Venables, Stoops, Special Teams, the D, lack of team motivation

[MamaMia]

If BV wanted to run some man to man would Stoops even let him? We don't know who's making the decision not to but with all due respect, the buck does stop with Mr. Stoops.

Do the players even want it bad enough to win a BCS game, or a big game of any kind? Thats why I tend to try not to blame any one person. We have problems with the players motivation, the special teams, the defense and the coaching.

We are in such deep do do. :O

Oh and yes, I'm spoiled. Spoiled rotten. We are OU...this state and lots of peoples money is put up to feed the monster yet I havent seen a well fed monster lately. :D

[oudivesherpa]

Burp!

[MamaMia]

Burp!You always bring so much to the table. :D

[WA. Sooner]

I would just be happy to see the special teams not play as special ed teams
O = A
D in the red = B+
D between the 20 =C/C-
Special teams = F

[fadada1]

i'm sick of the lack of D and special teams as well, but...

WE'VE ONLY LOST 1 GAME TO THE #1 TEAM IN THE COUNTRY!!!!

[MichiganSooner]

What he said.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Mama, IMO, I don't we have the guys on D to run man to man..especially against the teams that run 4 or 5 wide receivers out on the field....Jackson and Franks maybe could handle man to man but I don't think anybody else can.....

I think the problem with the zone D is that the guys are "covering the ground" instead of covering the wide out in their area of the field...Its like sometimes they don't get that the man in their area is their responsibility.

Watch what Oregon State did to USC..they played zone but everytime a USC receiver ran through their zone, they stayed with him til he left their area and dumped him off to the next defender in the next spot on the field..

I think Curly Bill is right...Its not so much that its a zone, but a SOFT zone.

[colleyvillesooner]

I think Curly Bill is right...Its not so much that its a zone, but a SOFT zone.

They have pills for that now...

[ashley]

Man is the worst thing you can run against the crossing routes people run now, especially Tech. It is also a sure way to increase your chance of getting beat deep.

[boomermagic]

They have pills for that now...

:D

[NormanPride]

Geez.. for the last time, we DO run man to man. Remember that long touchdown against KU where Jackson fell down? That was man-to-man.

[BoulderSooner79]

Mama, IMO, I don't we have the guys on D to run man to man..especially against the teams that run 4 or 5 wide receivers out on the field....Jackson and Franks maybe could handle man to man but I don't think anybody else can.....

I think the problem with the zone D is that the guys are "covering the ground" instead of covering the wide out in their area of the field...Its like sometimes they don't get that the man in their area is their responsibility.

Watch what Oregon State did to USC..they played zone but everytime a USC receiver ran through their zone, they stayed with him til he left their area and dumped him off to the next defender in the next spot on the field..

I think Curly Bill is right...Its not so much that its a zone, but a SOFT zone.

I totally agree - if we played man a lot against TT, they would get a zillion yards. The key is to be unpredictable and give different looks to the offense. Force the QB to figure what is going on during the play within a couple of seconds. They will make mistakes and it is imperative to cash in on those.

[boomermagic]

Motivation is part of a coaches job... Barry was the best at this...

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Geez.. for the last time, we DO run man to man. Remember that long touchdown against KU where Jackson fell down? That was man-to-man.

Not saying that they weren't in man to man, but didn't Jackson fall when he tried to jam Briscoe? Coming up and jamming the receiver to go inside is part of cover 2 zone defense to make him go to where the the help is...Jackson goes to jam, falls, Briscoe runs straight down the field where there is no help...

[NormanPride]

Then why wasn't there help downfield? He was on an island and our safeties were in the box to support the run.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Thats the problem with jamming at the line, if its not successful..If you don't force the wideout to run inside where the safeties are, then that is what happens....no help and long touchdown scores

[OU-HSV]

I just rewatched the game vs. texass.
I still maintain that after watching it once again, the D seemed poorly coached (and when you top that off with poor fundamental individual play, it's not a good combo to have). They were constantly not in position to cover the WRs, they were not in position to keep Colt from running free, they allowed too many big plays and too many points.
To me the fundamentals that lacked in specific in this game were not wrapping up when you hit someone. Being disciplined, for example, don't jump offsides (especially on third downs!), don't hit the opposing QB at all when he's stepping out of bounds (especially on his own sideline), and certainly don't do it twice.

And for those of you who argue that our defense is playing worse than normal because we lost Reynolds, my answer is, shouldn't Venables have a solid backup coached up ready to fill that role in case something like this happened?? Especially knowing Reynolds had a history of knee injuries. We should be deep at most or all positions, especially with the hype that all our recruits get. Especially with the talent we have.

And for those of you who say, the refs screwed us out of that game, I don't agree with that either. We had some calls go our way that probably shouldn't have as well. I agree that our Int. in the endzone was an int, he seemed to have possession with both feet on the ground before he landed on the ground and the ball came out. But that doesn't mean we would have won the game, we only would have gotten the momentum back.

The frustrating thing to me is that we're having so many problems this late into the season, in every game. Especially in the special teams category. Luckily and happily, we have a high powered offense that seems to be well coached 99% of the time and is capable of putting points up on anyone. The concern is that we face many teams who are also capable of putting many points up, especially when a defense is playing inconsistent.
Again, I'll say that I just want to see some changes for the better so we have a better chance at winning the big games. Whether the changes are to fire Brent, or for Stoops to have a one on one with Brent warning him that things need to change, or what. I don't have those answers.

So for those of you who possibly read all of that...I guess what I'm trying to say (in closing of my short story here), MamaMia, I agree...at some point Bob needs to take action to fix the D...he's the head coach, he's the man.

[TheUnnamedSooner]

i'm sick of the lack of D and special teams as well, but...

WE'VE ONLY LOST 1 GAME TO THE #1 TEAM IN THE COUNTRY!!!!

Yes, but we were the #1 team at the time.

[DangTire]

i'm sick of the lack of D and special teams as well, but...

WE'VE ONLY LOST 1 GAME TO THE #1 TEAM IN THE COUNTRY!!!!

That's all fine and dandy to say right now, just wait until the offense sputters and see how you're excuse sounds then.

[DangTire]

I just rewatched the game vs. texass.
I still maintain that after watching it once again, the D seemed poorly coached (and when you top that off with poor fundamental individual play, it's not a good combo to have). They were constantly not in position to cover the WRs, they were not in position to keep Colt from running free, they allowed too many big plays and too many points.
To me the fundamentals that lacked in specific in this game were not wrapping up when you hit someone. Being disciplined, for example, don't jump offsides (especially on third downs!), don't hit the opposing QB at all when he's stepping out of bounds (especially on his own sideline), and certainly don't do it twice.

And for those of you who argue that our defense is playing worse than normal because we lost Reynolds, my answer is, shouldn't Venables have a solid backup coached up ready to fill that role in case something like this happened?? Especially knowing Reynolds had a history of knee injuries. We should be deep at most or all positions, especially with the hype that all our recruits get. Especially with the talent we have.

And for those of you who say, the refs screwed us out of that game, I don't agree with that either. We had some calls go our way that probably shouldn't have as well. I agree that our Int. in the endzone was an int, he seemed to have possession with both feet on the ground before he landed on the ground and the ball came out. But that doesn't mean we would have won the game, we only would have gotten the momentum back.

The frustrating thing to me is that we're having so many problems this late into the season, in every game. Especially in the special teams category. Luckily and happily, we have a high powered offense that seems to be well coached 99% of the time and is capable of putting points up on anyone. The concern is that we face many teams who are also capable of putting many points up, especially when a defense is playing inconsistent.
Again, I'll say that I just want to see some changes for the better so we have a better chance at winning the big games. Whether the changes are to fire Brent, or for Stoops to have a one on one with Brent warning him that things need to change, or what. I don't have those answers.

So for those of you who possibly read all of that...I guess what I'm trying to say (in closing of my short story here), MamaMia, I agree...at some point Bob needs to take action to fix the D...he's the head coach, he's the man.

They haven't had fundamentals or looked like they were cohesive in 4 years. And Bob is a person who's gotten fat and happy and has a ready made excuse for poor performance. I've yet to hear Vulnerables take any blame for the atrocious coaching he's plagued OU with.