Brent Vulnerables on Al's show tonight

[SoonerNate]

Will Al hold his hand or ask tough questions?


Yeah right. Is there such thing as critical journalist up there for that paper or are they all just a branch of the sports info department?

Maybe I'll call in and give him a piece of my mind.

We better not run that Tampa 2 D this year or I will explode.

[mgsooner]

Will Al hold his hand or ask tough questions?


Yeah right. Is there such thing as critical journalist up there for that paper or are they all just a branch of the sports info department?

Maybe I'll call in and give him a piece of my mind.

We better not run that Tampa 2 D this year or I will explode.

You definitely should. Forgive me if I don't hold my breath though.

[Quik Sand]

:rolleyes:

[Sooner_Tuf]

Will Al hold his hand or ask tough questions?


Yeah right. Is there such thing as critical journalist up there for that paper or are they all just a branch of the sports info department?

Maybe I'll call in and give him a piece of my mind.

We better not run that Tampa 2 D this year or I will explode.

If you do explode try to get that on video.

[Big D Sooner]

We don't run a "Tampa 2" defense. We really never have.

[Big D Sooner]

I'm sure we occasionally do run a "Tampa 2" as an individual play, but our defense is probably more of a attacking defense that mixes in multiple zone looks and uses a lot of zone blitzes with the occasional man look mixed in.

[Mike Stoops]

Tramel has done a pretty good job of convincing people he's a great DC. I think he's a great LB coach and an ok DC. He's never gonna suffocate other teams so we have to score 30 to win.

[cleller]

I believe we run the "donut defense". There's a hole in the middle.

I know, its supposed to be there.

[Leroy Lizard]

Will Al hold his hand or ask tough questions?


Yeah right. Is there such thing as critical journalist up there for that paper or are they all just a branch of the sports info department?

Maybe I'll call in and give him a piece of my mind.

We better not run that Tampa 2 D this year or I will explode.

Make sure you charge the OU Athletic Department for your expert consulting services. No one should give out such advice without being properly compensated.

BTW, I hope you're not advising multiple teams on your Best Strategies approach, as that could be a conflict of interest.

[AZSOONER]

I think he's a great LB coach and an ok DC. He's never gonna suffocate other teams so we have to score 30 to win.

Agreed

[rekamrettuB]

Will Al hold his hand or ask tough questions?

Yeah right. Is there such thing as critical journalist up there for that paper or are they all just a branch of the sports info department?

Maybe I'll call in and give him a piece of my mind.

We better not run that Tampa 2 D this year or I will explode.

What tough questions are there during the offseason? I would like to see what questions you would have for him. That would be fun.

[SoonerNate]

I listen to Bob's weekly pressers during the fall and the press is scared to ask tough questions.

[mightysooner]

Tramel has done a pretty good job of convincing people he's a great DC. I think he's a great LB coach and an ok DC. He's never gonna suffocate other teams so we have to score 30 to win.


Agreed.......unless we're playing at home. We tend to choke the hell out of people in Norman defensively. Not sure why that doesn't translate on the road.

[SoonerNate]

Agreed.......unless we're playing at home. We tend to choke the hell out of people in Norman defensively. Not sure why that doesn't translate on the road.

Hopefully it was just youth. We shall see this year.

[mightysooner]

Hopefully it was just youth. We shall see this year.

Meh....his defenses have really never been stifling on the road during his tenure at OU. They bow up at home and play to the crowd luv, but on the road seem soft-ish and somewhat disoriented most of the time IMHO. He did a good job of getting our defense settled down the stretch last season which I think definitely involved youth issues and personnel changes. I thought our defense played with much more nastiness and intensity with Box got back on the field. I sure hope he can go a full season this year. Box is a good player. He sheds blocks better than any of our other LB's.

[Mike Stoops]

He's had some good performances away from home: 2007 Big 12 CG, 2005 Holiday Bowl, 2009 RRS (I know we lost but our defense was brilliant that day). There's just no consistency from week to week.

[mightysooner]

He's had some good performances away from home: 2007 Big 12 CG, 2005 Holiday Bowl, 2009 RRS (I know we lost but our defense was brilliant that day). There's just no consistency from week to week.

I'm talking about true road games only in front of a hostile crowd. I agree our defense was brilliant in the 2009 RRSO though.

[SoonerNate]

Meh....his defenses have really never been stifling on the road during his tenure at OU. They bow up at home and play to the crowd luv, but on the road seem soft-ish and somewhat disoriented most of the time IMHO. He did a good job of getting our defense settled down the stretch last season which I think definitely involved youth issues and personnel changes. I thought our defense played with much more nastiness and intensity with Box got back on the field. I sure hope he can go a full season this year. Box is a good player. He sheds blocks better than any of our other LB's.

If he can stay healthy that would be huge.

[Mike Stoops]

All I know is we're stuck with him cuz Bob won't replace him and apparently no school wants him to be their next head coach. So I'm trying to convince myself we can win a MNC with him as DC. As long as we have Josh producing great QB play every year (and hopefully great playcalling now that he's OC) I guess it's a trade off I can live with.

[picasso]

Tramel has done a pretty good job of convincing people he's a great DC. I think he's a great LB coach and an ok DC. He's never gonna suffocate other teams so we have to score 30 to win.

Kind of like the guy with your username.

[Leroy Lizard]

I listen to Bob's weekly pressers during the fall and the press is scared to ask tough questions.

Because if they do they will make asses of themselves (which hasn't stopped them before).

I have no idea what tough questions someone could ask him without coming across like... well... me.

Do you have a list of questions you want asked?

[gaylordfan1]

Meh....his defenses have really never been stifling on the road during his tenure at OU. They bow up at home and play to the crowd luv, but on the road seem soft-ish and somewhat disoriented most of the time IMHO. He did a good job of getting our defense settled down the stretch last season which I think definitely involved youth issues and personnel changes. I thought our defense played with much more nastiness and intensity with Box got back on the field. I sure hope he can go a full season this year. Box is a good player. He sheds blocks better than any of our other LB's.

There was also a huge improvement when A Train left with another injury. When he was healthy he was a stud. He wasn't fully recovered from his broken leg and only hindered our DL play. We really started getting nasty on D when we instituted the 50 front.

[rainiersooner]

I listen to Bob's weekly pressers during the fall and the press is scared to ask tough questions.

I don't think they're scared. I think they know they won't get an answer if they ask a direct, tough question. So they try to fool Bob. Which just pisses him off and clams him up. Either way, Bob doesn't answer questions.

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Is this the part where I overstate the obvious... that Brent's defense is actually Bob's defense?... Too soon? Any takers?

***FAR VURNLBLES!!!!***

***FAR STUPS!!!!***

THEY TOOK OWR JAWBS!

[soonerboy_odanorth]

One more thing...

After coaching middle school football 4 of the last 5 years, I realize after reading a bunch of the moronic comments offered up about Venables that most of the people making them couldn't coach middle school football.

Oh, you think you can. But you can't. And you don't. My suggestion would be to make a call to your local grade/middle school or youth leagues and have a go at coaching. Volunteers are always needed. I think the majority of the harpies would shut their pieholes after the experience.

Otherwise, "clueless putzes" is a phrase that comes to mind...

[Mike Stoops]

Do middle school coaches make over half a million dollars a year?

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Do middle school coaches make over half a million dollars a year?

Nope. But they suffer the same morons that think they can do it better.

[SoonerNate]

Kind of like the guy with your username.

Yes, that guy. I remember when he was in Norman I actually looked forward to watching our defense even more so than our offense.

I just want to get back to those days.

[Mike Stoops]

Nope. But they suffer the same morons that think they can do it better.

I get it. You're one of those "superfans" who never complain about anything. I've never been a mindless sycophant who never questions anything but if it works for you great.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I get it. You're one of those "superfans" who never complain about anything. I've never been a mindless sycophant who never questions anything but if it works for you great.

Its more can you differentiate between an Xs and Os problem and a Johnny and Joes problem. If you coach you find out that you just can't do certain things because kids just don't do them well. Our issues on defense are venables problem, he did recruit our soft as charmin linebackers after all. The problem is that No scheme is going to cover that up.

[Leroy Lizard]

I get it. You're one of those "superfans" who never complain about anything. I've never been a mindless sycophant who never questions anything but if it works for you great.

Complaining is one thing; questioning the knowledge of a coach is another. I might think that Venables isn't the best coach around (although I think he's pretty good), but I'm not going to tell him he's doing it wrong unless I have the credentials.

[soonerboy_odanorth]

I get it. You're one of those "superfans" who never complain about anything. I've never been a mindless sycophant who never questions anything but if it works for you great.

No. You really don't get it.

You don't see that big plays against our defense are more often busted assignments by the alignees (as opposed to the aligners), or that maybe our talent doesn't match up that day that well against a particular opponent, or that yeah, the staff took a risk and called a blitz to one side but the O had the right play at the right time that countered it. And they are having to work against offenses that in the college game are more multi-faceted than at any other time. Sure, the entire defensive coaching staff has a hand in all of the above, as well as schemes and game plans.

But instead of understanding this, taking it as a whole, when something does go wrong you are perfectly content to bleet like a goat: "Venables is BAAAAAAAAD, BAAAAAAAAAAD."

And nowhere in my post did I indicate coach jock-sniffing as a pastime. Don't use big words you don't fully understand.

[picasso]

Yes, that guy. I remember when he was in Norman I actually looked forward to watching our defense even more so than our offense.

I just want to get back to those days.

I agree. Our teams back then never had to outscore anyone on the road.

[rekamrettuB]

I agree. Our teams back then never had to outscore anyone on the road.

Never?

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Yep we won at Texas A&M in 2000 because Mike Stoops saved the day by holding A&M to 0 points!

[NormanPride]

Its more can you differentiate between an Xs and Os problem and a Johnny and Joes problem. If you coach you find out that you just can't do certain things because kids just don't do them well. Our issues on defense are venables problem, he did recruit our soft as charmin linebackers after all. The problem is that No scheme is going to cover that up.
This. Venables has shown the ability to adapt to his players fairly well. Better than most DCs that I've seen. But what he doesn't do is recruit very well as a coordinator. And since he recruits the position that we rely on most in our D...

[Sooner_Tuf]

I get it. You're one of those "superfans" who never complain about anything. I've never been a mindless sycophant who never questions anything but if it works for you great.

Caeser didn't really live here, did he? I didn't think so.

[mightysooner]

No. You really don't get it.

You don't see that big plays against our defense are more often busted assignments by the alignees (as opposed to the aligners), or that maybe our talent doesn't match up that day that well against a particular opponent, or that yeah, the staff took a risk and called a blitz to one side but the O had the right play at the right time that countered it. And they are having to work against offenses that in the college game are more multi-faceted than at any other time. Sure, the entire defensive coaching staff has a hand in all of the above, as well as schemes and game plans.

But instead of understanding this, taking it as a whole, when something does go wrong you are perfectly content to bleet like a goat: "Venables is BAAAAAAAAD, BAAAAAAAAAAD."

And nowhere in my post did I indicate coach jock-sniffing as a pastime. Don't use big words you don't fully understand.

Anybody can see a "busted assignment" issue as we've had them for years. It's the frequency and consistency of "busted assignments" that begin to draw a coaches performance into question after a period of time.

I'm not a Venables lover, nor am I a hater. BUT.....the overriding FACT here is, if Brent were truly held in such lofty regard nationally as a highly respected and innovative defensive coordinator by other schools, he would've been snatched up a long time ago by one of those schools given his resume. He's been here for a long time. Unless his career goals are to lay low and continue to swing from Bob's nuts for the rest of his career, he's hit a ceiling for some reason. I don't think KW nor Long could carry Venables nuts as coaches but even they got hired away.

Venables has done some good jobs of righting the ship with his defenses mid-season, but it seems he's always having to plug leaking holes every year after shaky starts. I don't pretend to know why that is but I think that's the national perception of him. Oklahoma has shifted in it's national reputation as being spoken about in terms of a "high powered offense" almost exclusively. Rarely is there ever talk, or any buzz really, about our defense anymore.

[SoonerNate]

Anybody can see a "busted assignment" issue as we've had them for years. It's the frequency and consistency of "busted assignments" that begin to draw a coaches performance into question after a period of time.

I'm not a Venables lover, nor am I a hater. BUT.....the overriding FACT here is, if Brent were truly held in such lofty regard nationally as a highly respected and innovative defensive coordinator by other schools, he would've been snatched up a long time ago by one of those schools given his resume. He's been here for a long time. Unless his career goals are to lay low and continue to swing from Bob's nuts for the rest of his career, he's hit a ceiling for some reason. I don't think KW nor Long could carry Venables nuts as coaches but even they got hired away.

Venables has done some good jobs of righting the ship with his defenses mid-season, but it seems he's always having to plug leaking holes every year after shaky starts. I don't pretend to know why that is but I think that's the national perception of him. Oklahoma has shifted in it's national reputation as being spoken about in terms of a "high powered offense" almost exclusively. Rarely is there ever talk, or any buzz really, about our defense anymore.

A- MEN!

[Mike Stoops]

Anybody can see a "busted assignment" issue as we've had them for years. It's the frequency and consistency of "busted assignments" that begin to draw a coaches performance into question after a period of time.

I'm not a Venables lover, nor am I a hater. BUT.....the overriding FACT here is, if Brent were truly held in such lofty regard nationally as a highly respected and innovative defensive coordinator by other schools, he would've been snatched up a long time ago by one of those schools given his resume. He's been here for a long time. Unless his career goals are to lay low and continue to swing from Bob's nuts for the rest of his career, he's hit a ceiling for some reason. I don't think KW nor Long could carry Venables nuts as coaches but even they got hired away.

Venables has done some good jobs of righting the ship with his defenses mid-season, but it seems he's always having to plug leaking holes every year after shaky starts. I don't pretend to know why that is but I think that's the national perception of him. Oklahoma has shifted in it's national reputation as being spoken about in terms of a "high powered offense" almost exclusively. Rarely is there ever talk, or any buzz really, about our defense anymore.

This. I would also point to another guy on our staff, Willie Martinez. He wasn't a great DC either, that's why he got fired at UGA but that doesn't mean he can't be good DB coach for us. I thought he did a great job last year considering the youth and inexperience at the position. Some guys just have a lower ceiling than others.

[picasso]

Never?

Sarcasm.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Venables has done some good jobs of righting the ship with his defenses mid-season, but it seems he's always having to plug leaking holes every year after shaky starts. I don't pretend to know why that is but I think that's the national perception of him. Oklahoma has shifted in it's national reputation as being spoken about in terms of a "high powered offense" almost exclusively. Rarely is there ever talk, or any buzz really, about our defense anymore.

The rest of your post was pure conjecture (meaning that any side could be right without more facts). My only comment is that not every coach WANTS to be a head coach and your underlying assumption is that BV does. Mickey Andrews spent 30 years on the FSU staff because he only wanted to be a DC at that school.

So dealing with the quoted part of the post:

This isn't the first time this happened. At this time in 2002, Mike Stoops said that Eric Bassey was ahead of Roy Williams when he stepped in at SS. It was 5 games in before he had to pull the plug on that experiment and change his defense. This doesn't include the multiple times we've picked the wrong starting QB (hybl in 2001, white in 2002, bomar in 2005, etc).

So what can we infer from this:

1. The coaches make an assumption that how kids play in practice = how they will play in a game. They probably have some byzantine grading system that they tweak every year that they feel comes close. The reality is that game day performances vary quite a bit from practice performances. "Gamers" make this staff pull their hair out (this staff isn't alone in that aspect, I'm sure) and they will always give the nod to the "Great Practice Player".

2. Due to the nature of the game, performance in practice is HIGHLY dependant on talent/skill/motivation on the opposite side of the ball. When we see our DL dominate in the spring, the natural inclination is "BEST DL IN CFB/WORST OL IN CFB" - the reality is somewhere in the middle with the "dominated" side performing above expectations with the "dominating" one performing below. Getting your butt whipped tends to be a good motivator.

3. Due to NCAA Limitations, Coaches are to have ZERO information from the end of spring practices to the beginning of fall camp. No information on offseason workouts, no information on voluntary drills, No information period. However, this is when most coaches put together the framework of their defense during this time. They have to get this together to install it in fall camp. In fall camp, you install probably 50% of your stuff with the remaining things installed throughout the year (there is only so much you can install in 18 practices).

4. Once film starts to accumulate against opponents coaches go through a cycle.

1. Diagnose - See what you are weak against
2. Try to correct the player - Talk to them, Train them
3. See if its fixed
4. If Not, Make Decision to continue working with player, tweak scheme*, or replace player
5. Rinse/repeat

*Note that tweaking the scheme takes about 2-3 weeks to install with limited practice time

Given this, the defense making adjustment by the 5th/6th game sounds reasonable, don't you think?

At the end of the day, the question is whether the problem was an alignment issue or an alignee issue. In most of the cases over the years, this has ended up an alignee issue. This doesn't absolve the coaches, especially if they recruited the alignee, but it does show you why you see the cycle that you are seeing.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Anybody can see a "busted assignment" issue as we've had them for years. It's the frequency and consistency of "busted assignments" that begin to draw a coaches performance into question after a period of time.

Dealing with this one separately.

I remember Pee Wee Woods. I remember many, many, many busted assignments by Mr Pee Wee. I also, applying hindsight, know that we had a Thorpe Award winner redshirting that year. The question is whether it was Mike Stoops's fault that we endured all of those busted assignments or was Pee Wee BETTER than derrick strait AT THAT TIME.

Using more hindsight, I know that Stoops made the correct decision to let us endure busted assignments until Strait was ready. Even redshirting to get bulk, he tore up his shoulder in that MNC run. Had he played as a freshman he probably would have ended up like marcus walker or brandon everage - chronically injured.

So we were stuck with ole Pee Wee (until they yanked MT's shirt anyway). It wasn't like there was a waiver wire we could go to. As fans we just gritted our teeth because there was nothing else we could do.

Now lets look at Mike Stoops and 2002. That defense was inconsistent as crap (opponents avg 15/game but we gave up over 24 5 times). Why? Because he lost an early entrant at a critical position. Does anyone think we give up that many points (or is that inconsistent) if TGRW was still at safety?

BV's defenses have been PLAGUED by early entrants (sometimes multiple) at key positions. This forces us to flip guys from offense over or continuously break in new players at positions.

Now some other points to consider which I think are 100% owned by the coaching staff:

1. During BV's tenure, we have more gifted athletes than we had under MS, however these kids are much worse football players.

2. Our linebacker play is pitiful. Watch the scrimmage highlights on runs, find a linebacker and follow him (hard because of the camera angle) and watch him play linebacker like a poke. I tried to illustrate this last year and I probably will more after the spring game, but these guys couldn't start for John Blake.

3. We are playing younger kids more often and they are getting hurt more often. One thing that is often assumed on message boards is that a player is exactly the same/better after they are injured. In rare cases, this is true. In most cases, we have to assume that the player is somewhere between the same and a ghost of what he used to be. And even if they are a ghost, it doesn't mean they can't dominate this game (IE Demarco/Mike Gaddis).

[AlboSooner]

I think BV knows how to defend the play-action-pass....

[rekamrettuB]

Sarcasm.

Good. :D

[SpankyNek]

What most people don't understand is the absolute grinder that our defense is put through now due to our offensive tempo and scoring percentage.

BVs defenses routinely face 3 more possessions by their opponents than MS defenses did.

(My opus on this subject was set aflame with that "other" message board, and I have no desire to do the crunching again, so I am working from memory here)

I believe that BV is actually a miniscule (around .3 points per possession) better than Mike was at disallowing scoring (This was before last season occurred)

[Mike Stoops]

I would disagree that our LB play has been awful. That's one area Brent has been consistent on. The weak link the past few years has been the secondary. I think that's mainly because Bobby Jack was an awful DB coach.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I would disagree that our LB play has been awful. That's one area Brent has been consistent on. The weak link the past few years has been the secondary. I think that's mainly because Bobby Jack was an awful DB coach.

Lets play a game here then. You take screen caps of your stance (that our linebackers are good and that our secondary is bad) and I'll present screen caps of my stance (that our linebackers are poor and they are causing our secondary to underperform because they are having to cheat into run support). [Yes, there is a weakness in my argument because our safeties weren't well coached against the run last year ;) ]

I'll go first...

Big 12 Championship Game - Long Run by Nebraska

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay1.PNG

so we are lined up wrong here. even though we are in a base 3-4, they still have as many blockers as we have defenders on the wide side of the field.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay2.PNG

this is the key to the play. one of the things that we've always been susceptible too is what is known as crossbuck action. basically that the backs cross each other going to opposite sides of the formation. i honestly have no idea why this causes as much havok as it does on this play, but the fullback drags 3 guys out of the play.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay3.PNG

carter and lewis are zeroed in on the fullback and commit. i highly doubt that the FB is a key as its an option. you'd think lewis would be like box and still be waiting for the play. carter may have responsibility for the back in coverage.

also note alexander starting to turn out of his rush lane.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay4.PNG

alexander is completely hosed. he makes it even worse though by allowing the lineman to release on box. this is one of the problems with running a 3-4 with undersized DEs.

the guys in yellow are completely neurtalized

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay5.PNG

if this were shaggy, my drawing would represent what is about to happen to us. since this is soonerfans, i'm just bringing attention to our safeties who should be keeping clear of the trash but are overcomitting into the wash. this should be an 8 yard gain max, but once your safeties overcommit its a long run.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay6.PNG

the X is where nelson should be. it is alexander's bust as to why they get through the LOS, it is box/lewis's bust as to why they would get 10, its nelson's bust that gives up the TD.

what i think is the problem here is that nelson is responsible for the running lane between alexander and ronnell. the problem is that this should be a flexible concept. if alexander goes wide, you should cover the green to the inside. nelson stays in his assigned gap instead of attacking the hole in front of him. based on reynold's perfect game, nelson would NOT get a negative mark for this play, alexander would.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay7.PNG

just showing the nice bearhug that nebraska got away with. also noting that nelson goes outside giving up the TD.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay8.PNG

which of the 11 white shirts should bring him down before the goal line?

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Def_RunningPlay9.PNG

if you were to place bets which would you take to almost get the ball carrier?

an AA safety that is 3 yards behind them with an incredibly favorable angle?
an all big 12 linebacker that is 4 yards behind them with a slightly less favorable angle?
a sub player with no angle and 6 yards behind them?

yeah, carter quit on the play. he should have flagged him down at the 20 but he never accelerated

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Ok, Play 2

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA1.png

this is a couple of plays before the fumble that bounced into lewis's hands. power set with the pistol.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA2.png

key thing to notice is that pryce macon isn't blocked. now i'm not going to get down on macon too much because he played an incredible game. that being said his technique was horrible on these plays and a lot of the reason why they were so successful. if you are a 170 lb cornerback facing a full speed 220 lb running back, you dive at their legs. if you are a 250 lb DE facing a stationary 200 lb running back, you form tackle them, you don't dive at their legs.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA3.png

lewis takes a step inside. not sure why as the action is going the other way. box and lewis should at this point switch responsibilities and basically cross. this isn't text book technique, but its something that we used to do as kids all the time on leaking linemen. it allowed us to keep gap responsibilities while using our speed to get around the lineman.

when linemen break down you have to use their lack of lateral quickness against them. our linebackers are like moths to a flame when they see a lineman though.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA4.png

so macon dives at the legs. you can see here how easy this play would be to string out if he keeps his feet. jeez there are 2 guys right there for you grab onto. anyway...

the lane is beginning to form and you can see that the person who should be filling it doesn't have a clue what is going on. i've been a big carter fan through his career at OU but ever since i've started doing these play breakdowns its pretty obvious that he struggles in understanding the feel of the game.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA5.png

highlight the hold and carter not looking at the ballcarrier.

so at this point, everyone should be thinking run. from this point on, if they aren't moving towards the ball they have no clue what is going on. the only exception is the close side corner who has responsibility if they toss a lateral back on to his side.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA6.png

so you see here that we have 2 guys who are doing their job ronnell and ibiloye. everyone else is either confused (nelson) in the process of becoming aware (carter), or blocked (lewis/box)

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA7.png

this is where this just gets sad. ronnell has managed to move farther to the ball carrier than either box or lewis.

oh and nelson still hasn't committed to the run

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA8.png

lewis looks like he's going to get him but he just never accelerates enough to get to high gear. that knee is bothering him more than he lets on. please note that this is the position where travis lewis will stay for the rest of the play. box is still blocked.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA9.png

carter and nelson finally figure out its a run play. lewis is getting left behind. no travis and box is still blocked.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatA10.png

this is more to highlight that box is still blocked

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Play 3

so this is the next play in the series. it may look awefully familiar.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatB1.png

just showing the release on the linebackers, carter not looking at the ball carrier.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatB2.png

macon unblocked. mcfarland with good push. both linebackers already blocked. again.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatB3.png

macon going for the legs again. mcfarland doing well but losing leverage. lewis is trying to run around the lineman to the outside. this is a risky gambit that is only going to work if box has the inside.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatB4.png

lewis is around but the offensive lineman is still engaged. the most important thing to notice is the placement of the lineman's hands on lewis's shoulderpads. he has a ton of leverage on lewis's upper body at this point even though he's out of position. at this point, lewis is toast. the only real way out of this is to spin with the direction of the push and try a dive at berkheads legs when he comes around.

mcfarland hesitates here allowing the hole to open further. the reason is that helu jr looks like he's cut blocking him (in this case a chop block) because of macon's submarine tactic.

ronnell slings his guy to the ground (seriously why can't he play MLB?). ibiloye is past his guy.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatB5.png

lewis gets pushed out of the play. mcfarland gives up leverage protecting himself from helu. lewis closes the green

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatB6.png

mcfarland reaches out but is out of position. box is blocked. no carter. left side of the D is doing petty good.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatB7.png

nelson comes up and fills the gap. causing burkhead to make a turn that he can't hold.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatB8.png

nelson makes the tackle.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

and play 4, I'll wait for your breakdown

next play in the series.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatC1.png

so nebraska goes with the same play from a different formation. we look like we are in man to man and have rolled carter up into the box.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatC2.png

the first thing to notice is that they changed the blocking scheme. they decided to block macon and left lewis free. they are leaking out on box though.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatC3.png

lewis has a free run at the play. the one thing to notice is that lewis is really late geting to the LOS. this play is going to take forever to develop.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatC4.png

the ball is on the turf bouncing towards the hole and an unblocked travis lewis.

now based on the way this play was developing there are 2 unblocked sooners -> travis lewis and ronnell. what i think they were going to do is option to helu and then come back to lewis's side with burkhead and race him to the edge. this is why they cut box instead of locking up on him.

the fumble was caused by a couple of things ->

1) the center has to reach block mcfarland 1 on 1. he had to move to his left and the snap angled to the left. unnecessary risk by the OC when more conservative blocking is working.
2) burkhead tried to continue the play instead of eating it. inexperience.

these 3 series show you something though ->

1) ronnell is hard as crap to block. he was made to be an outside linebacker in the 3-4.
2) our linebackers are pretty good at defeating cut blocks. horrible at getting past anyone straight up.
3) our safeties don't react very well to the run
4) mcfarland gets good push, but doesn't understand how to seperate from the blocker and finish the tackle.

http://pics.ouportal.com/NU_Off_WildcatC5.png

lewis with the recovery.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

One last point, I'm not trying to show you up or anything. This is just the way I see it. Your viewpoint is different and if the evidence supports it, I'll revise my opinion on the linebackers.

[This is a typical offseason thread btw. Consume time ftw]

[SoonerOX]

I listen to Bob's weekly pressers during the fall and the press is scared to ask tough questions.

That's because Bob would eat their children.

[Mike Stoops]

One last point, I'm not trying to show you up or anything. This is just the way I see it. Your viewpoint is different and if the evidence supports it, I'll revise my opinion on the linebackers.

[This is a typical offseason thread btw. Consume time ftw]

I realize I'm being put in the awkward position of defending Brent but you're complaining about a game in which his defense:

1. Shut out the opponent in the second half
2. Forced 4 turnovers
3. Had 7 sacks

?

[TopDawg]

Tramel has done a pretty good job of convincing people he's a great DC. I think he's a great LB coach and an ok DC. He's never gonna suffocate other teams so we have to score 30 to win.

If we would've scored just 21 points each game in 2009, we would've gone from 7-5 (regular season) to 10-1-1 (Miami scored 21 against us).

[starclassic tama]

that's true, but the game obviously played right into venables hands by having martinez hobbling around like that. i don't think nebraska would have won the game with a healthy martinez, but it would have changed things for sure.

[JRAM]

Put the brains of nate and mike together and you may have a tube of ****.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I realize I'm being put in the awkward position of defending Brent but you're complaining about a game in which his defense:

1. Shut out the opponent in the second half
2. Forced 4 turnovers
3. Had 7 sacks

?

I'm not complaining about the game at all. I'm not one of the fans on this board that believes that we can win them all, all the time. What I'm showing is specific plays that even in a dominant win show weaknesses. Weaknesses that the next team in line would then exploit (if they were able).

[Leroy Lizard]

I'm not a Venables lover, nor am I a hater. BUT.....the overriding FACT here is, if Brent were truly held in such lofty regard nationally as a highly respected and innovative defensive coordinator by other schools, he would've been snatched up a long time ago by one of those schools given his resume.

This is one of the weakest arguments against a coach. We said this about KW. The fact that no program wanted KW was proof that he was a horrible coordinator. Then Indiana hires him. So what happens to the argument?


He's been here for a long time. Unless his career goals are to lay low and continue to swing from Bob's nuts for the rest of his career,

He's making like $400,000 per year in a fairly secure job. Oh yeah, he's really suffering.



Venables has done some good jobs of righting the ship with his defenses mid-season, but it seems he's always having to plug leaking holes every year after shaky starts. I don't pretend to know why that is but I think that's the national perception of him.

I think the national perception of him is far better than you think. Coaches tend to be looked upon more critically by their own fan base.

[LakeRat]

I'm talking about true road games only in front of a hostile crowd. I agree our defense was brilliant in the 2009 RRSO though.

I assume this is sarcasm? Our brilliant defense gave up 45 that game.

[jersey sooner]

The fact that no program wanted KW was proof that he was a horrible coordinator.

The same Kevin Wilson that orchestrated the highest scoring offense in the history of college football? And JKM, beautiful.

[jersey sooner]

I assume this is sarcasm? Our brilliant defense gave up 45 that game.

lol

[NormanPride]

Nobody wanted KW because he was a terrible interview. The guy's brilliant, but he's socially inept from what I hear.

[rekamrettuB]

I assume this is sarcasm? Our brilliant defense gave up 45 that game.

Try 16.

[C&CDean]

Yay! jkm is back. For those of you who don't know him, please don't be stupid enough to get into an x's and o's debate with him. It will be pure pwnage, and it won't be pretty.

Anyhow, welcome back dude.

[pphilfran]

Yay! jkm is back. For those of you who don't know him, please don't be stupid enough to get into an x's and o's debate with him. It will be pure pwnage, and it won't be pretty.

Anyhow, welcome back dude.

There are a few that I refuse to debate...he is one of them...

[NormanPride]

jkm is a n00b that loves girl's basketball. ;)

[LakeRat]

Jkm, the first play actually looks like a bad angle by Carter. The "wildcat" appears that the scheme was for macon to try and create a "pile" being the free man. We are in Man so it seems to me that you would want Carter to be looking at the man he is covering. The free man is nelson who is lined up way out of the play. I would have thought he would have gone with the guy in motion.

So to me the first play is created by a bad angle by Carter, a safety. And the second series of big plays is by a hurt or hobbled nelson, a safety.

Your argument was bad play by the linebackers not the safeties.

We were playing a running team. Not Texas Tech. I am not saying your wrong, but for offseason debate, could see that it was in fact good play design, but just poor execution by an all american safety and a hobbled safety. No question some of those other players got whipped in the plays.

[NormanPride]

I do not believe the scheme we set up was to push run assignments by default back to the safeties who were sitting 10+ yards off the ball in man coverage. Our LBs need to be able to plug holes and get off of blocks to prevent the problems we saw in those plays.

[C&CDean]

All I really care about is if our linebackers can rip out the hearts of opposing teams' RBs and TEs and show it to them before they expire...

[StoopTroup]

This is what I think he's talking about.

http://www.eteamz.com/admin/econtent/images/buck.gif

JKM has some nice little tools to snag those plays with. Also helps to isolate things that caused the blow up in a play. I'm betting Coaches hate that ****.

However I think we lost our game at mizzou and TAMU last year due to Turnovers and a sputtering offense on those. Both games the Defense had the holes, yes....but had we not turned the ball over and had 2 INTs at Mizzou and 1-6 in fumbles and went 2 for 6 at mizzou and 3 for 6 at College Station in the Red Zone, we might have won those games. IMO that lost us those two games.

JKM does make good points however.

[goingoneight]

I assume this is sarcasm? Our brilliant defense gave up 45 that game.

You're a bit off on your years, aren't you? 45 points were scored on a Sooner D that lost it's best player and team captain. OU was kicking their azz until that happened. I'm pretty sure we don't shut out Florida State if Torrance Marshall busts a wheel in the second quarter.

BTW, that was 2008. The 2009 RRS made Pony Boy look like a bitch. Again, had OU it's Heisman trophy winner, best RB healthy and it's AA tight end, we're looking at a completely different ballgame. One that despite the odds heavily against OU, they knocked on the door all day long against the whorns.

I still don't get where it is people complain about Mike versus BV. It's not like Mike's had a great defense at Arizona. He's had just as much time to do that at AZ as BV has had to win a BIG 12 Championship and get to a BCS game. Unrelated, though... because Mike and BV were CO-COORDINATORS. Again, we go back to teamwork. Is Mike Stoops big, bad and scary without BV helping him out? And how good are the two of them together. Great, if you look at the 2001 Orange Bowl. You'd be wanting them both ****-canned after the 2002 OU-OSU game, though. There were plenty of great defensive moments under the Stoops/BV watch, but there were also moments where they needed a serious bailout... and sometimes they didn't get it.

I loved the Stoops/Venables defenses. But Stoops is head honcho in Arizona now. And as pointed out above, BV is still running what BOB has ran all along. You're just watching your TV set and you're frustrated that we haven't recreated that magical 2000 run yet. I feel your frustration, but consider this...

2005 Orange Bowl: no coordinator will save you when you don't give a ****.
2007 Fiasco Bowl: a team that almost lost to UAB made it to Glendale despite incredible odds. They get into a shootout because they couldn't stop themselves from turning the ball over early in the game. Boise State WAS good enough to win still... but again we look at turnovers. Three TOs resulted in 21 easy points pretty much.
2008 Fiasco Bowl: A little of column A, a little of column B, combined with six premier playmakers out with an injury. How do you beat a top five team when you're missing playmakers, don't appear to give a damn win or lose and you give the opposition the game constantly?
2009 BCSNCG: You turn the ball over five times, you eventually spoil a pretty good defensive effort against the eventual National Champion.

Now, if you've read this far... I'm not saying Brent's better than or equal to Mike. I'm saying you're looking at it in a much different way than what's probably actually playing out. To compare it to an offensive situation-- Sam Bradford looked great when he was kept upright in the pocket. But throw in a ****ty circumstance on the OL, and he's absent. Some guys were still great at what they did (Trent Williams, Ryan Broyles, DeMarco Murray), but pieces of the puzzle made it difficult for everybody when comparing 2008 and 2009.

[toast]

All I really care about is if our linebackers can rip out the hearts of opposing teams' RBs and TEs and show it to them before they expire...

Agreed, but I would add "somewhere near or behind the line of scrimmage.". ;)

[Leroy Lizard]

The same Kevin Wilson that orchestrated the highest scoring offense in the history of college football?

Yep. Insane, isn't it?

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Jkm, the first play actually looks like a bad angle by Carter. The "wildcat" appears that the scheme was for macon to try and create a "pile" being the free man. We are in Man so it seems to me that you would want Carter to be looking at the man he is covering. The free man is nelson who is lined up way out of the play. I would have thought he would have gone with the guy in motion.



The reason that I pointed out Carter was that the only guy who actually caught up to the ball carrier is Ibiloye at the very top. No one else got close.

That may have been Macon's thought process, but it wasn't even close to the right thing to do. He's in the backfield with 2 smaller players in front of him in a small space and no blockers. He should be thinking of grabbing onto both of them and seriously disrupting the timing of the play until the calvary arrives. Making a pile is for situations where the offensive team has the advantage in numbers and you have no ability to grab onto the ball carrier.

We are in either cover 3 or cover 1 with some man under assignments. Nelson is deep safety so he has to respect pass first. if he bites on play action, its 7 points.



So to me the first play is created by a bad angle by Carter, a safety. And the second series of big plays is by a hurt or hobbled nelson, a safety.

Your argument was bad play by the linebackers not the safeties.


Safeties very rarely have up the gut responsibilities. Up the gut is pretty much all on your linebackers unless we are in some exotic blitz (which would see the linebackers on the outside of the formation and the center empty). What you are seeing is that Carter most likely has the back out of the backfield as well as the alley on that side.

So this takes us back to the linebackers. Anytime you see an OU LB getting consistently blocked, our talent is down.




We were playing a running team. Not Texas Tech. I am not saying your wrong, but for offseason debate, could see that it was in fact good play design, but just poor execution by an all american safety and a hobbled safety. No question some of those other players got whipped in the plays.

I have some more illustrations in a thread around here somewhere. this wasn't a one off occurence it was a seasonal theme. When Stoops first got here, we didn't have the same player by player athleticism that we do now. However, we had much better football players than we do now.

Allow me to illustrate what I'm talking about from 2003 (sorry for the quality - i just grabbed them off youtube, racerx is getting me some higher quality vids for screen cappage)

1st - I hope we can agree that Vince Young was a better option runner than burkehead
2nd - the 2003 team had more DL talent than we do today. JJ/Cody was a fairly potent combo on the edge.

http://pics.ouportal.com/OUTexas2003Option1.PNG

Texas, Looks like a variant of the ace (either double flanker or someone up top, didn't check). we are in a base 4-2-5 with a safety cheating for the option to the strong side.

http://pics.ouportal.com/OUTexas2003Option2.PNG

On the snap, we see texas with a nice bubble to the option side. Safety closes up with QB responsibilities. Notice in the 2010 pics, that our DL is actually better at holding the line than our 2003 line.

http://pics.ouportal.com/OUTexas2003Option3.PNG

Safety takes pitch. Texas guards finally get to the LBs only to find out there are no LBs there. Our DL has been pretty much blown off the ball.

http://pics.ouportal.com/OUTexas2003Option4.PNG

Pitch is caught, we are strong anywhere the running back can go because of our linebackers.

http://pics.ouportal.com/OUTexas2003Option5.PNG

the final shot. Notice how far in the backfield the back (young/benson?) is caught.

So...

1. When was the last time you saw our linebackers playing behind the line of scrimmage like this?

2. Notice the LBs never get blocked. This isn't always the case with this crew, but it is the norm. Our early 2000's LBs keep space from blockers or violently attack them in the hole. Our current linebackers feel they HAVE to chicken fight with blockers 3-4 yards downfield and are constantly blocked.

[LakeRat]

JKM, your illustration is of an option to the outside, the one Nebraska ran was an interior zone read. I would hope that a guard would find a linebacker to block when they ran right behind him.

If, "Carter most likely has the back out of the backfield", why would he be all the way outside on that play. He should have turned into a spy which would have put him in perfect position to make that play for a small gain.

I agree that macon is potentially playing it wrong. What I am asking you to consider is if he was coached to do that? Is it possible that the scheme called for the interior free lineman to try and create a pile. I agree it obviously didn't work. But I am curious to whether that was what was called for.

These aren't similar plays. The offense is running a sprint option against a 4-2-5 and a zone read against a 3-4.

I am really enjoying the offseason conversation.

[LakeRat]

I did confuse the years and want to apologize.

[mightysooner]

This is one of the weakest arguments against a coach. We said this about KW. The fact that no program wanted KW was proof that he was a horrible coordinator. Then Indiana hires him. So what happens to the argument?

Nothing really. I don't consider Indiana a "program". It's identical to the Chuck Long departure to SDSU if you think about it. No really good job offers come along and then at the apex of growing, warranted criticism from the local and national media and the fans, the coach abruptly announces a departure to a tier 2 school for a head coaching job? Shouldn't a "record setting" and "brilliant" offensive genius be able to get a better job than Indiana? I predict the outcome for KW as a head coach at a horrible program will mirror the outcome of Long's career at SDSU. I hope I'm wrong. We'll see....

[starclassic tama]

so how do you go about rectifying this problem? i'm sure the coaches see it too, if you do. is it just a matter of the linebackers we used to have being so much better than the current group?

[Leroy Lizard]

Nothing really. I don't consider Indiana a "program".

You can't win with the KW bashers. Even when he lands a job as the head coach of a Big 10 school, it still isn't enough. :rolleyes:

[mightysooner]

You can't win with the KW bashers. Even when he lands a job as the head coach of a Big 10 school, it still isn't enough. :rolleyes:

I heard all this before when my friends thought I was crazy for criticizing coach Long's real ability. He was booed off his home field during his first season by his own fans and his career as a head coach was a real howler to say the least. We'll see who's right.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Plus saying he will probably fail is the least bold prediction ever. Name 10 coaches who have been coaching the same school since 2000. Stoops, Paterno....if there is a ton more I don't recall them..

[SoonerOX]

I'm a bit confused by some of these posts claiming that Brent doesn't recruit Linebackers well. Just looking at the guys we have seen play, are we saying that those guys aren't any good? If that is the case, I have to disagree. We have a solid linebacker corps, with a few more on the way.

[SoonerNate]

My problem with him isn't so much his recruiting prowess.

[jersey sooner]

1. Kevin Wilson got a bad wrap for one thing, and one thing only. The lack of a goal line run play. Perhaps that's something you sacrifice in order to score the most points in the history of the game. If it was my choice, I would have wanted him back this year. Imagine how much better an offense would be if all 11 players had run the same hurry up system together the year before.

2. I think not just OU, but all of college football is experiencing a tackling epidemic. The overall quality of defensive players, in my mind, has seen a drop-off. The 00-03 defenses weren't that good just because of Mike.

3. I would think being the OU defensive coordinator could be considered a destination job by some. I hope he sticks around.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

JKM, your illustration is of an option to the outside, the one Nebraska ran was an interior zone read. I would hope that a guard would find a linebacker to block when they ran right behind him.

If, "Carter most likely has the back out of the backfield", why would he be all the way outside on that play. He should have turned into a spy which would have put him in perfect position to make that play for a small gain.

I agree that macon is potentially playing it wrong. What I am asking you to consider is if he was coached to do that? Is it possible that the scheme called for the interior free lineman to try and create a pile. I agree it obviously didn't work. But I am curious to whether that was what was called for.

These aren't similar plays. The offense is running a sprint option against a 4-2-5 and a zone read against a 3-4.

I am really enjoying the offseason conversation.

Its going to be difficult to find that exact play in the 2000-2003 seasons because its a fairly new wrinkle in the zone read scheme. However, option football is option football. We have to think of the big picture and make some assumptions.

1. Both teams were prepped for the offenses they faced. This is our baseline - that each team should have a fundamental understanding of how to stop the opposing offensive play.

2. From that baseline, we then move to execution. How did each defensive unit execute against the opposing offensive play. Each one had flaws (IE the 2003 DL getting blown back), but as a UNIT did enough guys "make a play" to stop the play. For offenses a high % of the players have to execute their assignments to insure the success of the play, but for the defense it only takes 1 player to disrupt it.

an example,

Z1MpHG5x6q0

3. So given that, I can show you our 2003 D against the various zone reads in that game performing well or poorly. you choose.

[jersey sooner]

Art.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I'm a bit confused by some of these posts claiming that Brent doesn't recruit Linebackers well. Just looking at the guys we have seen play, are we saying that those guys aren't any good? If that is the case, I have to disagree. We have a solid linebacker corps, with a few more on the way.

From 1999 to 2008, BV recruited 29 players (~3 per year). The list is below and is noteworthy for its Hot/Cold nature. Out of those 3 per year, he hit big on 1, not so much on the other 2. What that meant was we had talent but we were thin and always racing to break in the next good player. And, this is my opinion, worked fine until Brent took over as DC. Meander down and take a look at the list after he became DC and tell me the how many names stand out at you.

All Linebackers

Austin Box
Brandon Crow
Brian Jimmerson
Brian Odom
Chris Patterson
Clint Ingram
Curtis Lofton
Daniel Franklin
Daniel Tabon
Demarrio Pleasant
Fred Fleeks
Gabe Toomey
Gayron Allen
J R Bryant
Lamont Robinson
Lance Mitchell
Lewis Baker
Mike Balogun
Mike Reed
Pasha Jackson
Rufus Alexander
Russell Dennison
Ryan Reynolds
Teddy Lehman
Torrance Marshall
Travis Lewis
Trey Whitlock
Wayne Chambers
Zach Latimer

Since 2004

2004
Chris Patterson
2005
Curtis Lofton
Lamont Robinson
Ryan Reynolds
2006
Brandon Crow
Chris Patterson
Daniel Tabon
2007
Austin Box
Mike Reed
Travis Lewis
2008
Daniel Franklin
J R Bryant
Mike Balogun

[SoonerofAlabama]

I know our defenses haven't been great for a while, and unfortunately it may get worse. We've got guys transitioning to a starting role and we've got guys switching positions. It may be tough, but it doesn't mean I'm not going to watch.

[LakeRat]

Its going to be difficult to find that exact play in the 2000-2003 seasons because its a fairly new wrinkle in the zone read scheme. However, option football is option football. We have to think of the big picture and make some assumptions.

1. Both teams were prepped for the offenses they faced. This is our baseline - that each team should have a fundamental understanding of how to stop the opposing offensive play.

2. From that baseline, we then move to execution. How did each defensive unit execute against the opposing offensive play. Each one had flaws (IE the 2003 DL getting blown back), but as a UNIT did enough guys "make a play" to stop the play. For offenses a high % of the players have to execute their assignments to insure the success of the play, but for the defense it only takes 1 player to disrupt it.

an example,

Z1MpHG5x6q0

3. So given that, I can show you our 2003 D against the various zone reads in that game performing well or poorly. you choose.

(Your argument, Our LB's are soft as "charmin")

Option is option based on one guy takes pitch and one takes ball handler (QB). But, when an option is a motion read, you have contain and fill. Not pitch and QB. Two completely different schemes.

In the 2003 example, you had DL consume blocks and the LB's get as quick to the outside. If in 2010 example, you have DL consume blocks, with the DE "containing and LB's and secondary filling.

The problem in 2010 is the filling by the secondary.

This whole debate started b/c you are claiming we have charmin for LB's. Both of the illustrations clearly show you have safeties taking horendous angles or they are injured. This is coupled with enept DT play on the interior.

I agree both teams were prepped properly, but individuals make bad plays. As on Defense, one guy can blow a play up, he also can give up a huge play as an individual.

As you showed in the diagrams, the unit in 2003 held to assignment and "made the play". IN 2010 diagram, one player busted on back to back plays and we look horrible. Neither play in 2010 was bad play by a LB.

With that being said, I have concluded that . . .

1. I disagree with your argument based on the evidence you have shown. I am not saying your wrong, but the evidence and facts you have shown don't demonstrate that.

2. My evidence is based on All Big XII numbers at the LB position. According to that, we aren't that soft.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

(Your argument, Our LB's are soft as "charmin")

Option is option based on one guy takes pitch and one takes ball handler (QB). But, when an option is a motion read, you have contain and fill. Not pitch and QB. Two completely different schemes.

In the 2003 example, you had DL consume blocks and the LB's get as quick to the outside. If in 2010 example, you have DL consume blocks, with the DE "containing and LB's and secondary filling.

The problem in 2010 is the filling by the secondary.

This whole debate started b/c you are claiming we have charmin for LB's. Both of the illustrations clearly show you have safeties taking horendous angles or they are injured. This is coupled with enept DT play on the interior.

I agree both teams were prepped properly, but individuals make bad plays. As on Defense, one guy can blow a play up, he also can give up a huge play as an individual.

As you showed in the diagrams, the unit in 2003 held to assignment and "made the play". IN 2010 diagram, one player busted on back to back plays and we look horrible. Neither play in 2010 was bad play by a LB.

With that being said, I have concluded that . . .

1. I disagree with your argument based on the evidence you have shown. I am not saying your wrong, but the evidence and facts you have shown don't demonstrate that.

2. My evidence is based on All Big XII numbers at the LB position. According to that, we aren't that soft.

You are reading WAYYY too much into the blocking scheme and not looking at it in terms of assignment football. Safeties are responsible for outside gaps, not inside. Your inference is that since the linebacker who was responsible for filling the hole is neutralized by a block, he's blameless. And since the Linebacker is blameless, the blame for not making the tackle is therefore on the safety. My argument is that because the linebackers CAN'T beat blocks, that it puts way too much pressure on your safeties to cover way too much green leading to other types of mistakes.

The evidence for our Linbackers being "soft" is simple. If the offense decides they want them out of the play, they assign them a blocker. I have illustrated in this thread and several others that they will then be neutralized 80% of the time. I have then given you several illustrations of Linebackers/TGRW beating blocks in the early 2000's and making the play.

Now, did those guys in the early 2000's get blocked? Yep. The difference was that they were neutralized 25-30% of the time vs. 50-80%. Since this is a team game, the superior play of other positions can sometimes minimize the impact. This is the point you are making -> that if another position had played above average then the play wouldn't have been as big. On this I agree, however it doesn't take away from the fact that other positions are making up for the weakness in another position and at some point opponents will come up with a formation to isolate your weak area and exploit it.

[LakeRat]

You are reading WAYYY too much into the blocking scheme and not looking at it in terms of assignment football. Safeties are responsible for outside gaps, not inside. Your inference is that since the linebacker who was responsible for filling the hole is neutralized by a block, he's blameless. And since the Linebacker is blameless, the blame for not making the tackle is therefore on the safety. My argument is that because the linebackers CAN'T beat blocks, that it puts way too much pressure on your safeties to cover way too much green leading to other types of mistakes.

The evidence for our Linbackers being "soft" is simple. If the offense decides they want them out of the play, they assign them a blocker. I have illustrated in this thread and several others that they will then be neutralized 80% of the time. I have then given you several illustrations of Linebackers/TGRW beating blocks in the early 2000's and making the play.

Now, did those guys in the early 2000's get blocked? Yep. The difference was that they were neutralized 25-30% of the time vs. 50-80%. Since this is a team game, the superior play of other positions can sometimes minimize the impact. This is the point you are making -> that if another position had played above average then the play wouldn't have been as big. On this I agree, however it doesn't take away from the fact that other positions are making up for the weakness in another position and at some point opponents will come up with a formation to isolate your weak area and exploit it.

Obviously weak areas of any team are exploited. I am enjoying the conversation b/c it is rare I get the opportunity to have a good conversation like this.

In your opinion, why have our LB's become a weak area? What was the change? Obviously we have had a LB decorated almost every year since Stoops and Venables have been at OU. Lehman, Rufus, Tlew, Rocky Calmus come to mind. Is it a recruiting issue? Did the coaching philosophy change? Obviously our scheme has changed? Has this hurt our LB's?