Defense: Coaching vs. Innate Ability

Submitted by StephenRKass on

In the discussions on our disastrous defense, criticism has fallen into two basic categories: player personnel & coaching. You could break it out this way:

1) Player ability
A) Starters
B) Depth chart
2) Coaching abilty
A) Schemes
B) Basic skills (tackling, angles, pad height, etc.)
C) Motivation

The comments on our defense have hit on almost all these areas. Some of our starters are less than ideal. (Cissoko?) The depth behind them is worse. Brian's meme seems all too true (any time you have players starting who were converted from another position, or are walk-ons, you can expect bad things will happen.)

Which is causing more of our problems on D: kids not getting the coaching, or the innate ability/speed/strength of our players? (i.e., if a corner is small and slow, no amount of coaching will help.)

I'm curious how long it will take for the schemes and basic skills to be more or less mastered. Can we expect this later this year, or not until 2010? I've heard that these are the kind of issues keeping Big Will and Turner from seeing the field.

I'm also curious how much the schemes and skills will allow GERG (with Barwis help) to mold 2 & 3 stars into a great team, and how much raw innate ability plays in (the need for 3 & 4 stars.)

I'm also curious if this takes 1, 2, or more years to implement.

Lastly, I'm curious what it is that is causing so many walk-ons to get playing time. Was it a misdiagnosis of the skill level of scholarship recruits? Or just that walk-ons were far better than expected? Or that unlike many programs, we are giving walkons a fair shake?

oakapple

September 28th, 2009 at 11:13 AM ^

The defense will be better as this year progresses, and it will be better in 2010. But I think it will be 2011 before GERG has enough of his players with sufficient time in the program. The cupboard is really bare, and you don't fix that overnight.

colin

September 28th, 2009 at 11:18 AM ^

Right now, we're an average pass defense and a bad rush defense. The pass defense is average more or less on the strength of BG, Warren and how well our blitzes were timed in a particular game. BG is gone next year, so unless Warren stays and Turner comes out of nowhere, the pass defense will probably take a hit. To compensate, we'll need decent linebacking. That means Fitzgerald outplaying Obi (unless you haven't given up hope on Obi...but at this point, c'mon). So there's work to be done to get the defense in '10 as good as '09.

JC3

September 28th, 2009 at 11:22 AM ^

It's going to take a good 2-3 years of solid recruiting and development (thank god for Barwis) for this defense to be good again. Will it be more than functional this year? Probably not, but maybe next year.

Farnn

September 28th, 2009 at 11:35 AM ^

Part of this is youth. On an ideal team, you won't see many freshman or even redshirt freshman/true sophomores starting, especially on defense. It takes a while to learn the more complex defensive schemes of college football, and to bulk up to a better weight. Another issue is many of these players have been getting by on athleticism in HS, and need to spend a considerable amount of time learning proper technique.

Just because you see these kids sitting behind walk-ons doesn't mean they are busts. These walk-ons are walk-ons because they aren't as athletic, but that probably means they have much better fundamentals which they needed to play at a high level in high school. Once the younger players get better fundamentals and understand the defensive schemes better they should beat out the walk-ons and improve the defense. This may not happen til next year or the year after depending on the player.

jokewood

September 28th, 2009 at 11:36 AM ^

While lack of experience isn't an excuse for all of our ills on defense (I'm looking at you, linebackers), it is true that we have a very, very young defense. In the preseason, I compared the published two-deeps of most Big Ten teams and major programs from around the country. In one comparison, I looked at the average years of experience of a player on the defensive two-deep. Here's how we stacked up compared to the programs I looked at... dead last. That can't be good.

1 = true frosh
...
5 = 5th-yr senior

AVG YEAR IN PROGRAM: DEFENSIVE TWO-DEEP
3.59 Virginia Tech
3.55 Penn State
3.45 Iowa
3.45 Ohio State
3.45 Michigan State
3.36 Alabama
3.32 Oklahoma
3.27 Georgia
3.23 USC
3.23 Wisconsin
3.18 Florida
3.14 Notre Dame
3.14 LSU
3.05 Texas
3.05 Nebraska
3.00 Miami
2.95 Illinois
2.91 Florida State
2.91 Tennessee
2.82 Minnesota
2.64 Michigan

jg2112

September 28th, 2009 at 11:49 AM ^

as we seem to be labeling this defense, let's not forget a few basic facts:

(1) The team is 4-0. Go check out the list of teams who cannot make this claim. Go ahead.

(2) For as "terrible" as this D is, these are the point totals for teams in the second half:

Western Michigan - 7 points.
Notre Dame - 14 points.
Eastern Michigan - 0 points.
Indiana - 10 points.

(3) The team could make it to the Delaware State game with the team 5-1 or 6-0. During that game the D will be able to embed Big Will, JB Fitz, Mike Jones, Hawthorne, Teric Jones, and Vlad Emilien, and let some of the stars rest up for the last 4 games.

StephenRKass

September 28th, 2009 at 12:03 PM ^

I'm excited about GERG and about the future. The team is a lot of fun to watch. I suppose the porous D gives Tates and Denard more chances to shine and to pull games out in the 4th quarter. Barwis is already making a difference in the 2nd half, and GERG seems to be making great halftime adjustments. I personally actually think, as posted elsewhere, that it will really take the defense until 2011 to gel and to do what needs to happen.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

September 28th, 2009 at 11:54 AM ^

It depends on the position. I think defensive line is much more about the players than the coaches. There's only so much you can tell a lineman to do: slant/don't slant, stunt/don't stunt, etc.

The case is similar with cornerbacks, but not to such an extent.

Linebackers and safeties, however, I think smarts and football sense can make up for a lot of physical talent deficiencies. You don't need an athletic freak at linebacker if your guy responds well to coaching. And Ezeh seems to have no more football sense than you and I.

tmiller

September 28th, 2009 at 12:21 PM ^

would boil down to Kovacs, correct? He is playing b/c of lack of depth. Outside of that the only walk ons are on special teams.

The short answer to all you asked above is: it is a long answer much of which won't get answered till the end of the season or next year. The proper response to the question is: Have faith. They (the coaches and the players) are going to make mistakes, but the one thing we have learned so far is that they are always going to be fighting.

Tater

September 28th, 2009 at 12:35 PM ^

When you have an offense like RR's, defense isn't as utterly neccessary as it used to be. It is beneficial, and will help win more, but RR's teams will be just fine until the defense matures.

AFAIC, they will be at least as good as Carr's last few teams while we are waiting for the defense to mature, and will be a lot more entertaining to watch. Don't forget that "we are ridiculously young" on offense, too. This group is going to be the core for at least one National Championship in the next few years.