pass defense

[Sooner8th]

9-11 105 yards 1 td - ON THE FIRST DRIVE!

Great job Mike. When it is so obvious Matt Mullen see it, you have a big problem.

[pappy]

Mike Stoops needs to go. We just gave up 30 points to Texas Tech who also started a backup QB. Every QB we face seems to have their best or 1 of their best games of the season against us.

[soonerfan69]

The secondary has turned into a hot steaming pile of poo what happened?

[okiewaker]

They are young and not very good. Hopefully they will improve.

[BoulderSooner79]

They are young and not very good. Hopefully they will improve.

Yep. Both Parker and Thomas got worked over pretty good. If they just played an average game, I don't think TTech gets more than a couple of field goals. They played better in the second half and got a few stops which let our O get into rhythm.

[GDC]

What exactly is supposed to happen when the defense is on the field? The most successful pass defense they run is when the open receiver drops the pass. Is the scheme so complicated that it gets more confusing the longer a player tries to execute it? Weren't the complicated schemes the reason many people wanted Venables gone?

[TXSooner]

is this a scheme or personnel issue?

[TrophyCollector]

is this a scheme or personnel issue?

Yes.

[olevetonahill]

9-11 105 yards 1 td - ON THE FIRST DRIVE!

Great job Mike. When it is so obvious Matt Mullen see it, you have a big problem.

Explain to us just how Tech got 105 yards ON THE FIRST DRIVE!
They took possession on their Own 13 and drove for a TD thats 87 yards not 105~
Yea the D stunk it up but lets now try to make em smell any worse .

[Jack T.]

Explain to us just how Tech got 105 yards ON THE FIRST DRIVE!
They took possession on their Own 13 and drove for a TD thats 87 yards not 105~
Yea the D stunk it up but lets now try to make em smell any worse .

They did get several penalties on that drive. Dunno how many, exactly, but it was substantial.

[OUmillenium]

I was such a Mike Stoops fan...until 2014. Is it just him? If Parker is such a bonehead at safety, try somebody else.

Calmus, Strait, and Roy Williams were top notch college players who did not have NFL speed. They were good because they were smart and instinctive - were they also well coached by Mike back then?

[8timechamps]

is this a scheme or personnel issue?

Both.

We have talent in the secondary, it's just inexperienced and/or young. I thought Jordan Thomas played really well today, even though he was targeted for much of the game, he was playing so far off his guy that it was almost impossible for him to make a tackle without the receiver picking up 4-5 yards.

I don't know what Mike Stoops is thinking, or what he knows that we don't, but from an outside perspective, it looks like he's got no idea how to defend in this conference. I don't know for sure, but I'd bet that when we sent pressure on Mahomes, he got rattled and made bad decisions just about every time. I don't know why we would send pressure on one down, then drop 8 the next. It was pretty obvious that Mahomes is no Bryce Petty, and needed time to make a good throw. The longer we gave him, the better he looked.

I'm not a "Fire (insert coach)" kinda person, but Mike Stoops is making hard for me to continue to think that way.

[8timechamps]

I was such a Mike Stoops fan...until 2014. Is it just him? If Parker is such a bonehead at safety, try somebody else.

Calmus, Strait, and Roy Williams were top notch college players who did not have NFL speed. They were good because they were smart and instinctive - were they also well coached by Mike back then?

I don't get it either.

[pappy]

Let's just be honest for a second here...it's a scheme problem. Yes the players are young/talented and will make mistakes because of their youth/inexperience, but against Baylor and again for a lot of the game against Tech, it wouldn't have mattered if we lined up Darrell Revis, Richard Sherman, Joe Haden, Patrick Peterson or the next top NFL corner on the list...When it's 3rd and 1,2,3,4 and your CB is playing 10 yards off the wr they're going to get a 1st down. That's what we did against Baylor and we were still doing it some today against Tech.

Also, If you are going to blitz to make the QB get rid of the ball quick you don't play your db's way off the wr's that makes for real easy throws/reads.

It also, doesn't matter, because Hell would freeze over before Bob would get rid of his brother.

[Sooner91ATL]

Explain to us just how Tech got 105 yards ON THE FIRST DRIVE!
They took possession on their Own 13 and drove for a TD thats 87 yards not 105~
Yea the D stunk it up but lets now try to make em smell any worse .

It's because of penalties. He did have 105 yards on that drive in the air. amazing.

[aero]

I don't know what Mike Stoops is thinking, or what he knows that we don't, but from an outside perspective, it looks like he's got no idea how to defend in this conference. I don't know for sure, but I'd bet that when we sent pressure on Mahomes, he got rattled and made bad decisions just about every time. I don't know why we would send pressure on one down, then drop 8 the next. It was pretty obvious that Mahomes is no Bryce Petty, and needed time to make a good throw. The longer we gave him, the better he looked.

I'm not a "Fire (insert coach)" kinda person, but Mike Stoops is making hard for me to continue to think that way.

I and others have been saying this for a while. You HAVE to pressure passing qb's. It's pretty simple. I don't care if it's Peyton Manning or a rs frosh. If you let them sit there they are going to find a receiver. Puts impossible pressure for the secondary to cover that long. It's starts with the D line and I'm thinking that's where the weakness may lie. You either have some beasts up front that can get to the qb or you have an array of blitz packages and disguises. Either way, you need some bodies on the line that can get in the backfield or take attention to free up blitzers. A prevent defense will prevent you from winning. Pressure the qb and he has less time to find open receivers, makes quick choices, makes mistakes, completions have to be quicker and shorter. You can play tighter coverage. Of course you gamble with tight man coverage but that's when you find corners that can cover and smart safeties. It seems it would be alot easier to coach that. I don't know how you coach a secondary to cover all day while the qb waits for an open receiver. I've felt the offense has appeared to have no gameplan, just call scripted plays. I guess the defense isn't much different. Whatever, it's frustrating to watch.

[BoulderSooner79]

It's because of penalties. He did have 105 yards on that drive in the air. amazing.

And that's double frustrating that they hurt themselves so much and still scored.

[olevetonahill]

So let me get this straight . Yall sayin we gave up 105 yards on their 1st drive due to penalties correct? With that thinking then we need to count all the scores that are nullified by penalties. :bi_polo:

[Sooner8th]

is this a scheme or personnel issue?

After getting humiliated by letting 6 or 7 straight 7 yard hitches be completed in a row last week, we STILL couldn't defend a seven yard hitch yesterday. I just don't understand why our coaching staff - mike and bob who coach the secondary - can't even stop a simple play when everyone know they can complete it on us. Are they so hard headed they won't change how they have been coaching and blame the players?

[Sooner8th]

So let me get this straight . Yall sayin we gave up 105 yards on their 1st drive due to penalties correct? With that thinking then we need to count all the scores that are nullified by penalties. :bi_polo:

YES! If you have a 1st and 10 and get a 5 yard penalty do you have to gain 10 yards for a first down? NO - you have to gain 15. Scoring and yardage are two separate things, it's a simple concept. You have to make up for the penalty yards.

[PhiDeltBeers]

^^^^ He's correct.

[Soonerjeepman]

They did get several penalties on that drive. Dunno how many, exactly, but it was substantial.

25 yards worth

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

It is amazing how when we move to more zone under Mike, this board hits on the same things they did under BV. Zone defenses are complicated and require everyone to execute their assignments to be effective.

What I'm curious about is why. I know Mike has been complaining about a couple of things they let the offense get away with (picks and illegal man downfield), but is that enough of a reason to get rid of a decently effective defense from the last 2 years?

[olevetonahill]

Jesus ****ing Christ!
How hard is it to understand ! They Lost those yards only to Have to make em Up ?

[tooslow]

This may help.... A QB throws a pass from his own 1yd line and the WR gets tackled for a 95yd gain. On 1st and G from the opponents 4yd line, there's a holding call on the offense which backs them up to the 14yd line. The next play results in a 14 d pass for a TD. The QB would have thrown for 109 yards in a single drive.... Not sure about college, but GB holds the NFL record with 125 yards gained in one drive.

[SoonerBBall]

jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]It is amazing how when we move to more zone under Mike, this board hits on the same things they did under BV. Zone defenses are complicated and require everyone to execute their assignments to be effective.

What I'm curious about is why. I know Mike has been complaining about a couple of things they let the offense get away with (picks and illegal man downfield), but is that enough of a reason to get rid of a decently effective defense from the last 2 years?

This is what I don't get. I remember you saying back under BV that the defense was too complex for a lot of the players to understand 100% and so we had busts. When Mike was brought in, he was supposed to simplify the defense and make it easier on everyone assignment-wise. Cut to this year and it seems like we're running the same stupid, complex zone schemes that BV was running and busting in similar ways.

[birddog]

I just watched hola Kyle's highlights on YouTube from last year's tech game. Besides Aaron Colvin playing Sanchezs role, which may be much more significant than I realize, what has changed since then? Only asking because I have a hard time breaking down the schemes and positioning of the defense.

[rock on sooner]

9-11 105 yards 1 td - ON THE FIRST DRIVE!

Great job Mike. When it is so obvious Matt Mullen see it, you have a big problem.

This is kind of petty but I'm sure it is important to Matt...his last name is
Millen....

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I just watched hola Kyle's highlights on YouTube from last year's tech game. Besides Aaron Colvin playing Sanchezs role, which may be much more significant than I realize, what has changed since then? Only asking because I have a hard time breaking down the schemes and positioning of the defense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nLmg93u8rM

1:35 is a good example, every DB is lined up in man to man with the linebacker having the inside slot guy. We have 1 safety on the 3 receiver side as well as one "robber" linebacker that is watching the QB. That linebacker would pick up the inside slot if he crossed the field instead of going outside.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS7j38q9xCg

27:36 you see we are in a zone defense. 11 is going to run an option route. He starts off on Hayes, but then crosses the formation and Hayes gives him up to the inside safety. The option is dependent upon what the inside safety does (11). If he stays back then he keeps running across the formation, if he jumps up then he changes his route to a post corner. He then beats him to the corner for the easy TD.

Issues - Hayes has the flats which is really odd. Typically you play zone over the top with man underneath, but on this play we ended up with man over, zone under. Hayes is sucked up when the QB scrambles giving even more room for the throw.

Where OU struggled under BV were the transition points to the safety. Our safeties tended to be overaggressive shallow because they thought they had help deep and got torched when the other team set up a route that caused the safety to be pulled away (like this one).

[OUmillenium]

It is amazing how when we move to more zone under Mike, this board hits on the same things they did under BV. Zone defenses are complicated and require everyone to execute their assignments to be effective.

What I'm curious about is why. I know Mike has been complaining about a couple of things they let the offense get away with (picks and illegal man downfield), but is that enough of a reason to get rid of a decently effective defense from the last 2 years?

I have been thinking the same all year...which leads me to think that Bob is behind this. Starting to think I discredited BV too much - especially if Bob was forcing him to run soft zones that good teams picked apart.

[OUmillenium]

This is what I don't get. I remember you saying back under BV that the defense was too complex for a lot of the players to understand 100% and so we had busts. When Mike was brought in, he was supposed to simplify the defense and make it easier on everyone assignment-wise. Cut to this year and it seems like we're running the same stupid, complex zone schemes that BV was running and busting in similar ways.

This!!!!^^^^^^^!!!!!!!

[thecrimsoncrusader]

Even the players said that Mike Stoops simplified the defense. The problem was, that was in Mike Stoops first year before switching to the 3-4 last season. I doubt they fell that way any more. I think the biggest problem is Mike Stoops is a 4-3/4-2-5 variant guy trying to run a 3-4 he is in no way comfortable with, which in turn, means the players won't be comfortable either.

Either Mike Stoops needs to get back to what he knows OR Bob Stoops needs to get a defensive coordinator who's identity has been the 3-4 for their career. Mike Stoops going to a 3-4 is almost like having Josh Heupel, a QB with a spread based background, try to run a zone-read offense and not having a clue how to do it, which has been the case.

At the collegiate level, Charlie McBride is the only one that I have seen change from what he did for many years (5-2) to a different alignment, 4-3, and be successful. You go with your strengths and what you know. I know part (not all obviously) of the reason that Mike Stoops went to the 3-4 was due to perilously thin DT numbers a few years ago, but that has gotten somewhat repaired, so I would like to see him switch back to what he knows and what he is good at.

[PalmBeachSooner]

After getting humiliated by letting 6 or 7 straight 7 yard hitches be completed in a row last week, we STILL couldn't defend a seven yard hitch yesterday. I just don't understand why our coaching staff - mike and bob who coach the secondary - can't even stop a simple play when everyone know they can complete it on us. Are they so hard headed they won't change how they have been coaching and blame the players?

That's the only thing I can come up with.

[8timechamps]

Even the players said that Mike Stoops simplified the defense. The problem was, that was in Mike Stoops first year before switching to the 3-4 last season. I doubt they fell that way any more. I think the biggest problem is Mike Stoops is a 4-3/4-2-5 variant guy trying to run a 3-4 he is in no way comfortable with, which in turn, means the players won't be comfortable either.

Either Mike Stoops needs to get back to what he knows OR Bob Stoops needs to get a defensive coordinator who's identity has been the 3-4 for their career. Mike Stoops going to a 3-4 is almost like having Josh Heupel, a QB with a spread based background, try to run a zone-read offense and not having a clue how to do it, which has been the case.

At the collegiate level, Charlie McBride is the only one that I have seen change from what he did for many years (5-2) to a different alignment, 4-3, and be successful. You go with your strengths and what you know. I know part (not all obviously) of the reason that Mike Stoops went to the 3-4 was due to perilously thin DT numbers a few years ago, but that has gotten somewhat repaired, so I would like to see him switch back to what he knows and what he is good at.

I'm in complete agreement with what you said. I do think Mike knows enough defense to correct the issues, but he needs help identifying those issues.

The 3-4 is the most difficult defensive scheme to run correctly. If it's not run near perfect, it's extremely prone to big play gashes. The key to a great 3-4 is 1) An excellent DT (which we have), and 2) Stout secondary (which we don't currently have). Since our weakness is in the secondary, Mike tries to offset that by dropping more guys into coverage. You can't do that in a 3-4 and be effective enough. The strong point of the 3-4 is that you can bring pressure from a 4th or 5th defender, and the offense doesn't know who it will be. It's not about outnumbering the O-line, it's about creating mismatches and forcing blocking busts within the O-line. That's why our defense looks so much better when they're playing aggressively.

If you line up in a 3-4, and drop all the LBs into coverage, you're basically running a press-prevent (my term). The QB is going to have plenty of time to find a target. On rare occasion, one of the 3 D-linemen will get through, but that's the exception, not the norm.

OU ran a version of the 3-4 for decades under Switzer. The 5-2 is almost a carbon copy of the 3-4, except for the type of ends you field. Mike needs to approach this defense like the old 5-2, with the understanding that he has more athletic ends (OLB). He should be sending a minimum of 4 guys on every down. When you drop everyone into coverage, you might as well be running a dime package the entire game.