We are a sloppy, undisciplined FB team. Nothing has changed for years. It has to be a culture issue. Our players don't knowvhowvto put teams away. How do you let a WR get behind you in that situation?????
1st Half Game Thread
- Thread starter Mike402
- Start date
We are a sloppy, undisciplined FB team. Nothing has changed for years. It has to be a culture issue. Our players don't knowvhowvto put teams away. How do you let a WR get behind you in that situation?????
No he wasnt. Bo played a matchup zone with 5 or 6 dbs on the field at a time. Banker plays with 4 and wants them to play straight up quarters the whole game.
If you don't see that Bo played a coverage first scheme and Banker plays a run stopping scheme, I can't help you. There's a reason that Bo gave up so many huge rushing numbers but the secondary was always solid and there's a reason why we were good against the run but bad against the pass last year. They are complete opposite schemes and require the talent to be in different spots. Banker expects his DB's to be able to cover on an island, that requires athletic corners. Bo stopped the pass with numbers and wanted corners that could help more in the run game. It tough for run stopping corners to be asked to shut down wr's one on one.
Luckily Oregon isn't what they were under Chip Kelly, not that they won't score 50 on this slow defense.
we've given at least 14 points away (that last pass play and TA near the goal line) against a crap team
if we play like this against a decent team we may get buried
Maybe but the 2ndary is supposed to be a strengt. Some of the things we're seeing is scheme and situation awareness. DBs playing with their backs to the ball and in chase mode is ridiculous. DBs haven't been the same since Marvin Sanders left. Is it that hard to turn around and make a play on the ball?
There's no such thing as a guaranteed 7. We should have gotten 3 out of that drive when Tommy made the poor decision. That last TD was lucky. And yet we're dominating. Even if we duplicate this "crappy" play the 2nd half we get 34-14. I expect we'll open it up. Let's chill out and find out!
GBR
Exactly. Bo's scheme required a great front 4 that could stop the run and pressure the QB, while allowing the other 7 guys to drop into coverage. When he stopped having great DT's, his scheme fell apart. The same way Banker's scheme isn't any good without good coverage DB's (which we don't have because Bo didn't recruit those kind of guys)
Wyoming should have had a pick 6 when we had it in their red zone in addition to his earlier interception in the red zone. Tommy is not playing well at all. Not what you expect from a guy with his experience...... Our punt game is costing us big time as well. O-line clearly ragged with two of our top 3 OGs out with injuries. Need to get some things straightened out or it will be a long drive home from the game for me next week.
Sometimes shiz happens. We're gonna win this game and people are going to bitch because we aren't FBS playoff dominant.
I'd rather make the opposing team march it down the field in 5, 6 or 7 plays, than give up a big pass play that changes the game instantly. Bo had a better scheme. At least you give your defense numerous chances to get a stop. Allowing your opponents to sling it all over the field just asks your defense to be perfect, every. single. time.
You want me to flip your meat?
If there is nobody I can think of to flip my meat, it's you boxes. It's always been you.
I would rather give up some big pass plays than 600 yards rushing and single game NCAA rushing records.
That being said, I'm not a fan of giving up big pass plays.
It's the lesser of two evils that I'm talking about. With a weak pass D, it only takes 1 play.
Not to pile on Tommy, but if he puts that 3rd down pass on Carter Wyoming doesn't get the ball back and we might tack on some more ourselves.
Ummmmm puuuuhhhhlease. Wisconsin just scored again on a 3 play 75 yard drive with no passes. Bo's "scheme" failed miserably on multiple occasions.
You do see the DBs we're recruiting? This is the Big Ten. We need to stop the run first. I will never accept Wisky curb stomping us again. I'd rather them beat us deep than run it roughshod all day. Eff that. That's when Bo lost me. December 2012. Wisconsin just scored again!
do you not understand the philosophy behind it? Even on that example, you are giving your defense 3 chances to get a stop. If you have a weak pass D, your defense has to be perfect every time. The thought process behind the scheme is sound. How he implemented it or whatever may be to blame, but the reasoning behind it is very valid.
How about we have good pass AND run defense. Bo's scheme sucked because he couldn't get his guys to execute it. PERIOD. We'll see what Banker can do this year although the defections and injuries are already hurting us.
melvin didn't score every time he touched the ball.. it was very rare that a running play went to the house under that scheme. So in order for a team to actually score, they had to string together a number of good plays. Under Bankers scheme, it only takes 1 pass play to score, so in essence, you are asking your DB's to be perfect all game long.
trying to explain the philosophy behind it, but that's cool
trying to explain the philosophy behind it, but that's cool
That's not a sound argument... It only takes one run to take it to the house as well. I see what you're saying, as long as we let the receivers get behind our DBs all the time, one and done... But they still have to execute it.
Bottom line is both ways are deadly... If we can't stop the run, we're in trouble. If we can't stop the pass, we're in trouble.
Pick your poison.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Whitlock: Deion Sanders TRASHES CU players entering the Portal
- Latest: Sidney Husker
-
-
