needs moar usage
Stunts on ther Defensive Line
I do not feel like Shafer has let the defensive line do stunts to put
them in a spot to make plays. To me, it looks like a linebackercentric
(I made that word up myself) defense that has the DL doing straight
rushes to occupy linemen so the linebackers can make plays. (Which
would be like running the ball up the middle with Odoms everyplay, its
just not his strength.) So anyway, I did some research, to see if
there was historical evidence that shows a tendency towards low sacks
with DLs and high sacks with LBs. This it what I found.
2006-2007 WMU
LB had 29 sacks
DL had 18 sacks
2007-2008 Stanford University
LB had 19 sacks
DL had 16 sacks
2007-2008 UM (2.2 sacs per)
DL had 18 sacks
LB had 10.5 sacks (7.5 are crables)
2008-2009 UM Defense (3.6 sacks per)
DL has 9 sacks
LB has 2 sacks
So that stats say that this year per game has more sacks rep than last year, but it seems like teams are having lots of time to throw the football. It would be nice to see how many hurries we have thiis year and last year. Anyway, it could because we played spreads the first two games, I thought that the stunts were really bad against the spreads (see app. st. and UO last year) so we just
have had less time to work on stunts in practice. However, I feel like
English does better with our defense last Saturday against ND if he is
given the opportunity. I am not saying Shafer is bad, I am just not
sure if he is adjusting to the personnel on UM's defense. What are
your thoughts?
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:01 AM | 
Um...
Um...
September 24th, 2008 at 8:07 AM |
count me as anti-linebackercentric
count me as anti-linebackercentric
no doubt michigan's strength is in the d-line and the lbs are weak---but how to play to this strength and minimize this weakness??---is there a way to have the allegedly faster lbs funnel the play to the d-line??-----seems that since our lbs are not good playing it straight anyway michigan might as well take more chances because eventually our lbs will do something bad
September 23rd, 2008 at 7:40 AM |
Could be a lot of reasons
Could be a lot of reasons
Stunts are nice, but as you know, they can put people seriously out of position, creating huge seams. (Seems to me that this happened often with English's defenses).
Michigan doesn't have the offense this year to make up for a quick score by the opponent, yet a pretty good defense that can stop the opponent from driving the length of the field.
Let's remember that the Big Ten season hasn't started yet- he might be holding back just a little. Might it also be that they are still learning the defense, and he wants the lineman to concentrate on whipping the man in front of them, and the linebackers and safeties to be more sure of their fits?
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:32 AM |
i think the point is that the
i think the point is that the
i think the point is that the blitz focus is on linebackers, as opposed to english, who used different actions (like stunts) to create opportunities for the DL. natutally if you are trying to create blitz opportunities for DL you will be sometimes out of position, like coach d said above- but i think i would take the chance since our LBs are blah anyway. am NOT/NOT saying english was better- just our DL was good and he did have some luck with those stunts.
i am worried that we blitz our slower LBs this year rather than create opportunities for our more athletic DL.
but it's still early in the year so we will see.
September 24th, 2008 at 7:41 AM |
count me as anti-linebackercentric
count me as anti-linebackercentric
no doubt the michigan d-line has way more talent than the lbs--so what to do???----can you use allegedly faster lbs to funnel opposition ball carriers to slower d-line players??----with this group of lbs i'd be sorely tempted to play five linemen on running downs----five-six dbs [oh, wait, our safety play is none too good] on passing downs---and never more than two lbs, run or pass,---anyway i think the problem is how do you feature d-linemen when the good of tackles for loss must be balanced with the bad of an lb miss and a 20-yard gain
...maybe that discrepancy could be due to any number of the following things:
A) Our DL is pretty awesome.
2) Our LBs are pretty meh.
iii.) 2 of our first 3 games (and the only two games we notched a sack) were against teams who ran the spread, which means fewer LBs in the box.
IV) Small sample size.
Last) All of the above?
I'm thinking it's that last one. Also, I don't see how "not allowing stunts" makes the system more "linebackercentric". I don't see the connection.