This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. 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!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. 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!
    Dismiss Notice

Thoughts: Do the D concerns stem from the inept offense?

Discussion in 'Buckeye Football' started by ysubuck, Nov 6, 2004.

  1. ysubuck

    ysubuck Be water my friend.

    Poor tackling, no pass rush, etc.

    The D has MSU stymied in the first quarter, but they were on the field for just about the entire half. There was a little pass rush, they couldn't run, and the D looked like they came to play. As the game went on they seemed to get worse.

    This has not been uncommon this season, so I was wondering if you all thought that the D might not be getting a fair shake. These guys have to be tired. Even the superior D of last season ran out of gas when, arguably, it counted most against Michigan. I don't have the numbers, but I'm sure someone does. How long has the D been on the field this season as opposed to the O? I have been on Snyder a little this season, but now I'm thinking that the D is just dog tired because the O can do nothing.
  2. BB73

    BB73 Loves Buckeye History Staff Member Bookie '16 & '17 Upset Contest Winner

    Other than the missed tackles, I thought the 'D" played OK today.

    They get tired being out there a lot, but only gave up 2 FG's in the second half.

    I do wish they'd force some fumbles, though.
  3. kn1f3party

    kn1f3party Junior

    To some extent they are overworked. I felt we made the appropriate adjustments after the half but Michigan State came out with a different plan. Our zone was getting sliced to pieces in the first half. Fortunately we were able to get more pressure and use an aggressive man to man that slowed the Spartans down a little.
  4. osugrad21

    osugrad21 Capo Regime Staff Member

    Easy for me...when Snyder mixed coverages and used some DL stunts, we had success. When we played a soft base zone scheme...we gave up yards

    Fatigue definitely played a role as well
  5. BuckNutty

    BuckNutty Hear The Drummer Get Wicked Staff Member Bookie

    My biggest problem with the defense is a lack of any consistent pass rush. Tackling has been poor all year, our scheme at times has been suspect but the guys up front are not getting it done like they have the past couple years. Getting to the passer can mask deficiencies in the secondary. We don't have that luxury this year.
  6. osugrad21

    osugrad21 Capo Regime Staff Member

    Exactly...I'm surprised Barrow or Gholston hasn't been used more on passing downs
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2004
  7. daddyphatsacs

    daddyphatsacs Let the cards fall...

    The lack of defensive pass rush leads to the offense buying time from an oppositional standpoint. I think that the defense was worn down later in the game and didn't have the intensity that they displayed early on. Regardless, they played their asses off and won against a good MSU squad.
  8. MaximumSam

    MaximumSam Newbie

    Our defense certainly isn't as talented or good as last year, but it's still pretty strong. If the offense could stay on the field, it would look even better. Our defensive line just isn't real athletic, and thus we aren't as good stopping the run or getting to the QB as we were the last few years. Our back seven is pretty strong, but we do play a lot of soft zones that minimize their effectiveness. Another year of experience could make this unit a lot stronger - they look like their thinking too much right now.
  9. BuckPshrink

    BuckPshrink Freshman


    4th. quarter D was sucking wind big time! Granted the O was not on fire and posession time could have helped, the sloppy pursuit, reactive vs. proactive pass coverage stood out! Either injuries have taken a big toll on the D line or Cat. earth movers need to build a berm 100 ft/4% grade behind the WHAC! As for next year, Coach S needs to follow a simple rule: sweat now; bleed less later!
  10. NewYorkBuck

    NewYorkBuck Do not read this title

    There are some serious problems with the philosophy on the D as far as Im concerned, especially on the corners. We play 10-12 yards off the WR. Not just on 3rd and long - every single play. We have recruited athletes - let them use it. Perhaps the most disturbing defensive play to me was when MSU got down inside the 15. Our corners were playing in the endzone. I really couldnt believe what I was seeing. Playing tighter down towards the goal line is so fundamental that I have never even seen a high school defense make this mistake - but yep - we were still out mandatory 12 yards off. The result? MSU touchdown - underneath.....

    Playing off that far not only gives up everything short and underneath, it largely takes your CBs out of run support. For my money - its just more playing scared. Id just assume let them fly around and make plays and attack, rather than being on their heels the whole game afraid to make a mistake.
  11. bucknut74

    bucknut74 You Enjoy Myself

    Need more zone blitz. We used to zone-blitz more than any other team in the country .I only recall seeing it a few of times this year, and it seems to have worked almost every single time.
  12. osugrad21

    osugrad21 Capo Regime Staff Member

    NYB I didn't agree with this assertion when I first read it but I didn't tape the game to check for reference. I asked DiHard to run through some of the series to check it out. Like I thought I was seeing, the CBs were usually 6-8 yds which is standard in cov 3 or 4. A few snaps did have the CBs up on the line which is either man or cov 2. There were also plays with what you are saying but I would guess that was cover 4 shell with man under.

    The TD you are referring to was not on the was on LBs. Snyder made some nice adjustments on the bunch trips by moving the safety out. They either manned up out of that or played a cover 3 look with the safety in the flats and the corner getting the deep third. The LBs (Hawk I think) did not pick up the crossing route.
  13. DiHard

    DiHard Guest

    not a secondary expert....but how much of a factor could both starting safeties being out with injuries be a part of coverage schemes..??
  14. buckiprof

    buckiprof 21st Century Buckeye Man Staff Member

    It was Hawk who did not pick up the crossing route.
  15. osugrad21

    osugrad21 Capo Regime Staff Member

    Grazie Prof...I was pretty sure it was.

Share This Page