forums

Props to Coach D

haters-gonna-hate-2.webp
 
Advertisement
We also cheated up the LBs on plays, and had them motion around, we played nickle on downs that werent 3rd, our middle LBs stacked the box, so yea he changed some sh¡t, if you dont think so you havent seen any of the games from this year, im just hoping he does the same sh¡t against GT
 
Duke looked terrible last night. I think defense played better but I need to see that against FSU, Cincy, and GT to believe.
 
A lot of our problems are that the first person there misses the tackle. Coach D can't make the tackle himself, he can only have the right coverage called.
 
Is this what it has come to at Miami? We have to praise a person for doing the obvious 4 years too late against an inferior opponent? Get this garbage out of my face and give me a real coach.
 
WhatTheHell said:
What I saw last night:

The DL was allowed to rush last night on 3rd downs, and with more than 3 defenders. They were allowed to pin their ears back and get the QB with 4+ rushers. I've seen this DL too often stand up at the snap and "contain" the QB as opposed to letting it rip and getting after it.

We were utilizing more nickel packages on passing downs. A relief seeing a CB over a slot WR on 3rd downs for once.

Predominately man coverage on passing downs with corners up in the line.

Much more one-gap by the DL, which is why they appeared faster and more dominant. Defenders attacked the holes instead of having to diagnose the play and react. Weren't responsible for 2 gaps, were allowed to fire off the ball.

Increased amount of blitzing.
Click to expand...

I thought we blitzed more on third down and also a bit more on earlier downs. But remember that we FINALLY started facing a lot of third and longs vs the 3rd and 2 that teams are usually in. Man coverage is nothing new. We run a lot of zone on early downs but we're generally a man team on passing downs. It's been that way. I can't comment on your gap statement but I rather doubt that they philosophically changed from a 2 to 1 gap defense overnight.

First down is the key for us. When teams like Nebraska get 6 yards, we are forced to stay in our timid based fronts. They stay in 2nd and 4 and 3rd and 1 and we look passive. When a threat-less team like Duke gets nothing, we stay in 2nd and 10 and 3rd and 7 and then we can start to employ these blitzes that we KNOW we have but don't often see much. That's because we don't fear them and are in advantageous situations.

People talk about the TFL against Nebraska. Duke is FAR worse and we still had a paucity in that regard. We had one sack and a couple TFL that came on bubble screens. I think we probably had 1 play truly made in their backfield.

If we somehow continued to face teams that can't win 1:1 matchups and we could win first down consistently, we'd probably look like this. We just don't often have that. I don't at all think these guys made some radical shift in coaching for their jobs. They just faced the right opponent IMO and to their credit the kids played sound, played with energy, and tackled well.
 
DadeCountyFinest said:
He tweaked the scheme......played press, loaded the box and the guys looked loose.
Click to expand...

should be the way we play until the guy leaves the program. The guys looks awesome, with the exception of a few plays that the lb was covering the slot receivers. They need to burn those pages as a sacrifice to the base gods!!!! They never work, allow either or both 17 and 34, with an sprinkle of one of the ILBs, to get after the ball carrier in the back field!!!!
 
I saw very little different from the typical playbook but inverted.

What I mean is they played their Under and Bear fronts, which are single gap fronts, for the majority of the game. In fact I only saw one or 2 Parcells 3-4 fronts the entire game, and both times we were gashed for over 6 yards.

If you want to follow what I'm talking about, the best thing to do is watch Chickillo. If he's lined up in the "frog stance" as ya'll call it, over the OT, we are 2 gapping. When he's lined up in a two point stance, we are one gapping.

Here's an example for the "Bear" front I saw a lot. The nice TFL by Fentress came out of this
Double-Eagle-C1-Special-EZ.jpg


They also played their under front a bit which is similar except Chickillo moves over one man to play outside shade on the OT, and the Nose lines up in the cnter-guard gap to his side.

This stuff is all in their playbook but it's more of the changeup front for them. It's much less conservative and what we played in 2011 exclusively. Ive said it a million times but if they cut their playbook in half and actually focused on basic techniques the D would improve. But I doubt they have the balls to run this exclusively against better teams. This was a "show me" defense in response to the massive criticism.
 
GoldenShowers said:
I saw very little different from the typical playbook but inverted.

What I mean is they played their Under and Bear fronts, which are single gap fronts, for the majority of the game. In fact I only saw one or 2 Parcells 3-4 fronts the entire game, and both times we were gashed for over 6 yards.

If you want to follow what I'm talking about, the best thing to do is watch Chickillo. If he's lined up in the "frog stance" as ya'll call it, over the OT, we are 2 gapping. When he's lined up in a two point stance, we are one gapping.

Here's an example for the "Bear" front I saw a lot. The nice TFL by Fentress came out of this
Double-Eagle-C1-Special-EZ.jpg


They also played their under front a bit which is similar except Chickillo moves over one man to play outside shade on the OT, and the Nose lines up in the cnter-guard gap to his side.

This stuff is all in their playbook but it's more of the changeup front for them. It's much less conservative and what we played in 2011 exclusively. Ive said it a million times but if they cut their playbook in half and actually focused on basic techniques the D would improve. But I doubt they have the balls to run this exclusively against better teams. This was a "show me" defense in response to the massive criticism.
Click to expand...

THIS!!
 
Advertisement
happy with the result, glad we made some major adjustments and that we were aggressive. however, we got burned in 4-5 long routes down the sidelines when in man press coverage. a better QB and better WRs would have torched us.

again, very glad we played more aggressive, but it seems our man to man coverage skills are a vulnerability?

anyone agree?
 
Advertisement
Back
Top