Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

CU Defensive Front Seven Alignment

Whatever defensive alignment helps us stop the zone read is the one I prefer. I am freaking sick of watching that play gash us repeatedly. I sometimes wonder why other teams don't just run it over and over because we've shown very little ability to stop it.

It's probably more complicated than this but it seemed liked our DEs had no ability to hold the edge. How does Leavitt or fresh DL faces help us there?
 
Hoping the JUCOs help immediately too. Been too long since we've had any JUCO contribute much. Sean Mohler (sp?)
 
TSchekler said:
Wouldn't the 3-4 Under alignment be predicated on the same 3 man DL that the 3-3-5 uses, as well as converting DEs to stand up, pass rush OLBs, who occasionally have to play in coverage? I think these two defenses are very similar in nature but the 3-3-5, IMO, would remove one player in a position of weakness (LB) from the field and add a player from a position of relative strength (DB).

As far as stopping the run goes, each of the "front 6" players are responsible for one of the 6 gaps. I think this sort of defense works so much better against the Read Option than the 4 man DL we used last year, as you add an extra guy in the front 6 that is tasked with stopping the run that is able to read and react from the LB spot, instead of a DL position. It also allows those two outside hybrids to force everything back in, instead of relying on your less athletic OLBs and DEs keeping contain.

That's just my two cents, and I'm not fully aware of the skill set of each one of the defensive players on the CU roster, like some people are. I just like the 3-3-5 better from a schematic POV. Thanks for the conversation, though!
Click to expand...

I think the biggest difference between the two defenses is the 3-3-5 requires the edge players to be "read and react" players. They have to be decisive and possess the physical skills to do what is necessary and that means 3 run-stuffing DL players who can be pass rushers/run stuffers and 3 very fast and strong LBers. We don't have the linebackers to run this defense, and standing up DE's only exposes them in coverage. In addition, I don't see a dynamic safety that will occasionally drop in as the 7th man in the box on our roster (there are some with potential of course).

The 3-4 under does not ask 6-7 players to "read and react" but rather is strictly single gap-assignment. The 7 players in the box create more zone blitz options for the D as well as brings more pressure on the line of scrimmage vs blitzes coming from the LB level.

The biggest difference personnel wise is that the 3-3-5 puts the "decision making" players (LB's and SS) 5 yards out from the line of scrimmage; whereas the 3-4 under puts them on the line of scrimmage (SLB and WDE).
 
Last edited:
Buff_nc said:
So in the original post & table, it was commented SLB needs to be the most versatile player But are any of those guys listed appropriate for that position? Seems a big stretch.
Click to expand...

I think Gilbert certainly is, he really is a LB/DE hybrid guy. The same is true for Hasselbach (much less body of work even in HS to evaluate however), Cottrell, and Falo. Those players were recruited out of HS as either DE or OLB depending upon what type of defense was looking at them.
 
BuffTuff said:
SLB
SDE
NT
UT
WDE
MLB
WLB
J. Gilbert
S. Kafovalu
J. Tupou
L. Jackson
D. McCartney
A. Gillam
K. Olugbode
G. Frazier
J. Carrell
J. Solis
C. Norgard
D. Wilson
R. Severson
D. Rippy
T. Hasselbach
J. Franke
E. Lopez
T. Henington
C. Shaver
R. Gamboa
T. Talianko
L. Cottrell
M. Matthewes
F. Umu
N. Robbins
M. Reid
G. Watanabe
H. Shaw
N.J. Falo
B. Tonz
L. Tuiloma
T. Coleman
S. Bennion


S. Berry

Is the table also meant to be in predicted depth chart order? If so, no way Norgard is #2 at UT. I see Robbins, Henington, Jackson batteling it out for that spot. Norgard a non factor

Holy s*** is that really the LB depth.? We may be in more trouble than I thought. Don't we have 2 scholarships left to use? Need 2 transfers or 2 unsigned JC LBs for sure.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily a true depth chart, but a rough estimate based on skillset and experience. I put Norgard above Henington due to Henington's past health issues; but it certainly will be a Spring/Fall battle to watch (if that is truly who is in the mix at that position). With Juda Parker graduating that would have been the case anyway.
 
ScottyBuff said:
Not necessarily a true depth chart, but a rough estimate based on skillset and experience. I put Norgard above Henington due to Henington's past health issues; but it certainly will be a Spring/Fall battle to watch (if that is truly who is in the mix at that position). With Juda Parker graduating that would have been the case anyway.
Click to expand...

No battle this spring as Henington is out.
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
Whatever defensive alignment helps us stop the zone read is the one I prefer. I am freaking sick of watching that play gash us repeatedly. I sometimes wonder why other teams don't just run it over and over because we've shown very little ability to stop it.

It's probably more complicated than this but it seemed liked our DEs had no ability to hold the edge. How does Leavitt or fresh DL faces help us there?
Click to expand...

When you run the zone read against a 4-3, there really is not an issue holding the edge. Our DE on one side would crash to help with the RB and sometimes the RB would cut outside him. People talk as though he's being over-powered by not 'holding the edge", but really, he's being out-quicked AND out-smarted.

The other side DE is not blocked and the QB reads him. If he sucks in, the QB will keep it and take it outside. Again, our DE's were awful at this, but I'd blame it on athleticism, rather than "not holding the edge".

Skinny and unathletic is a difficult weakness.
 
buffaholic said:
When you run the zone read against a 4-3, there really is not an issue holding the edge. Our DE on one side would crash to help with the RB and sometimes the RB would cut outside him. People talk as though he's being over-powered by not 'holding the edge", but really, he's being out-quicked AND out-smarted.

The other side DE is not blocked and the QB reads him. If he sucks in, the QB will keep it and take it outside. Again, our DE's were awful at this, but I'd blame it on athleticism, rather than "not holding the edge".

Skinny and unathletic is a difficult weakness.
Click to expand...

Then I guess the question is, do we think we will have upgraded athleticism at DE this year?
 
Buff_nc said:
So in the original post & table, it was commented SLB needs to be the most versatile player But are any of those guys listed appropriate for that position? Seems a big stretch.
Click to expand...

Expect to see a lot of NJ Falo in that position this year, IMO.
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
Whatever defensive alignment helps us stop the zone read is the one I prefer. I am freaking sick of watching that play gash us repeatedly. I sometimes wonder why other teams don't just run it over and over because we've shown very little ability to stop it.

It's probably more complicated than this but it seemed liked our DEs had no ability to hold the edge. How does Leavitt or fresh DL faces help us there?
Click to expand...

Buffaholic talked about the zone/read vs 4-3 DE mismatch.

I think the difference in scheme that Leavitt will (most likely) bring helps in the sense that there are more 1-on-1 matchups and simpler assignments at the line of scrimmage. A good example of this would be McCartney. Last year as the LDE he would face double teams from Tackle/Guards while trying to read the offense; in this defense he would attack the line of scrimmage against one tackle and only have 1 lane assignment for run plays.
 
ScottyBuff said:
I think the biggest difference between the two defenses is the 3-3-5 requires the edge players to be "read and react" players. They have to be decisive and possess the physical skills to do what is necessary and that means 3 run-stuffing DL players who can be pass rushers/run stuffers and 3 very fast and strong LBers. We don't have the linebackers to run this defense, and standing up DE's only exposes them in coverage. In addition, I don't see a dynamic safety that will occasionally drop in as the 7th man in the box on our roster (there are some with potential of course).

The 3-4 under does not ask 6-7 players to "read and react" but rather is strictly single gap-assignment. The 7 players in the box create more zone blitz options for the D as well as brings more pressure on the line of scrimmage vs blitzes coming from the LB level.

The biggest difference personnel wise is that the 3-3-5 puts the "decision making" players (LB's and SS) 5 yards out from the line of scrimmage; whereas the 3-4 under puts them on the line of scrimmage (SLB and WDE).
Click to expand...

Really good analysis. I'm definitely not as familiar with the intricacies of the 3-4 and the personnel required to effectively run it, so I'll concede to your knowledge of it.

You're 100% accurate about the 3-3-5 being a read and react defense, though. The hardest part about installing this defense is getting the players to the point where they aren't even thinking about their reads; they're just making them and attacking. I am part of a high school defensive staff that runs a 3-3-5 and we had some talented players that couldn't react quick enough to their reads, who were beat out by guys with less talent but were lightning quick with their reads off the snap. At the high school level, you can get away with that as long as the less talented guys are fundamentally sound, but a D1 college team would get exposed.

As far as specific personnel goes, you're probably right about the skill sets CU has at LB and it not being a good fit for the 3-3-5. The team I coached for had 3 "dudes" at the LB position that allowed us to do a lot of different things. However, our single-high FS (who was an absolute stud) was never really an "in the box" player like you mentioned. He, like everyone else, made his read and either dropped into coverage, or took an inside-out "banana" path to the ball carrier. When looking at CU's personnel, I pictured TT as the guy who could do both.

I know CU isn't going to install the 3-3-5 like I've described, but that's what I know, and it worked extremely well for us this past HS season. Thanks for the dialog today, though.
 
Henington back to DT with his torn ACL and added weight? That seems like his best position. Also Solis isn't playing DE. Hopefully Carrell can develop quickly so we can pair him with Tupou. We need some disruptiveness at DT. Tupou and Solis are run pluggers
 
Depth-starters listed first.

LDE- Robbins, Gilbert,Coleman,Kofovalu
DT- Topou,Jackson,Lopez
DT- Carrell, Solis, Franke
RDE-Mccarthney Wilson,Mathewes, Hasselbach

MLB- Gillam,Watanabe
SLB- Rippy,Shaver,Gamboa
WLB- Olugbode, Severson,Talianko


Shaver was moved to LB.
 
Last edited:
sliderNcider said:
Henington back to DT with his torn ACL and added weight? That seems like his best position. Also Solis isn't playing DE. Hopefully Carrell can develop quickly so we can pair him with Tupou. We need some disruptiveness at DT. Tupou and Solis are run pluggers
Click to expand...

The version of the "Under" defense that this is based on has the SDE as essentially a "Run Plugger".

Whether you call it a 3-4 or a 4-3 the responsibilities are the same (the "definition" of the WDE/Open End as a LB is just semantics).

Here is the best illustration I could find:

In this example (per my table), the SAM (SLB) is Gilbert; the Closed End (SDE) is Kafovalu; the Nose is Tupou; the T (UT) is Jackson; the Open End (WDE) is McCartney.
UnderBase.png
 
I'll invest more time in these alignments once we know what we will be running.

I will say that stopping the zone read isn't going to happen just because of an alignment change. Slowing it down should be any teams goal at the college level and an alignment change may help that, but I wouldn't expect miracles.
 
buffaholic said:
I'll invest more time in these alignments once we know what we will be running.

I will say that stopping the zone read isn't going to happen just because of an alignment change. Slowing it down should be any teams goal at the college level and an alignment change may help that, but I wouldn't expect miracles.
Click to expand...

In general, I would agree with you. However, half the battle of creating a great defense, IMO, is players being in the right position to make the play. That comes down to the players having assignment discipline, solid fundamentals, knowledge of the defensive scheme, and great formation recognition, all of which can be taught by the right teacher. The other half is the players on the field actually being talented enough to make the plays once in the correct position.

A new scheme that is, by nature, more conducive to slowing down spread offenses, can have a much bigger impact than you're giving it credit for. I will concede that it's not going to make CU into a top 30 defense with the talent that is currently on the roster, but we should see a marked improvement.
 
Adam M said, along with Awini moving to LB, Shaver is moving to the Mike LB position.

[tweet]565564568429015041[/tweet]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just got out of a class with Shaver and Cottrell. Shaver is absolutely massive I would love to see him crush some people at LB


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Kronah said:
I just got out of a class with Shaver and Cottrell. Shaver is absolutely massive I would love to see him crush some people at LB


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Listed at 6'3" 235 on CU's website. Definitely the type of build we like at the Mike. I wonder if they want Shaver as a solid backup for Gillam or if they have plans to move Gillam to another spot.
 
TSchekler said:
Listed at 6'3" 235 on CU's website. Definitely the type of build we like at the Mike. I wonder if they want Shaver as a solid backup for Gillam or if they have plans to move Gillam to another spot.
Click to expand...

I think they might be selling him a bit short. That's essentially my exact build and he definitely has me by an inch or two and probably like 15 pounds haha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Did Awini play defense in HS? How long will it take him to make the switch? A year?
 
Kronah said:
I think they might be selling him a bit short. That's essentially my exact build and he definitely has me by an inch or two and probably like 15 pounds haha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I have heard of a team switching to a 3-4 and rumor has it they are short on linebackers. You should talk to them.
 
Highlander said:
I have heard of a team switching to a 3-4 and rumor has it they are short on linebackers. You should talk to them.
Click to expand...

Hahaha believe me I would love too, I always dreamed of playing for CU! But my highschool football days have destroyed enough of my knees and ankles where I don't think it's an option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Looks like MM and Leavitt saw scottys chart and addressed the depth concerns at Mike and Will by moving Shaver and Awini. I like the 3 - 4 under scheme after reading all of this(and the clancy pendergast 52 defense notes). It appears to simplify assignments and responsibilities with 1 notable exception and play into our plethora of tweener sized DLs.

The 1 exception being that the SLB has to be a complete STUD. One question: who is Cottrell? I've never heard him mentioned before.

Oh, 1 other question: when we go to nickel coverage who comes out? The NT? The UT?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top