Why Is Our Defense So Passive?

[canesthing3]

If our defense is so(insert any negative adjective, it’s been used ad nauseous already) then why didn’t Pitt score more than 19 points?

If their QB was so comfy why didn’t he score more than 1 TD, especially considering the short fields he was given? We make backups look like Heisman winners is the (corny af) saying around here so what happened?

If our defense and now our offense apparently too(according to the porsters) is so bad why is the clear #1 team in America the only team to score more points than us through 5 games? Why hasn’t anyone else been able to keep us from winning by less than double digits?

I honestly want to to know. Because if you just came to this board with no idea what our record was, you’d think we were at best 1-4 or 2-3. Possibly 0-5. That’s how doom and gloom it is around here.

Actual football talk is 1 thing but the constant whining and nitpicking, while comparing everything to years past is tiring and beyond annoying. OP really just compared our current defensive regime to No D. You mother****ers are certified crazy.

 

[Hurracanes]

How dare you accuse Baker of being passive, look at this 3rd and 4 alignment.View attachment 133933

Thats literally telling Pitt, we’ll give you the first down.

 

[Hurracanes]

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.

Cross over, slam dunk, game over!

 

[hoops156]

y’all know how hard it is to play lights out in this new college football. Even bama gets their heads bust sometimes. As long as we hold em to 3 I’m cool at this point because it just is what it is. I just get mad at the amount of snaps I see Mccloud and Jennings get because there are plays sometimes where it’s like they’re wearing cement cleats

bama just allowed 600 plus to ole miss. lsu allowed 500 plus twice last year. its going to happen esp with the way offenses are run now. if you want that old school d that doesnt give up an inch, it wont happen esp with how many plays we prefer to run and at the tempo we prefer to. i will say our D doesnt look as good but we lack LBs and CBs. it just seems that were trying to protect our secondary more than even ive seen but i could be wrong.

 

[hoops156]

What was Clemson?

you mean the team with the best QB and RB in the country?

 

[hoops156]

Cross over, slam dunk, game over!

lol his whole point is largely poor given pitts backup QB threw it a billion times and wasnt particularly good. hes doing the same thing hes accusing everyone else of. at the end, the D gave up 19 points (10 of which came off of two drives starting inside the 20 (and one inside the 1) off picks).

 

[Go Canes!!]

Thats literally telling Pitt, we’ll give you the first down.

Yet they went 3-17 on third down and 0-2 on 4th.

Let me guess at your answer “Back up QB bro!”

 

[AlexCane]

Fans are disenchanted with Miami football for various reasons--understandably so over the past decade; however, I don't understand the complaints about the unit that has been consistently good under Diaz as both DC and HC. It ain't perfect, but a competent offense likely means a 10 win team year in, year out. 10 wins = better bowls, better exposure, better fan attendance, better recruiting, better players and that's when stuff starts to snowball into creating a top 10 program.

 

[Deleted member 25284]

Did you just say, I'd rather get beat deep?

Oy Vey.......... This place...

Go Canes!!!!!!

Yeah lol I know it sounds nuts but if you’re gonna play that aggressive in in the front you might as well be aggressive across the board. Teams are stealing 10 to 20 yards a pop on us underneath whenever they want. The long ball isn’t statistically a lay up. Let our guys play. If we get beat deep we get beat deep. Stop letting guys have career days with YAC tho

 

[Fly1]

How dare you accuse Baker of being passive, look at this 3rd and 4 alignment.View attachment 133933

CANES LEGACY.....THANK YOU

This is the stuff that is FRUSTRATING to watch. Sure, we held Pitt to less than 30 yards rushing, and we got 5 sacks against 2nd and 3rd string QBs, but we also let a freshman WR have a career day by having 147 yards.....over double his best day. He ain't Larry Fitzgerald. Pitt WRs were WIDE OPEN for a good portion of their catches. There were bright spots with Couch, but Baker has gotta do better.

 

[Calvin]

Aggression has nothing to do with how many LB's we have on the field. We weren't any more aggressive. Matter of fact, one could argue that are Strikers are our most aggressive guys.

We have a Striker out there because we play against mostly spread offenses. (10 & 11 personnel)

It doesn't benefit us to have 3 LB's out there versus the spread.

Obviously you, like coach diaz act like we are the only team playing against spread-offenses. If you think the striker position makes us a more aggressive defenses have at it. Our linebackers have been deployed wrong in this scheme vs what our secondary is being asked to do which is why our linebackers are damyum near never in passing lanes and keep being out of position on running plays. This is not a coincidence, if you look at alot of our defensive alignments the flaws pre-snap are often comical and than our weakside defenders are often just being asked to be in no Mans-land. There is no way guys should be getting open in our secondary on 2 and 3 receiver routes.

The striker position makes us more vulnerable against the run and all that position is traditionally for, your most athletic linebacker. With 3 linebackers, teams won't call to many trap plays to the weak-side waiting for the striker to clear out, also in a 4-2-5 you're asking your linebackers to cover more unnecessary ground which in turns causes them to be outta position often times as well as trying to read keys. So here is a basic fundamental question, if the striker position is here because we primarily play against spread offenses how does primarily protecting against the pass makes you a more aggressive defense over stopping the run 1st!

 

[Ver]

Pitt scored one touchdown on a drive that started at Miami’s one yard line.

 

[dirtyred786]

It's simple, because coach diaz and coach baker's defensive philosophies and defensive tendecies is to keep everything in front of you and not giving up "the big play" so they are zone guys at heart, which directly takes away from the techniques and the style of play that coach rumph and coach banda teach. I'm not sure what the purpose of going with that striker **** was for, but we were a more aggressive defense when we played with 3 linebackers.

I gotta agree with you about that striker position. Seems like all they do is blitz and play the run, so put a bigger body out there. The safeties cover the slot receivers 90 percent of the time so we might as well use 3 linebackers

 

[dirtyred786]

How dare you accuse Baker of being passive, look at this 3rd and 4 alignment.View attachment 133933

And during the next series on 3rd and 22 we played press. Smh

 

[Calvin]

The striker position is for the modern pass game. A guy that can cover and takle in space. He's that dude that covers Travis Etienne in the 2nd half of the Clemson game (Frierson) that should have been the game plan from the start.

So, adding 3rd LB makes things worse given our 2 starters can't cover in space.

Running a 4-3 doesn't make you more aggressive. The coverages you play determine the aggressiveness regardless of formation.

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.

 

[Calvin]

I gotta agree with you about that striker position. Seems like all they do is blitz and play the run, so put a bigger body out there. The safeties cover the slot receivers 90 percent of the time so we might as well use 3 linebackers.

Thank you sir, and that's exactly why poor finley ended up limping to the finish line last year, got wore down. A striker on a blitz against a runningback is often times Ami's atch which is rarely why our strikers get home. The sad part is, we've recruited well at the linebacker position the last 2 years, but we only gone use 2 at a time, they need to GTFOH with non-sense!

 

[coffeecane]

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

We gave up 1 TD on a 2 yard field. Ok

 

[Calvin]

Aggression has nothing to do with how many LB's we have on the field. We weren't any more aggressive. Matter of fact, one could argue that are Strikers are our most aggressive guys.

We have a Striker out there because we play against mostly spread offenses. (10 & 11 personnel)

It doesn't benefit us to have 3 LB's out there versus the spread.

Just a small sample size for you:

 

[Canes Legacy]

CANES LEGACY.....THANK YOU

This is the stuff that is FRUSTRATING to watch. Sure, we held Pitt to less than 30 yards rushing, and we got 5 sacks against 2nd and 3rd string QBs, but we also let a freshman WR have a career day by having 147 yards.....over double his best day. He ain't Larry Fitzgerald. Pitt WRs were WIDE OPEN for a good portion of their catches. There were bright spots with Couch, but Baker has gotta do better.

There is valid concerns with Baker’s scheme. Slot WRs always have potential to go off against us. The results will speak for themselves as the year progresses but I think we’ll see us hold the mediocre ACC offenses to around 20 points a game and any offense with a pulse with be around 30.

 

[Fly1]

There is valid concerns with Baker’s scheme. Slot WRs always have potential to go off against us. The results will speak for themselves as the year progresses but I think we’ll see us hold the mediocre ACC offenses to around 20 points a game and any offense with a pulse with be around 30.

I agree 100%