Defensive Scheme Discussion

[pickledickle25]

Starting this thread outside of the normal moaning and groaning threads to discuss defensive schemes and what we can change given our current talent/depth.

Recognizing that we do a lot of things poorly on defense but scheme-wise, there’s two things that I just can’t wrap my head around.

1. Why does Thacker continue to drop defensive ends into coverage on RBs and motioning WRs? If Bowling Green can out scheme us by attacking our DEs on wheel routes, I don’t want to think about what ugag and Miami are going to do. IIRC FSU torched us on these schemes and yet we STILL DO IT. Unforgiveable.

2. I don’t particularly care for the 4-2-5. Four down linemen limits our ability to be creative with blitz packages. 3-3-5 would allow us to be more creative, albeit probably worse against the rush. You would think if you’re going to put 5 DBs in the game you would be aggressive in pass coverage given the additional speed/help. If we are going to sit in soft (10-12 yards deep) coverage, we might as well run the 4-3 and commit to stopping the run while being ok with 5-7 yard outs (bend don’t break). But we can’t have it both ways and if you have multiple identities you have none.

Solutions?

 

[ibeattetris]

1. Why does Thacker continue to drop defensive ends into coverage on RBs and motioning WRs? If Bowling Green can out scheme us by attacking our DEs on wheel routes, I don’t want to think about what ugag and Miami are going to do. IIRC FSU torched us on these schemes and yet we STILL DO IT. Unforgiveable.

I think this is normal for a zone blitz which tends to be high risk high reward. I feel like we have to be tipping our hand in some way because teams seem to consistently beat it.

 

[pickledickle25]

I think this is normal for a zone blitz which tends to be high risk high reward. I feel like we have to be tipping our hand in some way because teams seem to consistently beat it.

Normal if you still want to drop 7 into coverage

 

[RamblinWreck92]

Scheme is irrelevant when our first guys to a ball carrier whiff.

 

[stinger78]

I despise the 4-2 and the 3-3 defenses. Give me a 4-3 or a 3-4. However, the 5 WR offenses are dictating the defenses these days. That said, there is not space on a field for 5 deep routes. They'd be tripping over themselves. There have to be underneath zones where a D can play zone D. Ideally, IMPO, the corners play man to stop the quick in/out, the safeties play deep cover 2 zone, and the LB handle the underneath zone routes and flat passes. This relies on speed to the ball and good open-field tackling. Not sure our LBs have the speed needed and I know the DBs could not tackle Mother Teresa. Not sure we can do this, but what we are doing isn't working either.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

3rd & 15, ball on their 7. We rush 4 & let that slow ass QB scramble for 16 & a first.

That, after taking a TO on 4th & 1 and our OL can't get a ööööing yard? Ballgame.

Key's OL hasn't improved in 5 years.

 

[ramblin_wreck08]

I think we need to play more aggressive. Sitting back in soft zone is a great way to allow the other team to methodically march it down the field. Thacker calls the game scared, from being 10 yards off in coverage, to only bringing 3 or 4 on 3rd and long. QBs at this level are going to kill a defense that plays soft.

Secondly, I’m constantly dumbfounded by our inability to put together a run stop package. Everyone attacks the OL, and we have no second layer. If the back breaks through, they go straight to the secondary. You need all 3 layers to be effective.

 

[stech81]

I’m not big on schemes but no defense will work if they don’t tackle

 

[AlaGold]

Well,scheme is one thing but basics like tackling and hustling aare missing.I wonder about our strength.We cAN.T STOP GYS WITH ONE MAN MUCH AT ALL.i SAW AN EXAMPLE OF THIS 1ST QTR. ON AN EASY TACKLE FROM BEHIND THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A KILL. oops,sorry for the caps.

 

[Vespidie]

Scheme is irrelevant when our first guys to a ball carrier whiff.

And our remaining defenders don't or can't wrap up and make point of contact stoppages.

 

[Technician]

The absolute number 1 problem I saw with our defense against BG was matador tackles: not getting juked, but literally sidestepping the ball carrier and trying to bring him down from the side with an arm tackle. While many parties were guilty of this, one particular LB transfer caught my eye using this technique on numerous occasions. Second problem I saw was not breaking down in front of a ball carrier in a heads up open field situation. Third problem was poor pursuit angles.

These are tackling fundamentals and they were all displayed on multiple occassions.

Scheme means nothing when you can't do the fundamentals. To put it in Tech terms: What good is calculus when you don't know algebra?

 

[JJacket]

BG's HC said in their presser last week that we played a unique defense.

Apparently, he didn't mean that in a bad way.

Just go to a 3-4 or a 4-3 already

 

[JJacket]

3rd & 15, ball on their 7. We rush 4 & let that slow ass QB scramble for 16 & a first.

That, after taking a TO on 4th & 1 and our OL can't get a ööööing yard? Ballgame.

Key's OL hasn't improved in 5 years.

Couldn't get that first down on 3rd and 1 either.

 

[GTRules]

Scheme is irrelevant when our first guys to a ball carrier whiff 10 yards downfield.

 

[Techfan02]

Sheerer at tennsesee had installed a 3-4 type of scheme so we may see some changes

 

[Akinji07]

Starting this thread outside of the normal moaning and groaning threads to discuss defensive schemes and what we can change given our current talent/depth.

Recognizing that we do a lot of things poorly on defense but scheme-wise, there’s two things that I just can’t wrap my head around.

1. Why does Thacker continue to drop defensive ends into coverage on RBs and motioning WRs? If Bowling Green can out scheme us by attacking our DEs on wheel routes, I don’t want to think about what ugag and Miami are going to do. IIRC FSU torched us on these schemes and yet we STILL DO IT. Unforgiveable.

2. I don’t particularly care for the 4-2-5. Four down linemen limits our ability to be creative with blitz packages. 3-3-5 would allow us to be more creative, albeit probably worse against the rush. You would think if you’re going to put 5 DBs in the game you would be aggressive in pass coverage given the additional speed/help. If we are going to sit in soft (10-12 yards deep) coverage, we might as well run the 4-3 and commit to stopping the run while being ok with 5-7 yard outs (bend don’t break). But we can’t have it both ways and if you have multiple identities you have none.

Solutions?

Look at this guy thinking he can have his own thread outside of normal moaning and groaning.

 

[gojkts]

Watched a replay of Miami’s last game (Temple). Temple ran a 3-4-4 scheme. They got torched. Failed to get pressure on van Dyke. Failed to stop the run. Gave up long TD passes. Miami’s offense did what it wanted to do. TBF, Miami just had better athletes. Not sure Temple’s defensive scheme mattered all that much.

Miami ran a 4-2-5 scheme most of that game and shut Temple down. Temples pass offense was poorly executed though. QB missed several wide open receivers. Receivers dropped catchable balls. Miami was giving Temple the wide screen and some underneath routes on long downs. Because they can tackle. Temple’s OL did a respectable job pass blocking but couldn’t create running lanes. Miami’s DBs like to gamble going for the int and left wide open receivers several times but Temple’s QB couldn’t put the ball on target.

Thacker’s scheme needed the LBs to be fast at reading where the play’s going and D linemen to shed blocks and create pressure. They did neither against BG. And turnovers are what killed Wake. That scheme gave up long drives and struggled with Wake’s stupid slow mesh run - because the DL were tied up, the RB could wait for LBs to commit, and nobody could wrap up a tackle on first contact. So damn frustrating to watch.

 

[JJacket]

Look at this guy thinking he can have his own thread outside of normal moaning and groaning.

 

[gnats67]

Sheerer at tennsesee had installed a 3-4 type of scheme so we may see some changes

Doubt we see it this year but I'm game. Bring it!

 

[stinger78]

It all depends in the personnel you have. A 3-4 needs DL who aren’t penetrators but who can occupy OL while the LB make plays. You need chunks in the middle. Biggers and Fortson, on paper, are that. I don’t think we’ve got the LB run that scheme though.