I think its being lost in the clutter

[upperdeck]

We know the D has issues.. But I also think that as 2 weeks ago showed you can fix a D easier than you can fix an O..

Defense is about guys being in the right spot more often than it is about talent.

Sometimes you get guys in space and you lose that battle but more often its about a guy not being where he is supposed to be or about a guy not making a tackle. Those are things you can correct in the film room, by getting better talent, or by calling a Better play.

But the thing that drives the bus will be the offense, getting that corrected requires a functional oline..

Since week 9 when Bergeron became the starter and then a couple weeks later we made the 2nd change

FSU 51-192
BC 42-159
Duke 43-286
Lou 52-261
almost 220 a game and 32 pts

the previous 7 weeks we avg 110. and 24 pts


I dont care who we played thats a huge jump in production if we see that again this week thats a huge trend in the right direction and its not being masked by a highly productive running QB.

If we go for 200 plus running this week even in a loss against 4 of the teams on our side, thats something to take from the season no matter the results on the field. the oline is basically coming back

when you start running for 200 it doesnt take much to fix the passing game, maybe the QB isnt as dinged up as he is now, maybe we score 7 more pts in a couple games.

Its still means the D has to get better. to me as much as I wanted to win the last 3 i also wanted to get better and I still think a new coach/new blood as the DC is the answer. Winning the last 3 might have pushed us to not make that change. 5-7 is still better than yr 1-2 and winning 2 of the last 3 after fixing the oline issues is positive energy to add to hopefully a solid DC hire

 

[SoBristol]

So, you are talking about the carry-over into 2020. The offense is trending in the right direction at season end, as you note, and everyone is back except Neal, Riley, and Evan Adams. We can replace those three — Devito should be much better; obviously the offense will be better.

The defense, though, will be a hugh challenge. Lose two good DEs, plus a starting DT, two starting LBs, two starting defensive backs. Only 4 returning starters, plus Bear Williams. The 2019 defense was not good, so you might wonder if the replacements might be better? Doubtful. We need an infusion of help from transfers. A big infusion.

 

[qdawgg]

You're looking at some of these things in a vacuum. The assumption players get better is a fallacy to some degree. Some players get better, some players get bigger/stronger/faster/"larger", some players learn the position at a higher level. Some don't, some even regress.

Film study doesn't instantly improve the ability of all players. If it did, people wouldn't complain about Cordy every week. Or see our defenders get beat, tricked, fall victim to the same plays over and over. Watching film and then executing on the field are such drastically different things for a variety of reasons. Even practicing doesn't correlate to improved play for all players. Recruiting matters, recruiting players who've played at high levels matters, recruiting smart players matters.

The DC has zero history of success at that position. He only has a history of some of the worst defensive numbers over multiple categories in every single year he was in that position. The D had one very good game and one very poor game. There hasn't been one thing that suggests he's the answer and will improve our defense. We need to hire a real DC. I have a bad feeling about the next couple years if we don't.

 

[SWC75]

We know the D has issues.. But I also think that as 2 weeks ago showed you can fix a D easier than you can fix an O..

Defense is about guys being in the right spot more often than it is about talent.

Sometimes you get guys in space and you lose that battle but more often its about a guy not being where he is supposed to be or about a guy not making a tackle. Those are things you can correct in the film room, by getting better talent, or by calling a Better play.

But the thing that drives the bus will be the offense, getting that corrected requires a functional oline..

Since week 9 when Bergeron became the starter and then a couple weeks later we made the 2nd change

FSU 51-192
BC 42-159
Duke 43-286
Lou 52-261
almost 220 a game and 32 pts

the previous 7 weeks we avg 110. and 24 pts


I dont care who we played thats a huge jump in production if we see that again this week thats a huge trend in the right direction and its not being masked by a highly productive running QB.

If we go for 200 plus running this week even in a loss against 4 of the teams on our side, thats something to take from the season no matter the results on the field. the oline is basically coming back

when you start running for 200 it doesnt take much to fix the passing game, maybe the QB isnt as dinged up as he is now, maybe we score 7 more pts in a couple games.

Its still means the D has to get better. to me as much as I wanted to win the last 3 i also wanted to get better and I still think a new coach/new blood as the DC is the answer. Winning the last 3 might have pushed us to not make that change. 5-7 is still better than yr 1-2 and winning 2 of the last 3 after fixing the oline issues is positive energy to add to hopefully a solid DC hire

So our problem was that our defense was

 

[kcsu]

Listen to Bailey's Pod. Its coaching.

 

[AAM62]

Listen to Bailey's Pod. Its coaching.

I did and that was a cop out from whigham, a dude who definitely thought he was better than he really was.

 

[PhatOrange]

Some of the out of position stuff isn't teachable though. IMO it's instinctual.

And LB size matters. Mikel Jones has the heart of a lion but he's as small our safeties. I don't watch him at OLB and think he's our future.

I do believe overall though. Fix the offense, move the ball and score more points and some of the defensive woes will go away.

 

[kcsu]

Some of the out of position stuff isn't teachable though. IMO it's instinctual.

And LB size matters. Mikel Jones has the heart of a lion but he's as small our safeties. I don't watch him at OLB and think he's our future.

I do believe overall though. Fix the offense, move the ball and score more points and some of the defensive woes will go away.

I agree. Our middle is weak. NT, ML, SS need to be downhill and able to bring it.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Agree. Everyone knew O-line would be key and it failed us. We will trend better next year.
Also, not for nothing, but guys like Phil Steele predicted this season (again) spot on. Same with last year.

We will trend again in the right direction next year using those models because of the number of returning starters (especially at key positions) and the luck factor (we had it last year, haven't been as lucky with key injuries this year).

I'll take a 4 win season if we can follow it up with two 7/8 win seasons and the occasional 10 win year. We (myself included) got way ahead of ourselves this year. We have the right system and approach to win as the only indoor team in college football -- we'll right the ship.

 

[SWC75]

I did and that was a cop out from whigham, a dude who definitely thought he was better than he really was.

When Orange Nation, (Steve Infanti and Seth Goldberg) were discussing whether the team had any reason to care who wins Saturday's game, they both agreed that there was none and backed up their opinion by quoting Julian Whigham who had posted in answer to the question, (probably on twitter) "Absolutely none." the whole conversation pissed me off and i lost a lost of respect for Whigham. I guessed that if he were still on the team, he'd be tanking this one.

 

[Doc5120]

When Orange Nation, (Steve Infanti and Seth Goldberg) were discussing whether the team had any reason to care who wins Saturday's game, they both agreed that there was none and backed up their opinion by quoting Julian Whigham who had posted in answer to the question, (probably on twitter) "Absolutely none." the whole conversation pissed me off and i lost a lost of respect for Whigham. I guessed that if he were still on the team, he'd be tanking this one.

I play checkers against my 6 year old and care about winning. How can D1 level college athletes not care about winning? If you just "go through the motions" in football, not only will you lose, but you may get injured. This isn't a baseball or basketball game where you can more or less avoid injury.

After working most of the year to get ready for the season, you play 12 regular season games. It baffles me how anyone with even the most minute level of competitiveness could not go out there and give 100% and care about winning. If players feel that way, that really bothers me.

 

[PhatOrange]

When Orange Nation, (Steve Infanti and Seth Goldberg) were discussing whether the team had any reason to care who wins Saturday's game, they both agreed that there was none and backed up their opinion by quoting Julian Whigham who had posted in answer to the question, (probably on twitter) "Absolutely none." the whole conversation pissed me off and i lost a lost of respect for Whigham. I guessed that if he were still on the team, he'd be tanking this one.

Weird take from Whigham who was 3-8 heading into his last home game ever. A game they won ending a 4-8 season and the firing of his head coach. Players want to win and sometimes they just play for pride. As a senior, wouldn't they want to win their last home game of their career? Bizarre take.

If you have nothing to play for don't show up.

 

[AAM62]

When Orange Nation, (Steve Infanti and Seth Goldberg) were discussing whether the team had any reason to care who wins Saturday's game, they both agreed that there was none and backed up their opinion by quoting Julian Whigham who had posted in answer to the question, (probably on twitter) "Absolutely none." the whole conversation pissed me off and i lost a lost of respect for Whigham. I guessed that if he were still on the team, he'd be tanking this one.

its actually funny because whigham is pretty transparent in how much he truly didn't care in terms of team success and wanting to be a leader. now that's fine, you don't have to be a leader if you don't want to. he clearly was the guy that would get smoked and blame the scheme (or lack of safety help). so, when he goes on and says the defenses struggles are 75% to 80% scheme when we have bad personnel (outside of the DEs), then I just don't buy it. Sure, there were scheme deficiencies over 4 years that cant be ignored, but its not 80% of the reason why you get abused by Maryland, BC, FSU, or LVille.