keep seeing all this stuff about how we were rusty and we have new players in the secondary yada yada yada.

But what does that have to do with being aligned poorly pre-snap?
 
Advertisement

LuCane

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
14,698
I keep seeing all this stuff about how we were rusty and we have new players in the secondary yada yada yada.

But what does that have to do with being aligned poorly pre-snap?
There has to be a logical explanation for insisting on playing 3 LBs against 3, 4-wide and even empty back sets. If you asked Diaz and Banda if they are aware Nickel and Dime packages exist, do we really believe their answer would be "what's that?" It's odd and I wish we knew more about what they're trying to accomplish or trying to avoid - game to game or more broadly. Aside from that, it pretty much comes down to this:

CFLCane said:
The secondary was just overhyped in the offseason, Diaz hasn't found the combination of CB's yet and the Safeties can't be trusted to clean up the back end like last year.

So far, Delaney hasn't shown the ability to change direction well. Jackson is about in the same boat. And, our defensive coaches add to their insistence on playing 3LBs with seemingly irrational concerns about "small" corners being unable to tackle (while apparently less worried their big corners cannot cover anyone well).

Think you see a better matchup this week, but fuggit. Let's see what happens.
 
Last edited:

Coach Macho

aka Beardy Ryan
Joined
Oct 11, 2012
Messages
12,711
I keep seeing all this stuff about how we were rusty and we have new players in the secondary yada yada yada.

But what does that have to do with being aligned poorly pre-snap?
There has to be a logical explanation for insisting on playing 3 LBs against 3, 4-wide and even empty back sets. If you asked Diaz and Banda if they are aware Nickel and Dime packages exist, do we really believe their answer would be "what's that?" It's odd and I wish we knew more about what they're trying to accomplish or trying to avoid - game to game or more broadly. Aside from that, it pretty much comes down to this:

CFLCane said:
The secondary was just overhyped in the offseason, Diaz hasn't found the combination of CB's yet and the Safeties can't be trusted to clean up the back end like last year.

So far, Delaney hasn't shown the ability to change direction well. Jackson is about in the same boat. And, our defensive coaches add to their insistence on playing 3LBs with seemingly irrational concerns about "small" corners being unable to tackle (while apparently less worried their big corners cannot cover anyone well).

Think you see a better matchup this week, but fuggit. Let's see what happens.

You're harping on the way we personneled. What about the way we aligned all game versus 2 WR sets?

We kept that 3rd LB in there for run support. If you watch the way we lined up on defense you'd notice that the 3rd LB was often aligned far inside of the #2 WR. (sometimes all the way in the box)

If you're gonna line-up that way then putting in an extra DB does nothing for you. If anything it gives you weaker run support.

Now, if you actually walked out and covered the slot then yes, a DB in that spot would behoove us. The way we were aligned, however, calls for a Linebacker in that spot.

Miami.jpg


Look how we're aligned there. You want a DB where that 3rd LB is? I don't.

I honestly don't remember what we did versus 4/5 WR sets. I do remember Toledo using a TE as a WR, which would probably explain why we kept a 3rd LB in. If we see TE's on the field we're gonna keep 3 LB's in.
 

Sgt_Cane

When the U is on, there is nothing else like it.
Joined
Nov 26, 2014
Messages
2,060
We either set the tone Friday night for the rest of the season or it's gonna be a loooong season
 

LuCane

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
14,698
I keep seeing all this stuff about how we were rusty and we have new players in the secondary yada yada yada.

But what does that have to do with being aligned poorly pre-snap?
There has to be a logical explanation for insisting on playing 3 LBs against 3, 4-wide and even empty back sets. If you asked Diaz and Banda if they are aware Nickel and Dime packages exist, do we really believe their answer would be "what's that?" It's odd and I wish we knew more about what they're trying to accomplish or trying to avoid - game to game or more broadly. Aside from that, it pretty much comes down to this:

CFLCane said:
The secondary was just overhyped in the offseason, Diaz hasn't found the combination of CB's yet and the Safeties can't be trusted to clean up the back end like last year.

So far, Delaney hasn't shown the ability to change direction well. Jackson is about in the same boat. And, our defensive coaches add to their insistence on playing 3LBs with seemingly irrational concerns about "small" corners being unable to tackle (while apparently less worried their big corners cannot cover anyone well).

Think you see a better matchup this week, but fuggit. Let's see what happens.

You're harping on the way we personneled. What about the way we aligned all game versus 2 WR sets?

We kept that 3rd LB in there for run support. If you watch the way we lined up on defense you'd notice that the 3rd LB was often aligned far inside of the #2 WR. (sometimes all the way in the box)

If you're gonna line-up that way then putting in an extra DB does nothing for you. If anything it gives you weaker run support.

Now, if you actually walked out and covered the slot then yes, a DB in that spot would behoove us. The way we were aligned, however, calls for a Linebacker in that spot.

View attachment 50460


Look how we're aligned there. You want a DB where that 3rd LB is? I don't.

I honestly don't remember what we did versus 4/5 WR sets. I do remember Toledo using a TE as a WR, which would probably explain why we kept a 3rd LB in. If we see TE's on the field we're gonna keep 3 LB's in.
I'll go ahead and play along:

1. Part of that alignment is we're seemingly keeping a 3rd LB in there to hedge and stay even in numbers on the box. Remember when we used to go nuts on how D'Onofrio would get outnumbered in the box. The only logical thing I can think of for the alignment is an attempt to hedge against the 7 offensive players in the box to avoid getting eaten up on 1st and 10. I disagree with it on straight principle because they're playing the 2 safeties back, but that's my best guess for the alignment.

I do not want a DB where that 3rd LB is hedging. I want a 5th DB to make our coverages more flexible. I keep mentioning personnel because, with a 5th DB, you can run a different coverage and even bring down a Safety, thereby accomplishing both goals. Would be shocked if he doesn't do this over the next couple games, though it's less necessary against what Duke has flashed so far this season.
 
Last edited:
Top