|
|
Post by ee1990 on Aug 12, 2019 15:50:11 GMT -8
Also, wtf are we @ Hawai'i the year we're on the 5 conference road game rotation? 6 f'n road games, nobody does that!
|
|
|
|
Post by BeaverG20 on Aug 12, 2019 15:56:56 GMT -8
Whatever we run, seeing less "2nd and 2's" is more important than anything, imo..
|
|
|
|
Post by giantkillers83 on Aug 12, 2019 17:18:40 GMT -8
Seemed like Elizabeth Warren wrote that article. Spin is spin.
Maybe Beavs will only be from nearly worst ever to only horrible or below average. Or not. Who knows ?
Somebody had right idea when they said an improved offense will help defense. Hold onto the ball, move the ball, score, at least change field position, don’t turn the ball over.all that helps D. Being better on special teams would help too
They may well be right. Hope they’re not REAL right.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 13, 2019 16:13:23 GMT -8
Also, wtf are we @ Hawai'i the year we're on the 5 conference road game rotation? 6 f'n road games, nobody does that! Except half of the Pac-12 conference? Arizona, California, Oregon State, UCLA, USC, and Washington State. Four teams out of the Big 12: Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, and West Virginia Colorado and Oklahoma also only play six home games with a neutral site rivalry game. Maybe you are thinking of those tug 'n' tickle teams back East that do no actually play anybody (but have gamed the system, so that straight up morons--and no one else--believe that they actually played a difficult schedule)? Teams back East may not do that. But out West, where teams actually play legitimate football schedules, you see it all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 13, 2019 16:21:32 GMT -8
I think people get too caught up in 3-4 vs. 4-3 terminology. Most NFL teams run a 2-5 if you want to get technical about, most downs the OLBs rush from the edges and become defacto D-Ends and it ends up looking like a 4-3, but, for example, Von Miller drops in coverage sometimes too, or doesn't rush and plays the more conventional run contain OLB role... Long story short, when you have a small, unproven stable of defensive linemen, and a large stable of compentent looking linebakers (many of whom are really DEs, but it makes them feel better to be called LB), it makes total sense, personel wise, to run a base defense that relies less on the defensive line. Sure, it takes a special nose tackle to make a true 3-4 run well.... but in a 4-3 it STILL TAKES FOUR D Lineman, special or not we dont have FOUR. We have three questionable starters (Whittley, Hodgins, Elu) and a bunch of unknowns (freshman and less hearlded transfers). Call the scheme whatever you want, maybe the best term for our defensive scheme should be: Hide and de-emphasize the d-lineman and all costs-4  The more I look at the linebaking core the more intrigued I get actually, if I squint I can see EIGHT Pac-12 starting LB! If I was Tibesar I would run a 2-5 and blitz on every down. I didn't see your reply, well stated. I also think the 3-4 is considered to be a little more flexible with where you can bring blitzes from. It might be a little easier to send that corner blitz from the 4-2-5 because you've got that extra DB on the field, or because your 4th DL is effectively your OLB who is athletic enough to drop into coverage and cover the flat, or whatever zone the blitzing DB vacated. And as you said, one of those linebackers is rushing the QB almost every snap anyway, and you can be a little trickier with which one that is(even if it's normally that one OLB guy) simply because there are more of those dudes on the field. Dick Lebeau made his living in the 4-2-5 out of the base 3-4 by sending 5(or 6) men on the rush, the offense never knowing which players it would be, while still being able to play zone behind it with that 5th defensive back. Perhaps we are saying the same thing but different ways. I am agreeing with you. If every team in NCAA football had the same talent level and Oregon State had a coach that could coach a 3-4, the 3-4 could work. I am saying that Oregon State does not have the talent level to pull off a 3-4. The Beavers are too light/subpar at tackling/untalented up the gut to make it work. And the coaching staff is not above average enough to overcome the talent deficiency to make it work. You and obf may know how to make it work and heck, it could totally work, if you were coaching up the team. But, from what I saw last year, Tibs was running nothing like what you were describing. It was much more of a base 3-4, mundane and vanilla, which eliminates all potential advantages to the 3-4 system, in my opinion. If you do not have a lot of misdirection, the 3-4 is a poor man's 4-3. And yet, even though it was a very vanilla, dumbed-down 3-4, the players still looked completely lost in week 12. Infuriatingly terrible to watch. Maybe it works in year two, now that several players on the team have played in it for more than a year? I would love for that to happen. I am just not holding my breath. |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Aug 19, 2019 9:31:29 GMT -8
I didn't see your reply, well stated. I also think the 3-4 is considered to be a little more flexible with where you can bring blitzes from. It might be a little easier to send that corner blitz from the 4-2-5 because you've got that extra DB on the field, or because your 4th DL is effectively your OLB who is athletic enough to drop into coverage and cover the flat, or whatever zone the blitzing DB vacated. And as you said, one of those linebackers is rushing the QB almost every snap anyway, and you can be a little trickier with which one that is(even if it's normally that one OLB guy) simply because there are more of those dudes on the field. Dick Lebeau made his living in the 4-2-5 out of the base 3-4 by sending 5(or 6) men on the rush, the offense never knowing which players it would be, while still being able to play zone behind it with that 5th defensive back. Perhaps we are saying the same thing but different ways. I am agreeing with you. If every team in NCAA football had the same talent level and Oregon State had a coach that could coach a 3-4, the 3-4 could work. I am saying that Oregon State does not have the talent level to pull off a 3-4. The Beavers are too light/subpar at tackling/untalented up the gut to make it work. And the coaching staff is not above average enough to overcome the talent deficiency to make it work. You and obf may know how to make it work and heck, it could totally work, if you were coaching up the team. But, from what I saw last year, Tibs was running nothing like what you were describing. It was much more of a base 3-4, mundane and vanilla, which eliminates all potential advantages to the 3-4 system, in my opinion. If you do not have a lot of misdirection, the 3-4 is a poor man's 4-3. And yet, even though it was a very vanilla, dumbed-down 3-4, the players still looked completely lost in week 12. Infuriatingly terrible to watch. Maybe it works in year two, now that several players on the team have played in it for more than a year? I would love for that to happen. I am just not holding my breath. Been on vacation so this is my first chance to reply. I agree that what we saw last year was a vanilla and VERY uneffective 3-4 defense. Hence my chomping at the bit to see a defense (regardless of "base") that is focused on disruption. Regardless of base scheme I don't think we have the talent to just line up and beat Stanford or even Cal or UCLA three downs in a row, toe to toe, your base plays against ours. The other team WILL score against this defense, maybe not quite as often as last year, and I do think some of the transfers will be difference makers, but IMHO the key is to cause long yardage downs (sacks and TFL), which pares down what the other offense can call, which means you can dial up even more disruption and ultimately lead to turnovers (ints or punts). You do that with dirsruption, all out and exotic blitzes, etc. and I think those are easier and better disguised from the 3-4, 2-5, 4-2-5, whatever you want to call it. And absolutley you will be caught with your pants down, probably several times a game, and they will hit a long pass or run on you (but lets be honest, they were doing that last year anyway), but hopefully we don't lead the entire country in fewest turnovers again. So, I am calling for a change in defensive... character maybe? Emphasis? Play calling? just not neccisarily a change in the "base" |
|
|
|
Post by jimbeav on Aug 19, 2019 12:31:13 GMT -8
So far, I've seen multiple reports from the last scrimmage on Saturday that the defense did "ok", with the caveat that we ran mostly a vanilla defense so the offense had the advantage.
Is it concerning that we're still mostly vanilla just 2 weeks from the season opener? Either we aren't playing like we're practicing, or Tibs is continuing to keep the reins tightly held, and I find either possibility disturbing.
I hope we don't have another DC who waits 5 games into the season to start throwing a nickel package into the mix...
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 19, 2019 12:53:05 GMT -8
So far, I've seen multiple reports from the last scrimmage on Saturday that the defense did "ok", with the caveat that we ran mostly a vanilla defense so the offense had the advantage. Is it concerning that we're still mostly vanilla just 2 weeks from the season opener? Either we aren't playing like we're practicing, or Tibs is continuing to keep the reins tightly held, and I find either possibility disturbing. I hope we don't have another DC who waits 5 games into the season to start throwing a nickel package into the mix... As far as running a vanilla defense at scrimmage 2 weeks before the season starts.... "Don’t expect OSU coaches to continue large scale tweaks for Saturday’s scrimmage. As Smith said, “you know exactly who is going to be watching,” meaning Oklahoma State, the Beavers’ season opening opponent on Aug. 30. “We’ll be running our base stuff. Not too many tricks,” Smith said." From: www.oregonlive.com/beavers/2019/08/oregon-state-defense-dominates-friday-practice-on-the-eve-of-a-big-public-preseason-scrimmage-day-14-recap.html |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 19, 2019 13:04:04 GMT -8
Perhaps we are saying the same thing but different ways. I am agreeing with you. If every team in NCAA football had the same talent level and Oregon State had a coach that could coach a 3-4, the 3-4 could work. I am saying that Oregon State does not have the talent level to pull off a 3-4. The Beavers are too light/subpar at tackling/untalented up the gut to make it work. And the coaching staff is not above average enough to overcome the talent deficiency to make it work. You and obf may know how to make it work and heck, it could totally work, if you were coaching up the team. But, from what I saw last year, Tibs was running nothing like what you were describing. It was much more of a base 3-4, mundane and vanilla, which eliminates all potential advantages to the 3-4 system, in my opinion. If you do not have a lot of misdirection, the 3-4 is a poor man's 4-3. And yet, even though it was a very vanilla, dumbed-down 3-4, the players still looked completely lost in week 12. Infuriatingly terrible to watch. Maybe it works in year two, now that several players on the team have played in it for more than a year? I would love for that to happen. I am just not holding my breath. Been on vacation so this is my first chance to reply. I agree that what we saw last year was a vanilla and VERY uneffective 3-4 defense. Hence my chomping at the bit to see a defense (regardless of "base") that is focused on disruption. Regardless of base scheme I don't think we have the talent to just line up and beat Stanford or even Cal or UCLA three downs in a row, toe to toe, your base plays against ours. The other team WILL score against this defense, maybe not quite as often as last year, and I do think some of the transfers will be difference makers, but IMHO the key is to cause long yardage downs (sacks and TFL), which pares down what the other offense can call, which means you can dial up even more disruption and ultimately lead to turnovers (ints or punts). You do that with dirsruption, all out and exotic blitzes, etc. and I think those are easier and better disguised from the 3-4, 2-5, 4-2-5, whatever you want to call it. And absolutley you will be caught with your pants down, probably several times a game, and they will hit a long pass or run on you (but lets be honest, they were doing that last year anyway), but hopefully we don't lead the entire country in fewest turnovers again. So, I am calling for a change in defensive... character maybe? Emphasis? Play calling? just not neccisarily a change in the "base" Welcome back! Hopefully you had a great time in _________. I was going to post what I am going to post, but I did not want to just respond to myself, so thank you for giving me the opportunity. Clemson (4-3 base) 44 - Alabama (3-4 base) 16 Clemson ran for 135 yards rushing (4.4 ypc) and passed for 347 yards (10.8 yards/pass). Clemson was 10-15 on third down and 1-1 on fourth down. Clemson was 5-6 on third down with 3rd & 6 or less and converted the fourth down on the sole third down stop. Alabama, the second best defensive team in all of college football, could not manage a single sack out of the 3-4. Drives allowed: Touchdown: 4 plays, 75 yards. Converted a 3rd & 14. Touchdown: 6 plays, 65 yards. Converted a 3rd & 5.
Touchdown: 8 plays, 47 yards. Converted a 3rd & 2 and 3rd & 7.
Field Goal: 8 plays, 61 yards.
Touchdown: 3 plays, 76 yards.
Touchdown: 12 plays, 89 yards. Converted a 3rd & 12, 3rd & 9, and 3rd & 5.
End of Game: 14 plays, 94 yards. Converted 3rd & 1, 3rd & 6, and 4th & 5.
I still maintain that, if Alabama cannot run a successful 3-4, Tibs has a snowball's chance of running a successful 3-4 in Corvallis.
Still, even as 3-4's go, Tibs' was uninspiring and still seemingly too complex to be run successfully last year. |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Aug 19, 2019 14:58:39 GMT -8
Been on vacation so this is my first chance to reply. I agree that what we saw last year was a vanilla and VERY uneffective 3-4 defense. Hence my chomping at the bit to see a defense (regardless of "base") that is focused on disruption. Regardless of base scheme I don't think we have the talent to just line up and beat Stanford or even Cal or UCLA three downs in a row, toe to toe, your base plays against ours. The other team WILL score against this defense, maybe not quite as often as last year, and I do think some of the transfers will be difference makers, but IMHO the key is to cause long yardage downs (sacks and TFL), which pares down what the other offense can call, which means you can dial up even more disruption and ultimately lead to turnovers (ints or punts). You do that with dirsruption, all out and exotic blitzes, etc. and I think those are easier and better disguised from the 3-4, 2-5, 4-2-5, whatever you want to call it. And absolutley you will be caught with your pants down, probably several times a game, and they will hit a long pass or run on you (but lets be honest, they were doing that last year anyway), but hopefully we don't lead the entire country in fewest turnovers again. So, I am calling for a change in defensive... character maybe? Emphasis? Play calling? just not neccisarily a change in the "base" Welcome back! Hopefully you had a great time in _________. I was going to post what I am going to post, but I did not want to just respond to myself, so thank you for giving me the opportunity. Clemson (4-3 base) 44 - Alabama (3-4 base) 16 Clemson ran for 135 yards rushing (4.4 ypc) and passed for 347 yards (10.8 yards/pass). Clemson was 10-15 on third down and 1-1 on fourth down. Clemson was 5-6 on third down with 3rd & 6 or less and converted the fourth down on the sole third down stop. Alabama, the second best defensive team in all of college football, could not manage a single sack out of the 3-4. Drives allowed: Touchdown: 4 plays, 75 yards. Converted a 3rd & 14. Touchdown: 6 plays, 65 yards. Converted a 3rd & 5.
Touchdown: 8 plays, 47 yards. Converted a 3rd & 2 and 3rd & 7.
Field Goal: 8 plays, 61 yards.
Touchdown: 3 plays, 76 yards.
Touchdown: 12 plays, 89 yards. Converted a 3rd & 12, 3rd & 9, and 3rd & 5.
End of Game: 14 plays, 94 yards. Converted 3rd & 1, 3rd & 6, and 4th & 5.
I still maintain that, if Alabama cannot run a successful 3-4, Tibs has a snowball's chance of running a successful 3-4 in Corvallis.
Still, even as 3-4's go, Tibs' was uninspiring and still seemingly too complex to be run successfully last year.Point taken. Although, you could also chalk this result up to any one team can beat another on "Any Given Sunday". FWIW, the very same matchup the year before resulted in Clemson scoring a measly six (6) points against Alabama's unsuccessful 3-4 defense  Your sample size of 1 game is a pretty meager oyster to make a soup condemning an entire base defense off of.... But, still, point taken. Every defense will, and can get exposed, especially in the hands of an overwhelmed, uninspiring, unimaginative, inflexible coach or coordinator. I really really really really really hope that Tibs proves to us all that he is indeed a very good defensive coordinator, able to game plan, scheme, make adjustments and coach up his players with the best of them, becuase we need another coaching change (any level, any sport) as much as we need another hole in our collective head |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 19, 2019 18:11:31 GMT -8
Welcome back! Hopefully you had a great time in _________. I was going to post what I am going to post, but I did not want to just respond to myself, so thank you for giving me the opportunity. Clemson (4-3 base) 44 - Alabama (3-4 base) 16 Clemson ran for 135 yards rushing (4.4 ypc) and passed for 347 yards (10.8 yards/pass). Clemson was 10-15 on third down and 1-1 on fourth down. Clemson was 5-6 on third down with 3rd & 6 or less and converted the fourth down on the sole third down stop. Alabama, the second best defensive team in all of college football, could not manage a single sack out of the 3-4. Drives allowed: Touchdown: 4 plays, 75 yards. Converted a 3rd & 14. Touchdown: 6 plays, 65 yards. Converted a 3rd & 5.
Touchdown: 8 plays, 47 yards. Converted a 3rd & 2 and 3rd & 7.
Field Goal: 8 plays, 61 yards.
Touchdown: 3 plays, 76 yards.
Touchdown: 12 plays, 89 yards. Converted a 3rd & 12, 3rd & 9, and 3rd & 5.
End of Game: 14 plays, 94 yards. Converted 3rd & 1, 3rd & 6, and 4th & 5.
I still maintain that, if Alabama cannot run a successful 3-4, Tibs has a snowball's chance of running a successful 3-4 in Corvallis.
Still, even as 3-4's go, Tibs' was uninspiring and still seemingly too complex to be run successfully last year.Point taken. Although, you could also chalk this result up to any one team can beat another on "Any Given Sunday". FWIW, the very same matchup the year before resulted in Clemson scoring a measly six (6) points against Alabama's unsuccessful 3-4 defense Your sample size of 1 game is a pretty meager oyster to make a soup condemning an entire base defense off of.... But, still, point taken. Every defense will, and can get exposed, especially in the hands of an overwhelmed, uninspiring, unimaginative, inflexible coach or coordinator. I really really really really really hope that Tibs proves to us all that he is indeed a very good defensive coordinator, able to game plan, scheme, make adjustments and coach up his players with the best of them, becuase we need another coaching change (any level, any sport) as much as we need another hole in our collective head Alabama sort of fell apart down the stretch defensively (by Alabama standards). The Tide finished by allowing 28, 34, and 44 points. Entering 2018, the Tide had only allowed 13 running backs to ever rush for 100 yards since 2007. In the last five games of 2018, Alabama allowed at least 130 yards rushing in each game with an average of 171 yards/game). That is unheard of for the Tide! I think that Alabama really misses Jeremy Pruitt, who took over the head coaching spot at Tennessee, got rid of a 4-2-5 in favor of a 3-4, and improved the Vols by two games in conference. If Tibs really knew how to coach a 3-4, though, he would be in Tuscaloosa (or pretty much anywhere else), rather than Corvallis. Maybe he will be after his monster season this year? We'll see. |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Aug 20, 2019 9:29:50 GMT -8
Point taken. Although, you could also chalk this result up to any one team can beat another on "Any Given Sunday". FWIW, the very same matchup the year before resulted in Clemson scoring a measly six (6) points against Alabama's unsuccessful 3-4 defense Your sample size of 1 game is a pretty meager oyster to make a soup condemning an entire base defense off of.... But, still, point taken. Every defense will, and can get exposed, especially in the hands of an overwhelmed, uninspiring, unimaginative, inflexible coach or coordinator. I really really really really really hope that Tibs proves to us all that he is indeed a very good defensive coordinator, able to game plan, scheme, make adjustments and coach up his players with the best of them, becuase we need another coaching change (any level, any sport) as much as we need another hole in our collective head Alabama sort of fell apart down the stretch defensively (by Alabama standards). The Tide finished by allowing 28, 34, and 44 points. Entering 2018, the Tide had only allowed 13 running backs to ever rush for 100 yards since 2007. In the last five games of 2018, Alabama allowed at least 130 yards rushing in each game with an average of 171 yards/game). That is unheard of for the Tide! I think that Alabama really misses Jeremy Pruitt, who took over the head coaching spot at Tennessee, got rid of a 4-2-5 in favor of a 3-4, and improved the Vols by two games in conference. If Tibs really knew how to coach a 3-4, though, he would be in Tuscaloosa (or pretty much anywhere else), rather than Corvallis. Maybe he will be after his monster season this year? We'll see. Calling it now... Tibs will be the Broyles Award winner this year, and Moore and Gumbs will be co defensive players of the year. Moore with 90 tackles and 8 interceptions and Gumbs with 16 sacks and 4 forced fumbles... How is THAT for optimistic Orange colored glasses, MONSTER year!!! I will of course delete this post probably sometime in September |
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on Aug 20, 2019 9:49:56 GMT -8
Alabama sort of fell apart down the stretch defensively (by Alabama standards). The Tide finished by allowing 28, 34, and 44 points. Entering 2018, the Tide had only allowed 13 running backs to ever rush for 100 yards since 2007. In the last five games of 2018, Alabama allowed at least 130 yards rushing in each game with an average of 171 yards/game). That is unheard of for the Tide! I think that Alabama really misses Jeremy Pruitt, who took over the head coaching spot at Tennessee, got rid of a 4-2-5 in favor of a 3-4, and improved the Vols by two games in conference. If Tibs really knew how to coach a 3-4, though, he would be in Tuscaloosa (or pretty much anywhere else), rather than Corvallis. Maybe he will be after his monster season this year? We'll see. Calling it now... Tibs will be the Broyles Award winner this year, and Moore and Gumbs will be co defensive players of the year. Moore with 90 tackles and 8 interceptions and Gumbs with 16 sacks and 4 forced fumbles... How is THAT for optimistic Orange colored glasses, MONSTER year!!! I will of course delete this post probably sometime in September And our kicker will be a Lou Groza finalist! |
|
|
|
Post by bucktoothvarmit on Aug 20, 2019 10:09:12 GMT -8
Calling it now... Tibs will be the Broyles Award winner this year, and Moore and Gumbs will be co defensive players of the year. Moore with 90 tackles and 8 interceptions and Gumbs with 16 sacks and 4 forced fumbles... How is THAT for optimistic Orange colored glasses, MONSTER year!!! I will of course delete this post probably sometime in September And our kicker will be a Lou Groza finalist! I don't know about any of that, but I'm calling this one.............The Beavs whip the Cowboys straight up on 8/30!! I'm wearing those Orange colored glasses until they get ripped off my face........(probably sometime in October  ) Go Beavs!! |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Aug 20, 2019 10:11:51 GMT -8
Calling it now... Tibs will be the Broyles Award winner this year, and Moore and Gumbs will be co defensive players of the year. Moore with 90 tackles and 8 interceptions and Gumbs with 16 sacks and 4 forced fumbles... How is THAT for optimistic Orange colored glasses, MONSTER year!!! I will of course delete this post probably sometime in September And our kicker will be a Lou Groza finalist! I am super excited about Jeffrey Nelson too!  |
|
)