• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

DC Jim Knowles (Official Thread)

The defense isn't going to get better for more than a year or two at a time until OSU finally finds and keeps a guy for more than a few seasons and then can consistently recruit to improve the talent and depth that it needs for that guy's philosophy. While I'm not happy with Knowles right now, I think he could be that guy. There were big improvements this year over what was basically a clown car flying down the highway, on fire, at 90 mph. We knew the offense would still have to carry the team regardless of what he did.

That being said, the boneheaded and hyper aggressive calls need to stop. If you don't have the personnel to have your DBs on islands, or can't rely on your blitzes getting home, then you have to be a bit more conservative. Most of all, Day and co. need to start winning big recruiting battles to pull in better safety talent if you're going to play 5 all the time. They've had good results so far, but desperately need players like Downs.



I definitely hope Ransom comes back. Haven't seen enough of Styles but I'm impressed that he's played as much as he has as an early enrollee. Stokes looks dangerous in coverage, but prone to terrible angles. The Martinez experiment is pretty much over. The biggest issue I have with his scheme is that it relies on having great safeties that are both really good in coverage and run support, and it's hard enough to just have 2 of those guys. At what point do you just find physical CBs and play them at nickel and call it a day?

This!
What many are forgetting in the first year Knowles, is that most of the season the defense made marked improvements, ESPECIALLY in the 2nd half. And that was an issue during Coombs' tenure. What many are also forgetting, is that Knowles' defenses make large improvements, year to year(https://okstate.com/sports/football/roster/coaches/jim-knowles/1570
The Oklahoma State defense has shown significant improvement each year during his first three seasons as coordinator. In 2018, the Cowboys allowed an average of 32.5 points and 452.5 yards per game, but in 2019, those numbers improved to 26.8 points per game and 412.3 yards per game. Then in 2020, those numbers improved again to 23.5 points per game and 379.0 yards per game.
).
The defense this year, was worlds better than the last 2 seasons, and Knowles said at the start of the season, he's only opened a portion of the playbook as not to overwhelm the team. But the offense was saying all year how much the defense was disguising looks to cause confusion. Now we live in a recency bias world, so many will only remember the last 2-3gms of the year, and not see how improved the defense looked.

But like you said, being too aggressive at times, at bad moments caused an L as opposed to a W. I too wonder if it would be better to have an actual CB playing in the slot instead of a S. Because like you said as well
great safeties that are both really good in coverage and run support, and it's hard enough to just have 2 of those guys
S are usually best at coverage OR run support, the elite(i.e. Ed Reed, Troy Polamalu, Malcolm Jenkins, Mike Doss, Sean Taylor, etc) can do both and they're in short supply. There are more CBs who can do both, though they usually do 1 of the traits better, a CB can be a great cover CB and decent in run support(and vice versa). IMO, starting Burke, Hancock and Johnson; and rotating the 3 S, would be better than starting the 3 S and rotating the CBs.
 
Upvote 0
An interesting ESPN article on sign stealing. There are comments from several coaches (including Knowles) in the article:

Inside the sideline paranoia of a college football coach

i


COACHES TEND TO
clam up when asked about paranoia among their ranks. Without fail, they'll start by saying they're too focused on the task at hand to worry about anyone pulling a fast one on them. Maybe they'll laugh and say they're naive. But eventually they'll admit to hearing cautionary tales through the years -- lip readers in the coaches box, parabolic microphones pointed where they shouldn't be, wild stuff that one Power 5 assistant says "would make [Bill] Belichick seem like a saint."

Everyone's a gossip, especially in the small world of college football. Share enough stories, and don't be surprised when those previously buttoned-up coaches start divulging experiences of their own -- accounts of malfunctioning headsets and former players who went turncoat.

Former Navy coach Ken Niumatalolo said he never paid much attention to things like sign stealing until a few years ago, when television producers moved their cameras to the opposite side of the field. The reason was innocent enough; Niumatalolo said they wanted to get a shot of the Navy sideline with the brigade in the background. But then an assistant warned, "That's bad." Niumatalolo asked why and the assistant, whom he had recently hired, explained how the school he came from had spent three hours watching TV copy of Navy's games to match their signals to their plays. "We're the most paranoid people," Niumatalolo said. "And a lot of it there's good reason for."

North Carolina coach Mack Brown sees a healthy level of mistrust as being an essential requirement for the job. "It's why my hair is really gray, I look old and I haven't slept well for 30 years," he said.

The threat of subterfuge is so prevalent there's a shorthand for when it's believed to have happened: getting skunked. While stealing signals is as old as the sport itself, a source said it has become a "cottage industry" of late. Ohio State defensive coordinator Jim Knowles estimates 75% of teams steal signals. "It's bigger than most people know," he said. Technological advancements and expanding support staffs are fueling concerns. But analog methods aren't to be discounted, either. Just last week, Georgia coach Kirby Smart had to respond to an unsubstantiated rumor that his team had filmed Ohio State's practice. Smart brushed it off, calling it "ludicrous." Former Oklahoma coach Bob Stoops once said that he regretted practicing in the Superdome prior to the 2003 Sugar Bowl because there were too many prying eyes.

No place is safe, and no one is above suspicion. It turns out not even ball boys can be trusted to move freely on the opposing team's sideline over fears that they might hear (or record) sensitive information. The same goes for the seemingly innocuous members of the chain gang -- the crew that marks the line of scrimmage and line to gain, and holds the marker displaying what down it is.

A longtime head coach and coordinator warned, "Think about all the money, dude," before ruling out any theory as being too far-fetched.

"Think about it, and that's where it's at," he said. "When you got assistant coaches making $2 million a year -- assistant coaches! -- and you got position coaches making $600,000-800,000 a year, I mean, everybody gets used to a standard of living they want to maintain."
.
.
.
continued

Entire article: https://www.espn.com/college-footba...side-sideline-paranoia-college-football-coach

i


Ohio State defensive coordinator Jim Knowles estimates 75% of teams steal signals.

Not only is Knowles convinced that opponents have filmed his signals, he believes some teams will then turn around and share what they've learned with others. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right?" Knowles said.

Knowles said he doesn't like to talk about it because what can he really do to stop it? But since he was asked, he wasn't going to pretend it wasn't real. "It is a huge part of what goes on," he said, "and kind of a story behind the game."

"You know," he said, "if you can imagine it, it can be done when you have resources and people and time."
 
Upvote 0
You know what I can imagine Jim?

Putting a lid on the big, back breaking explosive plays.

I can imagine calling a soft zone when protecting a two score lead with under 8 to play in the 4th quarter as opposed to say a "fuck it, let's blitz" man free pure risk kind of call in that same scenario. Those are the things I imagine should happen when you throw an absurd amount of resources at people who don't have much more time to show they deserve said resources you non playcalling fucking idiot.
 
Upvote 0
You know what I can imagine Jim?

Putting a lid on the big, back breaking explosive plays.

I can imagine calling a soft zone when protecting a two score lead with under 8 to play in the 4th quarter as opposed to say a "fuck it, let's blitz" man free pure risk kind of call in that same scenario. Those are the things I imagine should happen when you throw an absurd amount of resources at people who don't have much more time to show they deserve said resources you non playcalling fucking idiot.
We all mocked Tresselball until we needed it this year.

Just a simple man under cover 2 would've worked.
 
Upvote 0
We all mocked Tresselball until we needed it this year.

Just a simple man under cover 2 would've worked.

It's a situation specific thing. You don't even have to go full frontal Tresselball. Just be aware of the rules of the game making the ticking clock your friend and make it take, what 2:30-3 minutes to score. It a completely different game if you do that.
 
Upvote 0
It's a situation specific thing. You don't even have to go full frontal Tresselball. Just be aware of the rules of the game making the ticking clock your friend and make it take, what 2:30-3 minutes to score. It a completely different game if you do that.
Thought about this today oddly because I'm a degenerate Buckeye fan.

No nothing would've changed IMO. They would've scored more than likely on that drive in maybe 2:30? We then get the ball back with 6 minutes left and probably still kick a fieldgoal to go back up by 6 with maybe what 1:30-2:00 left? 1:30 for UGA vs our defense down 6?

They're still scoring to win by 1. We probably get the ball back with a few seconds left but it's not enough.
 
Upvote 0
People banging on Knowles should really be upset about how he inherited such an epically bad defense. He improved it, despite being sketchy at times. Give him another year.


It was pointed out on one of the buckege beats today that it appeared like Knowles didn't really know our players limitations until it was too late and I agree.

We went all year basically wrecking teams. Penn State scored a few late TDs, then Maryland made for a little concern but surely we were just looking ahead. Then we get hit for 5 big plays vs ttun before choking vs UGA.

IMO, he's got a difficult scheme to pick up and year 2 will be much better. It should be better just because the amount of talent we have coming back but it will also be better because we should have more options play call wise to counter teams.
 
Upvote 0
Knowles’ biggest issue is that he played such an aggressive scheme with average athletes in our back 4. In order for his scheme to succeed you need to have great corners and safeties. These things aren’t his fault.

For all of the love people gave Coombs until it was too late, he really did a number on the secondary.
 
Upvote 0
It’s absolutely his fault for not recognizing their limitations and modifying his approach to counteract/mitigate their shortcomings, though.
I'd say he did that pretty well till the last few games.

And he did it for stretches of those games. At some point against talent you can't hide your warts anymore. Could he have called better games I think if you ask him he'd tell you he could but no man is perfect
 
Upvote 0
Knowles’ biggest issue is that he played such an aggressive scheme with average athletes in our back 4. In order for his scheme to succeed you need to have great corners and safeties. These things aren’t his fault.

For all of the love people gave Coombs until it was too late, he really did a number on the secondary.

wait…you are giving Knowles a pass for running a defense knowing he didn’t have the personnel to run it? So a coach should take an IV league school in basketball and play a Loyola Marymount run and shoot with 5 slow white guys? Gtfo. You adapt your play calling to the personnel on hand. That’s great coaching. This jackass just decided to run whatever because he’s a riverboat gambler. Da fuq out of here with that b.s.
 
Upvote 0
It's a situation specific thing. You don't even have to go full frontal Tresselball. Just be aware of the rules of the game making the ticking clock your friend and make it take, what 2:30-3 minutes to score. It a completely different game if you do that.
Let me just say, up front, that I'm not defending Knowles. What he did / didn't do in Georgia's final possessions in the Peach Bowl, at some level, are indefensible.

That said... Knowles has always said that his approach is not situation specific. He has always said that his mindset is ALWAYS to stop the other team's offense and get them off the field. He has said (and I don't remember which Tuesday press conference it was) that he doesn't have a "special" up-by-X / down-by-Y two-minute-drill really-need-to-get-a-stop scheme. He says that he is an "always on" kind of guy and that's the kind of defense he wants and tries to deploy.

Maybe that's a coach being stubborn. Maybe that's a guy who doesn't do well with complexity. Maybe that's coach who is trying not to put too much on his players' plates. I have no idea.

My frustration with this is that at Knowles' pay scale, just as I'd say to whatever specialist who works for me (for example), he can't just be a one-trick pony. If his "always on" approach loses us a huge game to our rival and then, again, loses us a CFP semi-final, I'd tell him that I don't really care "always on" or "always off" or "always in flux". I'd tell him that what he gets market-best compensation to do is "always win".
 
Upvote 0
Let me just say, up front, that I'm not defending Knowles. What he did / didn't do in Georgia's final possessions in the Peach Bowl, at some level, are indefensible.

That said... Knowles has always said that his approach is not situation specific. He has always said that his mindset is ALWAYS to stop the other team's offense and get them off the field. He has said (and I don't remember which Tuesday press conference it was) that he doesn't have a "special" up-by-X / down-by-Y two-minute-drill really-need-to-get-a-stop scheme. He says that he is an "always on" kind of guy and that's the kind of defense he wants and tries to deploy.

Maybe that's a coach being stubborn. Maybe that's a guy who doesn't do well with complexity. Maybe that's coach who is trying not to put too much on his players' plates. I have no idea.

My frustration with this is that at Knowles' pay scale, just as I'd say to whatever specialist who works for me (for example), he can't just be a one-trick pony. If his "always on" approach loses us a huge game to our rival and then, again, loses us a CFP semi-final, I'd tell him that I don't really care "always on" or "always off" or "always in flux". I'd tell him that what he gets market-best compensation to do is "always win".
I mean that's great but we've swung and missed on recruits in the secondary for basically 3 years. Maybe Knowles needs to mix in more zone but our players in the back end are largely getting beat.

This defense looks a bit different with Battle at Safety and Clarke at corner for example (I know I'm forgetting others). It's largely execution and player limitations but yes Knowles needs to read the game a bit better too.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top