If the 3-3-5 is so terrible, why does WVU have a top-10 ranked defense?
Does this tell us that it is not the scheme buy rather the execution (eg this week's picture pages) and/or the players?
Will be watching the Pitt-WVU game with interest this afternoon.
November 26th, 2010 at 3:27 PM ^
running a base 43, particularly against power teams. We have enough defensive lineman to do it. Our linebacking deficit would look better. Against spread teams you could shift to a 425 or even a 335 as necessary. I've got a fundamental problem playing 3 linemen and 3 linebackers against a team that you know is going to pound it. It's the same effect as the spread in reverse. The big blockers and power backs simply outnumber the guys available to take on blocks and tackle. I like Ray Vinopal as a player, but to bring him into the linebacker spot against Wisconsin is just crazy.
November 26th, 2010 at 4:14 PM ^
I think we should have been playing a 4-3 or a 4-2-5 all season long.
Next year should be a 4-3, IMO.
November 26th, 2010 at 4:24 PM ^
Great, thanks. Do you have concerns that Michigan lacks the bodies up front to run a four man front? Hopefully we can get some solid depth out of Ash, Talbott, and Washington at the tackle positions, but there is very little experience in that group. Plus, with Martin and Van Bergen gone after next year, we'll really be lacking at those positions.
November 26th, 2010 at 6:17 PM ^
No, I'm not too concerned about the depth up front. Injuries could hurt us up front, but there's not really a position where that's not the case.
It's not uncommon for a team to need a redshirt freshman to play a backup role. That happens all over the place. So if our starting four could stay healthy next year, then I don't see it being a big deal.
As far as I'm concerned, you've got Van Bergen, Martin, Washington, and Roh to start as your first four. Jibreel Black is another viable option. And then you need Ash, Talbott, Paskorz, and/or Wilkins to play.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:29 PM ^
won't work against teams like MSU, Wisc., OSU, Iowa with power running games, unless it becomes a 34. A db is not equipped to take on and stand up the lineman and power blocking schemes.
November 26th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
I'm sorry, but you're incorrect. The 3-3-5 can easily stop power running teams if the personnel is good and the kids know what they're doing. Unfortunately, that's not the case at Michigan.
November 26th, 2010 at 3:09 PM ^
Another three years and our defense will be OK?
Yep, Rich Rod has at least that much time.
November 26th, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^
All Michigan fans really want is a DC who actually knows the defense he is running. I think much of the debate surrounds scheme but not how we use the scheme. GERG never ran the 3-3-5 before. And I think this disconnect has to be, in part, RR's fault in that he sort of forced the 3-3-5 on GERG. Just a perfect storm this year. I think we have some talent on the D.
November 26th, 2010 at 12:58 PM ^
is because Michigan's players are not "gap sound". They don't know or understand their assignments and the coaching staff is freaking lost.
The problem is that GERG doesn't "understand" the nuances and tactics of 3-3-5 defense. He probably gets the objective and possibly the strategy. But he tactical "how to" is lacking.
He's been probably reading tons of 3-3-5 books still and watching lots of past WVU film. But a college/NFL level DC should not have difficulty installing new defensive schemes.
The bigger question is what's with the marriage to the 3-3-5?
Rodriguez chose to make a "comfort hire" with GERG - someone without a backbone and someone who would "get along" with his hand-picked defensive assistant coaches from WVU above all things. By doingn so RR could reward loyalty and protect the assistants positions.
In hindsight the "cold-hearted, business approach" may have been better: Hire the best damned DC coordinator you can find and give him the full authority to set defensive strategy and manage it. This might meanbringing in his own staff of assitants, etc. if required. He did this for Jeff Casteel, so I don't understand why RR would not have learned from this.
GERG never had this option when he arrived at Michigan, and it's sort of his fault for accepting a colonel's role with corporal level authority.
All sorts of defenses can work very effectively to shut down opponents, including the 3-3-5. The best approach IMO would be to run situational defenses with some 4-3, 3-3-5, 4-2-5 and 5-2/5-3 variations. It's not THAT effing difficult to coach and it's almost a necessity if you want to be competitive in any league.
But everything for Michigan has been exacerbated by very, very young players in starting roles who are physically underdeveloped and/or 1st year players. The senior LBs have been playing under 3 different DCs and defensive systems. Talk about freaking confusing.
Things should be considerably better in the future as players develop, but Michigan is so bad right now on defense that "a lot of improvement" barely puts them at average. A new DC starts the process over again, but who ever it is would no doubt be an improvement.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:01 PM ^
Front page worthy comments. Thank you - excellent analysis.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:11 PM ^
e that DB needs to force RRod to abandon his defensive assistant friends, like we always wanted Carr to do with DeBored et el, and just go out and hire someone to run the defense how the DC wants to, whatever that may be. Go to the Chip Kelly philosophy and just focus on the Offense and other Head Coaching duties - which I believe RRod is very good at - and let a dedicated DC focus on the D.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:18 PM ^
"Hire the best damned DC coordinator you can find "
Does he have to be from DC? I don't know that many great DC's down there.
/S
To be serious, those comments were spot on.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:11 PM ^
In hindsight the "cold-hearted, business approach" may have been better: Hire the best damned DC coordinator you can find and give him the full authority to set defensive strategy and manage it. This might meanbringing in his own staff of assitants, etc. if required. He did this for Jeff Casteel, so I don't understand why RR would not have learned from this.
Rich Rodriguez "hired" Jeff Casteel for Michigan, too! Problem was, Casteel had second thoughts (likely family-related) about leaving Morgantown. Rodriguez then hired in succession two different guys with pretty nice resumes, neither one of whom worked out. Not because he interfered with them, but because on their own, they just couldn't produce on that side of the ball.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:29 PM ^
Not because he interfered with them, but because on their own, they just couldn't produce on that side of the ball.
Really? Why is it that everyone has said that it is RR who has forced the 3-3-5 upon Robinson and Shafer?
November 26th, 2010 at 1:43 PM ^
I thought that that was common knowledge around here too.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:35 PM ^
Syracuse's defense is not nearly as bad as ours is ad they have junk for players.
November 26th, 2010 at 2:36 PM ^
They also play in the powerhouse conference of the big east. Their tough non-conference schedule included Colgate, Maine, Akron, and the only BCS opponent in Washington. And lets see, they gave up 41 to Washington.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:17 PM ^
We surrendered 10 points to UCONN, a Big East team. It was our best performance of the year hands down. We had good athletes and talent that day but not against UMASS, Indiana and Notre Dame. Those 3 are junk opponents who moved the ball basically at will on us.
It is tough to have this discussion and not talk about the relative weakness of the league where it is working for West Virginia.
It is really hard to shake the repeating thought that our head coach wasn't well versed in the necessities of doing certain things well to play defense in this conference. That is about as charitable a way as it can be said.
This is evidenced by the pedestrian recruiting in 08, the lack of coordinator continuity, the smallish size of our back 7 recruits, the 3-3-5 scheme which is his baby, the seeming lack of development from season to season of many of our veterans, and the horrific fundamentals.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:23 PM ^
The men behind their D-Line are stemming and moving, attacking from different positions on every single play. The are ballhawks, too. 3 turnovers with 5 minutes left in the first half. This seems to me to be how you eliminate the "bubbles." At all times, there should be at least 4 men rushing the QB. GERG seemed, in the beginning of the season at least, to be content to drop everyone into a 3-deep zone behind the line. When you have an inexperienced secondary and allow your D-Line to get double teamed, bad results are sure to happen.
I really think the best-case scenario for the D is to get Casteel on board. RR knows him, the staff knows him, and he knows 3-3-5, meaning we wouldn't have to switch schemes drastically again.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^
The way M runs the 3-3-5 and the way WV runs it bear almost no resemblance to each other. WV is much more aggressive with their deployments, more blitzing, more slants, etc. They also seem to be much more aggresive going after strips (or Pitt just can't hang onto the ball).
November 26th, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^
it might have something to do with the fact that Wisonsin ran the ball like 34 of 35 times with a power running game, a great offensive line, and good backs. Same but lesser extent for Iowa, MSU, OSU and PSU. The closest Big East team to that is either UConn or Rutgers. I think we saw how good (or not) UConn is.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:27 PM ^
admit it, vanbergen/roh/banks/patterson are not interior dlineman....
Mike Martin cannot control 2 gaps every single snap, it has been proven this season,
DB's, warren gone, woolfolk injured out for season spelled doom for the corners,
Lbers, Ezeh is afraid of guards coming free hence he retreats from contact.....
Fact of the matter is this defensive personel even next yr is behind to run this defense.
Washington or Ash would have to be monster 330lb nt's and Martin Vanbergen again would have to get bigger to run this defense. Corners would have to grow up and woolfolk come back healthy....then we can talk about a defense getting much better.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^
I don't see much difference in size between WV's D-line and ours. The problem is transistioning that to the B10 or any other real BCS conference. To run it effectively you will need that 300+ lb NT. I think WV's current D would also struggle against B10 power run teams.
However, you put a Terrence Cody sized NT and a couple 290 lbs DT/DE's and I think it could absolutely work in the B10 w/ the right coordinator.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:32 PM ^
a 5-2, a 2-5, or all 11 guys on the line. It wouldn't matter.
The scheme itself is not the problem.
November 26th, 2010 at 1:40 PM ^
I have several of the games recorded. As I look at the replays there's one glaring problem which reoccurs every game! Our linebackers commit to absorbing the block and not shedding blocks.
Jonas bless his heart looks to blow the play up just about every down by going directly at the first guy avaiable. While I admire the toughness and the "I want to blow the play up completely coach" attitude, it's just not smart football. Engagement favors the blocker!
Thinking back at the last few pressers RR has treaded ever so lightly with comments about "guys not getting off of blocks". There's a plethora of instances where we're (LB's especially but not excluding the Secondary) in the right position to get to the ball carrier and yet our backer just plows into a blocker giving way for a nice run.
It's frackin habit forming at this point. Scheme doesn't matter much if you allow the blocker optimal position on the play.
Here's hoping we shed some blocks this Saturday.
Go Blue!
November 26th, 2010 at 1:44 PM ^
November 26th, 2010 at 3:02 PM ^
Jeff Casteel > Greg Robinson
November 26th, 2010 at 3:31 PM ^
Michigan has gotten pushed around by senior-laden teams with bigger, older, and slightly stronger players. Time will correct this. I would like to see a more conventional 3-4 for obvious running situations against pro set attacks, but I think the 3-3-5 will be just fine against spread teams and in nickel situations.
November 26th, 2010 at 5:10 PM ^
there's nothing wrong with it. I ran it in the big12 with Texas in 2013 on XB360 and won a national championship on All American giving up just 12 ppg. jimmies and joes not x's and o's
November 26th, 2010 at 6:59 PM ^
WVU leads the Big East in ppg allowed on D with 12.9. The worst defense in the Big East only gives up 27.0 ppg. There are 5 teams in the Big East whose defenses give up less than 20 ppg (and UConn, who is 6th, only gives up 20.5 ppg). Every team in the Big East has a "good defense" because...
the best offense in the Big East (Cincinnati) only averages 29.8 ppg which would only be good enough for 6th place in the Big 10 (and just barely ahead of Iowa, who is 6th in the Big 10, at 29.5 ppg). Btw, WVU's offense only averages 25.0 ppg which would put them in 9th place in the Big 10.
November 26th, 2010 at 11:54 PM ^
Gentlemen, this is the crux of my "uneasiness" with R-rod. I've considered that this Michigan team MAY just be the BEST team that he's ever coached?? I think right now this team could actually hang with or even BEAT his best Pat White led team. Think about it, thats just how bad the big east is/was and forever will be. That makes me nervous more than any particular result or statistic that people throw out to discredit Rod.
November 27th, 2010 at 12:58 AM ^
Do you honestly think 2010 Michigan could hang with a B12 champion in a BCS Bowl? This offense clearly is outstanding, but I would have little confidence in our chances of winning a BCS game. If we were to play (probably) Nebraska in January, we would be in serious trouble.