I Love This Defense | Syracusefan.com

I Love This Defense

TexanMark

Tailgate Guru
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
24,089
Like
43,649
From Skullet on TOS:

Holgorsen indicated that WVU's problems with Syracuse's blitz weren't attributable to just one factor.
Sixteen of their 24 first blitzes were different,” he said. “I give them a lot of credit for that. “We still hatted it up (had blocking assignment correct) for the most part, but they won a lot of those battles. The pocket got collapsed a lot. We have to do a better job of one on one pass protection. Some of the guys that were coming free, we have to do better from a quarterback-receiver standpoint and adjust routes quicker and get the ball out more quickly.”
* * *
 
The one scary thing about the WVU game is that we were cheating on many of the blitzes, leaving them with an open receiver. Had they been able to get rid of the ball quicker, we could have been in alot of trouble.

A better quarterback would have picked us apart.
 
The one scary thing about the WVU game is that we were cheating on many of the blitzes, leaving them with an open receiver. Had they been able to get rid of the ball quicker, we could have been in alot of trouble.

A better quarterback would have picked us apart.

That is the risk reward of playing so aggressively... We see it on offense as well.. I think this is why we see Graham coming to the forefront, you get rid of the ball and hope your wr can beat one guy, if he does big plays will happen
 
From Skullet on TOS:

Holgorsen indicated that WVU's problems with Syracuse's blitz weren't attributable to just one factor.
Sixteen of their 24 first blitzes were different,” he said. “I give them a lot of credit for that. “We still hatted it up (had blocking assignment correct) for the most part, but they won a lot of those battles. The pocket got collapsed a lot. We have to do a better job of one on one pass protection. Some of the guys that were coming free, we have to do better from a quarterback-receiver standpoint and adjust routes quicker and get the ball out more quickly.”
* * *
Couple of issues with the defense.

1. They haven't been challenged by a power run team yet this year.

2. Lot's of yds given up between the 20's and too many long td's. If they can tighten that up at all, then we'll have something with all hands on deck.

3. Other than Collaros SU will be going against QB's with issues the rest of the way.
 
In the next two weeks the defense will be challeged by big offensive lines and power rushing attacks. I'd expect Diabate to play less (and boy did he play well versus WVU - any question on why they recruited him has been answered) and more of our traditional 4-3. Whereas in the WVU game we were in the Okie package almost throughout - excluding goal line situations.
 
In the next two weeks the defense will be challeged by big offensive lines and power rushing attacks. I'd expect Diabate to play less (and boy did he play well versus WVU - any question on why they recruited him has been answered) and more of our traditional 4-3. Whereas in the WVU game we were in the Okie package almost throughout - excluding goal line situations.

And that is where we have struggled whcih would make one nervous, there will be nothing similar to the WVU game in the next two.. I just hope we score points and get ahead as neither UCONN or Lville wants to play from behind
 
And that is where we have struggled whcih would make one nervous, there will be nothing similar to the WVU game in the next two.. I just hope we score points and get ahead as neither UCONN or Lville wants to play from behind

That was last year. This year we have played the run very well.
 
If I was a WVU fan, what I would be questioning is why they went away from what was working. They knew/saw we were being ultra aggressive and early on they were killing us with a lot of draws and screens. They did that for 2-3 possessions and were successful. But then they went away from it for the most part and I have no idea why.
 
Couple of issues with the defense.

1. They haven't been challenged by a power run team yet this year.

2. Lot's of yds given up between the 20's and too many long td's. If they can tighten that up at all, then we'll have something with all hands on deck.

3. Other than Collaros SU will be going against QB's with issues the rest of the way.

I expect to see more Crume in the next couple weeks and thus less Okie and Diet Tab (who was great Friday night). Davis should become a factor again and Shamarko I think will look better.
 
I expect to see more Crume in the next couple weeks and thus less Okie and Diet Tab (who was great Friday night). Davis should become a factor again and Shamarko I think will look better.
I agree...can't wait until we develop some depth...make no mistake this team is still feeling the effects of losing 30 players in the transition.
 
I agree...can't wait until we develop some depth...make no mistake this team is still feeling the effects of losing 30 players in the transition.

Yeah, I will participate in any thread on this board singing the praises of this defense. I think the statistical regression has people missing a huge story with this defense, which has held it's own despite huge odds (youth, inexperience, lack of size, injury).

I think the beauty of the WVU plan -- not that I can verify this -- but I think Shafer gambled that Skullet wouldn't want to be patient. He wants big chunks and tons of points. If WVU simply runs the ball -- any running play -- they at least make us change what we're doing. It's easy to look at 24 rushes for 70 yards and miss that WVU's two backs carried 20 times for 102 and a TD. They just simply didn't want to run the ball that much. Same issue ND has with Brian Kelly from time to time.
 
Yeah, I will participate in any thread on this board singing the praises of this defense. I think the statistical regression has people missing a huge story with this defense, which has held it's own despite huge odds (youth, inexperience, lack of size, injury).

I think the beauty of the WVU plan -- not that I can verify this -- but I think Shafer gambled that Skullet wouldn't want to be patient. He wants big chunks and tons of points. If WVU simply runs the ball -- any running play -- they at least make us change what we're doing. It's easy to look at 24 rushes for 70 yards and miss that WVU's two backs carried 20 times for 102 and a TD. They just simply didn't want to run the ball that much. Same issue ND has with Brian Kelly from time to time.
I also think that our staff isn't impressed with Geno Smith's ability to adjust on the fly or stand in the pocket to make a throw.
 
Yeah, I will participate in any thread on this board singing the praises of this defense. I think the statistical regression has people missing a huge story with this defense, which has held it's own despite huge odds (youth, inexperience, lack of size, injury).

I think the beauty of the WVU plan -- not that I can verify this -- but I think Shafer gambled that Skullet wouldn't want to be patient. He wants big chunks and tons of points. If WVU simply runs the ball -- any running play -- they at least make us change what we're doing. It's easy to look at 24 rushes for 70 yards and miss that WVU's two backs carried 20 times for 102 and a TD. They just simply didn't want to run the ball that much. Same issue ND has with Brian Kelly from time to time.
I think Shafer knew we had to gamble to disrupt the WVU aerial attack. Make them do something different, if they want (like run the ball), but disrupt what they do best. Of course, it also fits what SU can do at this point, with Chandler back -- use blitzes to put pressure on the QB.
People trot out the excuses (depth, youth, inexperience, lack of size, injury) but we should be past that. Look at the make-up, at this point, of the units on defense. We have 4 highly experienced DEs (seniors and juniors, all of them); 3 experienced DTs plus a promising big frosh in Crume; 5 LBs who have now played a lot; and 7 DBs who have played a lot. We have good size at DE with Chandler back, and the DTs have stood up better than expected. The LBs are undersized but have more experience than folks acknowledge (Vaughan in the program, Spruill as a second year starter, Diabate as a Juco), although as a unit they are still developing. At DB, we have at least average experience with two seniors, two juniors, 3 sophs and no frosh. We have had a couple of big injuries (Chandler and Fisher) but most teams have that many.
Time to judge this defense on its performance, without the excuses.
 
I remember seeing posts like this after the Rutgers game and then the Tulane thing happened. Louisville has a good power game and a mobile qb and that combo has given Syracuse problems in the past and so far I haven't seen a lot that has changed my mind regarding that. I do believe that the SU defense has improved vs a power rush but have we played a team that focuses on that part of the game on offense? SU has to keep pressure on the qb while hopefully he doesn't have an accurate day throwing the ball. A good play action kills our d, much like it does any defense.
 
As far as I can tell Louisville's O is still getting untracked...so hopefully that "good play action" won't show up on Saturday.
 
As far as I can tell Louisville's O is still getting untracked...so hopefully that "good play action" won't show up on Saturday.

The key is to stuff the run so it isn't even part of the offense but if Louisville gets a 2nd and 4 situation too often we might have some issues. The SU interior line has improved from last year so I'm hoping those guys get a little penetration without the help of any blitzes.
 
I hope this game doesn't set up like last year...yowza. Lots of mo going in and we lay an egg.
 
I think Shafer knew we had to gamble to disrupt the WVU aerial attack. Make them do something different, if they want (like run the ball), but disrupt what they do best. Of course, it also fits what SU can do at this point, with Chandler back -- use blitzes to put pressure on the QB.
People trot out the excuses (depth, youth, inexperience, lack of size, injury) but we should be past that. Look at the make-up, at this point, of the units on defense. We have 4 highly experienced DEs (seniors and juniors, all of them); 3 experienced DTs plus a promising big frosh in Crume; 5 LBs who have now played a lot; and 7 DBs who have played a lot. We have good size at DE with Chandler back, and the DTs have stood up better than expected. The LBs are undersized but have more experience than folks acknowledge (Vaughan in the program, Spruill as a second year starter, Diabate as a Juco), although as a unit they are still developing. At DB, we have at least average experience with two seniors, two juniors, 3 sophs and no frosh. We have had a couple of big injuries (Chandler and Fisher) but most teams have that many.
Time to judge this defense on its performance, without the excuses.

Yes and no. I agree that you can't consistently make excuses. I get that. But Chandler and Shamarko are two pretty big injuries and P. Thomas was dealing with injuries in the preseason. I think you could argue that those are three of the four best players on this defense.

But, I agree, everyone has injuries. I just think it's the combo of those injuries, plus the loss of six really good players from last year (thought Lewis was underrated, Merkerson came on extremely strong, and Smith/Hogue/Holmes were the core of the unit). And experience is an issue they've had to deal with as well. I get your point, but consider that Vaughan really hadn't played much, Diabate is a juco and still has to learn the defense (even if he's more developed physically than the typical newcomer), we had basically zero experience at DT (Goggins redshirted), and our sophs in the secondary are true sophs, not redshirt sophs. That's still pretty early in the developmental curve, IMO.

Anyway, I don't entirely disagree and often think people overstate the importance of experience. But Shafer is a proven commodity and had, IMO, some legit hurdles to climb this year and, despite that, has managed to put together a decent defense that has kept us in ball games and could be very dangerous in 2012. I'm not sure we could have asked for much more than he has delivered.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,384
Messages
4,700,167
Members
5,906
Latest member
DA CUSE

Online statistics

Members online
263
Guests online
2,000
Total visitors
2,263


Top Bottom