What?
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
2018 Buffs Advanced Statistics Thread
- Thread starter J.R. Ewing
- Start date
Deleted member 807
Guest
Fisher has a pick against Jake Browning. That’s the one play where he flashed this year.
Which won't happen as I am sure MMac believes he is coaching for his career here at CU in these last 2 games.
That's the thing: you should expect them to be starting quality CBs. They were starters last year. It's ridiculous that 2 former starters can't be relied upon to be able to start if called upon. My expectations are higher than yours, apparently. Your expectations are more in line with where I'm at with Mehki -- who was brought in just before camp started and had to learn the techniques and defense from ground zero this August. I expect some miscues and blown assignments if a guy like that has to start and roll with him as he gains experience. It's very different than with Udoffia and Wigley.
I'm not disagreeing with you. Back-up DBs should expect to play, even if a team is healthy they should be ready.
My point is that they aren't as good as you would expect starters to be, that is why they are back-ups and Eliot is not doing anyone any favors with the situations he is putting them in.
It is just like you should be able to expect your safeties to be able to hold up in certain coverage. That doesn't mean you regularly expect them to cover WRs all over the field. You are inviting failure if you do so with most safeties.
No one is expecting greatness. But competence is not an unreasonable expectation.
Exactly. "Locate a guy Abrams isn't covering and throw a 50/50 ball to him" should not be a viable offense and it's exactly what every team from USC on has torched us with.
Someone needs to cut the tape showing this. It's every ****ing play. Also, Wigley finally made two plays on Saturday after not making a single goddamn play for five weeks, and he's doing the waggy finger and money gang signs. Holy ****, dude.
All season long it seems, and yet Eliot continues to find ways to put these guys out where opponents can easily find them.
This isn't a defense of Wigley and Udoffia, they are back-ups and have blown their share of plays. My point is that Eliot hasn't figured it out and continues to put them in that position and did so even with Abrams back.
When you lose five games in a row there is plenty of blame to go around but why is it that week after week we continue to get outcoached. We know where the weaknesses are, we see opponents exploit them every game and yet the next week we run the same stuff. How many times do we have to give up touchdowns before our coaches figure out that just because our OLBs may be as fast as some corners they can't cover WRs like corners. How often do we need to see our safeties ending up chasing a faster man across the field before we figure out that that concept doesn't work.
MM is supposed to be a defensive minded coach and an NFL level guy with pass coverage. If that is the case why does he continue to put guys in position to fail?
When teams have 3 or more guys in pass patterns, it is impossible to double cover everyone. What defensive coverage scheme are you looking for? I think what they did against Wazzu is what you're asking for. We had 2 DLs on the field for most obvious pass plays, rushing 3 by bringing a LB, and trying to cover 4 or 5 guys with 8 guys. Even went with more zone so that guys didn't have to match up and run with a receiver as much. Rarely blitzed. We got picked apart and Wazzu ended up with about 40 minutes of TOP.
Personally, I'd rather bring pressure and make guys make plays on an island like we'd been losing at before. At least that way you also make some plays while your offense is able to play aggressive and do some things. When you're that conservative on defense, you're also forcing your offense to play for TOP instead of to score. Not something this team is capable of doing.
This is a big part of it. When you are healthy it is hard to cover for extended periods of time, with depth guys almost impossible. Bring pressure, force the QB to make a decision and release the ball. Sure you risk giving up a big play but we are dong that already playing without pressure. Try to force some mistakes and hope you can turn the ball over and flip the field.
With our OL problems we aren't going to have a lot of long drives. See if we can give them some short fields to work with and get our D off the field.
So you want to put guys in 1-on1 coverage on an island while bringing pressure?
I could attempt to make excuses in some areas (OL perhaps), but I'm not that creative at DB. This is THE position that I hold MM accountable and it's failed us.
We are ending up with them one on one without pressure. Can't do worse.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
3-4 works best with press coverage.
A big part of the problem, as I see it, is the failure to get backups real game experience. Even during 2016, our starters played every snap.
It’s been a bit better this year with a couple of early blow outs, but even our back up QBs have almost no pass attempts (for reasons well discussed in other threads).
Best example is Viska with just a few plays last year. Really? Any of the three starters at WR were not a close second as seniors to Viska as a fresh, except maybe as to full understanding of the playbook.
I think this - and the systemic lack of extra bowl practices - has been part of the developmental problems at CU. Sure, fourth year seniors are developed (except at OL)... but few others who aren’t just physical freaks.
It’s been a bit better this year with a couple of early blow outs, but even our back up QBs have almost no pass attempts (for reasons well discussed in other threads).
Best example is Viska with just a few plays last year. Really? Any of the three starters at WR were not a close second as seniors to Viska as a fresh, except maybe as to full understanding of the playbook.
I think this - and the systemic lack of extra bowl practices - has been part of the developmental problems at CU. Sure, fourth year seniors are developed (except at OL)... but few others who aren’t just physical freaks.
When the odds are against you, often the very best strategy is one that increases randomness. So yeah, it's probably our best option - even if we get burned a few times.
Some of the toughest defenses take the most chances: ASU, WSU...
This is the point of press coverage. Sure, you may get beat on a good deep ball now and then, but you have a chance to shut down the offensive consistency and the dink-dunk time suck of a WSU.
Unless you're a zone blitz team, but while that would confuse the hell out of college QBs I don't think that there's enough game IQ and practice time for college defenders to learn that scheme.
So, yeah, 3-4 (or 5-2 under) in college is pretty much going to be man pressing WRs to disrupt the timing and prevent the hot throws the O is using to try to beat the blitz pressure.
So a lot of people say one of the really big offensive innovations in college ball was figuring out how to complete a lot of passes with an average quarterback.
Something I've actually been wondering lately is if a DC could figure out a zone blitz scheme that could both be taught to college defensive players in the amount of the practice/contact time they are allowed and still be confusing for oppressing qbs to read.
Part of me wonders if Chip Kelly's offensive practice philosophy* wouldn't be the way to go try and get there on the defensive side.
*Short version: practice is all about getting as many players as many reps as possible. Coaches don't stop and fix form or footwork issues, they don't do demonstrations of techniques, etc during practice times. They just let it go and move on to the next player /next rep. They "fix" and demonstrate things in the film room.
Would be amazing and revolutionary. Defense would force so many INTs and get so many sacks.
I know it is a different level but Boise does a great job with this. They aren't recruiting a lot of 5* talent but the guys who go there know that they are going to play and play when it matters. They do a great job in working their depth guys in and playing them while running their regular offense and defense. When they have somebody go down they always have a guy ready to step in who is ready to play.
For a coach like MM who has been on the receiving end of a lot of beat downs it is understandable not wanting to embarrass another coach but there is a big difference between scoring in the high 30's or 40's and putting up 60s and 70s. By not taking the opportunities to develop his players MM has hurt himself, and his teams.
Lots of different techniques from the DLs with great gap discipline. LBs have to know the zone coverage responsibilities of the entire back 8 and be able to jump from their spot into at least 3 of them on any given play. It's really hard to do.
That said, the Steelers were able to do it with very young defensive players for a long time but a lot of that was because Dick LeBeau's a frikin football genius and could teach it so well. Find CU a college LeBeau and we're in business.
There also just simply aren’t the athletes across the board in college to pull it off. Hence why most of the references you’ve made are to NFL teams... where 240 lb LBs run like college safeties and 300 lb DL move like college LBs.
As I was typing, I was thinking about that. We have enough trouble finding 1 DL who can 2-gap. That style of 3-4 requires that you have 3 who can do it. Then, when one of the DEs pulls his OL to the outside so the OLB can take an inside blitz, that same 2-gap DE has to be able to be able to play the edge against a zone read. That OLB who went inside has to be able to take on an OL on an inside run -- and he also has to be fast enough to speed rush the edge & versatile enough to cover a RB or TE. Even Saban, who knows that defense because a lot of it comes from the Parcells/Belichick school, doesn't have the horses to do it at Alabama.
A big reason why college football is more exciting than the NFL is, ironically, because college kids aren’t as good or athletic as the pros and just can’t run exotic stuff like that.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Love the way Bama runs it. Different caliber of personnel, obviously.
We finished the year ranked 88th. That's quite the accomplishment given the fact we were ranked 44th after the first 5 games. Stunning collapse.