Defensive Philosophy
- Thread starter CycloneKC
- Start date
The times that they did were from the linebackers position or from 5 yards off the line of scrimmage. Memphis had 6-7 man on the line of scrimmage.
I was not talking about just the Memphis game or even this season, ISU starting is a hole has been a problem the past couple of seasons. The TT and Baylor games last year come to mind, when we got behind a couple of scores and then played the rest of the game playing catchup. The championship game against Oklahoma we did the same.
It's never a good idea to let the opposing QB get comfortable in the pocket and be able to scan the field, we allow that way too often. The defense needs to continue to grow and change, because like any other new idea, people are going to find the weak spots in the defense, and they are using them against us.
Here are the screenshots at the snap for Memphis's two first quarter long touchdowns. Both times all of the defensive linemen and linebackers were within 3 yards of the line of scrimmage.
How many of them were sent to rush the qb? If they all were sent then I stand corrected and admit I was wrong. Did they all rush?
The first play did just have 4, I think one LB was a spy and one feinted a bit and I think then was there to cover the RB. The second one had 5 blitzing, with one LB covering the RB (one of the LB blitzers was delayed as he had a big stunt, but he was also the one who got to the QB as he threw).
I'll add that there was a big 3rd and 8 conversion on Memphis's second drive that had all 6 defensive linemen and linebackers on the line. 4 of them blitzed while two dropped into a zone, plus Cooper came up from the nickel spot right before the snap and was the 5th blitzer.
I don't mean to imply that Iowa State was blitzing every play or anything, but Heacock was definitely giving Memphis different looks early on, and Memphis just beat them. It was really when the defense sat back in more of a bend but don't break zone (the one that gives up those 3rd and fives that people hate) that Memphis started to get stopped some, but bad tackling in the second half canceled that out.
not understanding player responsibilities and ISU defensive concepts makes one believe what you said. But the fact is the receiver got behind our D on that play which shouldn’t have happened. Your assessment of the play on the other hand is ignorant like most who do not know what’s going on on the field
The receiver got behind the D but they didn't get burned?
ISU was in man D. He got out ran/shook and got his shoulders turned around (typically big no-no and bad news for a corner back) and then Freyler got caught looking and was late to help.
Unless there's another term besides 'got burned' for when a receiver just flat out runs by a guy.
Verdon and Cooper are awesome but we definitely need to figure something out for what to do without them because they are going to be injured at some point next year and the drop off when one of both is out is massive. We can't just hope they stay healthy all year.
Yes they got burned but it wasn’t primarily on Cooper. Playing man but was supposed to have post help. It is why he played it that way by rolling to the corner. You make statements not knowing their responsibilities and then pretend to assume you know exactly what happened lol
Coopers a safety and getting turned on a deep route happens. Like I said, his responsibility wasn’t the post route necessarily. He expected help and is why he rolled to the corner. I believe both him and Beau should’ve played that better but I understand the mental breakdown because of their multiple reads they have as safeties
He got turned around to the outside on the break and then out run along with Freyler.
Here is my take.
First, the 3 man front worked for a couple years more that people were not prepared for it, and had not figured out the best way to beat it. Now after many years of doing the same thing, it is predictable and everyone has figured out the best way to beat it.
Second, I have no problem with staying with the 3 man front for our base D, but we have to mix it up, we need to switch our D up some during the game to keep the Offense guessing etc. We need to mix in more looks and more types of Blitzes.
Third, I fully trust our Coaches are good enough and smart enough to see the above issues and hopefully will make the adjustments in the future.
I think overall we were predictable and stale on the offense to start the year, and over the last year or so, and after Ohio we started trying some new things and it worked. I do think we still have some issues running etc and some of that is down to line play etc. But now we have the same issue on Defense, we are stale and predictable, and it is time to mix it up a bit. I dont think overall we are broken, we just need some adjustments and show some different looks.
First, the 3 man front worked for a couple years more that people were not prepared for it, and had not figured out the best way to beat it. Now after many years of doing the same thing, it is predictable and everyone has figured out the best way to beat it.
Second, I have no problem with staying with the 3 man front for our base D, but we have to mix it up, we need to switch our D up some during the game to keep the Offense guessing etc. We need to mix in more looks and more types of Blitzes.
Third, I fully trust our Coaches are good enough and smart enough to see the above issues and hopefully will make the adjustments in the future.
I think overall we were predictable and stale on the offense to start the year, and over the last year or so, and after Ohio we started trying some new things and it worked. I do think we still have some issues running etc and some of that is down to line play etc. But now we have the same issue on Defense, we are stale and predictable, and it is time to mix it up a bit. I dont think overall we are broken, we just need some adjustments and show some different looks.