Let this sink in

[TheCusian]

What is my criteria? Since its yards per play, that decouples the defense from the offense. Being 127th in the country at 7.6 ypp and worse than forever is not acceptable. 6.0 would be a nice initial goal going forward.

We've played 3 out of 6 games vs teams in the top 25 in yards per play. Elite offense. (We did not help their avg that's for sure... but Louisville, USF and ND are very good and move the ball on everyone). Wake Forest is worse thanUCONN at moving the ball (#98).

Side note: it's weird to see FSU at #124 in defensive ypp. Same number of elite offenses + UNC at #42.

 

[rrlbees]

We've played 3 out of 6 games vs teams in the top 25 in yards per play. Elite offense. (We did not help their avg that's for sure... but Louisville, USF and ND are very good and move the ball on everyone). Wake Forest is worse thanUCONN at moving the ball (#98). Side note: it's weird to see FSU at #124 in defensive ypp. Same number of elite offenses + UNC at #42.

Why do you think I said going forward 6.0 would be a good goal?

 

[wooddoc]

Why can't we be real good on O and D? I reject the idea that it's ok to be bad on defense as long as the offense is real good. Some people make it sound like being bad on D is part of the offensive plan.

Like the saying goes: defenses win games and offenses bring in the crowds - or something like that... I agree with you. Personally, there were a lot of stone hands out there, Saturday - that needs to change. Lots of dropped balls that were catchable.

 

[Deuga]

I know it feels weird to accept Duke as a good football team. The cosmos isn't supposed to work that way. Duke is supposed to be a doormat in football. They're a good team because they've been willing to be patient.

Duke: same HC since 2008. SU: 4 HC's since 2008
Duke: 9 starting seniors. That's 9 seniors who have been in the same system for 4 years. SU: 4 starting seniors (and they know the new system no better than anyone else).

Despite all this and the apparent mistakes, we were down by 6 at half time against an ND team with significantly superior talent almost everywhere on the field. We're actually doing quite well considering the circumstances.

 

[GoSU96]

There is a salary cap on coaches in essence. And if your defense just gets smoked by a great offense all the time, they're not likely to be as well prepared as some factory defense that can get away with a middle of the road offensive system

This isn't just theoretical , there are plenty of schools out there to look at. Who is good both consistently other than factories?

What constitutes, good, consistently, and factory?

I'm going to point this out for the thousanth time, in 2012 this program was 17th in offense and 47th in defense. From 87 to 98 they were consistently in the top 40 in both.

Boise State has done it. Is TCU a factory? Toledo, or don't they count. Air Force? I'd say with their pace of play in the past if Baylor is top 60 that would qualify.

 

[Millhouse]

What constitutes, good, consistently, and factory?

I'm going to point this out for the thousanth time, in 2012 this program was 17th in offense and 47th in defense. From 87 to 98 they were consistently in the top 40 in both.

Boise State has done it. Is TCU a factory? Toledo, or don't they count. Air Force? I'd say with their pace of play in the past if Baylor is top 60 that would qualify.

you conveniently pick and choose when you want to look at per play data

we were 72nd in 2012 defense yards per play and 36th on offense.

tcu has a good blueprint with a great defensive coach who's smart enough to hand off the offense to air raiders. i'm fine with that but it's very hard to verify that a defensive coach is actually committed to it.

last year there were 14 teams in the top 40 in both (yards per play). they're either factories or kings of crappy conferences. except for baylor - which we both agree is a good model for us

 

[TheCusian]

Why do you think I said going forward 6.0 would be a good goal?

I was agreeing with you.

 

[syracuse95]

Very true, good point. I know we will be great on offense, just think this T2 at the p5 level is a HUGE question mark. I dont see it working at this level. Its a pro defense for a reason. I hope I am dead wrong on this.

First of all, we don't actually run a Tampa 2 a lot of the time. What we've been running is more of a mix of 4-3 in a cover 2, or cover 1 with some fairly basic and not-very-well-disguised blitz packages thrown in.

Secondly, I don't really know why the perception is that the Tampa 2 is unsuitable for college. Nobody has ever designed a defensive scheme that, when executed properly, doesn't work.

There's nothing mystical about it, it's run at other levels besides the NFL, and it's been around in one form or another for over 40 years. The hs team I played for ran it in the late '80s. It wasn't called the Tampa 2 then, but thats what it was.

That said, if you want to debate whether SU can recruit the right talent to run a Tampa 2 defense effectively against Top 25 teams, I think it's a valid point of discussion.

 

[upperdeck]

there are 2 parts to being a good defense.. one is scheme and be in position, two is making the play and the tackle. we allowed some huge plays againt ND. one long run everything was done right except one poor angle on a guy with really good speed. Our RBs does not score on that play. One long pass the DB was pushed, one pass he was just beat by a better talent, one pass the DB for no reason peaked and got beat. one 3 guys just missed a tackle.

thats not all scheme, and its not all physical, just as many mental mistakes as anything else.

all we have shown on D is that our mistakes tend to be so big it skews anything else we do right and we dont have the athletes to make up for mistakes.

watch the simple bubble screens. ND corners sets up the blocker, takes it on and makes the tackle for little or no gain. our DBs sets the blocker, has to wait for help and its a 5-8 yd gain. a bit better talent, but a lot more size. UL did the same thing. you can only coach up smaller/slower people so much when the ball gets to certain spots on the field. That will not be a long term thing, we had 2 kids this year that had it worked out would have had a chance to make a difference in those spots in year one and Morgan our one big DB has been hurt too. its a spot that can change in 1 yr with any luck.

 

[Bayside44]

I don't buy the we have NO talent argument. The last 5 classes have all been ranked in the 50's except what would now be true seniors. I know that's subjective but over time it's an indicator. It's not like our classes have been rated in the 100's. And until this true freshman class our classes have been better than Dukes.

When was the last time we trotted out a Jamison Crowder type talent on offense like Duke has just done?

 

[Josh Mack]

If the kids aren't that talented, and you fit your scheme to them, you will have a marginal gain due to fit (maybe) but at this level you'll never be that good.

I promise you we'll increase our talent doing it this way, and that will reinforce the system. People are noticing the passing numbers. That will pay dividends.

Look, everyone knows how to defend the no-huddle offense. It's nothing new! There are times when calling a huddle is actually the best decision to make. I just think this system would greatly benefit from more flexibility from this mandatory no huddle stuff! What's the point if you're not winning games? Football is more than focusing on how fast you can get a play off. Too many 3 and outs the second half. Coaches come and go. It's a money grab. Coach may decide to leave SU just like he left Bowling Green. It's really a coaches paradise in college football today! If SU is going to build a sustainable program, winning has to start now. Future talent is not going to want to come here just because of coach. Top players are attracted to winning programs. We gotta get to winning!

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Look, everyone knows how to defend the no-huddle offense. It's nothing new! There are times when calling a huddle is actually the best decision to make. I just think this system would greatly benefit from more flexibility from this mandatory no huddle stuff! What's the point if you're not winning games? Football is more than focusing on how fast you can get a play off. Too many 3 and outs the second half. Coaches come and go. It's a money grab. Coach may decide to leave SU just like he left Bowling Green. It's really a coaches paradise in college football today! If SU is going to build a sustainable program, winning has to start now. Future talent is not going to want to come here just because of coach. Top players are attracted to winning programs. We gotta get to winning!

WE HAVEN'T WON GAMES IN A DECADE AND A HALF

 

[dollarbill44]

Why can't we be real good on O and D? I reject the idea that it's ok to be bad on defense as long as the offense is real good. Some people make it sound like being bad on D is part of the offensive plan.

If we want to play for championships, we're going to have to be good at defense and great at offense.

 

[GoSU96]

Look, everyone knows how to defend the no-huddle offense. It's nothing new! There are times when calling a huddle is actually the best decision to make. I just think this system would greatly benefit from more flexibility from this mandatory no huddle stuff! What's the point if you're not winning games? Football is more than focusing on how fast you can get a play off. Too many 3 and outs the second half. Coaches come and go. It's a money grab. Coach may decide to leave SU just like he left Bowling Green. It's really a coaches paradise in college football today! If SU is going to build a sustainable program, winning has to start now. Future talent is not going to want to come here just because of coach. Top players are attracted to winning programs. We gotta get to winning!

Winning doesn't have to start now. That's nonsense.