Dino on Packer & Durham at 9:15

[Orijinal]

Whatever we do on defense has got to take into account that most teams will just want to try and plough it through us in the ground game if they can, and over-talent us.

We have got to be more aggressive at point of attack than we have been. And we have to stop deploying so much zone coverage. These QBs eat us alive on that stuff

 

[JRHEETER]

Yeah I gotta be honest I take that comment as a hey stanard, you have a three week try out. Prove to me why I should keep you...

aka if we play well defensively he’ll keep him but if not he will look elsewhere.

I think that’s a fair thing for Dino to do and I look forward to seeing what the defense can produce the last three weeks of the season.

 

[PAcuse]

The comment to me was Defense guys you have a few weeks to try out and see if you are staying or if some shuffling needs to happen.
I think it's time to see if it was all on Ward or more of a shake.
Standard will have to be better then average to be named DC imo.

 

[sufandu]

Here' my question(s) regarding the change. What was it that Dino finally saw that made him decide now is the time? It has to more than just production. I would think it would gomdeeper than that. Was it philosphy? Did Dino conclude that the type of defense he initially thought would be a good fit for the ACC is not what he imagined? Did he tell Ward to change scheme and Ward couldn't adapt? Was it the passive nature we saw from some positions like a few people have pointed out with the LB's? Was it game planning/play calling? Did Dino see a lack of in game adjustments or poor game planning to attack the other team's weaknesses while attempting to hide our own?

It seems like some of this stuff would have been evident regardless of results and Dino would have had input in some of it. Maybe some of the coaches on here can provide some insight.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Here' my question(s) regarding the change. What was it that Dino finally saw that made him decide now is the time? It has to more than just production. I would think it would gomdeeper than that. Was it philosphy? Did Dino conclude that the type of defense he initially thought would be a good fit for the ACC is not what he imagined? Did he tell Ward to change scheme and Ward couldn't adapt? Was it the passive nature we saw from some positions like a few people have pointed out with the LB's? Was it game planning/play calling? Did Dino see a lack of in game adjustments or poor game planning to attack the other team's weaknesses while attempting to hide our own?

It seems like some of this stuff would have been evident regardless of results and Dino would have had input in some of it. Maybe some of the coaches on here can provide some insight.

I would guess that it was the lack of being prepared for what our opponents were running. Outside of Clemson the D looked much better as the games went on. The adjustments were there but the fact that we were so lost to start just about every game was an issue. Felt like we were constantly chasing what the other team was doing and always a step behind.

 

[sufandu]

I would guess that it was the lack of being prepared for what our opponents were running. Outside of Clemson the D looked much better as the games went on. The adjustments were there but the fact that we were so lost to start just about every game was an issue. Felt like we were constantly chasing what the other team was doing and always a step behind.

How much input do you think Dino had in that game planning/prep? Because he's more of an offensive coach, do you think he is more hands off with the defense?

 

[Chip]

I would guess that it was the lack of being prepared for what our opponents were running. Outside of Clemson the D looked much better as the games went on. The adjustments were there but the fact that we were so lost to start just about every game was an issue. Felt like we were constantly chasing what the other team was doing and always a step behind.

Duke's offense hasn't been very good. RBs averaging under 4, QB rating isn't great. Total offense is even less than us. So I will be curious if we look better next week.

For those that track this stuff, the other thing to watch for are personnel changes. Will we see more 4-3, so more Jones? More Richards? Less Foster?

 

[Orijinal]

Here' my question(s) regarding the change. What was it that Dino finally saw that made him decide now is the time? It has to more than just production. I would think it would gomdeeper than that. Was it philosphy? Did Dino conclude that the type of defense he initially thought would be a good fit for the ACC is not what he imagined? Did he tell Ward to change scheme and Ward couldn't adapt? Was it the passive nature we saw from some positions like a few people have pointed out with the LB's? Was it game planning/play calling? Did Dino see a lack of in game adjustments or poor game planning to attack the other team's weaknesses while attempting to hide our own?

It seems like some of this stuff would have been evident regardless of results and Dino would have had input in some of it. Maybe some of the coaches on here can provide some insight.

Maryland: 63-20
Boston College: 58-27
Florida State: 35-17

Not powerhouse teams by any stretch the imagination.

Run defense has been terrible. Almost non existent. Very passive in the run game and that's why the team gets run over

Very passive in the pass game. Sit in a zone, hope to cause a turnover. Gives up big yards

Gave up a lot of points to Western Michigan

Change in defensive philosophy and mentality is absolutely necessary

 

[sufandu]

Maryland: 63-20
Boston College: 58-27
Florida State: 35-17

Not powerhouse teams by any stretch the imagination.

Run defense has been terrible. Almost non existent. Very passive in the run game and that's why the team gets run over

Very passive in the pass game. Sit in a zone, hope to cause a turnover. Gives up big yards

Gave up a lot of points to Western Michigan

Change in defensive philosophy and mentality is absolutely necessary

You didn't really address the question. Coaches need to look beyond the scoreboard. To a head coach, the problems that led to the results should have been evident, even in the games we won. When they look at film don't they see technique and strategy that make them go, "Uh oh, that won't work against the better teams we'll see this year." That's why I was asking for the coaches on here to comment about the details of what can be seen and not just the obvious results that we all see.

You mentioned the run defense. We all know it sucked. Why did it suck. Should LB's be lining up differently? Should they be reacting downhill quicker? Does it seem that they are not reading keys well? Should the dline be trying to slow the oline more to keep LB's clean? Should they be doing different things to get penetration and be more disruptive? Do they use sound technique? Is everyone simply physically overmatched? If so, why are they so much more physically overmatched this year compared to last? Did Slayton really make that big of a difference?

I'd like insight. I don't know enough to understand those details.