forums

Tale of Two DC's who are worlds apart one rising one falling

P

Paranos

All-ACC
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
14,029
What a difference between them. One openly talks about taking players in Florida no one wants and putting them in position to play in the countries Top 5 defense that plays an aggressive attacking 3-4 scheme, that wants to be even more ultra aggressive in 2015. The other thinks hoping for the opposing offense to make a mistake on 3rd down is playing quality defense.

[video=youtube;G-FHRHrxv2w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-FHRHrxv2w[/video]

[video=youtube;oalDizYMhgU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oalDizYMhgU[/video]
 
Advertisement
MD is a clown and should be coaching pop warner. Aranda would be a welcoming addition.
 
No sunshine from Dave Aranda. Dude does not have time for ice cream trucks or dodgeball
 
Falling? Dorito hit rock bottom his second year. Al the enabler kept him around not because of his DC skills but due to his DS skills.
 
Some contrast. One is all business, the other is laughing because everyone knows he's giving a stock answer.
 
An all about his son Youth football DC would be better than Donut! Aggressiveness is not a component in his passive defensive scheme.
 
I've been calling for Aranda for the past few years.

The guy gets it.

[video=youtube;jT-5oINZS0E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT-5oINZS0E[/video]

[video=youtube;KY8Xn1u_b9M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY8Xn1u_b9M[/video]
 
MD is a stuttering baboon. He doesn't even speak with confidence. Sounds to me like he still trying to learn how to coach from the book coaching for dummies.
 
Although he would be a major upgrade over NO D, he still doesn't run what really fits with the athletes down here in SoFL. I would take him in a heart beat over No D though. We need to get rid of the 3-4 and go back to the 4-3 or **** even better the 4-2-5.
 
Advertisement
Forcing the issue and dictating what the offense does, by using pressure is a very widespread strategy in college because 95% of the QB's can't handle it. We have a HC and DC who think passive is the way. Kids are good enough to complete short passes that move the chains without pressure. The Golden tenure has made that clear. Pressure sets a tone a develops identity. We do don't do the first and have lacked the second since they have been here. These 2 guys may be good guys in person, but I don't care. I want my Canes dictating the game to the other team and most importantly winning. Next please, and please be Butch.

Go Canes!
 
marshallrc13 said:
Although he would be a major upgrade over NO D, he still doesn't run what really fits with the athletes down here in SoFL. I would take him in a heart beat over No D though. We need to get rid of the 3-4 and go back to the 4-3 or **** even better the 4-2-5.
Click to expand...

Aranda runs a 3-4 defense based on speed and movement and he brings 4-5 man pressure on every done. He would be perfect for south Florida talent.

Go Canes
 
I'm not even calling for more blitzes, I'd just like us to be more aggressive schematically, using more aggressive principles.

Teams that are blitz heavy give up a lot of big plays. They'll cause a turnover or two, get some sacks or TFL's but then they'll give up a 50 yard TD.

Our principles alone are passive. 2-gapping is passive. Staying in 2-high coverage versus a heavy run team is passive. Spot dropping with your LB's is passive.

1-gap penetration is aggressive. Press coverage is aggressive. Pattern-matching with your LB's is aggressive. Instead of dropping into a soft zone and starring at the QB, run full speed and meet that WR at the apex of his route. Re-route his a$$ instead of letting him run down the seam freely. AGGRESSIVE PRINCIPLES!

Then when you find a good opportunity to send 5 or 6 guys without giving up too much then go for it. If the offense comes out in 3x1 (trips) formation then go ahead and send the backside OLB or Safety on a blitz and play man-to-man on the single WR. Or blitz the OLB from the 3 WR side and roll the Safety down to take his place.

There's plenty ways to be aggressive without giving the offense too much.
 
Aranda uses fronts that have 0,1,2,3, 4 down linemen and then brings a 5 the player occasionally. An he plays Quarters on the backend. He uses a lot of slanting, looping, psycho fronts but mainly he uses a base 3 man line with pressure rushers coming from all levels, think of Bill Young's defense on steroids. When Young came to Miami and brought his 3-4 scheme Miami lead the nation in tackles for loss and was Top 5 for everything else.

Go Canes
 
Advertisement
Coach Macho said:
I'm not even calling for more blitzes, I'd just like us to be more aggressive schematically, using more aggressive principles.

Teams that are blitz heavy give up a lot of big plays. They'll cause a turnover or two, get some sacks or TFL's but then they'll give up a 50 yard TD.

Our principles alone are passive. 2-gapping is passive. Staying in 2-high coverage versus a heavy run team is passive. Spot dropping with your LB's is passive.

1-gap penetration is aggressive. Press coverage is aggressive. Pattern-matching with your LB's is aggressive. Instead of dropping into a soft zone and starring at the QB, run full speed and meet that WR at the apex of his route. Re-route his a$$ instead of letting him run down the seam freely. AGGRESSIVE PRINCIPLES!

Then when you find a good opportunity to send 5 or 6 guys without giving up too much then go for it. If the offense comes out in 3x1 (trips) formation then go ahead and send the backside OLB or Safety on a blitz and play man-to-man on the single WR. Or blitz the OLB from the 3 WR side and roll the Safety down to take his place.

There's plenty ways to be aggressive without giving the offense too much.
Click to expand...

I want you as our next DC!

Macho 2016!
 
Coach Macho said:
I'm not even calling for more blitzes, I'd just like us to be more aggressive schematically, using more aggressive principles.

Teams that are blitz heavy give up a lot of big plays. They'll cause a turnover or two, get some sacks or TFL's but then they'll give up a 50 yard TD.

Our principles alone are passive. 2-gapping is passive. Staying in 2-high coverage versus a heavy run team is passive. Spot dropping with your LB's is passive.

1-gap penetration is aggressive. Press coverage is aggressive. Pattern-matching with your LB's is aggressive. Instead of dropping into a soft zone and starring at the QB, run full speed and meet that WR at the apex of his route. Re-route his a$$ instead of letting him run down the seam freely. AGGRESSIVE PRINCIPLES!

Then when you find a good opportunity to send 5 or 6 guys without giving up too much then go for it. If the offense comes out in 3x1 (trips) formation then go ahead and send the backside OLB or Safety on a blitz and play man-to-man on the single WR. Or blitz the OLB from the 3 WR side and roll the Safety down to take his place.

There's plenty ways to be aggressive without giving the offense too much.
Click to expand...
Thats elementary
 
plantcity3 said:
Coach Macho said:
I'm not even calling for more blitzes, I'd just like us to be more aggressive schematically, using more aggressive principles.

Teams that are blitz heavy give up a lot of big plays. They'll cause a turnover or two, get some sacks or TFL's but then they'll give up a 50 yard TD.

Our principles alone are passive. 2-gapping is passive. Staying in 2-high coverage versus a heavy run team is passive. Spot dropping with your LB's is passive.

1-gap penetration is aggressive. Press coverage is aggressive. Pattern-matching with your LB's is aggressive. Instead of dropping into a soft zone and starring at the QB, run full speed and meet that WR at the apex of his route. Re-route his a$$ instead of letting him run down the seam freely. AGGRESSIVE PRINCIPLES!

Then when you find a good opportunity to send 5 or 6 guys without giving up too much then go for it. If the offense comes out in 3x1 (trips) formation then go ahead and send the backside OLB or Safety on a blitz and play man-to-man on the single WR. Or blitz the OLB from the 3 WR side and roll the Safety down to take his place.

There's plenty ways to be aggressive without giving the offense too much.
Click to expand...
Thats elementary
Click to expand...


It is. And it will work. Spot on with regards to linebacker play. Forget spot dropping. The focus should be looking up receivers and redirecting with force, regardless if we play three, four or five under. Now it becomes an issue of carrying receivers. Phase carrying. As well as creating the favorable match up between backs/TE/Slot and backers. Allow the backers to work downhill verses the run and control the middle of the field against the pass. If only Golden/NoD would employ that strategy.

Regarding run heavy, I don't mind two deep so long as the safeties are primary run support, aligned at about 10 yards. If that don't get it done, a single high 10 man front will have to do. Whatever number it takes to stop the run, so be it.
 
Two unquestioned football minds...

290.webp

hqdefault.webp
 
Back
Top