The Daily Nole

Football – Assistant Coaches

Forums The Doak Football – Assistant Coaches

This topic contains 97 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  NoleSoup4U 1 year, 9 months ago.

Viewing 8 posts - 91 through 98 (of 98 total)
  • Author
  • #178885


    Bama had trouble with Ole Miss and Clemson offenses.

    Up tempo is good, but teams also need a 4 minute offence when necessary to close out games. That said, IMO, it’s always best to attack on both sides of the ball rather than play it safe.



    I’m not clear on what you mean by attacking both sides of the ball. Do you mean that in terms of tempo?



    I mean continuing to be aggressive instead of sitting on the ball ob offense, or playing a soft zone on defense.

    I loved Mickey Andrews’ defense. Step on the other team’s throat, usually with 2nd team guys, and without giving up much. If he had a shutout going, and the second team guys were giving up too many yards at the end, he’s put the first team guys back in. He’d man up and blitz.



    Okay, I sort of assumed you meant on both offense and defense, but figured I’d better check.

    I really am not sure about the entirety of the pros and cons of a defense that seeks more to keep everything in front of it versus a high-risk/high-reward defense. One could cite Louisville and ask what we would have to lose, but that to me was more a function of the secondary being totally lost (in 2016) and just Lamar Jackson being Lamar Jackson (2017).

    I have to admit I saw the more conservative approach as pretty useful given the talent we’ve had in the secondary the past couple of seasons. To me, if the secondary plays up to its talent level these past two seasons, the picture looks considerably different, particularly in 2016. It really should have been a shut-down secondary both years, which would have given the line plenty of time to get to QBs, and would have helped the linebackers avoid exposure for the mediocrity (at least in terms of performance, regardless of recruit rankings) at that position group.

    Of course the offense did the defense no favors this past season, and we all get why, but I think the defense looks a lot better these past two seasons if Derwin James doesn’t get hurt in the second game of the 2016 season and Francois doesn’t get hurt in game 1 of 2017. Yeah, Blackman started finding his groove, but not until the season had already more or less come off the rails.

    I know, I know: injuries are part of the game, but gambling a lot on defense might have exposed us even more against Deshaun Watson and Mitch Trubisky. And those games were plenty ugly as it was.

    All in all, I have no problem in principle with a more aggressive defensive attack, but unless you really trust your defensive coordinators’ play-calling – which I would point out a lot of people didn’t these past few seasons – you might be better off playing it safe for fear the other team’s offensive coordinator will have your defensive coordinator in checkmate by the end of the first half.



    All valid points. I’m right with you on how the offense plays a role in the defense’s performance.

    As far as injuries go, a team as talented as FSU can’t rely on a single guy. Heck, Bama lost 3 LB’s in 2 weeks.

    I don’t think having an attacking defense means high risk / reward. It just means rushing 4 or 5 guys to get pressure on the QB so he has to get the ball out in a hurry.



    In principle, I agree about not allowing a single injury to affect things, but it did and it does. We had some really bad luck with QBs and thus James Blackman, and the secondary did not pick up the scheme (whatever that scheme was) in 2016, so Derwin went out and so did the pass defense.

    As for the distinction between blitzing and high-risk/high-reward, I’m afraid I don’t see it. You blitz and you accept some associated risks. I don’t know, am I missing something?



    At the end of games (Miami), Kelly was rushing 3 guys and deep dropping 8. There was time for the QB to throw, and also plenty of room to scramble. Sending 4 or 5 is not like sending the house with no over the top help.



    Again. You look at the teams who have beaten Bama and it reads like this:

    1. Speed
    2. Ability to stretch the defense horizontally
    3. Ability to stretch the defense vertically
    4. Ability to run a lot of plays

    Bama’s defenses have historically been strong up the middle, and weak on the outside. They are big, but not extremely fast. They can set the edge, but there are other ways to get the ball on the outside, and they seem to struggle with that. Their corners generally are playing zone, but they can be beat. This can be shown by Bama corners struggling in the NFL. They are used to playing zone, and struggle against man-to-man.

    Bama also plays an Arspargeresque “Bend but don’t break” defense. They will try to play soft and either wait for you to make a mistake, or bend all the way down the field until you get inside the 20 yard line and force field goals. The teams who have done well against them have struck from outside the 20, or been able to punch it in inside the 20.

    The key to beating Bama is to:

    1. Run a lot of plays
    2. Hit some big plays
    3. Punch it in when you get inside the 20

    Bama isn’t going to beat themselves, but their philosophy isn’t going to lead them to be aggressive offensively. You have to take those offensive reigns and put the pressure on them, therefore getting them out of their comfort zone. I think WT is putting together an offensive coaching staff that can do this.

Viewing 8 posts - 91 through 98 (of 98 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.