forums

Watching Defense All-22 of UM-FSU from 2013: PART I

The key is what you alluded to: Mismatched fronts (assignments) with unusually soft coverages. It's a mismatch made in your opponent's offensive heaven.

I often rate defenses by "would I like to play Safety in that defense?" Under that rating, our defenses of late would be my absolute least favorite. You're typically ****ed one way or the other.
 
Advertisement
LuCane said:
jevoasis said:
How the **** is it so easy to see for ERRRRBODY and not Gluten or Dorito???
Click to expand...

They have always seen it. They just believe in it.
Click to expand...

They're so stubborn that in year 5 they still believe the defense can work even after the results they've witnessed. This is the true definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result.
 
They continue to do it b/c they are incredibly arrogant, and in their minds it's all the players fault.

It's the players fault to them that kids can't be both Jon Beason AND Teddy Bruschi....

It's the players fault that Anthony Chickillo couldn't be Richard Seymour and Michael Bennett.

It's unbelievably arrogant.
 
Watching our defense is like watching a HS defense.

Anybody with a basic knowledge of defense, can sit in the stands of a HS game, and immediately identify what coverage & front they're in...same **** with our defense.

Our Under looks like an Under.

Our Double Eagle looks like a Double Eagle.

Our 3-4 looks like a 3-4.

Ditto with our coverages.

If you watch the NFL, most the time you don't know what coverages & fronts they're playing, looks like they're throwing $h!t at the wall to see what sticks...but I also believe what they do is sound, even if it doesn't look like it.
 
Last edited:
CaneSince4Ever said:
Watching our defense is like watching a HS defense.

Anybody with a basic knowledge of defense, can sit in the stands of a HS game, and immediately identify what coverage & front they're in...same **** with our defense.

Our Under looks like an Under.

Our Double Eage looks like a Double Eagle.

Our 3-4 looks like a 3-4.

Ditto with our coverages.

If you watch the NFL, most the time you don't know what front & coverage they're playing, looks like they're throwing $h!t at the wall to see what sticks...but I also believe what they do is sound, even if it doesn't look like it.
Click to expand...

It mostly has to do with personnel packages. It's INCREDIBLY easy to know what front we are going to play based on who we send in.
 
Advertisement
prinmemo said:
In my experience in life and business, the guys that simplify things to core concepts / ideas perform the best. The guys that overcompljcate things are generally not that knowledgeable and less competent.

A scheme this complex is likely to fail.
Click to expand...

Awesome point
 
Showers,

Great thread. I can't really add much to what has already been said already, but ****, this whole thing makes our heads hurt.
 
Multiple looks should make us hard to predict, however in college this is just too complicated. What we SHOULD do is run a 4-2-5 (fits ourpersonnel) and run variations out of it. That way we could keep offenses off balance and not be predictable because we could use the same personnel to run different blitz packages and coverages. I'm all for balance, but when you try to fool people and it doesn't work that is worse than being basic because now you have blatant holes. No wonder the players are always "blowing assignments." I would too in this overly complex, joke of a defense. Maybe it would work with a bunch of Harvard grads and a coordinator that disguised things? It definitely should never be tried in Miami with 4-3/4-2-5 athletes that want to play aggressive and just flat out beat the oppositio because we are superior athletically.
 
The fronts and the principles within our fronts have been my main concern since day one. When they got hired I specifically said that (IMO) they would have a hard time (1) recruiting kids to play in their front and (2) getting productivity out of their fronts.

I don't think they're super predictable on the back-end though. They run every coverage in the book and they do a few things to disguise them. They play press-bail, which is a disguise technique. They also show 2-high and drop their Safety into the box late to play Cover-3. They're at least attempting to disguise what they do on the back-7 at times.

My main issue on the back-end is their principles, particularly with how they teach their LB's to play zone. The whole "spot dropping" **** is terrible and it erks the **** out of me. How many times have we seen a WR catch a ball right next to one of our LB's while he's covering grass and staring at the QB? This also causes our LB's not to get adequate depth on their pass drops. Often times QB's will complete nicely touched lob passes right between our LB's and Safeties. (right over the head of the LB's who are staring at the QB) I know for a fact that they teach this garbage because I attended a clinic by Hurlie Brown where he talked about. His exact words were "We teach our LB's, don't look at the WR until that ball has been thrown! Then you break on the ball!"
 
Coach Macho said:
"We teach our LB's, don't look at the WR until that ball has been thrown! Then you break on the ball!"
Click to expand...

What da what? As a LB, when you drop to your zones you are suppose to keep your head on a swivel and find the nearest threat. How are you going to defend the 2 and 3 wr coming across if you dont know where he is at? Cmon i learned that **** in little league.
 
Advertisement
plantcity3 said:
Coach Macho said:
"We teach our LB's, don't look at the WR until that ball has been thrown! Then you break on the ball!"
Click to expand...

What da what? As a LB, when you drop to your zones you are suppose to keep your head on a swivel and find the nearest threat. How are you going to defend the 2 and 3 wr coming across if you dont know where he is at? Cmon i learned that **** in little league.
Click to expand...

It's true. That's the Miami defense during the Golden era. It's a cluster-fvck of a scheme at every level.

We should be running bear, over and under fronts. It's all about preference regarding secondary play, but as a rule I think we should defend the run with numbers and the pass with speed. We have the personnel. Too bad the coach is more concern about pride than production.
 
CaneSince4Ever said:
Coach Macho said:
They also show 2-high and drop their Safety into the box late to play Cover-3.
Click to expand...

LMAO! Maaaan, you can see that $h!t coming from a mile away...I'd just chunk it to the side where the High-Safety came from, no way He can re-rotate to make a play.
Click to expand...

I hear you. Cincinatti hit a big vertical play on us when we did that, right down the seam.
 
plantcity3 said:
Coach Macho said:
"We teach our LB's, don't look at the WR until that ball has been thrown! Then you break on the ball!"
Click to expand...

What da what? As a LB, when you drop to your zones you are suppose to keep your head on a swivel and find the nearest threat. How are you going to defend the 2 and 3 wr coming across if you dont know where he is at? Cmon i learned that **** in little league.
Click to expand...

Have you ever seen us defend the 2 or 3 WR coming acorss? LOL
 
Coach Macho said:
plantcity3 said:
Coach Macho said:
"We teach our LB's, don't look at the WR until that ball has been thrown! Then you break on the ball!"
Click to expand...

What da what? As a LB, when you drop to your zones you are suppose to keep your head on a swivel and find the nearest threat. How are you going to defend the 2 and 3 wr coming across if you dont know where he is at? Cmon i learned that **** in little league.
Click to expand...

Have you ever seen us defend the 2 or 3 WR coming acorss? LOL
Click to expand...
Lol you do have a point
 
Back
Top