- Joined
- Jan 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,516
Did we account for the pitch man at all last night?
no...I wanted to kill someone watching that abomination.
Did we account for the pitch man at all last night?
Wasn't it Paul Johnson who fired Al Groh midseason because Groh's 3-4 defense wasn't working? Johnson probably has a real good insight into the shortcomings of the Groh/Golden 3-4. Like Nebraska, GT ran through us at will. He must have watched a lot of Nebraska film.
Jimmy Johnson always seemed to have a good handle on how to defense the wishbone and, I think, the option. The fullback never got a head of steam--or so it seemed. I wish somebody with real good X and O knowledge would explain exactly how we should have defensed GT's option, including explaining which defensive player should have had the assignment for which GT player. It was obvious guys either didn't understand their proper assignments or they kept busting them. There were times the pitch men were totally uncoverded--much of the time the fullback up the middle had wide running lanes. Should we have been scared of GT's passing as we seemed to be? Why was the MLB playing so far back?
I just don't get it, I don't understand enough about X's and O's, and I don't understand why the pros are so enamored of the 3-4. Is it our talent, or lack thereof?
One of the most fascinating interviews I ever heard was Barry Switzer on sports talk radio in Dallas. Basically, the veer offense he ran in Oklahoma was unstoppable. They used to routinely put 600+ of offense of err'ybody. Then he talks about JJ's Miami teams and how effective they were at defensing the veer. In a nut shell, it was about athletes and philosophy: undersized but fast, aggressive athletes, and an attacking approach where tackles too away the dive, defensive ends that would hit the QB EACH AND EVERY PLAY, regardless of whether or not he had the, ball, and corners coming up to take away the pitch. On the off chance that there was a rare pass play, the safeties were able to rotate over. In any even, our defenses dictated the action. We didn't go the Bobby Knight rape approach ("might as well lie back and enjoy it.")
You are correct in terminology. The wishbone was a veer-principled offense with 3 backs instead of two. How the defense attacks these offenses is fundamentally the same.
You are correct in terminology. The wishbone was a veer-principled offense with 3 backs instead of two. How the defense attacks these offenses is fundamentally the same.
Actually, I guess the veer is a component of Paul Johnson's triple option. It is apparently defensed in a manner similar to how JJ defensed the wishbone with the 4-3. I was wondering about "block down, step down." I had never heard the phrase before. This is what I found:
http://coachhoover.blogspot.com/2010/07/4-3-vs-flexbone-dt-play.html
Notice that the GT offense is called the Flexbone. Notice also the critical role of the 4-3 defensive tackle, and continuing to play assignments instead of freelancing. Maybe the pro infatuation with the 3-4 is not necessarily suitable when we play college teams that have more option. You almost never see an option play in the pro's. Once a year you might see a team throw in one play in a game just for surprise, but never a whole offense.
Yet we've seen two option teams and we've been destroyed by them. We used to be known for our prowess against wishbone and option teams.
One thing I take from reading the linked article--and I haven't fully absorbed it yet--is that it would be very very difficult for the center to run free to attack the middle linebacker using "block down, step down."
Then you have the DE crashing the QB. I remember Bill Hawkiins smothering the Oklahoma QB, Charles Thompson, in the '88 OB. I guess you force the pitch as much as you can. Take away the fullback, and then smash the QB early forcing him to pitch. Then the CB takes the pitch.
You have to keep assignments, no freelancing, and you do have one guy essentially who is assigned to make the tackle. i guess, in reality, other players will come in to help clean up but the first thing is to stay on your assignment no matter what and let the play--hopefully--end up with the pitch, since you've smothered the fullback dive and the QB keeping it. You don't put Chad in the position of having to try to cover the QB and pitch at the same time--which he did beautifully--but that is asking too much. He should smash the QB early and always, and let the other guys worry about the pitch.
Am I right?
As far as I know, Barry Switzer did not run the veer; he ran the wishbone.
We didn't put any hits on the QB. You hit that motherfcker every play, and you slow him down. Eventually, he'll get the yips and turn the ball over.
We're softer than Stay Puft. And it all starts at the top.