Why Is Our Defense So Passive?

[Number1CanesFan]

Are you serious, the formations are directly related to where and how you can be aggressive, which directly goes back to our alignment issues, and why we are often times caught being a passive defense and giving up 4th and 17th's or 1st and 21's. How many sacks have we gotten from the striker position as well. The base 4-3allows you to be more fundamentally aggressive, do you not think teams feel confident offensively knowing it's basically a nickel defense.

How's 1 more LB in the middle more aggressive than a 4-2-5 with the Striker lurking essentially having 7 in the box? It isn't. same number of bodies in the box. You're way off basis.

You can have a 4-3 and be in prevent defense with LBs at 10, CBs at 15 and Safeties at 25 yards off the ball. Is that aggressive? NO. What matters is the coverage scheme being played. Are you playing tight or off coverage? Man or zone? That's what matters. One more LB doesn't give you anything against a passing attack. A 4-3 against 5 WR or 4WR and 1 TE set is nothing but toast for the defense. You can't play man coverage with 3 LBs. Especially when 2 of 3 can't cover in space. You could argue a 4-3 is more aggressive against the run, but that's it.

 

[RedSquare]

First of all, I'm not a huge fan of Baker but comparing him to D'Onofrio is a sin. People complain about Enos but D'OhNo in my opinion is EASILY the worst coordinator we have ever had here. Like, ever.

Secondly, Bolden is the only ball hawk back there. Normally I'd agree with you - Miami defense is about taking away the run and letting our DBs play man because "our guys are better than yours 1 on 1." We don't have the personnel back there to do that right now.

Also the LB play isn't doing anyone any favors. I mean do you think we have Vilma in there or something? McCloud is completely lost on pass plays.

patrick nix says: "hold my beer."

 

[mossmadness]

Just a small sample size for you:

That WVU offense was more of a running offense. It played into having the LBs out there.

I never want to see the UVA QB be like 19/20 in a half and a true FR Pitt QB have the best game of his career the next week because they are just picking on our outside LB in the passing game.

 

[RedSquare]

But Pitt's offense is atrocious and were playing with their backup QB.
These are the games that our defense pads their stats on.

When people on here reference our TFL's, sacks and other **** stats to defend the defense, it's from games like this...because we **** sure don't excel versus any offense with a pulse. Louisville is a terrible team and we allowed their QB, RB and primary WR to have a field day. Nobody on their schedule has done that for them except us. Pitt and ND skull fvcked their offense.

i posted this elsewhere. but, now having thought about it for one more day, and reading your (well placed) comments, i'm even more convinced that i'm right:

------

"i thought our tackling was again a problem. way too many yards after first contact, and YAC. .... amari is spooked by the targeting calls. saw at least one or two plays where he pulled and allowed a catch or YAC because he was afraid of laying the lumber.

WTF!?!? on giving free releases to the slots? someone needs to press (or at least be covered over) the slot and be shoving their forearm into the receiver's mouth. as a QB, one of my favorite things to see was a guy in the Able Slot (3-5 yd split), or Baker Slot (5-9 yd split) uncovered. that meant there was a 99% chance that guy was going to have a clean route and be where he was supposed to. because unlike the receivers on the boundaries, a defender can't use the sideline and body positioning alone to redirect a receiver. just don't understand some of the gaps in the fundamental defensive structure. some of this is going to bite us in the *** at some point."

-----

 

[Swampcity]

I could see if we didn't have the athletes... but at times it seems like we are more of a read react team like D'Onofrio was coaching

Miami should be a multiple look...one gap, playing up the field .. taking advantage of our athletes... similar to what Clemson does

We let a 2nd string QB from Pitt, have so much time in the pocket he could cook, clean and pick up the kids from school before we could get to him

I'm not into the X's & O's of the Defense, but I agree that we don't seem to be a "sick 'em" Defense as we were with RJ McCintosh & Kendrick Norton.

 

[9oh4Cane]

Not passive, just undisciplined.

 

[305407cane]

Ain’t no one saying this defense is a top 20 unit. It is adequate to get through the coastal. But thag shouldn’t be the standard

 

[Calvin]

How's 1 more LB in the middle more aggressive than a 4-2-5 with the Striker lurking essentially having 7 in the box? It isn't. same number of bodies in the box. You're way off basis.

You can have a 4-3 and be in prevent defense with LBs at 10, CBs at 15 and Safeties at 25 yards off the ball. Is that aggressive? NO. What matters is the coverage scheme being played. Are you playing tight or off coverage? Man or zone? That's what matters. One more LB doesn't give you anything against a passing attack. A 4-3 against 5 WR or 4WR and 1 TE set is nothing but toast for the defense. You can't play man coverage with 3 LBs. Especially when 2 of 3 can't cover in space. You could argue a 4-3 is more aggressive against the run, but that's it.

Man, WTF are you talking about, stop talking outta yo ***, so let me get this straight, if we go by your 3 linebacker logic, UM hasn't played man coverage until coach diaz got here and "invented" the "striker" position, GTFOH, man do you even know football, seems like I'm wasting time!

 

[Calvin]

That WVU offense was more of a running offense. It played into having the LBs out there.

I never want to see the UVA QB be like 19/20 in a half and a true FR Pitt QB have the best game of his career the next week because they are just picking on our outside LB in the passing game.

The problem is, that **** defensive scheme they running doesn't leverage the safeties out with the linebackers cause they worried about giving up "the big play". That switching in and out from man to zone has never been good for the mindset of the db's that come thru here, we not built like that, zone is for them up north and Midwest schools.

 

[CaneSince4Ever]

Nobody in their right mind would rather get beat deep. That's laughable to say the least. If we were consistently getting beat deep. You would probably ***** about that too. There is nothing more demoralizing to a defense than to have them consistently get beat deep. Begging to get beat deep is fools gold. So stop acting like our defense is giving up 40 points a game.
Pitt only scored 19 because they got the ball first and goal at our inch line. The young guns are coming along and will and are becoming a welcomed addition to that side of the ball. We're going to be fine on D moving forward.

As for our struggles on offense. We're no offensive juggernaut, that's for sure. But we're light years ahead of where we were last season and I'm good with that. If you call an offense that has won 4 games by scoring 31, 47 , 52 and 31 struggling, then you and I just might have a difference of opinion on the word , struggle.

Go Canes!!!!!

I beg to differ, a team running the ball down your throat is more demoralizing, ala Ameer Abdullah in 2014.

 

[Number1CanesFan]

Man, WTF are you talking about, stop talking outta yo ***, so let me get this straight, if we go by your 3 linebacker logic, UM hasn't played man coverage until coach diaz got here and "invented" the "striker" position, GTFOH, man do you even know football, seems like I'm wasting time!

Obviously, you don't know anything about football. You provided nothing in your arguments except frail attempted insults.

How dumb can you be. We changed our offense to be modern. You think your old school defense is going to work against a modern spread offense? Clemson doesn't even run a 4-3 and they have all the dudes at every position to do it. We don't. At least not with our startering LBs.

You completely ignored my scenerio of a 4 and 5 WR spread offense. No 4-3 defense can cover let alone "play aggressive " as you say against a spread offense. Tell me how you play aggressive against a 4 or 5 WR spread offense with a 4-3 defense?

You arguing about 3 LBs and the problem is coverage. Even if you play a 4-3, it's what type of coverage you play that makes the defense "aggressive" not tjust the fact that your playing a 4-3. Was D'Onofrio's 4-3 agressive?

I wouldn't let you coach a pee wee league team, but I hear D'Onofrio needs help coaching his kid's team so maybe you have a chance.

Go get you a football 101 book. Study it well before you start popping off cause you just flapping your gums with your drawls down at your ankles.

 

[Dghustla]

I’d rather get beat deep than let teams nickel and dime us all the way down the field. Also, we stunt the DL to much and leave lanes for the quarterback to step up and throw.

Trading TDs for FGs sounds like a surefire losing strategy.

 

[Dghustla]

Fans Bruh

 

[TruCane81]

McCloud so far - is a spectator.

Watching offenses flying around.

That’s what he was from the beginning. The
problem is he is being misused. @Ethnicsands has been beating the drum about poor evaluations forever. The more high school film I watch, the more. User what has been holding this program back.

We take guys too often because of their physical profiles and try to turn them into the opposite of the skills they show in actual games. This is why Clemson’s “unathletic” 3 and 2 stars look way better than our 4 stars. They get alpha dog blue chippers and surround them with guys who showed the SKILLS to execute their defense regardless of their testing numbers. The end result makes them look like a vastly superior team athletically when they are a tut or THAT much better.

Shaq, Jennings and McCloud all showed exactly what they were on tape. We brought them in and asked them to do things they NEVER showed an ability to do. They were always looking for the ball at the snap and almost never shuffled laterally to take down runners through traffic. They were downhill thumpers that pounded running backs between the tackles as long as they were kept clean.

Shaq always got caught in the wash and would miss tackles when forced to move laterally. Jennings and McCloud are the same with worse play recognition.

But when you blitzed Shaq into a gap, he could make plays and made life **** on the quarterbacks up the middle. Our coaches are **** bent on rushing safeties off the edge though and we don’t get enough of this positive activity from our linebackers.

Jennings and McCloud should be used to crash inside gaps and collapse the pocket when they are on the field. It’s the only thing they can do consistently well and actually help us with their size and physicality, instead of hurting us with poor play recognition.

This is why the Flagg signing is a big deal. He can get to the ball early through traffic. He showed it on film. As long as we don’t ask him to chase fast players on the perimeter, he will make lots of plays for us. Hopefully this trend continues and we actually sign guys with the necessary skills to succeed at the coaches philosophy, instead of square pegging them and making them the whipping boys for the ire of disgruntled fans through no fault of their own.

 

[GOCANES05]

I was hoping for a bit more bludgeoning

 

[Ethnicsands]

That’s what he was from the beginning. The
problem is he is being misused. @Ethnicsands has been beating the drum about poor evaluations forever. The more high school film I watch, the more. User what has been holding this program back.

We take guys too often because of their physical profiles and try to turn them into the opposite of the skills they show in actual games. This is why Clemson’s “unathletic” 3 and 2 stars look way better than our 4 stars. They get alpha dog blue chippers and surround them with guys who showed the SKILLS to execute their defense regardless of their testing numbers. The end result makes them look like a vastly superior team athletically when they are a tut or THAT much better.

Shaq, Jennings and McCloud all showed exactly what they were on tape. We brought them in and asked them to do things they NEVER showed an ability to do. They were always looking for the ball at the snap and almost never shuffled laterally to take down runners through traffic. They were downhill thumpers that pounded running backs between the tackles as long as they were kept clean.

Shaq always got caught in the wash and would miss tackles when forced to move laterally. Jennings and McCloud are the same with worse play recognition.

But when you blitzed Shaq into a gap, he could make plays and made life **** on the quarterbacks up the middle. Our coaches are **** bent on rushing safeties off the edge though and we don’t get enough of this positive activity from our linebackers.

Jennings and McCloud should be used to crash inside gaps and collapse the pocket when they are on the field. It’s the only thing they can do consistently well and actually help us with their size and physicality, instead of hurting us with poor play recognition.

This is why the Flagg signing is a big deal. He can get to the ball early through traffic. He showed it on film. As long as we don’t ask him to chase fast players on the perimeter, he will make lots of plays for us. Hopefully this trend continues and we actually sign guys with the necessary skills to succeed at the coaches philosophy, instead of square pegging them and making them the whipping boys for the ire of disgruntled fans through no fault of their own.

Gold observation. There is a lot to evals, but as you note, it’s not judt player by player. You need to know what you’re looking for on the roster, and what roles kids project to fill. At best we seem to look at every kid based on some guess as to future ceiling, as opposed to recognizing that there is a range of outcomes for all kids and probability of success at certain key position fundamental traits can be more important than the 5% chance they become a well rounded star. Clemson gets this. We’re lost at recruiting 2.0.

 

[Coach Macho]

Nobody in their right mind would rather get beat deep. That's laughable to say the least. If we were consistently getting beat deep. You would probably ***** about that too. There is nothing more demoralizing to a defense than to have them consistently get beat deep. Begging to get beat deep is fools gold. So stop acting like our defense is giving up 40 points a game.
Pitt only scored 19 because they got the ball first and goal at our inch line. The young guns are coming along and will and are becoming a welcomed addition to that side of the ball. We're going to be fine on D moving forward.

As for our struggles on offense. We're no offensive juggernaut, that's for sure. But we're light years ahead of where we were last season and I'm good with that. If you call an offense that has won 4 games by scoring 31, 47 , 52 and 31 struggling, then you and I just might have a difference of opinion on the word , struggle.

Go Canes!!!!!

Nobody in their right mind. LOL
I guess I'm not in my right mind. I guess the countless college coaches I've seen speak are not in their right mind. I guess Brent Venables and Pat Narduzzi are not in their right mind, cause they dare people to throw deep.

How the fvck YOU gonna tell ME when this is what I do for a living?

I just fvckin' explained to you why.
DEEP BALLS ARE LOWER PERCENTAGE THROWS. And an offense can't beat a good defense by throwing deep balls all game. Literally impossible on this level of football.

However, even a bad QB can beat you throwing short/intermediate throws all game.
Do you even watch Miami?
Have you not seen mediocre QB's have career days versus us? Have you not seen QB's start games 14-of-14 passing?
How the fvck do you think they accomplish that? BY RELYING ON SHORT/INTERMEDIATE THROWS!

 

[KingB02]

First of all, I'm not a huge fan of Baker but comparing him to D'Onofrio is a sin. People complain about Enos but D'OhNo in my opinion is EASILY the worst coordinator we have ever had here. Like, ever.

Secondly, Bolden is the only ball hawk back there. Normally I'd agree with you - Miami defense is about taking away the run and letting our DBs play man because "our guys are better than yours 1 on 1." We don't have the personnel back there to do that right now.

Also the LB play isn't doing anyone any favors. I mean do you think we have Vilma in there or something? McCloud is completely lost on pass plays.

Problem is that we play zone 80 percent of the time in this defense and it is trash. We saw a bit more man this week and our CBs shined a bit.

 

[Coach Macho]

Because College football today is largely spread offenses scoring on 20+ yard passes. Baker is trying to keep those big plays to a minimum. They stiffen in the red zone, where there’s less room for an O to work. We all complain about the D, but it hasn’t failed us yet this season.

Que?

Hasn't failed us? At all?
Louisville's QB, RB and main WR had a field day versus us. They had over 500 yards of offense. Since then at least 2 teams have shut them down and held them to HALF that. (Pitt and ND skull fvcked that same offense)

He's keeping big plays to a minimum but we're among the worst in the country at giving up 10+ yard plays...so he's allowing teams to nickel-and-dime us all the way down the field.

 

[Mandingo]

First of all, I'm not a huge fan of Baker but comparing him to D'Onofrio is a sin. People complain about Enos but D'OhNo in my opinion is EASILY the worst coordinator we have ever had here. Like, ever.

Secondly, Bolden is the only ball hawk back there. Normally I'd agree with you - Miami defense is about taking away the run and letting our DBs play man because "our guys are better than yours 1 on 1." We don't have the personnel back there to do that right now.

Also the LB play isn't doing anyone any favors. I mean do you think we have Vilma in there or something? McCloud is completely lost on pass plays.

We have (3) supposed LB coaches - our bad LB play is all on them. They evaluated the talent. Recruited the talent. Developed the talent. And chose the starters. So it’s the coaches who are not doing themselves any favors.