Jump to content

Our DC


GMoney

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Jennings, and it would be awfully difficult to install a 4-man front defense in the middle of the season, so I’d bet the scheme would remain in place.

I am far from being a coach, but I always thought the reason you ran a 3 man front is that you didn't have enough talent for a 4 man.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wardly said:

I am far from being a coach, but I always thought the reason you ran a 3 man front is that you didn't have enough talent for a 4 man.

It's a part of it, definitely. But it's more of a philosophical decision than a snap decision going into a season like, 'man we better get into a 3-man front because we don't have the dudes'. It's recruited with the idea you'll only need X amount up front to survive up front. It's also employed and often times mainly employed pending your conference situation, offensively. It's not a bad gig for a spread em out, air em out conference like CUSA. Also like the Big12, which is why Matt Campbell installed it at ISU when he took the job there. 

I don't personally like it because you leave too many vulnerabilities out on the field at all times. It's as if a team is trying to stop the pass and the run at the same time instead of just doing what 100% of the really good defenses in the history of football do, stop the run. Defenses that can stop the run can typically get decent to good pressure on QB's as well. I like the 4-3 with a freak playing the will so that the D can be turned into a 4-2-5 without even changing personnel if time is limited per the situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

It's a part of it, definitely. But it's more of a philosophical decision than a snap decision going into a season like, 'man we better get into a 3-man front because we don't have the dudes'. It's recruited with the idea you'll only need X amount up front to survive up front. It's also employed and often times mainly employed pending your conference situation, offensively. It's not a bad gig for a spread em out, air em out conference like CUSA. Also like the Big12, which is why Matt Campbell installed it at ISU when he took the job there. 

I don't personally like it because you leave too many vulnerabilities out on the field at all times. It's as if a team is trying to stop the pass and the run at the same time instead of just doing what 100% of the really good defenses in the history of football do, stop the run. Defenses that can stop the run can typically get decent to good pressure on QB's as well. I like the 4-3 with a freak playing the will so that the D can be turned into a 4-2-5 without even changing personnel if time is limited per the situation. 

You should be our DC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Rudy said:

In regards to the secondary not turning back to look at the ball, that is taught at the earliest levels of football. It's football 101. Watch your receiver, when he reacts, you turn to look back. This is DIVISION 1 FOOTBALL. That concept, along with form tackling should be installed in them by now. 

 

God forbid they be taught to watch the receivers eyes and turn when the receivers eyes start to get big when the ball is arriving. Our secondarys heads might explode. 

Preach it, brother. You are right on. I explain this very thing to my wife seems like every week when were giving up an unlikely completion or a PI.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cerebus said:

But with, you know,  a DC that will actually leave campus to recruit. 

That would be ideal but at this point I’d be satisfied having a DC that could call a damn ballgame. We have a recruiting coordinator and others to pick up the slack as needed. Let Biagi or a position coach be the recruiting guru and let someone that knows their stuff run the d. Is Reffett known as some master recruiter? Outside of Ekeler who was co-dc, have we had a DC that could recruit well since Dickey left?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cr1028 said:

That would be ideal but at this point I’d be satisfied having a DC that could call a damn ballgame.

We need all hands on deck when it comes to recruiting.  I don't ever want to see an official coach not bust his ass on recruiting.  It has come to bite us more than once.  Only the HC and his 11 assistants can coach on game days and go out to recruit. 

Having a RC is important to coordinate the recruiters efforts and make the campus visits memorable, but they can't actually go and recruit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love GoMeanGreen.com? Tell a friend!
  • What's going on Mean Green?

    1. 18

      CFP board of managers expected to vote on 5+7 playoff format

    2. 76

      Another example - FBS needs to restructure

    3. 8

      UTSA (2/24/24)

    4. 6

      NCAA Football 25

    5. 5

      If the Conference Tournament started today....

  • Popular Contributors

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      15,351
    • Most Online
      1,865

    Newest Member
    Chasetr97
    Joined
  • GEOVbwaWAAEbd3Q.jpg

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.