Defensive scheme

Mavric said:
BigRedBuster said:
I found this tweet to be very interesting.

World-Herald Big Red ‏@OWHbigred 6m

6 minutes ago
Daniel Davie says no safety over the top in new system is different for cornerbacks. Watch live: http://bit.ly/1NawZbK
Click to expand...
Kind of the first comments directly from a player I have seen pertaining to specific changes in the scheme. Hopefully this allows for more run support up front.
Click to expand...
I thought that was interesting as well. Not sure it will change a whole lot as far as numbers in run support go. Sounds like we'll play a lot of quarters coverage so the corners would each have the outside quarter and have to stay deeper than the receiver instead of being as aggressive underneath when they know they have safety help over the top.

Previously our safeties were very active in run support. Now they'll have their middle quarters to cover so I don't think the run support numbers will be a lot different. We'll see....
Click to expand...
We're going to spend alot less time in a 2-high safety look in this system. We'll push one safety closer to the box, and have the other patrol the middle of the field.

 
This is correct. It will also help with crossing/over-the-middle routes that Bo's defenses were vulnerable to.

 
Maybe a bit more smash mouth football coming our way - hope it resembles the 94-97 & 99 era Ds.

 
The scheme, from what I understand is very similar to MSU. Which is exciting, considering that's a good scheme. But they also have their off games.

I expect us to struggle a bit with highly refined passing schemes. For example, MSU allowed 550 passing yards to Baylor. We aren't playing any teams with that type of high octane offense, but I expect us to be more "bendable" to guys like Brad Kaaya. I can still see us winning the game, similar to last year, but I can see Kaaya throwing 350 yards against us, but it not mattering in the end.

Then again, MSU only struggled on D against teams like Oregon, Baylor and OSU. All conference champions, all of which had an argument to be in the playoff. We struggled with teams like Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin and USC. Teams that are decent (except Iowa, they suck... we had no business strugglin' with them), but not great teams with amazing offenses.

I think it comes to how resilient we are to that "bending" and whether our offense can pick up some of the slack. It's hard for me to picture being "dominating" on D this year. But I picture us being a lot more competitive in situations that we struggled with previously.

 
cg_8 said:
The scheme, from what I understand is very similar to MSU. Which is exciting, considering that's a good scheme. But they also have their off games.

I expect us to struggle a bit with highly refined passing schemes.
Click to expand...
Whew. Thank goodness we don't play against very many, if any, of those.

 
Treand3 said:
This is correct. It will also help with crossing/over-the-middle routes that Bo's defenses were vulnerable to.
Click to expand...
And that's the big one. We were burned by some teams with those short crosses. UCLA and MSU comes to mind. A lot of teams have taken advantage of our Lb'ers in coverage over the recent years. I'd like to see that safety help, like a rover, helping with the middle of the field and as extra help on those HB Swing passes we've been burned on.

 
True2tRA said:
cg_8 said:
The scheme, from what I understand is very similar to MSU. Which is exciting, considering that's a good scheme. But they also have their off games.

I expect us to struggle a bit with highly refined passing schemes.
Click to expand...
Whew. Thank goodness we don't play against very many, if any, of those.
Click to expand...
I would much rather take the risk of getting burned by the pass than letting it be easy just running all over us.

 
BigRedBuster said:
True2tRA said:
cg_8 said:
The scheme, from what I understand is very similar to MSU. Which is exciting, considering that's a good scheme. But they also have their off games.

I expect us to struggle a bit with highly refined passing schemes.
Click to expand...
Whew. Thank goodness we don't play against very many, if any, of those.
Click to expand...
I would much rather take the risk of getting burned by the pass than letting it be easy just running all over us.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if True is joking or not... haha! But I would say that, yes, we don't have anything scary like Baylor. MSU could be scary. Miami is scary only because of Kaaya.

I'd agree with getting burned. Truth be told, we still got burned in Bo's scheme. We just got burned differently in the passing game. Like discussed before, the short passes and RB passes. I am still very surprised Miami didn't throw to Duke Johnson more often, considering he'd burn us majorly on his 5 receptions.

 
BigRedBuster said:
True2tRA said:
cg_8 said:
The scheme, from what I understand is very similar to MSU. Which is exciting, considering that's a good scheme. But they also have their off games.

I expect us to struggle a bit with highly refined passing schemes.
Click to expand...
Whew. Thank goodness we don't play against very many, if any, of those.
Click to expand...
I would much rather take the risk of getting burned by the pass than letting it be easy just running all over us.
Click to expand...
Ditto! I'm not overly concerned about our DL or our secondary, but I am overly concerned about out LBs. This group had better step it up big time, or we will still be suspect against the run.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
True2tRA said:
Treand3 said:
This is correct. It will also help with crossing/over-the-middle routes that Bo's defenses were vulnerable to.
Click to expand...
And that's the big one. We were burned by some teams with those short crosses. UCLA and MSU comes to mind. A lot of teams have taken advantage of our Lb'ers in coverage over the recent years. I'd like to see that safety help, like a rover, helping with the middle of the field and as extra help on those HB Swing passes we've been burned on.
Click to expand...
I remember Leach saying something to the effect of crossing routes being the way you beat Bo's coverages. Go back and look at ucla/msu games(as you mentioned) 2011 NW, bowl game against UGA, even Southern Miss. Also misdirection always gave his defense issues as well.

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