Sports Buzz (SIAP)

[Loafers]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

 

[Dingaan1828]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

It was obvious that they were running with great success. That's what tells them that they are going to run. It was apparently clear to everyone except our coaches.

Those numbers aren't available at the start of the half, so they couldn't be used to predict anything. They only tell you what happened, not what was going to happen.

 

[Loafers]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

It was obvious that they were running with great success. That's what tells them that they are going to run. It was apparently clear to everyone except our coaches.

Those numbers aren't available at the start of the half, so they couldn't be used to predict anything. They only tell you what happened, not what was going to happen.

I understand that. They didn't exactly sling it in the first half either. Plus they are a known running team. U sound like u are giving them an out.

 

[CanefaninBuckeyeland]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

I would love for someone to bring this specific stat to Golden and Dorito and watch them squirm.

 

[sebastian91]

I question the evaluator that questions why we run so much 3-4. You ask most knowledgeable Xs and Os person and they'll tell you the most optimal way to defend the spread offenses of today is with a 3-4 multiple front. Of course, not the passive way we run it.

Here's an interesting article about the NFL struggling to defend the read option. It even discusses the move toward more passive approaches to defense (and not in a good way).

http://grantland.com/features/after-offseason-searching-nfl-coaches-know-how-defend-read-option/

The old 4-3, 2-deep defenses we used to run likely would get lit up by the new spread/read option offenses. One thing that people here often forget is that every defense is "read and react" unless you're just blitzing everyone. Our players seem to react a lot more slowly than they should be, which I blame the coaches for. I don't think they're trying to run a bad scheme at all, but it's very clear that they aren't succeeding at teaching it. Even worse, the players are not even executing the basics (tackling), which I also blame the coaches for. If they go into the GT game with the same approach they took to Corn****erville, it could be a repeat of that game where GT ran for 472 yards against Randy's defense.

I disagree that our old defense would be lit by the "new" offenses, especially the read option. The option was the offense of choice before we came along and the wishbone was very much a read option. Miami destroyed it as an acceptable D1 offense and relegated it high school and the academies. How did the read option do against Ravens with Ed and Ray? I suspect it would be fine against the spread also because of the pressure it brought. But it is not just 4-3 or 3-4 discussion. We won our first NC with a 5-2, which is basically a 3-4. My issue is that I don't not believe our old defenses were "read and react". I remember that being discussed every time someone got off a screen play or QB slipped contain or we got fooled for a 20 yard gain. Talk would always be about that is the price of the "act then read" defense Miami plays. I remember, "meet me at the QB and play run along the way"-- that is act then react. Hey, our old defense got used before Al got here too, but it was the lack of DTs that was the problem, well, maybe coaching was slacking also. But Dig Daddy would be on Al's defense and it would not matter because he would only be allow to stand at LOS and dance with guards until ball carrier got to him. Perpetration is the secret to defense. Let the other guy find ways to adapt to it while you beat his QB and RBs to death in the backfield.

The old triple option had very little passing threat. That's the difference. The new spread/read option offenses have a significant passing component, and the first option of the triple (FB dive) isn't there. The triple option of old is totally different.

 

[RiDLer80]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

Don't teams usually come out with the intention of stopping the run first to make offenses one-dimensional?

Isn't that basic defensive football? Stop the run the first.

 

[Duvalco.Cane]

LMAO @ "Albortion"

 

[Dingaan1828]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

It was obvious that they were running with great success. That's what tells them that they are going to run. It was apparently clear to everyone except our coaches.

Those numbers aren't available at the start of the half, so they couldn't be used to predict anything. They only tell you what happened, not what was going to happen.

I understand that. They didn't exactly sling it in the first half either. Plus they are a known running team. U sound like u are giving them an out.

How am I giving them an out? Please re-read my post. I merely pointed out in the second part of my post that numbers compiled as a result of the game are not predictive.

 

[drifters1234]

Somewhere, somebody has a picture of Golden an D'Onofrio in the locker room shower with Sandusky.

If someone has a picture of both of them with Sandusky, how would that help them keep their jobs at UM?

You mean to say Donofrio has a picture of Golden w/ Sandusky, as that would give Donofrio the leverage to keep his job, notwithstanding his incompetence. But the reality is that this is Golden's Al Groh-based defense as well. Donofrio is doing exactly what Golden wants him to - run a passive read and react Temple defense with stud S. Fla. speed athletes. It defies all logic, but 4 years of data can't be denied.

 

[drifters1234]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

Don't teams usually come out with the intention of stopping the run first to make offenses one-dimensional?

Isn't that basic defensive football? Stop the run the first.

Not if you're on the short Al Groh-tree of coaches.

 

[drifters1234]

Al Golden is seriously f'n delusional everybody mocks him HS coaches, college coaches, ex-NFL players, radio host, fans, everybody sees his 3-4 Defense is a disaster and he's in complete denial

C'mon now. As Golden says, "It starts with me. We will block out the distractions, and move forward."

And that wraps it up succinctly. They'll ignore the criticism of their inept defensive scheme, and continue doing the same thing. Which will lead to the same results we have been enduring for 3+ years. It would be hilarious if it were not the team I root for.

 

[drifters1234]

I question the evaluator that questions why we run so much 3-4. You ask most knowledgeable Xs and Os person and they'll tell you the most optimal way to defend the spread offenses of today is with a 3-4 multiple front. Of course, not the passive way we run it.

He means bc we don't have the DL personnel to run it effectively, especially (as you pointed out) the passive way we run it.

 

[Canediver]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

It was obvious that they were running with great success. That's what tells them that they are going to run. It was apparently clear to everyone except our coaches.

Those numbers aren't available at the start of the half, so they couldn't be used to predict anything. They only tell you what happened, not what was going to happen.

I understand that. They didn't exactly sling it in the first half either. Plus they are a known running team. U sound like u are giving them an out.

How am I giving them an out? Please re-read my post. I merely pointed out in the second part of my post that numbers compiled as a result of the game are not predictive.

Normally I'd agree with this thought but with this coaching staff I'd argue that those numbers are quite predictable.

 

[Dingaan1828]

Second half 39 possessions. 36 run 3 passes. Now I am no wizard, but to me it's CRYSTAL clear they were going to run.

It was obvious that they were running with great success. That's what tells them that they are going to run. It was apparently clear to everyone except our coaches.

Those numbers aren't available at the start of the half, so they couldn't be used to predict anything. They only tell you what happened, not what was going to happen.

I understand that. They didn't exactly sling it in the first half either. Plus they are a known running team. U sound like u are giving them an out.

How am I giving them an out? Please re-read my post. I merely pointed out in the second part of my post that numbers compiled as a result of the game are not predictive.

Normally I'd agree with this thought but with this coaching staff I'd argue that those numbers are quite predictable.

I didn't say predictable, I said predictive.

 

[Loafers]

It was obvious that they were running with great success. That's what tells them that they are going to run. It was apparently clear to everyone except our coaches.

Those numbers aren't available at the start of the half, so they couldn't be used to predict anything. They only tell you what happened, not what was going to happen.

I understand that. They didn't exactly sling it in the first half either. Plus they are a known running team. U sound like u are giving them an out.

How am I giving them an out? Please re-read my post. I merely pointed out in the second part of my post that numbers compiled as a result of the game are not predictive.

Normally I'd agree with this thought but with this coaching staff I'd argue that those numbers are quite predictable.

I didn't say predictable, I said predictive.

I wasn't necessarily accusing you having a G placed on your chest. I'm just saying ur logic is the same as no D. He is basically saying well yeah they ran it everytime but how did we know. You only know now cu it happened. I understand te logic. Quite capable of understanding. I would say that to get to 36-3 run pass ratio at some point it was 15-2, 16-2, 17-2,18-2 etc etc etc. so while u couldn't predict it was going end how it did, you could logically conclude that when the other team is avg 7 yds a carry and is running 95% of the time., why would u stop. See this is where no D fails.

I bet he is in the box talking to Al saying "yeah I know they ran 15 straight times but the next one has to be a pass. I guarantee it". " ok they ran again , they have us thinking run here, they are going to throw it. They set it up. Damnit another run".

Fast forward to post game " well obviously in hindsight they ran it, but you know we don't have a crystal ball".


How about play the run and if they pass have your scheme and players make a play. He acts like he is the only coach in America with the dilemma of a team possibly throwing or passing on a play. He must be on utter bewilderment when we get stopped on offense. " wow how did they stop the pass there when they were thinking run, amazing"