Watching the D early

[HRE Otto IV]

Our gameplan last week was awful. We had the safeties up in run support which left our corners 1 on 1 deep, which killed our pass D. We had the DEs crash down, which means we chose to make Jackson beat us instead of Radcliff (which is insane). Not that we did well against Radcliff either, but those were late in the game.

I will be interested to see what changes we make vs USF. At the very least I would think that we will keep the safeties back the 1st few drives so we don't see 21 points in 5 mins again. Then as the game goes on we may see them come up. In this game I rather see the QB beat us. Mack is the better runner and Flowers isn't nearly as fast as Jackson. Here are the YPC for each from last year:

Jackson 5.9
Radcliff 4.6

Flowers 5.2
Mack 6.6

That should make it obvious who you need to stop first. Also it will be interesting to see how Franklin plays. I am not sure what was going on last game (whether it was coaching or incorrect reads), but he consistently took himself out of plays. The fact our starting MLB is rarely involved in plays, despite playing 2 running teams thus far, is worrisome.

Our talent on D is lacking but the coaches need to at least give them a chance. That didn't happen last week.

 

[upperdeck]

if you read the stories we didnt really design the D that we saw last week.. multiple guys out of position over and over.. add to that UL had way more speed at most positions.

they better we ready for the sprint WR sweep since USF runs that about 10 times a game. the D better not get caught ball watching or they will chasing just like last week

 

[HRE Otto IV]

if you read the stories we didnt really design the D that we saw last week.. multiple guys out of position over and over.. add to that UL had way more speed at most positions.

they better we ready for the sprint WR sweep since USF runs that about 10 times a game. the D better not get caught ball watching or they will chasing just like last week

I don't believe that one bit. We didn't play Tampa 2 at all so they are either wrong about not changing or wrong about running a Tampa 2.

Either way it is a failure by the staff. If the DEs weren't supposed to crash down that is on the staff. That should have been drilled into them all week. And then during the game. Yet every time they crashed. There is no excuse for both the FS and SS to be up so far unless that is the plan. Maybe one but not both. What was Franklin doing out there? If he wasn't being instructed to do what he was then he was missing fundamental reads which has nothing to do with the new system. How can that happen?

 

[PhatOrange]

I don't believe that one bit. We didn't play Tampa 2 at all so they are either wrong about not changing or wrong about running a Tampa 2.

Either way it is a failure by the staff. If the DEs weren't supposed to crash down that is on the staff. That should have been drilled into them all week. And then during the game. Yet every time they crashed. There is no excuse for both the FS and SS to be up so far unless that is the plan. Maybe one but not both. What was Franklin doing out there? If he wasn't being instructed to do what he was then he was missing fundamental reads which has nothing to do with the new system. How can that happen?

i've read your analysis all week and i think you're wrong on a lot of fronts but nevertheless, how do we know the ends weren't instructed to stop crashing down? do we think our defensive coaches are that stupid? With the ends, it's stuff we're going to have to deal with, last year they were all in high school except for pickard and wilson. but you can't bench them. it's growing pains.

cordy is super aggressive and his getting beat on the first play had nothing to do with coaching, it was cordy making a bad play. i watched that play 10 times and every other receiver on the field was blanketed. it was all on cordy. that was repeated. our safeties are bad.

Zaire had the exact same issues last season so it's not just Ward and this staff. It's Zaire.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

Our gameplan last week was awful. We had the safeties up in run support which left our corners 1 on 1 deep, which killed our pass D. We had the DEs crash down, which means we chose to make Jackson beat us instead of Radcliff (which is insane). Not that we did well against Radcliff either, but those were late in the game.

I will be interested to see what changes we make vs USF. At the very least I would think that we will keep the safeties back the 1st few drives so we don't see 21 points in 5 mins again. Then as the game goes on we may see them come up. In this game I rather see the QB beat us. Mack is the better runner and Flowers isn't nearly as fast as Jackson. Here are the YPC for each from last year:

Jackson 5.9
Radcliff 4.6

Flowers 5.2
Mack 6.6

That should make it obvious who you need to stop first. Also it will be interesting to see how Franklin plays. I am not sure what was going on last game (whether it was coaching or incorrect reads), but he consistently took himself out of plays. The fact our starting MLB is rarely involved in plays, despite playing 2 running teams thus far, is worrisome.

Our talent on D is lacking but the coaches need to at least give them a chance. That didn't happen last week.

Haven't you been paying attention to the board? Last year the problems were coaching, scheme and game planning. This year it's purely a talent deficiency and nothing else. ; )

 

[Chip]

Zaire had the exact same issues last season so it's not just Ward and this staff. It's Zaire.

That was one of my bigger unspoken worries going into the season.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

i've read your analysis all week and i think you're wrong on a lot of fronts but nevertheless, how do we know the ends weren't instructed to stop crashing down? do we think our defensive coaches are that stupid? With the ends, it's stuff we're going to have to deal with, last year they were all in high school except for pickard and wilson. but you can't bench them. it's growing pains.

cordy is super aggressive and his getting beat on the first play had nothing to do with coaching, it was cordy making a bad play. i watched that play 10 times and every other receiver on the field was blanketed. it was all on cordy. that was repeated. our safeties are bad.

Zaire had the exact same issues last season so it's not just Ward and this staff. It's Zaire.

How do we know the coaches didn't want the DE crashing down? That is a huge assumption. Which then doesn't make the coaches stupid. That makes more logical sense to me that having the DEs crash was the plan. If the plan was to have the DEs ignore the dive, which IMO was not the instruction, then the players would have to be total idiots to crash down 100% of the time. I don't believe that to be the case. Using logic it was more likely the DEs were following instructions than blowing the play 100% of the time. It is almost impossible to get it wrong every time. So which makes more sense?

Cordy was awful the first play. That was inexcusable coverage. The other long pass play IMO he screwed up as well. My point with the safeties is that both shouldn't be playing run first, unless that is the plan.

If Zaire isn't being instructed to do what he has been doing, he needs to sit.

 

[bevosu]

Coaching and talent disparity. We've had a lot of posts over the past few years about coaching deficiencies. McDonald/Lester offense, Bullough/Shafer defense.

I've noticed that recently (this year) there are more fans willing to post about talent disparity.

Personally I've thought all along that the major problem was talent. Recruiting has obviously been sub par for a long while. Coaches can be blamed for that. Along with weather, facilities, recent football reputation and whatever else you want to throw in.

Schemes..offensive and defensive philosophies can affect competitiveness and I fully expect Dino's offensive philosophy to be a major step in the right direction, but as others have stated we've really got to step up our recruiting results.

I for one am glad to see more and more posters acknowledge that talent may be our most serious achilles heel. A lot of us seemed to be reluctant to publicly say that in recent years.

I want to see Dino and crew upgrade recruiting results on defense as well as offense...snagging Devito is encouraging.

 

[baggerbob]

Our linebackers have been getting run over, or missed tackles since D Smith, and Doug Hogue left in 2010. We haven't recruited well there, need to try the Redshirt freshmen, and freshmen, give them experience now, it might pay off down the line.

 

[007]

How do we know the coaches didn't want the DE crashing down? That is a huge assumption. Which then doesn't make the coaches stupid. That makes more logical sense to me that having the DEs crash was the plan. If the plan was to have the DEs ignore the dive, which IMO was not the instruction, then the players would have to be total idiots to crash down 100% of the time. I don't believe that to be the case. Using logic it was more likely the DEs were following instructions than blowing the play 100% of the time. It is almost impossible to get it wrong every time. So which makes more sense?

Cordy was awful the first play. That was inexcusable coverage. The other long pass play IMO he screwed up as well. My point with the safeties is that both shouldn't be playing run first, unless that is the plan.

If Zaire isn't being instructed to do what he has been doing, he needs to sit.

Not trying to be a DB here, but I will say that your understanding of what is actually happening out on the field is too simplistic. The schemes, techniques, alignments, reads, gap responsibilities, stunts and coverage calls are much more complex than your "analysis."

There are multiple play calls even in the base defense, and even then those will vary by down, distance, field position, and personnel groupings. And...they are, more often than not, playing something other than the base D.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Not trying to be a DB here, but I will say that your understanding of what is actually happening out on the field is too simplistic. The schemes, techniques, alignments, reads, gap responsibilities, stunts and coverage calls are much more complex than your "analysis."

There are multiple play calls even in the base defense, and even then those will vary by down, distance, field position, and personnel groupings. And...they are, more often than not, playing something other than the base D.

I get that. Not sure what you are saying though.

For whatever reason the DEs crashed down every play. Not some here or some there but every play. The "why" we don't know and we will never know because we aren't on the field. IMO because it happened all the time it was more likely the plan than it was the players. There isn't anything complex about that. It is what happened.

For whatever reason Franklin was attacking the LOS and taking what would have been the cutback for Radcliffe. Again like I said we don't know the why. It could have been the player or the plan. However it does not jive with the way the DE played. What is the point of playing the cutback on the dive if you are telling the QB to keep the ball? So something was off there. Whether player or plan.

Both of the safeties looked to be playing run first and came flying up to stop Jackson. The way they played that appeared to be their responsibility, to stop Jackson from turning upfield and breaking a long run. That coincides with the way Franklin and the DEs were playing. Was that the plan or were the safeties messing up? We don't know.

The WRs weren't just getting behind the safeties, the safeties were nowhere in sight. Usually when a safety bites on the run he still is around the play. But that didn't happen which usually indicates cover zero. But like I said we don't know for sure whether it was player or plan.

Louisville had an amazing performance on O and they left a lot of points on the field. They missed on three long pass plays that were open. We had so much go wrong that IMO there is no way it is all talent. There was a huge disconnect on the D. How much of that was talent? How much of that was a poor plan? How much of that was a plan that with our talent couldn't possibly be executed? How much of that was the players not understanding their roles? And if they don't understand their roles how much of that is on the coaches? IMO the D was so bad it was a little bit of everything. I don't think you can point to just one of those. Some of that no coach can control. The factors that can be controlled though IMO we didn't do a very good job of.

 

[007]

I get that. Not sure what you are saying though.

For whatever reason the DEs crashed down every play. Not some here or some there but every play. The "why" we don't know and we will never know because we aren't on the field. IMO because it happened all the time it was more likely the plan than it was the players. There isn't anything complex about that. It is what happened.

For whatever reason Franklin was attacking the LOS and taking what would have been the cutback for Radcliffe. Again like I said we don't know the why. It could have been the player or the plan. However it does not jive with the way the DE played. What is the point of playing the cutback on the dive if you are telling the QB to keep the ball? So something was off there. Whether player or plan.

Both of the safeties looked to be playing run first and came flying up to stop Jackson. The way they played that appeared to be their responsibility, to stop Jackson from turning upfield and breaking a long run. That coincides with the way Franklin and the DEs were playing. Was that the plan or were the safeties messing up? We don't know.

The WRs weren't just getting behind the safeties, the safeties were nowhere in sight. Usually when a safety bites on the run he still is around the play. But that didn't happen which usually indicates cover zero. But like I said we don't know for sure whether it was player or plan.

Louisville had an amazing performance on O and they left a lot of points on the field. They missed on three long pass plays that were open. We had so much go wrong that IMO there is no way it is all talent. There was a huge disconnect on the D. How much of that was talent? How much of that was a poor plan? How much of that was a plan that with our talent couldn't possibly be executed? How much of that was the players not understanding their roles? And if they don't understand their roles how much of that is on the coaches? IMO the D was so bad it was a little bit of everything. I don't think you can point to just one of those. Some of that no coach can control. The factors that can be controlled though IMO we didn't do a very good job of.

I wouldn't even try to address most of that, especially the strawmen. Fact one: the DEs did NOT crash down every play. Some of that is read dependent, some of that is technique specific, and some of that is gap responsibility and dependent on whether you are looking at the strong or weakside DE.

Babers even talked about in his PC how Coleman was in proper containment in the D gap, and the QB still ran around him untouched. Do you think Coleman crashed down first and then shuffled to outside containment?

 

[Ish88888]

I don't believe that one bit. We didn't play Tampa 2 at all so they are either wrong about not changing or wrong about running a Tampa 2.

Either way it is a failure by the staff. If the DEs weren't supposed to crash down that is on the staff. That should have been drilled into them all week. And then during the game. Yet every time they crashed. There is no excuse for both the FS and SS to be up so far unless that is the plan. Maybe one but not both. What was Franklin doing out there? If he wasn't being instructed to do what he was then he was missing fundamental reads which has nothing to do with the new system. How can that happen?

Tell me about it! Hence my doubt about this scheme. Isn't the T2 supposed to support the corners up top? Everything in front if the dbs, bend, not break? Hell if our corners are gonna be on an island, we better be bringing the house up front! And btw, lets get Slayton back inside and just burn all the shirts and rotate the speed at DE.

 

[Ish88888]

Our linebackers have been getting run over, or missed tackles since D Smith, and Doug Hogue left in 2010. We haven't recruited well there, need to try the Redshirt freshmen, and freshmen, give them experience now, it might pay off down the line.

Totally agree, minus cam Lynch and dyshawn , we haven't had impact lb play since hogue and company. All of our lbs are undersized, her run over, and while speed is supposed to be their game, they are often caught out of position.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I wouldn't even try to address most of that, especially the strawmen. Fact one: the DEs did NOT crash down every play. Some of that is read dependent, some of that is technique specific, and some of that is gap responsibility and dependent on whether you are looking at the strong or weakside DE.

Babers even talked about in his PC how Coleman was in proper containment in the D gap, and the QB still ran around him untouched. Do you think Coleman crashed down first and then shuffled to outside containment?

No I don't think that. When I watched the game again in slow motion the DE wasn't in contain during the first half (I didn't watch the 2nd half). Only once out of 7 times was the DE playing the QB. Jackson is reading the DE. Why do you think he kept it every time if the DE was outside? So he made the wrong read every time? The DE didn't even break down they followed the T every time after the first run. That is what happened. We can discuss why it happened. That is debatable. But to say it didn't happen?

The play Babers is probably referring to is the first long run. In that case the DE was caught in between not sure what to do as 2 TEs who were "pulling" were coming at him. The DE came under the block and Jackson took it outside him. Had he gone outside the block then Jackson just cuts it up with the same result. The next 6 zone reads the DE crashed down.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Coaching and talent disparity. We've had a lot of posts over the past few years about coaching deficiencies. McDonald/Lester offense, Bullough/Shafer defense.

I've noticed that recently (this year) there are more fans willing to post about talent disparity.

Personally I've thought all along that the major problem was talent. Recruiting has obviously been sub par for a long while. Coaches can be blamed for that. Along with weather, facilities, recent football reputation and whatever else you want to throw in.

Schemes..offensive and defensive philosophies can affect competitiveness and I fully expect Dino's offensive philosophy to be a major step in the right direction, but as others have stated we've really got to step up our recruiting results.

I for one am glad to see more and more posters acknowledge that talent may be our most serious achilles heel. A lot of us seemed to be reluctant to publicly say that in recent years.

I want to see Dino and crew upgrade recruiting results on defense as well as offense...snagging Devito is encouraging.

Good take. Mine as well. Dino said multiple times that contain and the edge was set often but Jackson just ran around it. That's a talent deficiency. Obviously there were some wrong coaching calls but the talent is not there on D anywhere to execute a proper gameplan against an opponent like Louisville who will give FSU a heck of a fight, imo. They destroyed us and barely tried.

 

[SoBristol]

Good take. Mine as well. Dino said multiple times that contain and the edge was set often but Jackson just ran around it. That's a talent deficiency. Obviously there were some wrong coaching calls but the talent is not there on D anywhere to execute a proper gameplan against an opponent like Louisville who will give FSU a heck of a fight, imo. They destroyed us and barely tried.

Yes, they destroyed us.
Then consider -- how many seniors do we have on that defense? How much experience at DE? The defense overall is not as young as last season, but it is still led by juniors & sophs.

And how much experience among our coaching staff on the defensive side? How long has this defensive coaching group been together? How many games have they coached against top 20 teams? Tom Kaufman has been with Dino 4 years, Nick Monroe 2 years, Brian Ward 1 year, and Vince Reynolds (DL) joined this season. It is a young group.

The one hope I see -- a young defense, and a young coaching staff, have a lot to learn. Maybe they will.