Time to experiment on the D-Line?
"Hail to the Victors" pre-season mag suggested a D-Line with Campbell at nose tackle and Martin as a defensive end where he won't continuously get double teamed. Anything that gets more pressure on the QB sounds good to me. Supposedly Campbell was showing improvement in the spring. What happened? Man, at this point, maybe the coaches should put him at nose for a quarter and see what happens.
September 19th, 2010 at 1:19 PM ^
If Campbell was ready to play he would play. I doubt some guy on his computer who has never met William knows more about his playing ability than a 20+ year football coach at the college level who, you know, actually interacts will William on a daily basis...
September 19th, 2010 at 1:43 PM ^
Lou Gehrig agrees with you.
September 19th, 2010 at 1:52 PM ^
schemes or because he's overweight and doesn't have the stamina? Not to denigrate any nose tackles out there, but scheme-wise, how difficult can it be? If it were just a shape issue, and I post this just because we post things 'round here, don't gnaw off me leg, but if that were the case I would get his butt out there a few plays here and there just to burn a few calories.
September 19th, 2010 at 3:12 PM ^
Considering he's in good enough shape to block on a 3rd and inches call, I think it's not the weight. I wouldn't same scheme is nothing for NT, but I think the biggest factor is being ignored. Maybe he's just not good enough yet. He'd have to constantly beat off (enter joke here) double teams to disrupt both run plays and get pressure on passing downs. If you cannot consistently do that then the defense is in trouble. Martin has been the best d-line guy by far so far. Why risk moving him and screwing everything up. The NT is critical in this defense, maybe GERG isn't willing to trust a RS Freshman yet.
Personally, I'd love to see Campbell come in on running downs as the DT, keeping RVB at DE. I know he's supposed to be a NT (and at 335 his range sucks) but he would more likely be in a 1 on 1 and who would choose to run at him? Granted this is coming from a guy who has never played or coached football.
September 19th, 2010 at 5:00 PM ^
The key is that he has to consistently beat double teams including MOLK in practice.
Not gonna happen.
September 19th, 2010 at 3:34 PM ^
Like everyone else is asking what does "ready to play mean"? The fact of the matter is Mike Martin is a bit undersized when going against O linemen who are 315+. Our D line was manhandled by UMass yesterday. I think if you are putting in a 330 lbs William Campbell atleast there is some serious beef in the middle. I don't think Terrance Cody for Alabama was in any shape to play for anything but the guy took up space and was tough to move. Is it possible that Campbell could have that same effect?
September 19th, 2010 at 1:20 PM ^
At this point? We're 3-0 and also attempting to improve with the guys we have. If Campbell isn't in, there's a reason for that. He came into the fall out of shape and is still working to get in game shape. He'll get some looks as the season progresses (and hopefully against BG) but he has yet to put together in a game, so RR says. I guess he is dominant one-on-one in practice but struggles in game situations for whatever reason.
September 19th, 2010 at 1:21 PM ^
At this point, why not? Especially against BGSU and Indiana. What we are doing now is not working. We always new the secondary was suspect, but if we can't at the very least control the line of scrimmage, we are doomed, especially against power teams.
Martin is a beast, Roh can be explosive. Sagesse, Banks and RVB have been nonfactors. Moving Martin outside and putting Campbell inside (assuming Campbell can hold his own there) may at least give us some options.
At this point...isn't it at least worth a try?
September 19th, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^
Time to start blitzing T. Gordon more; and letting Ezeh come up the middle on passing downs.
I think the D-line is fine, they just have way too much responsibility or the 3 to rush the passer with zero assistance from the LBs/Safeties blitzing.
Time for Gerg to open up the blitzing a bit (but hopefully we won't have to display it until BIg 10 play)
September 19th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^
Yes, this.
September 19th, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^
I'd rather see an experiment with the occasional blitz or perhaps coverage where our defenders come somewhere near the wide outs.
September 19th, 2010 at 1:38 PM ^
That's so crazy it just might work!
September 19th, 2010 at 1:39 PM ^
We have worked in the occasional blitz, such as bringin T. Gordon off the edge against ND. But we don't have the corners to play press coverage and if we blitz too much we can expect to give up more big plays. It is frustrating but Robinson has to coach within his talent.
September 19th, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^
frequently in 2009 and burned us for it.
How did tUOS score its last touchdown?
How did Iowa's Moeaki (sp?) get so wide open for his first touchdown?
How would have ND scored their first TD had their back/receiver not stepped out of bounds?
These are just off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more. If "blitz frequently" was the solution, then we'd be giving GERG props for 2009.
In defense of GERG's 2009 play-calling, he really didn't have a lot of good options. Trust the 2009 secondary to cover or roll the dice? Opposing O-coordinators knew the dilemna facing GERG and dialed up screens accordingly.
.
September 19th, 2010 at 4:49 PM ^
My beef with Gerg last year was his love of the all-out blitz on 3rd and goal. That's the ultimate feast-or-famine play. I like sending pressure, but not sending everyone. If just one of the blitzers had dropped into coverage on the OSU screen, we'd have blown it up.
September 19th, 2010 at 4:58 PM ^
I said we could try the "occasional" blitz. That does not equal "frequently". In any event, our defense can't get much worse:
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2010&rpt=IA_teamtotdef&site=…
September 19th, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^
If it was worth a try, I have to believe RR would be trying it. There just hasn't been much time to experiment on line up changes really. Here's hoping they finally get some of that time next week.
September 19th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^
How come no one brought this up after Notre Dame and UConn? It takes one terrible showing as a unit to experiment?
September 19th, 2010 at 1:41 PM ^
September 19th, 2010 at 1:28 PM ^
I agree that there needs to be something done before the big 10 season starts. Banks is not getting it done and Van Bergen hasn't been playing up to his potential thus far. Let's see what the coaches come up with.
September 19th, 2010 at 1:37 PM ^
September 19th, 2010 at 2:02 PM ^
But Jibreel Black might be. He's gotten some looks already and seems very active while out there. Martin inside, move RVB back to his spot from last year and put Black in the DE spot BG had last year. I'm not sure how well he'll hold up against the run, but I'd have to think it'd bring more pass rush.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:06 PM ^
I'm by no means a football coach but I can't see Roh holding up as a defensive end in a 3-3-5/3-4. Definitely too early to judge but I cant help but think that maybe this was the wrong year to switch to a 3 man front.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:09 PM ^
Hopefully GERG is saving all of his blitz packages for when he starts B1o play. You cannot expect great pressure rushing 3 all of the time.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:26 PM ^
Yeah I hope the coaches are saving lots of plays on defense and offense for later in the season
September 19th, 2010 at 2:46 PM ^
that putting WC and his 300+ lbs in there might possibly divert some of the constant double-teams MM is getting. I would agree that practice performance might be the explanation for his absence so far, but it's not unheard of for some guys to be mediocre in practice but effective in games. I hope RR & Co. get the opportunity against BG to see if Campbell can add anything, if for no other reason just to give the starters a breather.
September 19th, 2010 at 3:22 PM ^
so why not. The kickers are apparently studs in practice. If WC is bad in practice he may be a stud in games.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:53 PM ^
I definitely want to see more of Campbell. The fact that he comes in for short-yardage situations suggests that the staff does have confidence in him to plug up the middle. We're not getting enough out of Sagesse and Banks. I think the 3-3-5 is fine if you have three playmakers up front, but right now we don't.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:55 PM ^
Apologies for being both negative and a kiss ass but Patterson seems to be validating Brian's initial reaction to hearing his move to nose tackle. If I'm wrong, please correct. If so, it makes WC all the more frustrating.
September 19th, 2010 at 3:10 PM ^
clearly mike martin is our most dominant defensive player but some (much?) of his value is lost when he is double teamed every play. i too wonder what would happen if he would play de and see if big will could occupy people in the center of the line. again the coaches know a lot more than we do but i fear getting shredded by the running game of msu, iowa, wisconsin, and osu.
September 19th, 2010 at 5:17 PM ^
we just gave up more points to umass than either holy cross or william and mary.