In Defense of our Defense

mjb1979 · 11-14-2009, 01:37 PM

Over the last few weeks, it seems like a lot of people have criticized our defense. Yes, they have problems stopping the run. Yes, they can be out-muscled at times. Yes, it seems like they aren't as physical as they could be. But think about it; we lost 10 starters from last year. The number one reason why no one respected us in the preseason polls was because of that fact. And yet, here we are, at 10-0.

A look at the two-deep depth chart on defense is telling. 12 of the 22 players are freshman or sophomores. Three players are former offensive players who were moved to that side of the ball out of necessity for depth.

Diaco and his coaches deserve an enormous amount of credit. A lot of coaches have a way of doing things, regardless of the personnel at their disposal. Good coaches put the players they have in the best position to be successful. That is what Diaco and crew have done. To paraphrase Rick Pitino, Connor Barwin isn't walking through that door. Terrell Byrd isn't walking through that door. Mike Mickens isn't walking through that door. We have a bunch of kids and a handful of seniors who weren't good enough to start until now, and yet, we are undefeated. That, my friends, is great coaching. They play well enough to let the offense score a lot, and that's all we can ask for.

#41 · 11-14-2009, 01:50 PM

The problem I have with out defense is that it's conservative almost to a fault. I understand the need for preventing the big play (and the D is remarkably good at preventing big plays), but the team seems content to stay in a two-deep, 4-man rush shell for entire games while they get picked apart or run over.

In obvious passing situations, it's frustrating to watch the 3 or 4 man rush not make it give the QB have ton of time to pick out the open man. The strategy worked against the lesser teams who didn't have QBs who can identify and deliver the football to the open man consistently, but as the quality of competition has gotten better, this has become more of a problem.

Further, pressure on the QB is the best way to force turnovers. Pressure in the face stops the QB from being able to step into throws, resulting in easily-picked underthrown passes or blind throws to covered men. Pressure on the sides is the best way to force fumbles, as the QB gets hit without being able to protect the ball. UC hasn't generated many turnovers the last two games because they aren't getting pressure.

It also impacts running, because lack of run-blitzing usually results in fewer TFLs -- which again, has become a problem as the quality of competition has increased.

I get that there's a lot of new players -- but now, they've all got 10 games of starting experience. It's time to start letting people make plays and take SOME chances.

mjb1979 · 11-14-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by #41

The problem I have with out defense is that it's conservative almost to a fault. I understand the need for preventing the big play (and the D is remarkably good at preventing big plays), but the team seems content to stay in a two-deep, 4-man rush shell for entire games while they get picked apart or run over.

In obvious passing situations, it's frustrating to watch the 3 or 4 man rush not make it give the QB have ton of time to pick out the open man. The strategy worked against the lesser teams who didn't have QBs who can identify and deliver the football to the open man consistently, but as the quality of competition has gotten better, this has become more of a problem.

Further, pressure on the QB is the best way to force turnovers. Pressure in the face stops the QB from being able to step into throws, resulting in easily-picked underthrown passes or blind throws to covered men. Pressure on the sides is the best way to force fumbles, as the QB gets hit without being able to protect the ball. UC hasn't generated many turnovers the last two games because they aren't getting pressure.

It also impacts running, because lack of run-blitzing usually results in fewer TFLs -- which again, has become a problem as the quality of competition has increased.

I get that there's a lot of new players -- but now, they've all got 10 games of starting experience. It's time to start letting people make plays and take SOME chances.

I agree with you in theory on this, but in reality, I don't think we have the guns to do this against a good team, and I think the coaches know that too. Our offense has the ability to score every time we have the ball, even against a good defense. Most offenses do not have that ability. That is how our defense is designed. No big plays, make teams drive the ball down the field to score a few yards at a time. In that time, hope that they make a mistake or fizzle out. Last night, WVU didn't make any big mistakes, but they did fizzle out several times. This is what our team has to do to win.

Rock · 11-14-2009, 04:53 PM

With a 3 man "not very effective" rush + zone coverage, a QB will pick it apart as receivers slide into the seams. Our outside contain is very soft especially to the right side of the defense. I agree that the coaches may not have the weapons up front to be as effective as they would like.

mjb1979 · 11-14-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock

With a 3 man "not very effective" rush + zone coverage, a QB will pick it apart as receivers slide into the seams. Our outside contain is very soft especially to the right side of the defense. I agree that the coaches may not have the weapons up front to be as effective as they would like.

Yeah I definitely agree that the three man rush is not effective. Last night when we brought four guys, Brown was more uncomfortable and had less time. Not sure why they don't mix it up more.

cpawstoney · 11-14-2009, 05:11 PM

For what it's worh, listening to Dan Hoard on the way home from the game. He said the defense held Noel devine to 88 yeard rushing and dis not let him pop a run over 8 yards.

regoarrarr · 11-14-2009, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by #41

It also impacts running, because lack of run-blitzing usually results in fewer TFLs -- which again, has become a problem as the quality of competition has increased.

Don't we lead the nation in TFL?
________
Fucktubw

DimitriusChristedes · 11-14-2009, 09:57 PM

cats have gone up against some extremely talented running backs this year. Rogers from oregon st, the fresno kid, devine, USF's running quarterback. At times it looks like they cannot stop the run, but note that typically it is the first half in which the opposition has the most success running the ball. UC adjusts. They bend but rarely break. Pass defense has been great all year.

It would be nice to see them close the deal more often on third and long, it's one of their weaknesses. And they let scrambling quarterbacks off the hook too often. But rather than lament what they haven't done, I'd rather be appreciative of what they have done - hold the opposition to fewer points than the offense can score. Every single game.

MDW79 · 11-14-2009, 10:27 PM

Werent we like 4th in the country in points allowed going into the UCONN game? I too get frustrated with the bend don't break approach but keep in mind we have never trailed in the 2nd half. Even the UCONN game was never really in doubt. We have been playing with such huge leads, so it's a little scewed, and the defense does seem to step up when we need them. Ex. 4th and 8 last night, up 21-17. I'm not saying they're unbelievable but they are solid and execute what our gameplan calls for.

Lobot · 11-14-2009, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDW79

Werent we like 4th in the country in points allowed going into the UCONN game? I too get frustrated with the bend don't break approach but keep in mind we have never trailed in the 2nd half. Even the UCONN game was never really in doubt. We have been playing with such huge leads, so it's a little scewed, and the defense does seem to step up when we need them. Ex. 4th and 8 last night, up 21-17. I'm not saying they're unbelievable but they are solid and execute what our gameplan calls for.

The UConn game disproves the 1st half theory and the same thing happened against FSU. We cannot stop a power inside running team without loading the box. We can beat those teams by scoring quickly but we cannot stop them.

My strategy for Pitt. Force Stull to throw deep. Stull is efficient but not great. If we can get a good pass rush on him that's even better. Do not let Dion Lewis run wild on us.

Bearcat-in-Italy · 11-15-2009, 01:07 AM

This team takes a bend but not break mentality and it works for the most part. We don't give up the big play (except for UCONN). We held WVU to 14 points over 59 minutes and gave up a garbage TD to run clock down to 39 seconds...and we won. I admit it's scary seeing teams chew up yards, but we get a lot of sacks and a lot of tackles for loss, and it works, so far.

The key is to get a few TOs. We got none the last 2 games and it made a difference (in a bad way).

bearcatbret · 11-15-2009, 01:15 AM

I did make the comment that we had zero take aways Friday. Also, WVU did not have a single penalty except for two on the same kick off series. Our team stalled drives with huge personal fouls. We need to play penalty free and force some turn overs against Pitt to win that game. Also, there were times on Friday where Brown scrambled for his life and then ended up making something happen. I saw holding on a couple of those plays that were not called.

11-14-2009, 01:37 PM	#1
mjb1979 Distinguished Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Cincinnati, OH	In Defense of our Defense Over the last few weeks, it seems like a lot of people have criticized our defense. Yes, they have problems stopping the run. Yes, they can be out-muscled at times. Yes, it seems like they aren't as physical as they could be. But think about it; we lost 10 starters from last year. The number one reason why no one respected us in the preseason polls was because of that fact. And yet, here we are, at 10-0. A look at the two-deep depth chart on defense is telling. 12 of the 22 players are freshman or sophomores. Three players are former offensive players who were moved to that side of the ball out of necessity for depth. Diaco and his coaches deserve an enormous amount of credit. A lot of coaches have a way of doing things, regardless of the personnel at their disposal. Good coaches put the players they have in the best position to be successful. That is what Diaco and crew have done. To paraphrase Rick Pitino, Connor Barwin isn't walking through that door. Terrell Byrd isn't walking through that door. Mike Mickens isn't walking through that door. We have a bunch of kids and a handful of seniors who weren't good enough to start until now, and yet, we are undefeated. That, my friends, is great coaching. They play well enough to let the offense score a lot, and that's all we can ask for.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-14-2009, 01:50 PM	#2
#41 Distinguished Member Join Date: Sep 2009	The problem I have with out defense is that it's conservative almost to a fault. I understand the need for preventing the big play (and the D is remarkably good at preventing big plays), but the team seems content to stay in a two-deep, 4-man rush shell for entire games while they get picked apart or run over. In obvious passing situations, it's frustrating to watch the 3 or 4 man rush not make it give the QB have ton of time to pick out the open man. The strategy worked against the lesser teams who didn't have QBs who can identify and deliver the football to the open man consistently, but as the quality of competition has gotten better, this has become more of a problem. Further, pressure on the QB is the best way to force turnovers. Pressure in the face stops the QB from being able to step into throws, resulting in easily-picked underthrown passes or blind throws to covered men. Pressure on the sides is the best way to force fumbles, as the QB gets hit without being able to protect the ball. UC hasn't generated many turnovers the last two games because they aren't getting pressure. It also impacts running, because lack of run-blitzing usually results in fewer TFLs -- which again, has become a problem as the quality of competition has increased. I get that there's a lot of new players -- but now, they've all got 10 games of starting experience. It's time to start letting people make plays and take SOME chances.

11-14-2009, 04:53 PM	#4
Rock Member Join Date: Nov 2007	I Repeat Myself With a 3 man "not very effective" rush + zone coverage, a QB will pick it apart as receivers slide into the seams. Our outside contain is very soft especially to the right side of the defense. I agree that the coaches may not have the weapons up front to be as effective as they would like.

11-14-2009, 05:11 PM	#6
cpawstoney Veteran Join Date: Apr 2007	For what it's worh, listening to Dan Hoard on the way home from the game. He said the defense held Noel devine to 88 yeard rushing and dis not let him pop a run over 8 yards.

11-14-2009, 09:57 PM	#8
DimitriusChristedes Distinguished Member Join Date: Apr 2007	cats have gone up against some extremely talented running backs this year. Rogers from oregon st, the fresno kid, devine, USF's running quarterback. At times it looks like they cannot stop the run, but note that typically it is the first half in which the opposition has the most success running the ball. UC adjusts. They bend but rarely break. Pass defense has been great all year. It would be nice to see them close the deal more often on third and long, it's one of their weaknesses. And they let scrambling quarterbacks off the hook too often. But rather than lament what they haven't done, I'd rather be appreciative of what they have done - hold the opposition to fewer points than the offense can score. Every single game.

11-14-2009, 10:27 PM	#9
MDW79 Veteran Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Cincinnati	Werent we like 4th in the country in points allowed going into the UCONN game? I too get frustrated with the bend don't break approach but keep in mind we have never trailed in the 2nd half. Even the UCONN game was never really in doubt. We have been playing with such huge leads, so it's a little scewed, and the defense does seem to step up when we need them. Ex. 4th and 8 last night, up 21-17. I'm not saying they're unbelievable but they are solid and execute what our gameplan calls for.

11-15-2009, 01:07 AM	#11
Bearcat-in-Italy Distinguished Member Join Date: Oct 2007	This team takes a bend but not break mentality and it works for the most part. We don't give up the big play (except for UCONN). We held WVU to 14 points over 59 minutes and gave up a garbage TD to run clock down to 39 seconds...and we won. I admit it's scary seeing teams chew up yards, but we get a lot of sacks and a lot of tackles for loss, and it works, so far. The key is to get a few TOs. We got none the last 2 games and it made a difference (in a bad way).

11-15-2009, 01:15 AM	#12
bearcatbret Veteran Join Date: May 2008	I did make the comment that we had zero take aways Friday. Also, WVU did not have a single penalty except for two on the same kick off series. Our team stalled drives with huge personal fouls. We need to play penalty free and force some turn overs against Pitt to win that game. Also, there were times on Friday where Brown scrambled for his life and then ended up making something happen. I saw holding on a couple of those plays that were not called.