Our 3 man front does not seem very fearsome

Submitted by iawolve on

Not sure I am sold on our 3 man fronts. We are not getting much pressure on the QB and we were getting killed on runs to the boundary. I don't know if we have not learned enough, personnel is not correct or it's an alignment issue. I know one thing for sure is that outside of Mouton, our backers get caught in the wash a lot. Teo from ND was making plays everywhere, that group seemed much more active side to side. I don't know if the extra man in front allowed them to make plays.

WorldwideTJRob

September 12th, 2010 at 12:13 AM ^

I think for the most part it was our 3 man front going up against 6 blockers, so more times than not the offense will win that battle. I believe GERG wanted them to drive the ball on us rather than gamble by blitzing and giving up huge plays. The epitome of our "bend but don't break" D

cjm

September 11th, 2010 at 10:46 PM ^

I do feel like we struggle to get solid/consistent pressure in our 3 man rush but they played better than I expected.  Right now I am struggling to find anything really wrong.  It's just hard to be down after a great game like that.

I agree with A2MIKE - wait for UFR

CalGoBlue

September 12th, 2010 at 9:36 AM ^

I'll start with the bad news:  Gordon was also responsible for the ND TD to Smith at the beginning of the second half.  There were two receviers in his area and he went *between* them.

The good news is that he was a receiver until spring practice, this was his second game, and these were technical mistalkes that can be corrected thorugh coaching and film, not a demonstration of lack of speed, strength or athletic ability.  By next year he should be solid.

On another point, as Brian pointed out, the CBs played well.   Floyd did not do as much as I feared.

grand river fi…

September 11th, 2010 at 10:48 PM ^

I thought the D line did a fine job.  They missed a couple tackles, and I have no expectations of pressure when rushing 3, but they were fine.  Martin blew up a couple plays early then seemed to get double teamed the whole time.

That said, I thought the mass of bodies in the secondary was fantastic

clarkiefromcanada

September 12th, 2010 at 1:21 AM ^

...that 24 to the so-called offensive genius Brian Kelly. Well, how about that call at the end of the fist half BK? and your reliance on the refs?

Bow down the the king, Rich Rodriguez...who today demonstrated how the spread is supposed to be run.

As for the complainers...for heaven's sake, wait at least for the grading and the UFR before the mountain of complaints.

Zone Left

September 11th, 2010 at 10:51 PM ^

They're just trying to keep everything in front of the secondary and let the offense do its job.  The coaches would like to bring a lot more heat, but don't feel comfortable letting tight ends catch 95 yard touchdown passes and causing me to throw my computer and fortunately hit a cushion.

Meeechigan3

September 11th, 2010 at 10:57 PM ^

and why did the TE get wide open for a 95 yard TD pass?

Because we rush 3 against a max protect and let the QB have ALL DAY to throw from his own goal-line.

We should've rushed 4 and blitzed 2. Send 6 after ND. Their OL could NOT handle our pass rush when we went with 4 down with Roh at DE and Mouton/Gordon coming off the blitz.

Rushing 3, dropping 8 into coverage is EXACTLY how you get gashed through the air.

The only way you stop a passing attack is to kill the QB.

We have solid pass rushers. So use them.

CalGoBlue

September 12th, 2010 at 9:40 AM ^

Shouldn't there been someone else back there in case something like this happened?  Even if Gordon had defended it better, it could have turned into a jump ball.  Shouldn't someone else be back there?

dahblue

September 11th, 2010 at 10:51 PM ^

I thought our defensive front did a nice job, but they were 3 on 5...so it's kinda hard to break through.  I do recall one blitz in the second half, and it worked.  Not sure why we held back on the pressure, but the front guys did a solid job.

Dallas Wolverine

September 11th, 2010 at 10:52 PM ^

before the game started we would have to win in the TO's and we did but the kicking game is atrocious! Calling all soccer players! HELppppppp! We have got to find someone that can kick the ball.

MGlobules

September 11th, 2010 at 10:52 PM ^

at home. (I know this will seem like a non-sequitur, but suddenly the record doesn't look nearly so unfavorable as it once did. This team is going to get better and better.) 

jmscher

September 11th, 2010 at 10:53 PM ^

No pressure seems to be part of the scheme. Greg showed blitz almost every played and then dropped 8 into coverage. Worked pretty well too except for the two errors by cam Gordon (who is learning and going to get better). I was actually pleasantly surprise that we did occasionally get pressure rushing three against 5.

johnvand

September 11th, 2010 at 10:56 PM ^

It got better when we moved Roh down as a rush DE.

Not sure if that's going to be a permanent look, or just something we do on obvious passing downs.  Swap out Banks/Sagesse for Roh.

VictorValiant

September 11th, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^

i agree you can't expect too much when 5 are blocking 3.  for a 3 man front, they can get some pressure.

but what this means is that with an empty backfield, we have 8 players guarding 5 receivers, yet Crist threw for 277 yards.  there is still room to improve, but the defense has been playing better than most people expected.  i'm optimistic for the future.

GoblueNate

September 11th, 2010 at 11:09 PM ^

that it is a 3 man front, so any sort of push is meant to bring a double team not a sack/TFL.  Our backers may not be playing great, but Mouton I thought was outstanding (except for the whole wrap up Allen for a loss instead he gets a first play).  Also, Ezeh appeared to be not as lost.  I didn't see much out of Herron who I think was in, and Roh made at least two TFLs that I can remember.  Also, the dline did get pressure, maybe not a sack, but pressure, which in a 3 man front is all we can expect.  I felt they actually did a better job this game, against a more diverse offense.  What killed us this game is the same as what killed us in the 2nd half of the UConn game, which I think were counters and traps w/pulling guards up the middle.  How we defeat that in a 3 man front I don't know.

BlueGoM

September 11th, 2010 at 11:12 PM ^

It's just that when you rush only three guys against 5 blockers you frequently get zero pressure on the QB, which sometimes results in 95 yard TD passes to tight ends.   (Ya listening to me, Gerg?)

Also ND's o-line is extra huge.

FingerMustache

September 12th, 2010 at 12:12 AM ^

the dline were able to collapse the pocket, but it seemed like they were always facing away from the quarterback, or just could never get a hold of him. it seemed like there were times when roh was in position to make a play, but wasnt always aware of where he was in relation to the quarterback. and by the time he would spin around and zero in, crist would be just releasing the football.

switch26

September 12th, 2010 at 12:40 AM ^

We had quite a few Pass blocks that helped force some 4 and outs..  I was impressed with the pressure early on, but once ND had momentum we couldn't do shit..

lhglrkwg

September 12th, 2010 at 12:47 AM ^

let's be serious, richrod doesn't sit on the side-lines thinking "man i love it when dayne crist has an hour to throw the ball". he is thinking "gee given the apocalyptic secondary situation I have, i'd much rather give up 8 yard under routes than 70 yard bombs over the top of my ridiculously inexperienced secondary. let's rush 3, pray, and then hope denard can put up 500 yards of offense"