Defense

[SWC75]

Experience, conditioning, simplified D, practicing against a fast paced offense, new offense designed to score. I am much less worried than most. I agree with bcubs, I am not expecting an NC, but the whole team will impress people. Several teams will not know what hit them.

You generally defend best what you practice against. I'm actually more concerned about defending the grind-ot-out teams, (and we play several) than the light-it-up teams. And the grind it out team are generally not higher rated, so they could effect our reputation more if we lose to them. But I think they will give us trouble.

 

[TheCusian]

You generally defend best what you practice against. I'm actually more concerned about defending the grind-ot-out teams, (and we play several) than the light-it-up teams. And the grind it out team are generally not higher rated, so they could effect our reputation more if we lose to them. But I think they will give us trouble.

I'm on the opposite side of things. If the offense is as prolific as it can be, those grinding teams will find themselves forced out of their strengths rather quickly. That's why there are none in the B12, I think.

 

[HtownOrange]

You generally defend best what you practice against. I'm actually more concerned about defending the grind-ot-out teams, (and we play several) than the light-it-up teams. And the grind it out team are generally not higher rated, so they could effect our reputation more if we lose to them. But I think they will give us trouble.

I agree that teams generally perform better against teams that play similar to what they practice against and that the grinding teams could pose a problem; however, with a quick attack offense that can score quickly can easily demoralize a slow grinding offense while sparking their own defense. Also, once the fast paced offense gets ahead, the grinding offense must leave its game plan, which defeats the purpose of their grinding offense.

Please make no mistake, I fully understand - and expect - our opponents to score more. HCDBs system is built on our offense scoring even more. The defense creates a few breaks (stops or turnovers) and the offense exploits the opportunities.

I also agree that if we lose to a team perceived to be a lesser than Syracuse team, then we will be bruised in our reputation. Shouldn't a higher ranked team have their reputation take the hit for losing to a lesser team?

 

[Dmcnabbrules]

If the offense can click this year, it will take a lot of heat off of the defense, obviously. However, we play against some stellar defenses this year that will give Dungey & Co fits on offense. In those games, hopefully our D has jelled enough to get some stops and keep us in the game. We have a huge test Week 2 against LVille. They might have the best D we will play against all year. Certainly top 2-3.

In any event, we have to be patient. Already got some good talent lined up in the recruiting channels.

I just can't wait to watch some football. It's been a long, long offseason since Babers got hired.

One thing that could work in our favor against Louisville

“Defensively, Todd Grantham is a 3-4 guy and his problem is this: Schematically, he outthinks his players, and if you use tempo against them, you can really cause problems because they struggle to line up right and they’ll bust coverage, bust blitz. I think he just does too much. He comes from that pro background, but it’s not what you know, it’s what the players understand.” - See more at: ACC Coaches Talk Anonymously About Conference Foes for 2016

 

[TheCusian]

I agree that teams generally perform better against teams that play similar to what they practice against and that the grinding teams could pose a problem; however, with a quick attack offense that can score quickly can easily demoralize a slow grinding offense while sparking their own defense. Also, once the fast paced offense gets ahead, the grinding offense must leave its game plan, which defeats the purpose of their grinding offense. Please make no mistake, I fully understand - and expect - our opponents to score more. HCDBs system is built on our offense scoring even more. The defense creates a few breaks (stops or turnovers) and the offense exploits the opportunities. I also agree that if we lose to a team perceived to be a lesser than Syracuse team, then we will be bruised in our reputation. Shouldn't a higher ranked team have their reputation take the hit for losing to a lesser team?

That's exactly right. This offense allows teams to punch above their weight when playing teams that may have more talent, but play slower.

 

[tipphill]

I might be in the minority but I am more interested in how the defense performs in this first game than I am in the offense. I have enough faith in the coaching, system, and talent on the offensive side that I am not overly worried about how it looks in the first game, or even how it progresses over the course of the season. I am a lot more skeptical about the defense. The inexperience and youth coupled with the "fit" of the players we have for the new cover 2 has me much more interested in how we look, and progress over the season. But I'm excited to see what we got, go orange!

very well said that has been my MAIN concern as well

 

[SUalldway]

The whole Tampa two thing is being overblown. That will be the base defense but the coaches probably aren't idiots. I guarantee Ward will blitz in third down. Our defense was garbage last year anyway. I love Shaf as a person but they did a poor job recruiting on the defensive side of the ball. Maybe it was to fit the scheme but for the most part the D was too small and slow for ACC play.

You hit the nail on the head! I had to shut the game off a few times last year watching the matador defense, since the alternative was to throw a heavy object at my TV.

 

[dollarbill44]

It seems like the defenses that give this offense fits are D's that can generate pressure without blitzing, LB with coverage skills and good in space, with exceptional talent at CB. That sound right?

Defenses like that give every offense fits at every level of football. There just aren't many defenses like that.

 

[dollarbill44]

You generally defend best what you practice against. I'm actually more concerned about defending the grind-ot-out teams, (and we play several) than the light-it-up teams. And the grind it out team are generally not higher rated, so they could effect our reputation more if we lose to them. But I think they will give us trouble.

Reputation? Reputation? You want to talk about reputation???

 

[TheCusian]

Defenses like that give every offense fits at every level of football. There just aren't many defenses like that.

That was kind of my point .

It's why Baylor and Oregon romp through most of their opponents until they play a Ohio St or Alabama. I think it's also why the system doesn't work as well in the NFL.

 

[Finwad32]

Yes, that sounds about right. For further in-depth, stellar details on the schemes and fronts that work best, I will point to our resident coach himself, Mr. Finwad32. Brett is an awesome football mind.

Thanks for the props brother! Thankfully it's time for some football, offseason felt forever... Hope all is well!

 

[Chip]

One thing that could work in our favor against Louisville “Defensively, Todd Grantham is a 3-4 guy and his problem is this: Schematically, he outthinks his players, and if you use tempo against them, you can really cause problems because they struggle to line up right and they’ll bust coverage, bust blitz. I think he just does too much. He comes from that pro background, but it’s not what you know, it’s what the players understand.” - See more at: ACC Coaches Talk Anonymously About Conference Foes for 2016

Giggity

 

[upperdeck]

all offenses can work pretty well until they hit a D with better talent. if you can man up the WR like teams called ALABAMA do your options get pretty limited.

 

[TheCusian]

all offenses can work pretty well until they hit a D with better talent. if you can man up the WR like teams called ALABAMA do your options get pretty limited.

Agreed, of course. But this offense gives you a chance vs teams with better talent. As opposed to the traditional meathead offense...

If taking chances is built into your DNA and you're good at it, you're still applying tons of pressure on good defenses. If you're a running first team relying on D - your opportunities for a W can die in the first Q. Watch the BG vs Tenn highlights on YouTube from last year. They lost, but they were able to find and apply pressure with deep passes.

Honestly - sometimes the talent gap is too much to overcome. But I'd rather go into a game with an offense like Babers. Least you have some rounds in the chamber.

 

[dollarbill44]

That was kind of my point .

It's why Baylor and Oregon romp through most of their opponents until they play a Ohio St or Alabama. I think it's also why the system doesn't work as well in the NFL.

Sign me up for losing in the first round of the playoffs.