Post Game UCLA Tweets

[MichiganDad3]

I don't even understand what same run fit means so if someone could break that down for me I'd be grateful.

 

I'm no expert, so I could be wrong, but look at the photo Jay Foreman posted. See how the defensive tackles are in the same gap? One of them should be taking care of the gap that the RB is going through. The LB there did his job getting into the other gap, and the DE's are containing the play like they're supposed to.

 

It's like Jay says - it's not scheme. It's mental, physical errors and it's just flat out getting beat by the guy across from you.

If different players fail to execute over a 3 year period, then either the scheme doesn't work or it is too difficult to learn. Either way, the scheme needs to be abandoned.

[alwayshusking]

If you can't marry the scheme to your current personnel, you have a scheme issue.

[TheSker]

If you can't marry the scheme to your current personnel, you have a scheme issue.

 

There is no scheme available for a MLB who can't shed blocks

[Hercules]

If you can't marry the scheme to your current personnel, you have a scheme issue.

 

OK, but good luck finding a scheme that doesn't ask its defensive linemen to do something as basic as fitting the correct gap.

[Count 'Bility]

We dont have a scheme issue. At times, maybe that applies. We dont have a talent issue.

I agree we do not have a scheme issue. I do think we have a talent issue. It's being addressed, but is not fully addressed yet. I think two of the more glaring examples may be a Gregory in place of Meredith and Bando in place of Compton. Gregory and Bando are simply more physically gifted than their predecessors from last season.

I dont the talent issue is as dire as you comment makes it seem-my interpretation anyway. Because outside of the CCG last year, every game we've lost and even the ones we've been blown out in since joining the big 10, we've shown to be competitive enough to compete at the top lever for significantly more than just a blip of the game. It's a mental issue. One little thing goes wrong, and heads go down. And then the avalanche begins. No one finds the will to step up on stop it. And this is the whole works from coaches to player to everyone. You can go back through every loss since joining the Big 10 and see that we've had the talent to win those games. We just dont have the mentality. Granted the first couple classes lacked talent necessary and the developement and depth has been widely debated, But I never felt like we were so outclassed in the talent category that it couldnt be overcome with a tough mindset. That's missing too, and that's how these losses are happening. I'm more disturbed by this lack of intensity than I would ever be of schematic issues. All we here is how these guys would run through a wall for Bo and the coaches and each other. Well, we dont want them to run through wall, just the other team. And for some reason they just dont do that much.

[alwayshusking]

Just wait for another Suh to show up, then Bo's scheme will work. Hope to only play pocket passers too. Sounds like a great strategy.

[True2tRA]

Better to get burned once in a while instead of letting the other team drive the length of the field at will.

 

Note the comments asking why when we miss a tackle there's nobody else in the same zip code. It's hard enough getting enough guys to cover the field against adangerous offense that spreads it out, as it is.

 

I suspect we'd all feel quite differently about 'better to get burned once' when it happens.

 

I think it comes back to, you need a dominant front four. So far it seems we have some of that, but not really. Blitzing can be a way to deal with that, but if you have issues up front it's going to cause you trouble, no matter what. And we're still, ultimately, talking about blitzing on a smallish percentage of plays. Even the teams that blitz often. So really, everything comes back to the effectiveness of the line. If they struggle everyone's behind the 8-ball.

 

Again, that's why Bo needs to play a lot of zone against dual threat QBs. He sticks with man under and you have all of your back 7 with their backs to the ball except for the safeties who are usually quite deep. This creates huge gains on QB scrambles. Hundley isn't even that good of a runner. He was sacked 52 times last year and is quite vulnerable to pressure.

 

Show me a good defense that plays the way we do. No one does. You can't be that passive and be good on defense.

 

Bo will continue to play the patty cake scheme and it won't work, especially against decent offenses.

 

Yep. This is why I will always hate this scheme. A four man rush for four quarters and we think we are going to get consistent pressure? How? Nobody in the country gets a constant four man rush. Then you throw in the pressure it pits on DB to cover for an extended amount of time. Guys get tired. They lose focus. No safety help in the run game. Bracket coverage playing ten yards off the ball. You don't get a bump. You don't impede routes. It's basically the offense taking what you give them all game long. It's easy for a decent team. Bend don't break defense will always fail. You just keep getting bent over and f'd. You don't go out there and wait for opponents to make mistakes, you have to blitz, mix it up, force mistakes. Six years of watching this crap I'm tired of it.

[Count 'Bility]

If you can't marry the scheme to your current personnel, you have a scheme issue.

 

OK, but good luck finding a scheme that doesn't ask its defensive linemen to do something as basic as fitting the correct gap.

This.

 

2nd pic. 2nd dlineman from the left. Flat out got beat. Straight up got hooked and turned. This is the lack of fire I'm talking about. You have to have the understanding that at minimum, you have to hold your ground and stay that gap.

[True2tRA]

How do you guys think it's not a scheme issue? Who the f#*k do you think is asking them to play like this?

[Count 'Bility]

How do you guys think it's not a scheme issue? Who the f#*k do you think is asking them to play like this?

What do you mean? Our coaches are not asking that dlineman to lose that one on one battle and allow himself to get hooked.

 

At some point the players do have to put forth the effort to fight through some things. That's a one on one matchup and that guy got destroyed.

[Hercules]

How do you guys think it's not a scheme issue? Who the f#*k do you think is asking them to play like this?

 

I think there are probably some arguments against the current scheme as far as reducing the amount of man coverage we use. It was amazing when Gomes, Amukumara, Dennard and Hagg were flying around, and could blanket everyone on the field. But I don't think we have the personnel in the secondary right now to blanket everybody in man coverage, and I'm guessing that using more zone would be more effective in stopping the big play, and in stopping the run game.

 

However, when it comes to playing the run in those pictures Foreman and Benning posted? That has nothing to do with scheme, because you're not going to find a scheme that makes up for the defensive line making mistakes or getting worked.

[TheSker]

We dont have a scheme issue. At times, maybe that applies. We dont have a talent issue.

I agree we do not have a scheme issue. I do think we have a talent issue. It's being addressed, but is not fully addressed yet. I think two of the more glaring examples may be a Gregory in place of Meredith and Bando in place of Compton. Gregory and Bando are simply more physically gifted than their predecessors from last season.

I dont the talent issue is as dire as you comment makes it seem-my interpretation anyway. Because outside of the CCG last year, every game we've lost and even the ones we've been blown out in since joining the big 10, we've shown to be competitive enough to compete at the top lever for significantly more than just a blip of the game. It's a mental issue. One little thing goes wrong, and heads go down. And then the avalanche begins. No one finds the will to step up on stop it. And this is the whole works from coaches to player to everyone. You can go back through every loss since joining the Big 10 and see that we've had the talent to win those games. We just dont have the mentality. Granted the first couple classes lacked talent necessary and the developement and depth has been widely debated, But I never felt like we were so outclassed in the talent category that it couldnt be overcome with a tough mindset. That's missing too, and that's how these losses are happening. I'm more disturbed by this lack of intensity than I would ever be of schematic issues. All we here is how these guys would run through a wall for Bo and the coaches and each other. Well, we dont want them to run through wall, just the other team. And for some reason they just dont do that much.

 

I do agree with the mental/psychological aspect as well.....and I'm in line with your thinking. Though yes, I do think there are two teams we had a large talent gap with......Wisky and Ohio State. I think there was more talent equality in the Big 10 in the middle of the league. I think it's why Urban Meyer called everyone out on recruiting. I think continued recruiting will solve a lot. The mental part and the killer instinct are vital also. That's why I'm so disappointed in Martinez as a leader.

[MichiganDad3]

How do you guys think it's not a scheme issue? Who the f#*k do you think is asking them to play like this?

What do you mean? Our coaches are not asking that dlineman to lose that one on one battle and allow himself to get hooked.

 

At some point the players do have to put forth the effort to fight through some things. That's a one on one matchup and that guy got destroyed.

Every defensive player isn't going to win every battle. The scheme has to work even when some players get beat.

[MichiganDad3]

How do you guys think it's not a scheme issue? Who the f#*k do you think is asking them to play like this?

 

I think there are probably some arguments against the current scheme as far as reducing the amount of man coverage we use. It was amazing when Gomes, Amukumara, Dennard and Hagg were flying around, and could blanket everyone on the field. But I don't think we have the personnel in the secondary right now to blanket everybody in man coverage, and I'm guessing that using more zone would be more effective in stopping the big play, and in stopping the run game.

 

However, when it comes to playing the run in those pictures Foreman and Benning posted? That has nothing to do with scheme, because you're not going to find a scheme that makes up for the defensive line making mistakes or getting worked.

First of all, maybe Gomes and company were more effective because opposing coaches have watched film and figure out how to beat Bo's scheme. Second, maybe the DL appears to get bat because they are coached to play pattycake instead of rush like wild men.

[TheSker]

How do you guys think it's not a scheme issue? Who the f#*k do you think is asking them to play like this?

 

I think there are probably some arguments against the current scheme as far as reducing the amount of man coverage we use. It was amazing when Gomes, Amukumara, Dennard and Hagg were flying around, and could blanket everyone on the field. But I don't think we have the personnel in the secondary right now to blanket everybody in man coverage, and I'm guessing that using more zone would be more effective in stopping the big play, and in stopping the run game.

 

However, when it comes to playing the run in those pictures Foreman and Benning posted? That has nothing to do with scheme, because you're not going to find a scheme that makes up for the defensive line making mistakes or getting worked.

First of all, maybe Gomes and company were more effective because opposing coaches have watched film and figure out how to beat Bo's scheme. Second, maybe the DL appears to get bat because they are coached to play pattycake instead of rush like wild men.

 

Or maybe part of the reason Gomes and company were more effective is because they were more talented.....thus their entrance into the NFL. Check out our NFL draft history since 1990. If you need help, I have a year by year breakdown.