JJ Husker
Assistant Coach
Thanks for some of the explanations. I can recognize when we don't have a guy in position to make the play but I am not always sure who it was supposed to be. (And I played linebacker in high school- guess there's a reason that was the end of my football career)1 - They were almost always double-teaming one of our DTs so that was part of it. VV actually still got some push even against a double-team so that was good to see. As has been mentioned, Randle didn't do very much. We also ran a lot of twists with the DT going outside and the DE inside so they were moving away from the QB.
2 - The RB motion was a big problem for the first quarter and change. After that, we quit running a LB out there to cover the motion back so that fixed a lot of the problem. That's a fairly simple fix so I'm not sure why it took so long. After that, it was more hesitancy on Santos' part that let the running game go. He was trying to wait and figure out who had the ball on the zone read and by the time he figured it out he couldn't recover in time. If he would have attacked the running going to his side - whether or not they had the ball - he would have stopped several plays for no gain or a loss. Have to trust the rest of the defense to make plays.
3 - I'm surprised at how many people are complaining that we played a "vanilla" defense or refused to bring more than four guys. I don't remember a game when we blitzed more than Saturday. MIKE blitzes, corner blitzes and at least two zone blitzes. In the past we rarely blitzed but that was definitely not the case Saturday.

As for the bolded, I guess I am complaining that we didn't blitz enough because when we did it seemed to be much better than when we didn't. I literally can think of only one play that was a big gainer when we blitzed and, like I said earlier, that one was not because they exploited the blitz. I've always been fond of doing what works until they force you to do something else. I didn't see them force us to quit blitzing.