defensive expectations

QuadF

QuadF

Dodd-Like
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
11,886
Yesterdays performance was completely unacceptable. Given our past defensive woes and the effects it has on our upper class man combined with a new DC's system, what are the expectations for total defense and ppg?

This is not to shift blame away from cpj (its his team and his responsibility), but USF seems to have exposed the exact issues we expected to see. Kicking, kick coverage, defensive pressure.

I'm just curious what the yard stick we're measuring against is.
 
TBH I expect that ypg and ppg will probably be pretty similar, but I we need to see more negative plays. Sacks, TFL, turnovers, etc. We had some penetration yesterday, which is more than we can say for previous years, but we still couldn't track the QB down and just gave up 8 yd scrambles instead of passes.

It's the first year, so we have to be realistic, but either way yesterday was not acceptable.
 
I would expect to give up a lot of points to a good QB with a hot hand and finishing the game down four starters.
 
johncu said:
TBH I expect that ypg and ppg will probably be pretty similar, but I we need to see more negative plays. Sacks, TFL, turnovers, etc. We had some penetration yesterday, which is more than we can say for previous years, but we still couldn't track the QB down and just gave up 8 yd scrambles instead of passes.

It's the first year, so we have to be realistic, but either way yesterday was not acceptable.
Click to expand...
Our players aren't very good. Silk purse, sow's ear kinda thing.
 
Yukonwreck said:
Our players aren't very good. Silk purse, sow's ear kinda thing.
Click to expand...
I think they're average. Our results are well below average. There are dozens of P5 teams with similar talent that are infinitely worse than us on offense but somehow manage to field a competent defense. That is a coaching problem.
 
johncu said:
We brought in 3 new position coaches, including a new DC with a completely different style than the one people complained about. We need to give them a chance to coach.
Click to expand...

Two ejections didn't help ... perhaps questionable calls at that ... did the guys "ponder" how hard to pursue seeing that the refs were calling it tight? Legit question. I don't know.
 
GTplusCPJequalsSuccess said:
Your post is really incorrect. That QB didn’t beat us with his hand. He beat us with his legs which makes all the more shocking that we didn’t adjust to that.
Click to expand...

The fact that QB was able to run on us like that shows one of two things:
1. Defenders are leaving their positions/assignments
2. Defenders are getting pushed around

Either way, we are the kings of opening up large running lanes for other teams and it sucks. It was a flashback to last year of the RB running straight up the gut untouched.
 
QuadF said:
Yesterdays performance was completely unacceptable. Given our past defensive woes and the effects it has on our upper class man combined with a new DC's system, what are the expectations for total defense and ppg?

This is not to shift blame away from cpj (its his team and his responsibility), but USF seems to have exposed the exact issues we expected to see. Kicking, kick coverage, defensive pressure.

I'm just curious what the yard stick we're measuring against is.
Click to expand...

I didn’t see you mention the injuries and ejections.
 
coit said:
I didn’t see you mention the injuries and ejections.
Click to expand...

Stop it already. Next man up. Injuries are part of football. We get it. You are hanging your hat on injuries and ejections.

My problem is scheme. Still no pass rush. Soft coverage. Not swarming to the ball. I thought this D was attacking and aggressive. I saw very few blitzes. Very much reactionary. On top of no adjustment for letting a pocket passing QB run it down our throats. Also s scheme issue with no adjustment.
 
GTplusCPJequalsSuccess said:
Stop it already. Next man up. Injuries are part of football. We get it. You are hanging your hat on injuries and ejections.

My problem is scheme. Still no pass rush. Soft coverage. Not swarming to the ball. I thought this D was attacking and aggressive. I saw very few blitzes. Very much reactionary. On top of no adjustment for letting a pocket passing QB run it down our throats. Also s scheme issue with no adjustment.
Click to expand...
This does not sound informed. We blitzed plenty yesterday, and actually had seven loss plays (sacks or TFL). We were aggressive in coverage, which is part of the reason why the LB were never positioned well to stop the QB scrambles.

What really killed us defensively was that Barnett played like the No.1 QB he once was. Not only was he 21/31 for 202 yds in the air, he was also USF's leading rusher with 91 yds on 16 carries (5.7 ypc). He played a great game.

Most of the posters on this board, myself included, really only know if it's working or it ain't working. And yesterday obviously it wasn't working.
 
18in32 said:
This does not sound informed. We blitzed plenty yesterday, and actually had seven loss plays (sacks or TFL). We were aggressive in coverage, which is part of the reason why the LB were never positioned well to stop the QB scrambles.

What really killed us defensively was that Barnett played like the No.1 QB he once was. Not only was he 21/31 for 202 yds in the air, he was also USF's leading rusher with 91 yds on 16 carries (5.7 ypc). He played a great game.

Most of the posters on this board, myself included, really only know if it's working or it ain't working. And yesterday obviously it wasn't working.
Click to expand...

Barnett isn’t known as a dual threat QB. Our defense made him a dual threat QB which is horrifying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top