Giving up the short routes?

[Soonermagik]

We seem to give receivers even of lesser talent i.e. Baylor, Iowa State etc.. lots of room to take the underneath routes. This allows teams 5-7 yards a play, which is more effective than running against our defense.

Is this a good strategy? I don't understand why we don't move our DB's right on top of the receivers and take away the short routes. IMHO, we need to trust our safeties, and get more aggressive on defense.

[ouwapiti]

i'm a lot more worried about giving up the long routes....if we give them up to baylor....whats gonna happen in lubbock???...i'm very antsy about this saturday....giving up the long pass has been ou's 'achilles' the last few years

[Soonermagik]

I feel that Tech's plan is going to be slants, curls, screen passes to wear out our D and move the ball. I know what you are saying about giving up the deep ball, but Tech is really a west coast offense. They love it when teams give them the short routes.

[illinisooner]

We give up the short routes to prevent the big play, or so we're told. Of course, this means we must tackle well and not overpursue when those short routes are completed.

[jwlynn64]

Tech threw the ball down field Saturday vs. Texas. In particular, they threw down the middle, which has been a weakness for us this year.

Of course, if I saw that then the OU staff noticed that as well. I'm sure they will adjust the D accordingly.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

We seem to give receivers even of lesser talent i.e. Baylor, Iowa State etc.. lots of room to take the underneath routes. This allows teams 5-7 yards a play, which is more effective than running against our defense.

Is this a good strategy? I don't understand why we don't move our DB's right on top of the receivers and take away the short routes. IMHO, we need to trust our safeties, and get more aggressive on defense.

our philosophy is to make an offense execute 10 plays to score, instead of gambling and allowing them to score in 1.

[The Maestro]

our philosophy is to make an offense execute 10 plays to score, instead of gambling and allowing them to score in 1.

I do agree that is our philosophy, but if the opponent takes 10 plays and scores and burns 7 minutes off the clock and gets our defense tired, I'd prefer taking the chance of blitzing, playing man some on lesser talented teams and forcing the QB to make a great play in three seconds versus making a 7 to 8 yard play in five or six seconds.

I guess I wish we would just mix it up more. Disguise coverages (if we aren't) and make them think zone when we go man with a blitz and then make them think man and blitz when we go zone. The key to any scheme is making the opponent think you are doing one thing and doing the other. Same goes for the offensive side of the ball.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

i think your quote says everything i'm thinking. we are struggling with the fundamentals of the simplest parts of our defense with guys who have been playing it for 2-3 years. we as a rule have been a zone/zone blitz team for 7 years, yet somehow we have ended up with a hodge podge of guys that don't fit the system.

better player != more athletic

the most athletic player i've ever seen sat the bench behind jamelle holieway.

[The Maestro]

i think your quote says everything i'm thinking. we are struggling with the fundamentals of the simplest parts of our defense with guys who have been playing it for 2-3 years. we as a rule have been a zone/zone blitz team for 7 years, yet somehow we have ended up with a hodge podge of guys that don't fit the system.

better player != more athletic

the most athletic player i've ever seen sat the bench behind jamelle holieway.

Yeah, great point. And not sure if you meant Eric Mitchel or Charles Thompson, but both might work in that scenario.

I guess I just think sometimes we make it too hard. I mean, the Baylor QB??? We can't go man and blitz the hell out of him, drop the middle backer a safety and blitz everyone else and force him to make a great throw on two proven athletes in Reggie and Marcus in three seconds before 7 guys converge on him? Sure, if we are playing a great QB that might not be the best idea, but football is a game of penetration and if the defense is always backpedaling it is like we are hoping the offense has enough plays to make a mistake versus forcing them to make a bad play.

Like I said, kudos to LSU's attacking defense. Had they not gone after John Parker Wilson with the game tied late the game might have gone to overtime. But they attacked him, forced him to make a bad play and now they are ranked ahead of us. I wish our defense would come after people more like that, especially when they don't necessarily have the best talent to make big plays with a blitz coming.

And please someone explain to me what a delayed blitz does that is a benefit to a defense! The way I see it, it just takes a guy out of coverage, but he delays the blitz so he doesn't force a quick decision by the quarterback. Venables or someone on our staff loves the delayed blitz and it makes no sense to me at all.

[TopDawg]

And please someone explain to me what a delayed blitz does that is a benefit to a defense! The way I see it, it just takes a guy out of coverage, but he delays the blitz so he doesn't force a quick decision by the quarterback. Venables or someone on our staff loves the delayed blitz and it makes no sense to me at all.

I usually prefer a regular blitz, but the advantage, as I see it, to a delayed blitz is that it might be less likely to be picked up because the person responsible for picking up that blitz will put their attention elsewhere when they see you're not blitzing.

A regular blitz that takes 1 second to get to the blocker and ends there is often less effective than a delayed blitz that takes 2 seconds to get to where the blocker would've been.

[OUmillenium]

Nice explanation, I'll buy it.

Also, agree with what Maestro has to say.

[The Maestro]

I usually prefer a regular blitz, but the advantage, as I see it, to a delayed blitz is that it might be less likely to be picked up because the person responsible for picking up that blitz will put their attention elsewhere when they see you're not blitzing.

A regular blitz that takes 1 second to get to the blocker and ends there is often less effective than a delayed blitz that takes 2 seconds to get to where the blocker would've been.

I see that point, but I think the QB at Baylor is more apt to feel the pressure before the snap and think, "OH, CRAP! Here comes Nic Harris at the snap and we have no one to block him! I have two to three seconds to make a play!" Again, it goes back to mixing it up and not always being the same thing. Use it all...man and blitz, cover two, zone blitzes...keep changing so the offense gets no flow, circa 2001 Orange Bowl against a 50 point, 500 yard offense per game that gets shutout.

[The_Red_Patriot]

Bend don't break defense. Yea teams will get total yards against you but they won't put up the points.

OU's D gets stout once a team gets within the 35.

[The Maestro]

In reference to this year, I just wish we would have forced that Tim Wakefield heater throwing Cody Hawkins into making quick and accurate throws instead of dropping back and throwing underneath routes on their way to beating us...and our bending, not breaking, on the field entirely too long in the second half defense.

[TopDawg]

I see that point, but I think the QB at Baylor is more apt to feel the pressure before the snap and think, "OH, CRAP! Here comes Nic Harris at the snap and we have no one to block him! I have two to three seconds to make a play!"

Yeah, a delayed blitz is more of a "strategy" blitz and may seem a little overboard against a team that you are significantly more talented than. Unless you're just practicing it for future use.

You can probably put that Baylor QB in the same state of mind just by faking a blitz.

[Soonermagik]

I do agree that is our philosophy, but if the opponent takes 10 plays and scores and burns 7 minutes off the clock and gets our defense tired, I'd prefer taking the chance of blitzing, playing man some on lesser talented teams and forcing the QB to make a great play in three seconds versus making a 7 to 8 yard play in five or six seconds.

I guess I wish we would just mix it up more. Disguise coverages (if we aren't) and make them think zone when we go man with a blitz and then make them think man and blitz when we go zone. The key to any scheme is making the opponent think you are doing one thing and doing the other. Same goes for the offensive side of the ball.

Well put!!!!! I remember one play in particular against Baylor where we were playing nickel and their QB audibles and I told my wife they are going to run. Sure enough they break off a huge run for 20 + yards. I agree 100% we don't disguise our coverages enough.

Plus, it is not like Baylor scored 10 points, 21 points is pretty significant. If our offense had sputtered at all we could have been in a real dog fight. I just miss the old aggressive style of defense Mike Stoops brought. Sure you can get beat deep, but you can also create fumbles, sacks, picks, make them go more conservative on offense. Really a strong defense can control the tempo of the game.

[The Maestro]

You can probably put that Baylor QB in the same state of mind just by faking a blitz.

Yeah, my wife fakes and I am totally kewl with it! :cool:

[DreamZ22]

our philosophy is to make an offense execute 10 plays to score, instead of gambling and allowing them to score in 1.


OUTSTANDING ANSWER!!! Read my mind.

[ashley]

I am more than willing to let our coaches that see all the video and have been doing it a long time make the decisions.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I am more than willing to let our coaches that see all the video and have been doing it a long time make the decisions.

:confused:

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I m really not that concerned myself..I think OU slows them down just like every other year until Harrell gets frustrated and starts forcing throws..OU gets a couple of INTS and Sooners win again

[madillsoonerfan5353]

Bend don't break defense. Yea teams will get total yards against you but they won't put up the points.

OU's D gets stout once a team gets within the 35.

I agree it's sucks giving up tons of yards, but yard don't win the game!!!

[MI Sooner]

I guess I just think sometimes we make it too hard. I mean, the Baylor QB??? We can't go man and blitz the hell out of him, drop the middle backer a safety and blitz everyone else and force him to make a great throw on two proven athletes in Reggie and Marcus in three seconds before 7 guys converge on him? Sure, if we are playing a great QB that might not be the best idea, but football is a game of penetration and if the defense is always backpedaling it is like we are hoping the offense has enough plays to make a mistake versus forcing them to make a bad play.

This is exactly what I think. I mean, we have the players that are ideally suited to this type of defense, but we still run a soft cover 2, zone-blitz scheme. It's even more troubling when we give up the deep ball in that coverage.

I say play tight and aggressive, give up the occassional big play, but get a bunch of three and outs. Can anyone dig up stats on three and outs, and we rank in forcing them?

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Again, it goes back to mixing it up and not always being the same thing. Use it all...man and blitz, cover two, zone blitzes...keep changing so the offense gets no flow, circa 2001 Orange Bowl against a 50 point, 500 yard offense per game that gets shutout.

You know, I don't recall seeing our defense go into man all season. Even with the blitz, they're either bringing linebackers and rolling the nickel up with Cover 2 over, cracking the nickel with LBs fanning out to cover the flat with corners in soft zone, or cracking a DB with a zone blitz and a safety over. Never once do I recall seeing straight up man coverage.

With that, you guys are right. Southwest Airlines couldn't get behind the defense. But there's a lot of the under where receivers are catching balls in the seams. Corners are releasing to the safeties quickly, and with safeties sittin' on the deep third, you can hit shallow posts and drags all day long, ESPECIALLY when you support it with routes to the deep thirds to push the safeties back.

The only real variance I've seen so far is against a 5 WR set. And even then, they've shown press at times, only to peel off to settle back in zone.

What had me scratchin' my head was all the stunts we ran on the defensive front. So much so it kinda put the brakes on a consistent upfield pass rush. Or else it seemed that way, but I haven't actually shaken down the film yet.