Chinander on His Defense

[brophog]

My theory continues to be there are more offensive guys to go around than there are defensive guys.  So the Power 5 schools can (generally) find enough of both to be fairly balanced but the G5 teams are left to make due with what's left which is more offense than defense.

I might be completely pulling this out of my @$$ but it seems to make sense and I'm going to go with it until the Chin proves me wrong (hopefully never).

 You can scheme around issues much easier on the offensive side than the defensive side, due to having the ball and the advantages therein. What happens then at lower tier schools is they become offensive heavy to make up for recruiting disadvantages. Even if you're the chief bigwig school at a lower level, your ability to recruit superior athletes compared to your rivals is limited because you're all using the same pool left over after all of the upper divisions are done. The lower the division, the more this becomes the case.

 

[brophog]

Best stat/quote I’ve heard from chinander “80% of drives end with no points if there was a sack/negative play”. It’s been awhile since I read that but that was the gist of it.  My take is we will find balance some plays will slip but we will create plenty of disruption too.  The main difference is we will have an offense that can take advantage of that for once!

The concern is that drives also can end without such a play and UCF last year seemed to only get a key stop when they got a turnover. What we all want to see is not a decreased focus on generating those negative plays but an increase in just getting stops. 

 

[Dansker]

I think EC's philosophy is better suited for the B1G than the AAC. There are not as many spread/air raid type of teams here that we have to worry about. I think the defense we all saw UCF had against Auburn is the defense he's working on setting up in Lincoln. Turnovers, turnovers, turnovers, and limiting explosive plays, being aggressive with their attack.