B1G, if true
- Member for
- 3 years 13 weeks
|1 week 4 days ago||That position often forced||
That position often forced him to cover slot recievers too,which is not good. Solid defenses are built up the middle. Therefore putting your best defensive player in the middle is not a bad idea. It is also not just about Jake Ryan. It is about making the entire defense better. If we play solid defense and win 10 games, I don't care if Ryan is third string waterboy.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||You are correct about Tall||
You are correct about Tall and I think he was a good coach. He was replaced by Hoke and Mattison, who are two very well respected defensive line coaches with a ton of experience. I think this is the learning curve you are talking about and I agree with you that there is one.
Experienced coaches do stay on one side of the ball, but younger coaches ofter flip for a few years. They do this for a couple of reasons and I'll use a coach with a defensive background as an example. If they have to go coach offense, it forces them to understand how offenses truely work. They can then use their defensive knowledge to attack opposing defenses because they know where the weak points are.
Yes, I know there is more than taking proper steps involved in playing football. It was just a simple example of a very important part of playing football.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||You might want to check on||
You might want to check on who made the absolute statement first and yeah they can. All coaching is it teaching. If you can teach a linebacker to take his proper steps, why can't you teach a wide reciever too? If you can teach a linebacker to take on a block, why can't you teach a corner too?
What do I know though, I've only coached like seven positions.
|4 weeks 2 days ago||Umm, no. Good coaches can||
Umm, no. Good coaches can coach any position on the field. At the end of the day technique, drills and responsibilities can be learned pretty quickly. You do not have to play a position to coach it. Greg Mattison played offense in college and he was even hired by an NFL team to coach linebackers even though he had never coached them before.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||It's a defensive call.||
It's a defensive call.
|16 weeks 3 days ago||So True||
I've been saying for years that the 3-3 was not the problem. I have ran it with great success as a defensive coordinator, as well as a 4-3. The 3-3 is a totally different animal that most people don't really understand and you give some great examples of how you need to adjust. When I switched to the 3-3 from the 4-3 there was a learning curve on how to adjust and I don't think GERG ever really knew how to make those adjustments.
|16 weeks 3 days ago||Oh I get what he was saying||
Oh I get what he was saying and agree with what he said. What I am getting at is that there are high school coaches out that there that do a better job of preparing their teams. It is brutal watching this team play on the road.
|16 weeks 3 days ago||"On the road or neutral site||
"On the road or neutral site we look like a high school team and are constantly unprepared and look flat". That is a pretty big insult to a lot of very good high school football coaches. I actually don't think many high school teams are as bipolar as Hoke's though. I agree with you that it is a huge issue and a puzzling one at that.
|16 weeks 4 days ago||As a Panthers fan I have no||
As a Panthers fan I have no idea what you are talking about. Cam was awful last year. When Chud got the head job at Cleveland last year I literally ran around my classroom cheering like an idiot.
|19 weeks 5 days ago||For most teams that use the||
For most teams that use the boards to call their plays, each offense play is also given a category. For example inside zone might be movies and counter might be rappers. When they call the play at the line of scrimmage then they just use something that fits into those categories. They also have to determine if they are going to run the play to the left or right. Just using the few examples you have already and assuming that they're talking about the movies and not the actual comic book characters. Perhaps a movie that has THE at the beginning is a play to the right (The Wolverine) and a movie that does not goes to the left (Puss in Boots). They may be doing something different but this is how I learned it.
|23 weeks 4 days ago||In my experience the players||
In my experience the players are the ones that pick out the pregame music. It is not there for the fans. Do I like all the music that my players pick for pregame? No, but then again I realize that it is not all about me.
|35 weeks 4 days ago||That is how it used to be.||
That used to be the case until about five or six years ago. The cost of having the ambulance there now just cost some school districts more than they can afford. I've seen a kid with a neck injury lay on the field for an hour and another for about 45 minutes after breaking his ankle (was very similar to Fitz's injury last year). Some towns don't even have an ambulane or EMT any more because it has all become privatized. Last year our booster club paid to have an ambulance at our games.
|1 year 21 weeks ago||You are correct that the||
You are correct that the o-line is the biggest problem. I think people don't understand how it translates to play calling though. Ohio runs a 4-3 and our interior line cannot single block both of their DT's, this means we need to doulbe atlease one of them.
That is huge win for them, they have now "changed the math". Ideally on offense you want to block each defender with one guy, because you are already at a numerical disadvantage due to the fact that your ball carrier cannot block and unless you run the single wing or an option scheme your quarterback does not block (it is considered a block by the quarterback if someone accounts for him on an option play in which he gives or pitches it) So assuming single blocks in a pro style offense you have nine guys accounting for eleven. Now you add in a double and it is eight vs eleven (This is why teams often run bootlegs to keep a couple of guys honest so you don't need to block them) Now if we have to doulbe both of the DT's it becomes a bigger problem. Add in a missed block and oh boy it gets ugly.
Their lack of respect for our interior run game, combined with their talent on the line means they can play the inside run game with the two DT's and the MLB. They can now widen out their ends and OLB's to control the outside run game. Add in the safeties because of the lack of a deep passing created by the pressure or who is playing QB and you have a recipe for a really bad offense. They now have three guys committed to the outside on each side, plus a MLB who is going to look for the cutbacks. Now you cannot run the ball at all, but if you just give up on it they will simply pin their ears back. This also makes the middle look pretty open, which it is, if you have the guys to do it. We do not have those guys. I would guess this was part of the adjustment that they made at halftime and the only thing Al could do was attack the middle, which is like hunting a bear with a BB gun.
|1 year 21 weeks ago||Their defense as a unit may||
Their defense as a unit may be mediocre, but there defensive line is legit. Our offensive line is simple not very good as a unit. In order to exploit the rest of the defense you need to take care of their front four. We did not and honestly cannot do that on a regular basis and the examples that you give are the results of the few times we did. Are they better than us as a whole? Maybe a little, but the one area that they are really good we are really bad. There is a reason so much emphasis is being put on the OL in recruting. To me this game goes back to old saying that games are won in the trenches. They won the trenches.
|1 year 21 weeks ago||Secret Sauce??||
What are you talking about? Turnovers weren't the issue? In football turnovers are always an issue and if you turn it over you will not win very many games. In our four loses we turned to ball over 16 times. That is umm, not good. It also make it difficult to call plays during a turnoverfest because your players often become rattled and are thinking about not turning the ball over, which leads to mistakes.
How is Al only a "passable" OC? He was the OC on Aurburn's undefeated team awhile back, when he had players that fit his system. Who are the OC that could have made Denard a pocket passer? He did the best he could to modify his system to fit Denard while still building for the future. Maybe you should give him sometime with a pocket passer before you say he isn't great. This isn't a video game where you can just add the plays you want and it doesn't really matter how they work together or what type of talent you have.
"Being a good OC isn't about hard work or luck, it's intelligence," That couldn't be futher from the truth. In fact, that is one of the dumbest things I have read on here in a long time.
The fact of the matter is that the offense is really not that talented. We have a QB that doesn't fit the system, average running backs, one stud OL, one good OL, three interior OL that are simply not good enough to get the job done no matter how hard they try, our WR's leave a lot to be desired and our best TE is a skinny true freshman. Look how many Ohio defenders will get drafted in the next few drafts (I count five in just the next one) and then look at how many of our offensive players will. (I count two and Denard will switch positions)
I like this quote to describe how Brady and Al have handle the offense, "Always be a first-rate version of yourself, instead of a second-rate version of somebody else." If you want to see a high tempo, spread option attack that is going to put up video game numbers then you are in for a lot of disappointment in the future.
|1 year 45 weeks ago||Agreed!||
Would love to have those questions answered. I also don't know how GERG did it to be honest with you. To have no control over the defense you are running or the guy's coaching it would be enough to drive me insane.
|1 year 45 weeks ago||The 4-3 didn't produce||
The 4-3 didn't produce terrible results. The shitty position coaching produced terrible results. Shafer's 4-3 defense is a pretty good one and is really fun to coach because of how aggressive it is.
|1 year 45 weeks ago||It doesn't mitigate speed.||
It doesn't mitigate speed. It mitigates size through the use of speed. Teams that run the 3-3 are usually small and fast. Does it help against the speed? Sure. If taught and run properly with the right players it will shut down a power running game. Then again, that can be said about any defense.
Like you said though Michigan's 3-3 was coached by someone who had no idea what he was doing and was surrounded by guys who can't coach fundamentals. That is a recipe for disaster.
|1 year 46 weeks ago||I watched the show first and||
I watched the show first and then read the first two books before the start of the second season. Like you said, you notice all of the things they leave out or change, although I will admit some are for the better. However, what they did to the battle for King's Landing on the show almost made me swear off the show forever.
|1 year 46 weeks ago||Good points||
Don't forget about field goals though. I think it is more important to the field goal part of the kicking game, due to all of the moving parts and timing.
|1 year 46 weeks ago||Where are these holes that||
Where are these holes that need addressing? Every position has been addressed. Everyone from here on out is just icing on the cake.
The differece between being a great and a good one is huge. Try losing a game because you got a kick blocked.
|1 year 46 weeks ago||Speed of the game||
It's all well and good that high school kids can do it, but they also don't have the same athletes coming after the kicks like they do in college. If he can get the ball back in .69 sec that is impressive and a huge advantage in the kicking game.
|1 year 50 weeks ago||It is a fun defense||
I installed this defense three years ago and have run it ever since. It took a little while to get everyone comfortable switching over from the 4-3 scream and splatter, but once they did it was a lot of fun. Here are a bunch of things that I have learned over the years:
There are a lot of different ways to run a 3-3-5. Some guys will run the true stack with the DTs at the 4 tech and the Sam and Will stacked behind them, this is what I run. I know a guy that runs his with the DTs in 5's and the Sam and Will in 30's three yards off the ball. I know two guys who run with the DTs in 3's and the Sam and Will at 50's. This will all depend on the type of athletes you have.
Also, you need to decide how you want to use your box safeties (Spur and Bandit) to get the most out of your players. I line mine up 3x3 off the last man on the line in base defense and will often have them rolling up or back. This will also be determined by how you line up your DTs and LB's. This year for example my spur almost always lined up 1x1 off the line, a lot like a standup end in a 5-3. On the other side though my Bandit would often walk off and be 8 yards off the line becasue he could fly down hill.
The three safeties are in my opinion the most important guys on the field. These are your best athletes and they need to have the best coaches. If your Spur and Bandit cannot hold the edge you mine as well just go home. They also need to be able to go out in the flats and depending on your coverage scheme they may need to cover man to man. The FS needs to be a ball hawk, make quick reads, and tackle in the open field, he can be the difference between a good and great defense. Some coaches though will have their FS sit back and just not give up the big play. (Which I hate.)
Are you going to be a blitzing team or one that reads and reacts? I personally love to blitz (one game I blitzed on every single play) and you can be very creative. I use a numbering system to call my blitzes which allows me to be very flexible and come up with things on the sideline. Combined with different fronts we will show I have over 200 blitzes drawn up. I will usually take about 30 into a game, 20 that we consider our bread and butter and then 10 or so that take advantage of the offense or cover up our weaknesses.
If you have a small defensive line slant and loop them all of the time and have them get up field. Do not put them in a position to get latched on too. I love to slant them to the strong side and then bring multiple guys on the back side. If you have big guys slant and loop them all of the time and have them smash the line to the inside gap. This year I had a huge defensive line, 290 at nose and 270 and 250 at DT. I would slant them one way or the other and they would destrory the OL. Our DL had more pancakes this year than the OL.
Another thing you need to decide is what you are going to run for coverages. I like to run cover 0 or 1. However, we also run cover 3 and cover 3 clould (the spur and bandit take deep outside 1/3's and CBs take the flats, looks like cover 2). Like everything else they each have pro's and con's and you need to make it fit with your kids abilities. The first two years we were primarily cover 3, but last year it was almost all cover 1.
Coaching technique is the most important thing. There are some techniques in this defense that are a lot different than some of the things you may have been doing. You need coaches that can coach them. For the spur and bandit if they lack in just one area they will get exploited. This past season I lost my Spur and Bandit coach and my FS coach. I had to replace them with a guy that had never coached before (this is for varsity) and an offensive coach that moved over to defense. They struggles, the kids sruggled, and as a result our team struggled. In the end though that was my fault for not making sure that my coaches were ready to do the job.
I would agree with what someone said earlier, find another school that runs the system that you want and send your whole staff over. I have a number of playbooks and if you are a member of glaziers they have a ton of stuff on their website. I spent around six months working on my playbook and working with other coaches. There are a lot of things for you guys to go over in a short amount of time.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||Correct||
Having spent enough time in Wisconsin I can say that you are correct. However, you forgot one very important thing that they look for, they want guys who are just straight up nasty at the point of attack. I've seen them practice before and they get after it like no one I have ever seen before. You could be at the other side of the practice facility and hear those boys pads popping. This is the sort of thing that Hoke wants to get back too. Your last point is also very true, they recruit almost all of those lower rated guys at their summer camp, if they want an offer they know they have to go to that camp.
It's interesting that you mention their star ratings because the one five star that they have, Josh Oglesby has had a hard time getting playing time and keeping it. He is a physical freak, but having seen him play in high school and practice in college the one thing that he does not really have when paired next to his peers is that real deep down nasty streak. Hopefully, he can turn it around, because he is a great kid, but I don't see it happening.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||His first year as DC he ran||
His first year as DC he ran what he called the "Raven Package" where he pretty much combined the 3-4 and 4-3 under into one. The down linemen were in a strong 5, strong 1, and a weak three. He had Suggs in a weak 5 tech and he would play from either a two or three point stance depending on the situation. They also brought their Sam backer up to the line.
That is what he showed us prior to his first season and the next season he came back to the clinic and said that he ran a lot of it, with a lot of success. I think that after his first season he felt a lot more comfortable and put in more of his own 4-3 stuff. Either way the 3-4 and 4-3 under are very similar. With the number of LB's that we have been going after it's not out of the question that we could see some 3-4 type looks in the future.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||He was the best quarterback||
He was the best quarterback because they let him play with the first string offense against the at best second string defense. He was put in a situation where his rate of failure would have been low, which is what you should do with a young qb to build some confidence. To say that he was the best and is going to be awesome is not entirely fair given the context of the situation. If that is what you need to hitch your wagon to to get through these hard times by all means do so, but I would cool the jets on any talk about how good he was in what was really just a controlled scrimmage.
|3 years 4 days ago||1) A) Yes the QB will still||
1) A) Yes the QB will still be lining up in the shotgun. B) Clapping and stomping? Just how exactly do you expect to signal for the snap when the entire stadium is screaming at the top of their lungs? Out yell them, shit he won't have a voice left by halftime. C) Starring over like a deer in the headlights at the coach? You don't have to worry about that anymore, they will now be starring like a deer in the headlights at the defense, left to make their own choices. I'm not sure I like that trade off. D) We will still be running out of the gun so mistimed handoffs are still a possibility.
2) They're not listening to the stomp or clap, there are a hundred thousand people in the stadium. They are opperating pretty much the same as they would for a silent count. Which has nothing to do with inexperince and everything to do with coaching. Hell we teach our freshmen in high school to do it, and they're very good at it.
3) What exactly does experience get you? Personally I think that is one thing that people look into way to much. Is it important yes. If it was the deciding factor why are the RB's with the most experince looking up at a couple of guys with very little on the depth chart? Our WR have a lot of playing time under their belts I will give you that but, they have very little experience running these types of routes and combinations. Therefore most of their experience is moot because if they can't run the right routes in the right situations then they won't be playing.
4) I will give you this one for the most part, but realize that he will have a harder time running from undercenter than he did from 7 yards in the backfield. There is a reason that most of those world class athletes are playing back in the spread and not the pro offense.
5) Again, I agree for the most apart. It won't be doom and gloom but there will be growing pains and probably when we can least afford them. Overall, it really comes down to defense. I don't think we will lose because of the offense this year, but I really don't see them winning to many for us either, but that depends on how much Hoke kept in the bag during the spring game too.
|3 years 1 week ago||Agree||
Magnus, while I often disagree with what you say, you are 100% right. I cringe every time I have to type that word.
|3 years 1 week ago||Nope||
They can't be, they are a one back set. Which means no FB and three WR. According to what I have been reading that would make it a gimmick. However, the QB lines up under center most of the time, but they still run some gun. I really don't know if they run enough from under center to over come the three WR's on the field though. Someone should make an equation of how much FB you need on the field. Perhaps if you run it with two TE's that will make up for the lack of a FB. Also, I could be mistaken but I believe they run some zone blocking, which would be a strike against manball. Other than all of those issues I would say it's probably as close to manball as you can get.
|3 years 1 week ago||or||
or it could have to do with the fact that we might score on the first drive, punt the next three and the other team would be winning 28-7. At that point your game plan is pretty much shot to shit and when you're a running football team a 21 point deficit is hard to overcome with that first year QB.