Defensive question

[8timechamps]

I've coached football for quite a while, and I grasp the concept of zone defense. What I don't completely understand is why we aren't more physical at the line of scrimmage...specifically our defensive backs.

If we're going to use a four (or even three) man front, it seems like it would make sense to run a cover two and try to disrupt the timing at the line of scrimmage. We have to have some of the best athletes in the Big XII playing in our secondary (as a whole), so I don't see the reasoning. Doesn't playing a soft zone invite schemes like the one TT ran last Saturday? I realize that a man defense is at a higher risk of giving up the big play, but it just seems that we should have the athletes to play more man. Now, it's possible we are playing a lot of man coverage, and I've just not paid enough attention, but I know we rarely check WRs at the line.

It was mentioned in another thread that the SEC has had success defensively because they are more physical with the CBs checking the WRs at the line. I don't know if this is actually the case, or not, but in theory, it makes sense.

Thoughts?

[starclassic tama]

what is a soft zone?

[cleller]

I won't pretend to be a coaching mastermind, but I was just wondering about our lack of jamming receivers today, also.

It seems we always end up giving the wrong QBs time in the pocket. With Texas, we were all over their jumpy, kiddy QBs. With TT, we lay back and let him pick us to pieces. Shoot, look at Landry. When he has time, lookout. Hurry him just a little, and here comes the punter.

[8timechamps]

what is a soft zone?

I don't know if it's an 'official' term at the collegiate level, but it's what I consider the method a db uses (when playing zone) to allow a 5 or 6 yard cushion to the WR. Some people call it a bend-but-don't-break defense. I've just always called it a soft zone.

[8timechamps]

I won't pretend to be a coaching mastermind, but I was just wondering about our lack of jamming receivers today, also.

It seems we always end up giving the wrong QBs time in the pocket. With Texas, we were all over their jumpy, kiddy QBs. With TT, we lay back and let him pick us to pieces. Shoot, look at Landry. When he has time, lookout. Hurry him just a little, and here comes the punter.

I'm no matermind, but it just seems odd to me. Especially when you're getting beat play after play.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I think you are overestimating the athletes and technique ability of the athletes in the OU secondary...Not saying they aren't good players, but Gabe Lynn is our 3rd corner...Who are you going to match him up on?

And OU is running a little more man under

[8timechamps]

I think you are overestimating the athletes and technique ability of the athletes in the OU secondary...Not saying they aren't good players, but Gabe Lynn is our 3rd corner...Who are you going to match him up on?

And OU is running a little more man under

It's a possibility I'm overestimating our ability. I heard that Flemming is a possibility for Saturday...that would be good.

[starclassic tama]

you say "run a cover two" as if a team uses only one cover scheme. OU's deep safeties are in what you call a cover two probably more than anything else, but you can't run just a cover-whatever the entire time or the offense will find a way to attack it. as for the soft zone or 5-6 yard cushions, no team has all their DB's in man coverage all the time. you have to run some combination of man and zone.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Hurst struggles, or struggled Saturday against taller receivers and Fleming and Lynn both struggle in finding the ball in the air some..Hurst is playing really solid overall..We missed Fleming more against the run Saturday than his cover skills..

I think this KSU game is a game where we need Fleming because of run support.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

The thing that really hurt against OU saturday(i know everyone is ready to move on) that not many are talking about is the fact that TT was successful running the football..when the front cant stop the run and you have to start making DBs more accountable, it creates problems. .When OU did blitz, their oline could pick it up..With their huge splits, when a db blitzed, they had a guy to pick him up and then Doege threw the ball to where the corner came from...It didn't matter what OU did in the first half defensively, it didn't work..I did think they played very well in the 2nd half

[TXBOOMER]

OU runs a lot of cover two brother. The debacle the other night had to do with personell, effort, lack of bringing pressure and three and outs on offense more than scheme IMHO.

[starclassic tama]

The thing that really hurt against OU saturday(i know everyone is ready to move on) that not many are talking about is the fact that TT was successful running the football..when the front cant stop the run and you have to start making DBs more accountable, it creates problems. .When OU did blitz, their oline could pick it up..With their huge splits, when a db blitzed, they had a guy to pick him up and then Doege threw the ball to where the corner came from...It didn't matter what OU did in the first half defensively, it didn't work..I did think they played very well in the 2nd half
great points. a passing game's best friend is being able to run the football. slows down the pass rush, slows down the secondary, keeps everyone running with an eye peeked in the backfield. if you held a gun to stoops or venables head before the game, they probably thought there was NO WAY tech was going to be able to gash them on the ground like they did.

[8timechamps]

you say "run a cover two" as if a team uses only one cover scheme. OU's deep safeties are in what you call a cover two probably more than anything else, but you can't run just a cover-whatever the entire time or the offense will find a way to attack it. as for the soft zone or 5-6 yard cushions, no team has all their DB's in man coverage all the time. you have to run some combination of man and zone.

I'd say OU runs a cover two about 95% of the time (sans any safety blitzing). I'd also say that cover two is the most widely used base coverage in college football. You can, in fact, run a cover one. Been doing it for about 6 years now.

I suppose what I'm getting at is why we aren't more physical at the CB position. I didn't want to go into the entire defensive scheme. Cover two is usually assumed man coverage underneath (at least in our league). So, It was a long (roundabout) way to say "jam the receiver".

[8timechamps]

I guess my question is really "why don't we disrupt timing" at the LOS more? Become more physical? Is it all about personnel, or a philosophy?

[starclassic tama]

I'd say OU runs a cover two about 95% of the time (sans any safety blitzing). I'd also say that cover two is the most widely used base coverage in college football. You can, in fact, run a cover one. Been doing it for about 6 years now. ah, we're on the same page then. for some reason i read your initial post as why doesn't OU ever run a cover two?
it's an interesting conversation, scheme vs. skill. is venables schematically sound? i certainly think so. but the amount of times the defense has looked clueless is good food for thought. was the texas tech loss simply a matter of the players not playing very well, and the defense ends up being very very good if not among the elite in college football?

[8timechamps]

ah, we're on the same page then. for some reason i read your initial post as why doesn't OU ever run a cover two?
it's an interesting conversation, scheme vs. skill. is venables schematically sound? i certainly think so. but the amount of times the defense has looked clueless is good food for thought. was the texas tech loss simply a matter of the players not playing very well, and the defense ends up being very very good if not among the elite in college football?

Yeah, I think my inclusion of "cover two" was confusing.

And I like the way you put it: Scheme vs. Skill.

[cleller]

Its tough to realize that guys like Rocky Calmus, Torrance Marshall (and Roger Steffen) Ontei Jones, JT Thatcher, Michael Thompson, Derrick Strait, Dan Cody, Corey Callens don't come along all that often. Getting them all on one defense is like hitting the lottery.
Those guys only let the other offense get first downs occasionally to let Heupel plot his next moves.

Seriously, whatever they had going on the night of the Orange Bowl with FSU was a masterwork of defensive genius, execution, and domination.

[starclassic tama]

that is definitely true, but we have had defenses with more NFL talent than that bunch that has struggled mightily, how does anyone explain that? maybe they were more talented but less fundamentally sound?

[NormanPride]

Talent vs football player, IMO. In college you need more of the latter with only a few of the former.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Im doing a stat study and some tape review of 99-2001 football vs what we've seen in the last 3-4 years..I'm not finished but I can tell you ability of offenses they faced has a lot to do with it.

[NormanPride]

Yeah, you've got to remember that we introduced the spread to mainstream teams. Before us, not many people used it. Now, it's everywhere. The 2000 D would probably give up a bunch more points now...

[TFSooner]

I guess my question is really "why don't we disrupt timing" at the LOS more? Become more physical? Is it all about personnel, or a philosophy?

Wasn't Lynn real close to the LOS on the two or three times he was toasted Saturday against Tech? I know he was on at least one, where the receiver essentially out-physicaled him, ran right past him, and caught a 40-yard (or so) pass.

[madillsoonerfan5353]

Talent vs football player, IMO. In college you need more of the latter with only a few of the former.

THIS^^^^ and the fact that those guys early on in the Stoops era had a LOT to prove and played with a chip on their shoulder. Not many 4 and 5 stars on those teams. And IMO the boys from the STATE of OKLAHOMA on those teams play a little harder because it's a pride thing for them. Don't get me wrong about Stills, Jefferson, and Clay I love these guys(no homo). But boys like Winchester and Ratterree and Dom Whaley are gonna give just a little more IMO because OU to them is not just a stepping stone.

[KantoSooner]

I enjoy reading technical analysis from people who know what they're talking about. I learn things. And knowledge is good.
The main question for our defense, though, is whether they choose to be dominated. Last weekend, until well after halftime, they looked like they didn't much care.
We'll see if the question is answered in a different way this weekend.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Yeah, you've got to remember that we introduced the spread to mainstream teams. Before us, not many people used it. Now, it's everywhere. The 2000 D would probably give up a bunch more points now...

Yup..some interesting stuff so far..basically in 2000, every defense in the conference was statistically better than what anyone else had..

[NormanPride]

THIS^^^^ and the fact that those guys early on in the Stoops era had a LOT to prove and played with a chip on their shoulder. Not many 4 and 5 stars on those teams. And IMO the boys from the STATE of OKLAHOMA on those teams play a little harder because it's a pride thing for them. Don't get me wrong about Stills, Jefferson, and Clay I love these guys(no homo). But boys like Winchester and Ratterree and Dom Whaley are gonna give just a little more IMO because OU to them is not just a stepping stone.

I don't necessarily think it's stars or anything, it's all in evaluation. jkm is about 100x better at getting the point across here, but one of the big problems we've had is that we aren't very good at recruiting to a particular scheme or system. We often seem to get the best guy we can at a position, then tailor our scheme to the starters. The problem with that is that you might not recruit the same type of guy from one year to the next. What happens when you have an injury and the backup isn't suited at all to the system you run?

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I don't necessarily think it's stars or anything, it's all in evaluation. jkm is about 100x better at getting the point across here, but one of the big problems we've had is that we aren't very good at recruiting to a particular scheme or system. We often seem to get the best guy we can at a position, then tailor our scheme to the starters. The problem with that is that you might not recruit the same type of guy from one year to the next. What happens when you have an injury and the backup isn't suited at all to the system you run?

This thread is all over the place but I'll try to deal with this one.

We won a national championship with the Tampa 2 - a full zone with some interior man 2 man principles (Ohio State won the NC with the exact same D 2 years later). The irony is that every single one of those kids were recruited for either a 46 D (under ryan) or a Man Press under Stoops (both of these were heavy blitz, corner on an island with no safety help Ds).

So what made it work? The key to the Tampa 2 is not overwhelming talent at every position, its talent at a few key positions and most importantly discipline. And that 2000 defense, outside of JT Thatcher, had discipline in spades.

[NormanPride]

In college, the most assignment-sound team has a great shot at winning. The 2000 team was freakish in its ability to stick assignments.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Do you guys know how many top 10 passing offenses OU had to work against in 2000?

A little trivia here.

[NormanPride]

Probably only FSU?

[stoops the eternal pimp]

That's it..and only 2 top 10 total offensive teams..FSU and Nebraska..

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Statistically speaking going back to 99, you can see a shift from Good offenses/average defenses in the SEC and average offenses/good defenses in the big 12 to the opposite...

[NormanPride]

I can correlate that to the introduction of the spread in the Big 12, and the removal of it in the SEC. Do any of them run a true spread now?

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I haven't watched enough of what Auburn is doing this year to tell..I know Mahlzahn's O is typically considered spread..and Does Mississippi state?

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

That's it..and only 2 top 10 total offensive teams..FSU and Nebraska..

TTech was #11

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/2000/Internet/ranking_summary/2000000000522.HTML

[stoops the eternal pimp]

That's in passing offense..total offense they were 65th

[NormanPride]

I haven't watched enough of what Auburn is doing this year to tell..I know Mahlzahn's O is typically considered spread..and Does Mississippi state?

I don't think either use the route combinations and wide spread formations that you see in the Big 12. Consider Baylor, Tech, and Mizzou. The SEC offenses remind me more of KSU or ISU.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Do you guys know how many top 10 passing offenses OU had to work against in 2000?

A little trivia here.

i was answering this question -> TTech was 11 texas was 14

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Yup....The pass attempts that texas tech put up in certain years is amazing

[jkjsooner]

I won't pretend to be a coaching mastermind, but I was just wondering about our lack of jamming receivers today, also.

It seems we always end up giving the wrong QBs time in the pocket. With Texas, we were all over their jumpy, kiddy QBs. With TT, we lay back and let him pick us to pieces. Shoot, look at Landry. When he has time, lookout. Hurry him just a little, and here comes the punter.

Well, sometimes the spread QB's love to be blitzed. I know Josh Heupel would pick blitzing teams apart. Also think about how umbrella defense that A&M used effectively in 2000 on us. It wasn't about putting pressure on Heupel but instead about keeping everything short and tackling.

The question is, if we were playing a soft zone then why did we get beat so often on long passes?

[NormanPride]

Because of terrible run support.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Well, sometimes the spread QB's love to be blitzed. I know Josh Heupel would pick blitzing teams apart. Also think about how umbrella defense that A&M used effectively in 2000 on us. It wasn't about putting pressure on Heupel but instead about keeping everything short and tackling.

The question is, if we were playing a soft zone then why did we get beat so often on long passes?

When people remark about "long passes" its more about distance they have to throw. For example, their first TD was a "long pass play" where the pass was thrown behind the line of scrimmage. A soft zone is actually inviting this play with the intent that your defense can rally to the ball and stop it for minimal gain. We did give up some long passes on the sidelines but that is one of the weak spots in a cover 2.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

And the player was spilled to the middle of the field, Nelson just didn't make the play

[NormanPride]

Nelson was on a blitz, though... The first one, we blitzed right into their screen and got burned. Not sure about the second.

[8timechamps]

When people remark about "long passes" its more about distance they have to throw. For example, their first TD was a "long pass play" where the pass was thrown behind the line of scrimmage. A soft zone is actually inviting this play with the intent that your defense can rally to the ball and stop it for minimal gain. We did give up some long passes on the sidelines but that is one of the weak spots in a cover 2.

That was exactly what I was referring to. In theory, a soft zone should be able to defend the offensive scheme TT ran (at least inside the 20's). My question is why we didn't play more bump and run on the corners. STEP made a good point about Lynn is probably not capable, at this time, to do that. But, I'd think, as many receivers as TT used, we'd be able to match up more times than not.

[8timechamps]

Wasn't Lynn real close to the LOS on the two or three times he was toasted Saturday against Tech? I know he was on at least one, where the receiver essentially out-physicaled him, ran right past him, and caught a 40-yard (or so) pass.

It's possible that he was playing bump and run, and just got beat every time and I just missed it. Did that happen to Colvin too? (serious question, I don't remember).

[TFSooner]

It's possible that he was playing bump and run, and just got beat every time and I just missed it. Did that happen to Colvin too? (serious question, I don't remember).

I don't remember it happening once Colvin replaced Lynn, but I could have missed it.

[8timechamps]

I don't remember it happening once Colvin replaced Lynn, but I could have missed it.

Who got beat on the TT touchdown coming out of the half? Since I'm not going to go back to watch any of that game (ever), I have to rely on my (often) cloudy memory.

[NormanPride]

Lynn first, then Hurst. Everyone got beat, which is really discouraging.

[8timechamps]

Lynn first, then Hurst. Everyone got beat, which is really discouraging.

Hurst...that's who I was missing. Thanks NP!

[soonerbub]

I just wish that we would bring some heat when we're getting torched. Bring a couple guys from one side and drop a DE (Frank probably best) on the other side.

Bring Gabe on some blitzes (like we used to do with Shelby) when it's apparent early on that he can't cover his man.

We gave up 572 yds of offense Saturday night & that is the most given up in the history of Oklahoma Football (really I looked). Changes are in order when we play the mighty aggots of stoolwater.

As for this week I expect a lot of 8 in the box; containing the old man's option will be the key (good chance for the Bird to show out).

[cvsooner]

Not only were we getting beaten on routes, we were also (backers and secondary) tackling very poorly, and our front four were not getting pressure unaided. When we got pressure, Doege wasn't so comfortable, but it was a gamble several times that we lost. Along with the game.

[cccasooner2]

Who got beat on the TT touchdown coming out of the half? Since I'm not going to go back to watch any of that game (ever), I have to rely on my (often) cloudy memory.


That one was to Torres where Lynn couldn't find the ball. Defending the TD to Swindell required Hurst to be about 6'11".

[jumperstop]

That one was to Torres where Lynn couldn't find the ball. Defending the TD to Swindell required Hurst to be about 6'11".

I don't remember the Hurst blown play, but Lynn couldn't find the ball all three plays he got burned on because he didn't even turn around. I'm SURE that's not how he's coached to defend that play.

[BoulderSooner79]

I don't remember the Hurst blown play, but Lynn couldn't find the ball all three plays he got burned on because he didn't even turn around. I'm SURE that's not how he's coached to defend that play.

That's because Hurst didn't blow the play. It was a good play call against man coverage combined with perfect execution. The only thing Hurst could have done if he saw it early enough would be to hold and hope the ref didn't see it.

[jumperstop]

That's because Hurst didn't blow the play. It was a good play call against man coverage combined with perfect execution. The only thing Hurst could have done if he saw it early enough would be to hold and hope the ref didn't see it.

A holding penalty is better than a td. No way he could have known though. Lynn blown plays were by far the most mindboggling. Even the old grandma I passed on the way out was telling her husband, "That number 9 didn't play so good..."

[BoulderSooner79]

A holding penalty is better than a td. No way he could have known though. Lynn blown plays were by far the most mindboggling. Even the old grandma I passed on the way out was telling her husband, "That number 9 didn't play so good..."

Lynn actually had good position on that TD play and could have defended the pass. But he never even tried to locate the ball or at least turn his head and pretend to. DBs get a lot of leeway with the refs on PI calls if they just turn their heads. I agree Hurst had no chance to even go for holding on that play, but in that case, a flag might not be better than the TD. If they are going to score anyway from the 1 most likely, the extra time could be a killer. Sort of like those few cases where teams actually let the team score so they at least get the ball back and control of the clock. It's desperate times when that's the case, but it almost worked in that Packer/Broncos superbowl.

[OUNASH]

I havent seen a defensive back at OU get torched like Gabe Lynn did since John Elway burned Dwight Drane all day. Both of these were loses and I blame both on poor coaching and **** poor executing on the players part.

[ashley]

No, we did not play much cover 2 vs. TT. They would run 4 verticle all nite. We did run a lot of 2 man. Plus we line up in 2 and disguise coverage. We get little rush out of our D tackles and poor coverage out of backers. This poor rush creates time for receivers to get away from our cover guys.
Add this to awful run blocking, our back being out and Jones having an terrible first half.
I also coaches.

[delhalew]

Especially Hurst in the endzone, I don't see why he didn't jump and play to the ball. It's not like he could do anything about the receiver.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Lynn actually had good position on that TD play and could have defended the pass. But he never even tried to locate the ball or at least turn his head and pretend to. DBs get a lot of leeway with the refs on PI calls if they just turn their heads. I agree Hurst had no chance to even go for holding on that play, but in that case, a flag might not be better than the TD. If they are going to score anyway from the 1 most likely, the extra time could be a killer. Sort of like those few cases where teams actually let the team score so they at least get the ball back and control of the clock. It's desperate times when that's the case, but it almost worked in that Packer/Broncos superbowl.

I've noticed this from all the DBs this season, especially Fleming..By the time he finds the ball, the receiver has it....

[NormanPride]

That's true of about 99% of college corners, though.

[delhalew]

That was my problem with the Tech game. This season we have played the ball, and we've gotten turnovers and bat downs. Against Tech, they didn't even try.

[NormanPride]

Normally teams do not have the time to throw those routes because we're in the QB's face. Since our DTs are terrible without Walker in there, the DE's had to focus on run support rather than rushing the passer.

[toast]

Normally teams do not have the time to throw those routes because we're in the QB's face. Since our DTs are terrible without Walker in there, the DE's had to focus on run support rather than rushing the passer.

and our lb's with run support were MIA. Our success formula in the past is to make teams one dimensional and speed up the qb's play (at least make them feel like there's less time in the pocket). Since we never negated the run, we weren't able to get after the qb which exposed our db play some.

[BoulderSooner79]

I think Tech was different because they get rid of the ball quickly and it's hard to get pressure on the QB - a taste of our own medicine. But once the D got tired, they did have more time to go down field than we've been allowing to other teams. Tech had 55 plays in the first half as I recall; seems like 60-65 is when it starts really fatiguing the defense.

[NormanPride]

We used to have that offense on lock-down. In the past three seasons we've changed our D up to better handle postseason teams we may face, but it's killed our performance against Tech and Mizzou. We can count Baylor in there if we're not careful...

[starclassic tama]

Against Tech, they didn't even try.why do people keep saying this? do you really think the defensive backs thought to themselves, you know what, i could make a play on this ball but i'm not going to...? they gave it their all, they just got beat. it happens to every DB in the world, just so happens it happened to several of ours more than once in the same game...

[stoops the eternal pimp]

That's true of about 99% of college corners, though.

No, guys who are seniors or have had considerable playing time dont...Unless I am missing something, Fleming wasn't like this last season..

[NormanPride]

People didn't run many fades against us last season that I can remember. We had experienced safeties and our LBs were much more vulnerable over the middle, so it was a better bet to go there. You see more teams running fades because we're leaving our corners on an island more this year. I wonder if we still see that...

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

No, guys who are seniors or have had considerable playing time dont...Unless I am missing something, Fleming wasn't like this last season..

How much has Fleming practiced since Jan 5?

[Dan Thompson]

When you say "check", do you mean knock them on their butt?

[stoops the eternal pimp]

How much has Fleming practiced since Jan 5?

I dunno..How much? I know he missed a lot, but we are 2 months into the season..

[8timechamps]

When you say "check", do you mean knock them on their butt?

Not necessarily, just disrupt the timing of the route.

[NormanPride]

Yeah, but I don't think much of that time is dedicated to technique anymore.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Not necessarily, just disrupt the timing of the route.

What if it isn't a timing route?

[NormanPride]

Then you bump them a bit to give the blitzers even a half second more to get to the QB? I dunno...

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Then you bump them a bit to give the blitzers even a half second more to get to the QB? I dunno...

You can't play bump and run with everyone its just too easy to get picked.

[8timechamps]

What if it isn't a timing route?

I think every route is a timing route if the dbs can give the front enough time to get pressure on the QB.

[NormanPride]

You can't play bump and run with everyone its just too easy to get picked.

Correct.

[8timechamps]

To clarify, I'm not saying we need to play bump and run every down of every game. My question was specifically about last week. At some point, it became apparent we weren't going to be pressuring Doedge all night. I realize the risk of bringing extra guys, but I've always played tight coverage on the outside when bringing pressure.

Now, I coach high school ball, so I'm certainly not at the level of Stoops & staff, just curious about the possible reasons.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

To clarify, I'm not saying we need to play bump and run every down of every game. My question was specifically about last week. At some point, it became apparent we weren't going to be pressuring Doedge all night. I realize the risk of bringing extra guys, but I've always played tight coverage on the outside when bringing pressure.

Now, I coach high school ball, so I'm certainly not at the level of Stoops & staff, just curious about the possible reasons.

Okay, well think about the flow of the game. You have a gameplan but you couldn't change it at all because our offense was 3 and out all first half. not much you can do in 55 seconds.

[cvsooner]

Bingo. The offense was stymied, between its apparent ineptitude and the play of Tech's defense. The frustration of some fans about some of our red zone problems is almost comical. Y'know, there are 11 guys on the other side of the ball, who are D1 athletes who are trying just as hard as they can too....sometimes they win.

[8timechamps]

Okay, well think about the flow of the game. You have a gameplan but you couldn't change it at all because our offense was 3 and out all first half. not much you can do in 55 seconds.

Good point. The 6 three and outs (not to mention the what, four in a row) wouldn't present a chance to make such an adjustment.