I've about had all I can stand to watch of our Defense

#26
#26
duckman398686 said:
i disagree. against cali and florida and even alabama it seemed like everybody in the secondary was getting burnt. that hasn't happened as freuquently as the season has progressed. willingham was the one that was giving up the majority of the big plays this past saturday. plus we got a bunch of coverage sacks in the game and thats huge. you didn't see that earlier in the season. they're still not where they need to be. but they're still not in as bad of a shape as they were in either.
Click to expand...

I guess I was watching a different game. What I saw was UK come out at halftime and immediately score like there was no defense, in the spread. They did this a couple more times as well. Then in the four OT's, UK had all touchdowns in a spread formation. Fortunately for us, UK's defense isn't all that great either.

I am not knocking the team, I think they have played great this season and am proud of CPF for keeping them focused and enthusiastic about the season. It just gets a little frustrating when you see the opposing team go into the spread and you can predict the results - every time!

I don't fault the DB's that much for this in that they need to be coached how to defend and have to be placed in the proper position and know how to read an offensive formation. IMO, the reason we suck against the spread is because our LB's are out of position. They are either blitzing because our line can't put pressure on the QB or charging the line as soon as the ball is snapped. With a spread, the LB's have to play back and sort of in a zone scheme and let the line rush the passer. Even when they do play back, they will either follow a TE going toward the sideline and leave the middle open or assist with a WR on the sideline leaving the middle open. We get burnt on sideline throws simply because the DB's are playing too soft. Somebody is telling them to do that. IMO, they are told that to keep from giving up a big play, but when the opposing team scores at will on short passes, it produces the same result, just takes longer.

Yes, we did have a lot of sacks during the UK game, but I saw maybe one coverage sack. The rest were blitzes.
 
#28
#28
It starts with how much pressure our front four gets on the QB and how well they can stop the run.
 
#29
#29
gsb0824 said:
I guess I was watching a different game. What I saw was UK come out at halftime and immediately score like there was no defense, in the spread. They did this a couple more times as well. Then in the four OT's, UK had all touchdowns in a spread formation. Fortunately for us, UK's defense isn't all that great either.
Click to expand...

I've made the same observation as have others. Tennessee has trouble stopping the spread offense.

I think the 4-3-4 isn't a good defense against the spread. I'd rather see a 4-2-5 or a 3-3-5 defense against a spread offense. Chavis is relunctant to change.
 
#30
#30
Jacob Tamme was a beast, and he killed us. But Mayo killed him and we recovered. We WILL get revenge on the "Matt F$*#ing Mauck Game" and rule the SEC once again. Go Get Em Phil!!!
 
#31
#31
Hal Mumme was one of the first to run a spread offense in the SEC yet we pretty well put a stop to them then.

One of the things we were doing in the 2nd half that wasn't working was single man to man coverage on the receivers. Top that off with the fact that we were giving them 8 to 10 yards off the line of scrimmage. I think it might work better if our db's were at least as fast as our opponents receivers. They obviously weren't. Traditionally our db's have been much faster than the opposing receivers looking back to guys like Dion Grant or Carl Pickens. However, that's not all of it. The Defensive line is so weak that we are pulling our Linebackers in to do their job and leaving open the tight ends and the fail safe tailback.

For whatever reason, the fact that our db's and receivers used to run track in the spring seemed to help a lot on the speed factor. I believe that there is a lot of benefit to be gained once again encouraging the guys to run track again.

Our offense could have and should have done a lot more to have helped the defense. 1 measly field goal in the 4th would have likely done the trick. For that matter, 4 or 5 first downs. We've got some good tailbacks, but the offensive line is a little weak. In situations like that if you are wanting to run the clock and keep the opponents offense off the field, it helps to keep the ball on the ground with a Mose Phillips kind of back that can eek out first downs 3 yards at a time instead of trying to pass the ball on 2 or 3 yard plays. These supposed safe pass plays we were running where the ball is passed to someone on or about the line of scrimmage with no screen or blocker to see to it that they actually make a yard out of the deal is kind of pathetic. Ainge might as well have thrown the ball out of bounds and just picked up back at the line of scrimmage.

Skip
 
#33
#33
gsb0824 said:
Our D was great in the 90's because we never saw a spread offense in the 90's. Plain and simple, Chavis doesn't know how to coach a defense to defend against the spread offense. If a team plays a spread offense during the entire game, i.e. Florida, Bama, Cal, we get hosed from the start. When a team changes to the spread offense at halftime to try to catch up, i.e. South Carolina, Kentucky, we get hosed starting at halftime. When a team doesn't go into a spread, i.e. Arkansas, Miss St, UGA, we win big. Even when Vandy started spreading the offense in the first half they did well. Why they abandoned that scheme I have no idea.

When you use a 90's defensive scheme against teams using a modern offense, it simply doesn't work. That's why the spread was invented in the first place, because a team could slice through 90's style defenses so easily.

Couple this fact with a bunch of freshmen DB's, and you have already seen the result.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

I have noticed improvement with the D-Line and Linebackers but the Secondary play has been woeful for the most part. Berry has been the lone bright spot in the secondary IMO. I know the rest of the guys are young but there have been a lot of busts and what looks like bad technique.

Vinson has had several interception opportunities but does not seem to be able to catch the ball. I really would have expected to see him hang on to a few since he was working out as a WR initally.


Based on what I've seen, there will still be plenty of questions on Defense entering next season.
 
#34
#34
If you have watched all season then it is obvious how much our young defense has improved. If you dont see that then your TV must show different games than mine on Saturdays.
 
#35
#35
gsb0824 said:
Our D was great in the 90's because we never saw a spread offense in the 90's. Plain and simple, Chavis doesn't know how to coach a defense to defend against the spread offense. If a team plays a spread offense during the entire game, i.e. Florida, Bama, Cal, we get hosed from the start. When a team changes to the spread offense at halftime to try to catch up, i.e. South Carolina, Kentucky, we get hosed starting at halftime. When a team doesn't go into a spread, i.e. Arkansas, Miss St, UGA, we win big. Even when Vandy started spreading the offense in the first half they did well. Why they abandoned that scheme I have no idea.

When you use a 90's defensive scheme against teams using a modern offense, it simply doesn't work. That's why the spread was invented in the first place, because a team could slice through 90's style defenses so easily.

Couple this fact with a bunch of freshmen DB's, and you have already seen the result.
Click to expand...

Please explain your definition of the "spread offense" to me. You grouped UF, UCB, and UAT together and inferred that they ran a similar offense that you call "spread". Please describe this.
 
#36
#36
My take on the defense is this...

I have NO IDEA why we started rushing three late in the game against KY, it appeared whacko.

If our Offense catches of 2 of 5 dropped passes in the 4th quarter, that were extremely catchable, what we did on Defense was irrelevent.

So what I am looking at is how Fulmer, Chavis, and Cutcliff are working together to win a game. I don't blame Cutcliff (I love any W), I am just saying that he is going to have his kids catching those passes, and Chavis and him had a great plan in place to win that game by 14 points easy, and it was a couple of dropped passes that put the spotlight on Chavis, in which he still did not break.

Why did we start dropping back 8 into coverage? I dont know, but if Lucas catches that 4th down out route right in his hands, we could have dropped 11 into coverage, cause the game was over.

Not to mention #23's INT was a result of dropping into coverage, which would have also sealed the game, if not for dropped passes on the next series.

So while there is still some sputtering going on, our coaches are a few plays from working their game plans all day long, I think.
 
#37
#37
The defense has improved over the course of the last 5 games. BUT, they must play lights out Saturday.
I'm very hopeful for next years defense. We should be very good.
 
#39
#39
We have scored more TD's this season than any season since 1998. And we are close enough to pass the 1998 mark.
 
#40
#40
Today I've read some great analysis of this year's team play, particularly about the defense. There are some terrific observations about the spread offense with respect to defensive scheming and line play. I watch Mizzou all the time due to my friend's season tickets and I was at Armegeddon at Arrowhead Saturday night.

I personally dislike that offense, but I am hard pressed to disagree with several comments that have been made concerning how hard it is to scheme against. It's the no-huddle, five receiver, empty backfield (or just one back) with the motion and receiver screens and all of that stuff. It really never varies, but it is a match up game. One-on-one football. That's the idea. Put your guy with their guy and make plays.

Mizzou is beatable, but not stopable. The spread is all about movement and ball matriculation. Dink and dunk and find the best match up. The running game is diagonal and angles and cuts play the most important part of that, so you get slant running and oblique, chip blocks that nobody has to hold for more than a second. The spread is all about speed. And frankly, as good as our guys are, they seem a little slow this year to me in getting to the play. That could be positioning, or recruiting and I cannot tell which. With the hooplah about our recruiting classes, I tend to think it is positioning.
 
#41
#41
Voluripides said:
Today I've read some great analysis of this year's team play, particularly about the defense. There are some terrific observations about the spread offense with respect to defensive scheming and line play. I watch Mizzou all the time due to my friend's season tickets and I was at Armegeddon at Arrowhead Saturday night.

I personally dislike that offense, but I am hard pressed to disagree with several comments that have been made concerning how hard it is to scheme against. It's the no-huddle, five receiver, empty backfield (or just one back) with the motion and receiver screens and all of that stuff. It really never varies, but it is a match up game. One-on-one football. That's the idea. Put your guy with their guy and make plays.

Mizzou is beatable, but not stopable. The spread is all about movement and ball matriculation. Dink and dunk and find the best match up. The running game is diagonal and angles and cuts play the most important part of that, so you get slant running and oblique, chip blocks that nobody has to hold for more than a second. The spread is all about speed. And frankly, as good as our guys are, they seem a little slow this year to me in getting to the play. That could be positioning, or recruiting and I cannot tell which. With the hooplah about our recruiting classes, I tend to think it is positioning.
Click to expand...

I agree with the analysis that the spread works because teams try to use a more traditional defense to stop it. They can get a good speed match-up with a WR on a slower LB. I don't find the spread offense particularly entertaining other then the novelty which has wore off.
 
#42
#42
Voluripides said:
It's the no-huddle, five receiver, empty backfield (or just one back) with the motion and receiver screens and all of that stuff.
Click to expand...

Based on this definition UT runs a spread offense. No?

Everyone points to UCB, UAT, and UF as eveidence that we can't stop a "spread offense" since we lost those game. I'm still looking for someone to explain this offense and how the only time we faced it was when our defense struggled.
 
#43
#43
If #12 catches that 4th and 3 gimmee... then we'd be sitting here talking about the great effort the D gave to shut UK down in the first half and limit them in the second half.

They HAVE improved. They now tackle much better. They are making teams work for their points... not as many big plays. They play pretty decent run defense. They played good man coverage and got pressure in the first half of the UK game.

UK adjusted. They're a good O. The D just needed the O to pick up a first down.

In the OT, both coaches seemed to play conservative on D trying to let the other O make a mistake. UT did but the block made up for it. Woodson made the critical mistake on that 2 pt conversion.

Great game... but it should have never been that close.
 
#45
#45
Bama isn't any more of a spread team than UT. Most O's now have 4 and 5 wide formations.

What most refer to as a spread formation team is one that runs that as their standard set and usually one that runs a read option out of it. The spread is effective when you have a great QB. When you have a mere human, it is no better than any other- witness Texas after Young. Utah after Smith... and probably WVU after White.

To beat the spread, you have to learn to read the QB. He's the guy you have to beat.

As it becomes more widespread, more coaches will develop ways of defeating it. Just another novelty offense that is taking time to adjust to.
 
#46
#46
There's a reason the spread isn't run in the Pros... and eventually it will be minimized in CFB as well.

Tebow's hand is one good argument against it. If it had been the other hand, he might have lost his career. Young QB prospects will notice when QB's get injured because of what the system asks them to do.
 
#48
#48
mtt2d said:
It starts with how much pressure our front four gets on the QB and how well they can stop the run.
Click to expand...

Great post. A furious rush from our down linemen will make our secondary look fantastic. No pass rush and someone will eventually get open. It takes all 11. What a great game!
 
#49
#49
Spread offenses are hard to stop even when you know its coming. We have noone demanding a double team inside. We need a better push to force the qb out of the pocket. Our db's for whatever reason play soft zone about 90% of the time, so it makes it just that much easier when we don't get any pressure. It's a combination of young db's and no line. Even the best corners can't hold up all day. Hopefully we can address the lack of a tackle with a bad additude this recruiting class. Never been impressed with bolden or mapu. Dan williams will get better however.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top