"Base Defense"

Coach Power'T said:
So Boise State, who routinely beat Power 5 schools and played in BCS bowls is the example you are going with? 

Ok, well I'm going to plan on Arkansas State playing in a new years six bowl game
Click to expand...


Thanks for providing evidence for my point. Don't take my quote out of context. BigRedIowan was arguing that we're in the B1G and they're in the Sunbelt, therefore they had no business being in a game with us. My response was that conference affiliation has nothing to do with how good a school is or can be. 

Do I think or know that Arkansas State 's going to be world beaters? Nope. Do I think that teams from outside the P5 schools can be good teams? Yup. 

 
Huskerzoo said:
Thanks for providing evidence for my point. Don't take my quote out of context. BigRedIowan was arguing that we're in the B1G and they're in the Sunbelt, therefore they had no business being in a game with us. My response was that conference affiliation has nothing to do with how good a school is or can be. 

Do I think or know that Arkansas State 's going to be world beaters? Nope. Do I think that teams from outside the P5 schools can be good teams? Yup. 
Click to expand...
Yea, but its the implication that Arkansas State is in that class to create a sort of "feel good" narrative that absolutely cannot be justified.

 
Zaimejs said:
I have been on this board for years, and every year I see the same comments about why our defense is terrible. "We don't want to show (insert top 25 team here) our whole package... so we were just playing our 'base defense'."

Seriously?

Do you think Alabama ever just plays their base defense because they are afraid of giving something away? It shouldn't be about gimmicks and secret tricks up your sleeve. It should be about execution week in and week out. We bring our best game every week, put it on the field, and adjust as needed to whatever the other team has prepared for.

This pathetic excuse that so many have used for so long needs to go to the garbage can along with every Blackshirt given out to these mediocre players, and the paychecks we give to defensive coordinators. 
Click to expand...
I don't think that's what they did at all. Just because somebody says that on a message board doesn't mean it's true. It's most likely that they're trying to get their coordination down before everybody is allowed to go buck wild.
 

 
Coach Power'T said:
Yea, but its the implication that Arkansas State is in that class to create a sort of "feel good" narrative that absolutely cannot be justified.
Click to expand...
Way to keep twisting the narrative. The point is simple: non-P5 schools have the ability to be good (there are a lot of attributing factors that make this true today more than ever before), particularly to the point of being able to compete with a below average/average P5 team (which, to be blunt, is the group we are in). No one is saying AkSt is Boise. Boise was/is simply the best example of this entire point; AkSt files somewhere below.

 
Hope this is the correct thread.  I'm purely a fan, with very little coaching knowledge beyond what would seem to be common sense type things.

When I saw how often they were throwing out in the flats, basically down the line of scrimmage, I was certain that at some point we'd be able to cue on that and grab at least one pick-6.  Is "press defense" the type of defense that would put d-backs at the line and stick to those wides?  Do we not play that because we're afraid of getting beat on a deep ball?  I think I saw maybe one play where our guy was there at the same time the pass arrived, for a loss of a yard or two.

Somebody learn me up on that scenario please.

 
grandpasknee said:
Hope this is the correct thread.  I'm purely a fan, with very little coaching knowledge beyond what would seem to be common sense type things.

When I saw how often they were throwing out in the flats, basically down the line of scrimmage, I was certain that at some point we'd be able to cue on that and grab at least one pick-6.  Is "press defense" the type of defense that would put d-backs at the line and stick to those wides?  Do we not play that because we're afraid of getting beat on a deep ball?  I think I saw maybe one play where our guy was there at the same time the pass arrived, for a loss of a yard or two.

Somebody learn me up on that scenario please.
Click to expand...


To answer your question directly, yes, press coverage can present a number of problems for these types of plays. It's not a cure all, and it presents its own problems for the defense. That's putting the cart before the horse, though (as is any of this "vanilla" talk).

The big problem for Nebraska was not what they ran, but that they ran it so poorly. The first quarter is a great example with these WR screen passes. The major problem on those plays is simply being outnumbered. Whether it was in 2 receiver or 3 receivers to a side, on multiple occasions Nebraska had 1 less defender than they had receiver. This happens for a lot of reasons, but communication is the big one. 

This isn't really 3-4 vs 4-3 mularky, just coverage principles. Arky St was often in 10 personnel (1 RB, 0 TE, 4 receivers). Those personnel packages present problems for a defense because as a defense you always want to have 1 more player than they have potential blockers (whether we're talking the perimeter on a WR screen or in the box against the run). 10 personnel though means the defense is often in the situation Nebraska was in whereby there are only 5 defenders left in the box. The way a defense will try to account for this is to have a 6th player, often an OLB, flex or hedge between guarding a slot receiver and being present in the box.

That position was played poorly all night, as was the Safety help often far too late. Because of this, you have 2 receivers against 1 CB. All Arky St was doing was throwing to that outside receiver, the inside receiver blocked that CB, and they had a relatively easy gain. Any team that has the most meager of WR screen packages in their playbook would be able to replicate what Arky St did.

 
A quick remedy for that screen pass is to get off the block quickly, but consistently throughout the game our defenders allowed themselves to be locked up by their blocking receivers. 

Then, when we ran that same play, Ark State's defender disengaged from the block and made the tackle, for a loss. 

All of that scheme talk is fine, but at the point of attack if the defender simply sheds the block, they have the potential to make the play. We consistently failed to do that, and gave up 400+ yards in the air.

 
knapplc said:
A quick remedy for that screen pass is to get off the block quickly, but consistently throughout the game our defenders allowed themselves to be locked up by their blocking receivers. 
Click to expand...


Sometimes that was the case. It's not always. You get out angled at times.  But I agree, allowing yourself to get blocked and not getting off the block has been an issue for several years.

knapplc said:
Then, when we ran that same play, Ark State's defender disengaged from the block and made the tackle, for a loss. 
Click to expand...


There was a play right before half where Nebraska was in a 2 man stack and an Arky St player beat the block and made a great play. There is a lot of opportunity for that on that play, with that coverage. Arky St tended to split their receivers laterally out a bit more, and we played that CB off the line more, so that sort of opportunity didn't often present itself the other way around.

 
knapplc said:
A quick remedy for that screen pass is to get off the block quickly, but consistently throughout the game our defenders allowed themselves to be locked up by their blocking receivers. 

Then, when we ran that same play, Ark State's defender disengaged from the block and made the tackle, for a loss. 

All of that scheme talk is fine, but at the point of attack if the defender simply sheds the block, they have the potential to make the play. We consistently failed to do that, and gave up 400+ yards in the air.
Click to expand...


All that is true.  But IMO it's (mostly) secondary.  If the answer to all defense was just "get off your block and make the tackle" no one would need schemes or plays.  You have to put your players in the best position to be able to make plays.  And with our pre-snap positioning and coaching the LBs to not move for a couple counts, I don't think we were doing that.

 
Mavric said:
All that is true.  But IMO it's (mostly) secondary.  If the answer to all defense was just "get off your block and make the tackle" no one would need schemes or plays.  You have to put your players in the best position to be able to make plays.  And with our pre-snap positioning and coaching the LBs to not move for a couple counts, I don't think we were doing that.
Click to expand...




Both are true - part of it is scheme & positioning (which weren't great), but part of it is actually making plays.  All night long we weren't disengaging from those blocks, and it cost us.  Fix either of those things and they get far fewer yards, and possibly fewer points. 

 
To be fair, we limited that quick throw to the sideline in the 2nd half. ASU had zero points until they started taking some chances throwing down field late in the 4th. I can't find quarter by quarter stats or we could see how much change there was.

 
I found the quarter by quarter drive summary:

ASU ran:

1st: 22 plays for 111 yards (5.0 ypp)

2nd: 27 plays for 168 yards (6.2 ypp)

3rd: 12 plays for 49 yards (4.1 ypp)

4th: 30 plays for 165 yards (5.5 ypp)

Breaking down the 4th quarter further, here's the drive summary for ASU:

Plays-Yards (Result)

10-61 (FG)

2-(-4) (Safety)

12-63 (TD)

6-45 (End of game)

Without watching every play, I can't tell you which of those plays were throws to the sideline of down the field.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top