chuck does not have a great track record

[kcsu]

In looking at his coaching stints one has to question this hire.

 

[Doctor44]

im unimpressed with all the hires to date

 

[omg_cuse_rules]

Im not putting this entirely on bullough. Chuck must have ran this whole 3-4 idea by shafer at some point. Scott has the defensive insight and authority to flush this idea the minute he heard about it. Of course the offense didnt help much either. I haven't given up hope yet but I really dont wanna turn into one of those "well its almost basketball season" guys. Still plenty of season left fellas. Go cuse!

Sent from my SPH-L300 using Tapatalk

 

[007]

Im not putting this entirely on bullough. Chuck must have ran this whole 3-4 idea by shafer at some point. Scott has the defensive insight and authority to flush this idea the minute he heard about it. Of course the offense didnt help much either. I haven't given up hope yet but I really dont wanna turn into one of those "well its almost basketball season" guys. Still plenty of season left fellas. Go cuse!

Sent from my SPH-L300 using Tapatalk

Agreed. Those who think that Shafer is not heavily involved in game planning on both sides of the ball are going to be very disappointed. Especially those who think that the "answer" to the teams poor production is for Shafer to get "more involved."

I know that his philosophy is to allow his "coaches to coach." I think this is particularly applicable to the coordinators making play calls in game, player rotations, player groupings, etc. There is no way in hell he is not involved in major game planning decisions, including the decision to use the 3-4 against GT.

 

[HtownOrange]

HCSS is involved and had to approve of what DCCB wanted to try. All decisions fall on HCSS and he knows it. I do think that the DC and OC are good, but they lack the experience for the jump to the ACC, as does HCSS. Overall, with the losses from last year's team and a new, inexperienced staff in place I am still objective that we have a good crew. With the new ACC exposure and opportunity for the southern kids to play in the ACC, we should be able to improve our speed/size/talent level.

We have a lot of work to do to improve but I still think we have the right people. We gave Marrone a few years to get us out of the dumpster and this crew will need a few years to get us to the next level.

 

[Ottoble]

I'm just wondering why the 3-4 we've run the 4-3 with success against the run for awhile now it just seems like way too drastic a change for a one week prep especially for the players but also the coaches calling the D. My thought would have been run 4-3 and push eskeridge up to almost a LB position to be an extra run stopper leave the other saftey back in a zone similar to what we already do on obvious running downs. I don't know I took some time before posting about this game the D looked uncomfortable and unprepared by switching to 3-4 we gave up the line of scrimmage against a big talented o line and they gashed us big with the Fullback.

I wonder if in GTs last 3 Losses if all those teams run 3-4? But have the right players and experience in the system by running it every week.

 

[rosconey]

we ran the 3-4 because schafer is over thinking from fear - guy is scared right now as a head coach-
he is letting every scenario he can think of run his game plans -


even the witless robinson never pulled a stunt like this - got to believe if we had a dc that had some hc experience this never would have happened -

if this isnt the bitch slap back to reality that hcss neeeds- we are doomed

 

[HtownOrange]

I'm just wondering why the 3-4 we've run the 4-3 with success against the run for awhile now it just seems like way too drastic a change for a one week prep especially for the players but also the coaches calling the D. My thought would have been run 4-3 and push eskeridge up to almost a LB position to be an extra run stopper leave the other saftey back in a zone similar to what we already do on obvious running downs. I don't know I took some time before posting about this game the D looked uncomfortable and unprepared by switching to 3-4 we gave up the line of scrimmage against a big talented o line and they gashed us big with the Fullback.

I wonder if in GTs last 3 Losses if all those teams run 3-4? But have the right players and experience in the system by running it every week.

I agree that we should stick with what we know and this is a reinforcement to HCSS and DCCB that they should not make drastic changes but rather address the nuances they would need to work on from the base 4-3 D to handle the option attack. I think we should have stuck with HCSS historic stunt blitzes and that would have thrown off the option attack enough to have had a fighting chance (defensively), but that is only an opinion. We obviously need more team speed to win big in the ACC.

 

[SaltineWar]

This whole coaching staff is MAC retreads. If we want to compete in the ACC the athletic dept. is going to have to make some real hires.

 

[rosconey]

This whole coaching staff is MAC retreads. If we want to compete in the ACC the athletic dept. is going to have to make some real hires.

mac turns out great coach's year after year- were they come from aint a issue at all-never will be

this return of the fab five is the issue - they thought they could get back together and get the same results as before- times have changed as have they over the years- its not the same cogs meshing as before-

hcss made a huge mistake by hiring from such a short list of candidates -

 

[Noexcuse]

This whole coaching staff is MAC retreads. If we want to compete in the ACC the athletic dept. is going to have to make some real hires.

I'd say not exactly true. The words "all" and "retreads" being the exaggerations. Not that I'm happy with the blowout losses or the seeming lack of preparation/game planning.

 

[Cuseman78]

Im not putting this entirely on bullough. Chuck must have ran this whole 3-4 idea by shafer at some point. Scott has the defensive insight and authority to flush this idea the minute he heard about it. Of course the offense didnt help much either. I haven't given up hope yet but I really dont wanna turn into one of those "well its almost basketball season" guys. Still plenty of season left fellas. Go cuse!

Sent from my SPH-L300 using Tapatalk

The choice of going 3-4 is a macro decision made months ago. It was undoubtedly a Shafer call, I'm sure with input from his defensive staff. For those that think Bullough unilaterally decided to scrap the 4-3 last week, then they haven't a clue.

That said, Chuck Bullough is TERRIBLE at his job. 7 games in, he looks like the Brian Pariani of this staff. There is absolutely no excuse for the ridiculous blow-outs in 3 of our losses to this point. Obviously, I'll wait until the end of the year to call for his head, but lets just say I'm not optimistic about him changing my mind.

Shafer needs to do better. I could actually live with being 3-4 at this point considering the schedule, but these blow-out losses scare the bejeezus out of me. It smacks of a staff that is getting badly out coached. Our 1st half scoring differential is absolutely frightening. 100+ to 17 against BCS opponents. That's not a talent issue, thats a coaching issue.

 

[storange]

I like Shafer and I want him to make it, when the season is done he has be able to cut some buddies if their not making the grade . Nobody is gone yet IMO

 

[retro44]

I'm just wondering why the 3-4 we've run the 4-3 with success against the run for awhile now it just seems like way too drastic a change for a one week prep especially for the players but also the coaches calling the D. My thought would have been run 4-3 and push eskeridge up to almost a LB position to be an extra run stopper leave the other saftey back in a zone similar to what we already do on obvious running downs. I don't know I took some time before posting about this game the D looked uncomfortable and unprepared by switching to 3-4 we gave up the line of scrimmage against a big talented o line and they gashed us big with the Fullback.

I wonder if in GTs last 3 Losses if all those teams run 3-4? But have the right players and experience in the system by running it every week.

The reason the 3-4 front is not run more frequently is because it can be a very rigid defense to learn for the players and the installation of it often takes a few years due to getting players to fit the system physically.
The Defensive line on a 3-4 has two Defensive Ends who often times weigh between 280- 300 lbs. They're main responsibilities are to have gap coverage and take the attention of the offensive tackles as well as the guards. The Defensive Tackle (commonly called a nose tackle) is arguably THE most important position on the defensive side of the field. They're asked to disrupt the Center, A Gaps and make their presence known to both Guards. This position is extremely demanding and often times hard for defenses to fill because the players have to be very large (330lbs is optimal size), be able to maneuver the interior offensive line with cat lick reflects and the person has to accept that he may not garner much attention statistics wise. The theme overall for the defensive line is to occupy offensive blockers so that the linebackers can cause disruptions in the backfield.


here's va tech's defense...http://www.shakinthesouthland.com/2011/9/28/2454131/inside-the-virginia-tech-defense
which the type I liked to have seen run...split 40 is just another name

byu runs a hybred 3-4 but uses oversized or much bigger linebackers than we used.plus they use a big S.S. like a linebacker

Miami is claiming they are running a 4-3, but some say it is a well disguised 3-4 and golden has taken a few years to achieve it. They also gave up 30 to G.T.

 

[Crusty]

Shafer has used 3-4 Oakie packages for a long time. I am guessing that is where this scheme came from.

 

[007]

Shafer has used 3-4 Oakie packages for a long time. I am guessing that is where this scheme came from.

Many/most 4-3 base teams use a 3-4 Okie or 3-4 hybrid in nickel packages. The 3-4 was not "new" to SS or Bullough or the SU players. The assignments were.

 

[Crusty]

Many/most 4-3 base teams use a 3-4 Okie or 3-4 hybrid in nickel packages. The 3-4 was not "new" to SS or Bullough or the SU players. The assignments were.

Agreed. Which is why our guys basically watched the game. They were not sure of their assignments.

It would have been easier to teach from our base - changing from the base 4-3 for the GT game seemed to make little sense.

In the NC State post game interview CB said that their were some adjustment to make for GT but not that many. I guess he really underestimated the job.

I really would love to hear his logic.

 

[erog78]

The choice of going 3-4 is a macro decision made months ago. It was undoubtedly a Shafer call, I'm sure with input from his defensive staff. For those that think Bullough unilaterally decided to scrap the 4-3 last week, then they haven't a clue.

That said, Chuck Bullough is TERRIBLE at his job. 7 games in, he looks like the Brian Pariani of this staff. There is absolutely no excuse for the ridiculous blow-outs in 3 of our losses to this point. Obviously, I'll wait until the end of the year to call for his head, but lets just say I'm not optimistic about him changing my mind.

Shafer needs to do better. I could actually live with being 3-4 at this point considering the schedule, but these blow-out losses scare the bejeezus out of me. It smacks of a staff that is getting badly out coached. Our 1st half scoring differential is absolutely frightening. 100+ to 17 against BCS opponents. That's not a talent issue, thats a coaching issue.

Agree with everything you said. 3-4 at this point is completely acceptable but these blowouts are ridiculous. Bullough is coaching us out of games. We need to keep in close it the first half so we can continue to run the ball. The defense s/b the strength of this team.

 

[Chris02M]

if you listen to Shafer they said they were working on this game since summer so since we ran a majority of 4-3 for the 1st 6 games our players probably got confused and mixed there 4-3 responsibilities with what they were supposed to do in the 3-4

 

[Chris02M]

Agree with everything you said. 3-4 at this point is completely acceptable but these blowouts are ridiculous. Bullough is coaching us out of games. We need to keep in close it the first half so we can continue to run the ball. The defense s/b the strength of this team.

your right about our running is the strength of our offense but at some point we are going to have to come out throwing to loosen up the defense

 

[retro44]

In early 2008, it was said that Shafer would bring his own opportunistic brand of defensive play to Ann Arbor in the form of a higher-risk, 4-3 “flex” defensive set that would blitz frequently and force gobs of turnovers. Wolverine football fans suddenly grew nostalgic from this news, reminiscing about those hard-hitting, bulwark Michigan defenses of the past - those coached by Bill McCartney, Gary Moeller and former head coach Lloyd Carr. Sacks galore, interceptions, fumble recoveries and memorable reversals in game momentum that gave 98% of Ann Arbor residents acute laryngitis. It all sounded so familiar and welcoming.

from here...http://whencarcajousattack.blogspot.com/2009/07/revisiting-former-michigan-defensive_09.html


Scott Shafer was introduced as Syracuse’s defensive coordinator on Monday and said that he and Rich Rodriguez “had quite a few differences” philosophically. That became obvious at the Purdue game when Michigan suddenly switched to a 3-3-5 that failed miserably. Rodriguez and Shafer were not on the same page, and that can’t happen with the new defensive coordinator. - See more at: http://michigansportscenter.com/tag/scott-shafer#sthash.8BlCrSo5.dpuf


http://blog.syracuse.com/orangefootball/2009/01/shafers_philosophy_as_syracuse.html says it will bring an attacking 4-3 defense to Syracuse.

and yes I do know that shafer went to a 3-4 oakie package on passing downs so he could bring the house on blitzes,but it wasn't a staple for Syracuse or elsewhere.

 

[kcsu]

this was a total failure on the coaching staff. Regardless of what they thought they should have realized that the players did not have the ability to implement it. When i play golf on a gamebox i often pick a club or shot that i would never attempt on the course

 

[kcsu]

Take a look at how Chuck did at UCLA in 2010 Horrible. He gave up over 30 points in 8 games and was torched for 49, 55, and 60 on three occassions. Not sure if he is the right guy for the job