The Defense: The Big Question

[Cougatron]

So the defense is the big question going into the 2015.

Over the first 3 years in the Leach era the defense was a very inconsistent unit. At times it would do some really good things like help secure the apple cup victory in 2012. Or hold strong against USC and get a pick 6 to help us win the game. Our first shutout in 8 years all be it against Idaho was still something nice to see, but still glaring issues where it would collapse like colorado in 2012, the bowl game in 2013. etc. Big explosive plays would happen at the most inopportune times Rutgers first play etc, and a change was needed.

I have a theory based out of pure speculation that Breske was hired to be a stepping stone DC. He was someone who was from the Northwest, had experience putting together defenses with success, and would be used to put us into a template 3/4 multi front for the future, but because recruiting was important as well as other things Leach knew his tenure would be limited. If he worked out amazing, but for the most part he was brought in to organize the style of the defense as an initial template. This is just a theory, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was true. Wouldn't surprise me either if it wasn't.

Now that the template is in place and the shortcomings surfaced to where we need to move another direction to move that unit up it's time for a new young recruiting DC to elevate the personnel in the template, and after seeing what is working best in the conference the 5 DB focused defense to defend against the spreads is what is needed. Enter Alex Grinch, a guy who is familiar coming in after Breske (Grinch came in to Wyoming after Breske), Grinch is a secondary 5 db familiar coach running it at Missouri winning 2 SEC East Championships.


He checks all the boxes for the next stage in the unit rebuild. A young guy that brings in talent, knows how to follow Breske, can help finish the 4-2-5 /3 3 5 hybrid we want to run. The biggest thing to realize is that rebuilds come in stages. The entire thing doesn't go up at once. We all would like that, but Leach strikes me as someone who is doing things in stages. Just like now talking about going undercenter more. His goals were to get the frameworks in place (OL, WR, RBs) and throw it a lot to get to a point that the more complete guts could be added. Defense was no different. Get a framework in place. Now add the secondary elements and strong recruiters to fill in the guts.

So Enter Alex Grinch/Roy Manning. Great recruiters with a lot of energy, and the final 5DB component. So what can we expect our defense to look like going forward.

1. Lots of speed. A premium will be put on a LB/ Secondary that can move around this will help against containing big plays, and will be able to defend against large wr packages that are often seen in the Pac 12

2. More tradition 4 man fronts and rush DE. With guys like Jeremiah Mitchell coming in a true rush DE will be brought in more often instead of using the hybrid buck to do it all the time.

3. Safeties everywhere. We'll see a lot of safeties all over the place as running out of the nickel will happen often. Expect fast hard hitting safeties to be all over the field.

4. Turnovers. Having multi fronts with 5 secondary players means there is an extra safety to account for now.
That allows for a lot of opportunities for QBs to not see the extra safety who will be lurking around in coverage.

5. More QB pressure. With extra DBs floating in coverage the QB now has to take more time to find the right space giving more time for our pass rush to develop.

They'll be a lot of kinks to work out in the early parts, and most certainly there will be mistakes, but it looks like we'll be taking another step forward next year for the program.

 

[kayak15]

I am more concerned about special teams than the defense. But if defense is not the big question, it is certainly a big question. New leadership and enthusiasm in Grinch. Reading between the lines of the interviews with defensive backs during Spring practice I got the distinct impression that the coaching of cornerbacks and safeties has been upgraded. The kids seem to be impressed with his abilities and are listening.

One factor that you did not mention is depth. We have more this year than last and should be able to deal with injuries and illness a bit better. Let us hope that the days of "Well, crap, I guess we will just have to burn a red-shirt and put a kid right out of high school out there and hope it works." are over.

Let's hope the days of rolling up 59 points and still losing are over too.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

So the defense is the big question going into the 2015.

Over the first 3 years in the Leach era the defense was a very inconsistent unit. At times it would do some really good things like help secure the apple cup victory in 2012. Or hold strong against USC and get a pick 6 to help us win the game. Our first shutout in 8 years all be it against Idaho was still something nice to see, but still glaring issues where it would collapse like colorado in 2012, the bowl game in 2013. etc. Big explosive plays would happen at the most inopportune times Rutgers first play etc, and a change was needed.

I have a theory based out of pure speculation that Breske was hired to be a stepping stone DC. He was someone who was from the Northwest, had experience putting together defenses with success, and would be used to put us into a template 3/4 multi front for the future, but because recruiting was important as well as other things Leach knew his tenure would be limited. If he worked out amazing, but for the most part he was brought in to organize the style of the defense as an initial template. This is just a theory, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was true. Wouldn't surprise me either if it wasn't.

Now that the template is in place and the shortcomings surfaced to where we need to move another direction to move that unit up it's time for a new young recruiting DC to elevate the personnel in the template, and after seeing what is working best in the conference the 5 DB focused defense to defend against the spreads is what is needed. Enter Alex Grinch, a guy who is familiar coming in after Breske (Grinch came in to Wyoming after Breske), Grinch is a secondary 5 db familiar coach running it at Missouri winning 2 SEC East Championships.


He checks all the boxes for the next stage in the unit rebuild. A young guy that brings in talent, knows how to follow Breske, can help finish the 4-2-5 /3 3 5 hybrid we want to run. The biggest thing to realize is that rebuilds come in stages. The entire thing doesn't go up at once. We all would like that, but Leach strikes me as someone who is doing things in stages. Just like now talking about going undercenter more. His goals were to get the frameworks in place (OL, WR, RBs) and throw it a lot to get to a point that the more complete guts could be added. Defense was no different. Get a framework in place. Now add the secondary elements and strong recruiters to fill in the guts.

So Enter Alex Grinch/Roy Manning. Great recruiters with a lot of energy, and the final 5DB component. So what can we expect our defense to look like going forward.

1. Lots of speed. A premium will be put on a LB/ Secondary that can move around this will help against containing big plays, and will be able to defend against large wr packages that are often seen in the Pac 12

2. More tradition 4 man fronts and rush DE. With guys like Jeremiah Mitchell coming in a true rush DE will be brought in more often instead of using the hybrid buck to do it all the time.

3. Safeties everywhere. We'll see a lot of safeties all over the place as running out of the nickel will happen often. Expect fast hard hitting safeties to be all over the field.

4. Turnovers. Having multi fronts with 5 secondary players means there is an extra safety to account for now.
That allows for a lot of opportunities for QBs to not see the extra safety who will be lurking around in coverage.

5. More QB pressure. With extra DBs floating in coverage the QB now has to take more time to find the right space giving more time for our pass rush to develop.

They'll be a lot of kinks to work out in the early parts, and most certainly there will be mistakes, but it looks like we'll be taking another step forward next year for the program.

I'd like to believe that no coach would hire an assistant thinking that he would fire him when the time was right. I don't believe that Leach is that type of coach. Other than that, I like the rest of your post, particularly the bullet points at the end.

 

[BiggsCoug]

So the defense is the big question going into the 2015.

Over the first 3 years in the Leach era the defense was a very inconsistent unit. At times it would do some really good things like help secure the apple cup victory in 2012. Or hold strong against USC and get a pick 6 to help us win the game. Our first shutout in 8 years all be it against Idaho was still something nice to see, but still glaring issues where it would collapse like colorado in 2012, the bowl game in 2013. etc. Big explosive plays would happen at the most inopportune times Rutgers first play etc, and a change was needed.

I have a theory based out of pure speculation that Breske was hired to be a stepping stone DC. He was someone who was from the Northwest, had experience putting together defenses with success, and would be used to put us into a template 3/4 multi front for the future, but because recruiting was important as well as other things Leach knew his tenure would be limited. If he worked out amazing, but for the most part he was brought in to organize the style of the defense as an initial template. This is just a theory, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was true. Wouldn't surprise me either if it wasn't.

Now that the template is in place and the shortcomings surfaced to where we need to move another direction to move that unit up it's time for a new young recruiting DC to elevate the personnel in the template, and after seeing what is working best in the conference the 5 DB focused defense to defend against the spreads is what is needed. Enter Alex Grinch, a guy who is familiar coming in after Breske (Grinch came in to Wyoming after Breske), Grinch is a secondary 5 db familiar coach running it at Missouri winning 2 SEC East Championships.


He checks all the boxes for the next stage in the unit rebuild. A young guy that brings in talent, knows how to follow Breske, can help finish the 4-2-5 /3 3 5 hybrid we want to run. The biggest thing to realize is that rebuilds come in stages. The entire thing doesn't go up at once. We all would like that, but Leach strikes me as someone who is doing things in stages. Just like now talking about going undercenter more. His goals were to get the frameworks in place (OL, WR, RBs) and throw it a lot to get to a point that the more complete guts could be added. Defense was no different. Get a framework in place. Now add the secondary elements and strong recruiters to fill in the guts.

So Enter Alex Grinch/Roy Manning. Great recruiters with a lot of energy, and the final 5DB component. So what can we expect our defense to look like going forward.

1. Lots of speed. A premium will be put on a LB/ Secondary that can move around this will help against containing big plays, and will be able to defend against large wr packages that are often seen in the Pac 12

2. More tradition 4 man fronts and rush DE. With guys like Jeremiah Mitchell coming in a true rush DE will be brought in more often instead of using the hybrid buck to do it all the time.

3. Safeties everywhere. We'll see a lot of safeties all over the place as running out of the nickel will happen often. Expect fast hard hitting safeties to be all over the field.

4. Turnovers. Having multi fronts with 5 secondary players means there is an extra safety to account for now.
That allows for a lot of opportunities for QBs to not see the extra safety who will be lurking around in coverage.

5. More QB pressure. With extra DBs floating in coverage the QB now has to take more time to find the right space giving more time for our pass rush to develop.

They'll be a lot of kinks to work out in the early parts, and most certainly there will be mistakes, but it looks like we'll be taking another step forward next year for the program.

I'd be surprised if the defense had as much improvement as you think. New faces, new coaches, new schemes don't add up to significant improvement. I think they'll be better, I don't think they'll line up and play as well as you think.

Im not a fan of 425/335 hybrid or any hybrid defense at all. Not in college football anyways. Too many things to teach to too many new faces at WSU. Grinch will be an exception coach if he can pull it off.

 

[YakiCoug]

I am more concerned about special teams than the defense. But if defense is not the big question, it is certainly a big question. New leadership and enthusiasm in Grinch. Reading between the lines of the interviews with defensive backs during Spring practice I got the distinct impression that the coaching of cornerbacks and safeties has been upgraded. The kids seem to be impressed with his abilities and are listening.

One factor that you did not mention is depth. We have more this year than last and should be able to deal with injuries and illness a bit better. Let us hope that the days of "Well, crap, I guess we will just have to burn a red-shirt and put a kid right out of high school out there and hope it works." are over.

Let's hope the days of rolling up 59 points and still losing are over too.

The defense needs to force far more turnovers than it did a year ago. No one expects it to be another Palouse Posse (not with the offenses in this league today), but asserting itself is going to make the offense even better - or so we can hope, because hope is a good thing ...
(4:39)

 

[YakiCoug]

I'd be surprised if the defense had as much improvement as you think. New faces, new coaches, new schemes don't add up to significant improvement. I think they'll be better, I don't think they'll line up and play as well as you think.

Im not a fan of 425/335 hybrid or any hybrid defense at all. Not in college football anyways. Too many things to teach to too many new faces at WSU. Grinch will be an exception coach if he can pull it off.

I rewatched the spring game, and I saw the defense in a 4-3 99 percent of the time. Other than a safety occasionally brought in for a LB (4-2-5), I didn't see a whole lot of experimentation.

 

[random soul]

I rewatched the spring game, and I saw the defense in a 4-3 99 percent of the time. Other than a safety occasionally brought in for a LB (4-2-5), I didn't see a whole lot of experimentation.

I fully expect Lemora and Taylor to function as "nickel" linebackers in this system. It'll be a 4-3 with one small linebacker until there's more experience with it on the roster

 

[kayak15]

The defense needs to force far more turnovers than it did a year ago. No one expects it to be another Palouse Posse (not with the offenses in this league today), but asserting itself is going to make the offense even better - or so we can hope, because hope is a good thing ...
(4:39)

View embedded media

Yaki, I think we can almost count on more turnovers this coming season. Some, including Scott, our new moderator, have expressed the belief that the law of averages will kick in and we will return to the mean. Probably so, but I look at it differently. Couldn't find all the data but it looks like the opponents passed the ball about 400 times last year and completed about 250 of those attempts. The ball was in the air four hundred times and was fair game for anyone. They caught the ball 250 times and we caught it......3 times?! It would be damn near impossible to replicate that without actively trying. Now, the offense has an obvious advantage. They know where the pass is going and the QB is trying to avoid interceptions. But, only three interceptions? It is a near certainty that we should see a significant increase in interceptions. Fumbles recovered? Your guess is as good as mine. But I think that we can expect a nice jump in turnovers with a good degree of confidence from the interception rate alone.

Thanks for the Shawshank Redemption clip. Terrific movie and Morgan Freeman was, as always, great in his part.

 

[Cougatron]

I rewatched the spring game, and I saw the defense in a 4-3 99 percent of the time. Other than a safety occasionally brought in for a LB (4-2-5), I didn't see a whole lot of experimentation.

I am pretty certain the 335 is in the package. Although we didn't see it I believe it's in there somewhere or will be added in the fall because of what Missouri was doing when Grinch was there.

Here's a whole article about them pulling out the 3/3/5 switch in a game to slow down Toledo. The whole point of the 425/335 is it is an anti spread defense. And variations of the 4/3 man front can screw up the blocking assignments enough to mess up their game plan while keeping the same DB set to counter any pass. And the 335 being optimal against knowing it's pass heavy.

 

[kayak15]

Maybe Leach is keeping the defensive formation under wraps. After all, he won't even let the media know if a red-shirting kid has the sniffles. We should beat PSU and Wyoming with a vanilla defense and Rutgers is primarily a running team. We won't need or use a pass defending formation for Rutgers. At least, I hope not. Keep it hidden so pass-happy Cal won't see any film of what we are intending to confront them with? Or maybe I am just overly suspicious. Or just full of crap again.

 

[Cougsocal]

Schemes and coaching can only help a defense so much. Don't expect a major change in defensive performance until the talent level improves dramatically. The vast majority of HS kids play both ways, and they can be slated for either side of the ball when they hit campus. Until we start putting the lion share of the best athletes we recruit on defense we will continue to struggle. There would have been no Palouse Posse unless Patterson, who was a stud TE in high school. was moved. Also Mobley was the best RB in the state, Childs the best RB on the eastside, Hunter the states best receiver. When your recruiting is struggling, as ours is. you must rob Peter to pay Paul.

Price had his come to Jesus moment over his high O, low D philosophy, with Mike Zimmer, a young energetic DC, will Leach see the same light now?

 

[Cougatron]

Schemes and coaching can only help a defense so much. Don't expect a major change in defensive performance until the talent level improves dramatically. The vast majority of HS kids play both ways, and they can be slated for either side of the ball when they hit campus. Until we start putting the lion share of the best athletes we recruit on defense we will continue to struggle. ?

This is total bs. Rahmel Dockery is a perfect example of how kids DO NOT want to play defense now if they are an offensive star in hs on the west coast. And you can't just "move them" over. They will transfer if you lie to them which is what you will have to do to get them to switch sides, because why would they commit to playing defense for a team if what they want to play is offense. They just won't do it.

And this isn't just us. It's everybody in the Pac 12.

Here's the national defense ratings

Total Defense
#3 Stanford
#60 Utah
#65 UCLA
#76 Oregon State
#78 USC
#80 Washington
#83 Arizona State
#89 Oregon
#99 WSU
#105 Arizona
#114 Colorado
#124 Cal

Look at that. THE ONLY team not in the bottom half of the FBS is Stanford. 90% is in the bottom 1/3 of the FBS.

But but but that's total defense not scoring defense...

#76 Arizona State
#80 Arizona
#98 Oregon State
#117 Washington State
#119 Colorado
#123 Cal

Same thing. So why is this a problem for EVERYBODY? Because the best athletes don't want to play defense. This conference values offense. That's why you see so many offensive coaches. Almost every single coach in the Pac 12 has an offensive background. There is a reason why they were hired. That's the brand of football people like, that's the brand people want to play.

So this idea of "you have to put the best athletes on defense" is total bs. The second you tell the kid I want you to come play defense for us is the second they take the offer from th 5-7 other explosive offenses that offer them an offensive sport instead.

What you have to do is get a scheme that can combat the spread and people who can teach it.

Missouri beat Oklahoma State (air raid variant) with a 4-2-5/335 hybrid
TCU? 4-2-5 - Best defense in the Big XII beating Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor etc (All Air Raid spread hybrids)

If the scheme isn't geared to beating the type of offenses you are facing then you are going to lose games period. It's not about athletes. It's about scheme. But there are few DCs that are running the new defenses that can stop it.

What is the most common defense? 4-3 cover 2. most places STILL run that. The air raid was invented to destroy that defense. The 3/4 is the next common defense, while better it STILL has issues with the spread (See Nick Saban vs Texas A&M (Air Raid variant)

The 5 DB schemes are the ones that slow down the spread offenses. If you don't have one of those in it will be rough.

 

[YakiCoug]

What made that 1994 defense special were the two d-tackles and the MLB. All those around them fed off this center of the defense. Doba said so himself. Eaton, Sasa, and Fields ate offenses alive, but there was one offense that gave them some fits - ASU, which ran a bit of the spread/run option. They didn't have the athletes Oregon's had the last several years, but ASU was essentially the only team to get a jump on the Palouse Posse. That base 4-3 with great interior players struggled a bit. Btw, that same defense existed in 1993 but lacked one player - Mark Fields. It made a tremendous difference.
But there's this notion that all we have to do is move these running backs to linebacker or this wide receiver to corner and - BOOM! - the Posse is reborn. The conference's offenses are too complex, too smart, and too fast today. Throw in the liberalized use of hands by o-linemen, and I doubt you'll see many great defenses in the Pac-12.

This is total bs. Rahmel Dockery is a perfect example of how kids DO NOT want to play defense now if they are an offensive star in hs on the west coast. And you can't just "move them" over. They will transfer if you lie to them which is what you will have to do to get them to switch sides, because why would they commit to playing defense for a team if what they want to play is offense. They just won't do it.

And this isn't just us. It's everybody in the Pac 12.

Here's the national defense ratings

Total Defense
#3 Stanford
#60 Utah
#65 UCLA
#76 Oregon State
#78 USC
#80 Washington
#83 Arizona State
#89 Oregon
#99 WSU
#105 Arizona
#114 Colorado
#124 Cal

Look at that. THE ONLY team not in the bottom half of the FBS is Stanford. 90% is in the bottom 1/3 of the FBS.

But but but that's total defense not scoring defense...

#76 Arizona State
#80 Arizona
#98 Oregon State
#117 Washington State
#119 Colorado
#123 Cal

Same thing. So why is this a problem for EVERYBODY? Because the best athletes don't want to play defense. This conference values offense. That's why you see so many offensive coaches. Almost every single coach in the Pac 12 has an offensive background. There is a reason why they were hired. That's the brand of football people like, that's the brand people want to play.

So this idea of "you have to put the best athletes on defense" is total bs. The second you tell the kid I want you to come play defense for us is the second they take the offer from th 5-7 other explosive offenses that offer them an offensive sport instead.

What you have to do is get a scheme that can combat the spread and people who can teach it.

Missouri beat Oklahoma State (air raid variant) with a 4-2-5/335 hybrid
TCU? 4-2-5 - Best defense in the Big XII beating Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor etc (All Air Raid spread hybrids)

If the scheme isn't geared to beating the type of offenses you are facing then you are going to lose games period. It's not about athletes. It's about scheme. But there are few DCs that are running the new defenses that can stop it.

What is the most common defense? 4-3 cover 2. most places STILL run that. The air raid was invented to destroy that defense. The 3/4 is the next common defense, while better it STILL has issues with the spread (See Nick Saban vs Texas A&M (Air Raid variant)

The 5 DB schemes are the ones that slow down the spread offenses. If you don't have one of those in it will be rough.

 

[Cougatron]

Doba said so himself. Eaton, Sasa, and Fields ate offenses alive, but there was one offense that gave them some fits - ASU, which ran a bit of the spread/run option. They didn't have the athletes Oregon's had the last several years, but ASU was essentially the only team to get a jump on the Palouse Posse. .

This is absolutely correct. The spread came into being as a means to counter nasty 4/3 cover 2 defenses.

By making the LBs have to cover fast WRs / spreading out the defense it exposed those defenses and exploited their weaknesses instead of playing to their strength by trying to run in between the tackles / to the outside.

Once the spread came into effect the small fast teams that got their players into space would just destroy the traditional 4-3.

So what is the response to that? Well if the offensive philosophy changed...then so too must the defense. thus the nickel formation defenses are coming in to be the answer adding an extra safety to add more speed/extra coverage. Yet have the pursuit to stop the run.

The reason why Stanford is able to do what they do is that school is all about lineman and smart players. They could leverage their academic standard as a carrot to get the biggest and smartest players. If they have smart players that can control the line of scrimmage in a smart way they knew they could win some games, couple that with power running to give their defense more rest and eat up clock, and that's stanford.

But even with that top defense...8-5 is where they are at now, and if they can't refill those trenches they will sink quickly.

 

[YakiCoug]

This is absolutely correct. The spread came into being as a means to counter nasty 4/3 cover 2 defenses.

By making the LBs have to cover fast WRs / spreading out the defense it exposed those defenses and exploited their weaknesses instead of playing to their strength by trying to run in between the tackles / to the outside.

Once the spread came into effect the small fast teams that got their players into space would just destroy the traditional 4-3.

So what is the response to that? Well if the offensive philosophy changed...then so too must the defense. thus the nickel formation defenses are coming in to be the answer adding an extra safety to add more speed/extra coverage. Yet have the pursuit to stop the run.

The reason why Stanford is able to do what they do is that school is all about lineman and smart players. They could leverage their academic standard as a carrot to get the biggest and smartest players. If they have smart players that can control the line of scrimmage in a smart way they knew they could win some games, couple that with power running to give their defense more rest and eat up clock, and that's stanford.

But even with that top defense...8-5 is where they are at now, and if they can't refill those trenches they will sink quickly.

Arizona didn't do well in the 2014 Pac-12 championship game, but the Wildcats were the only team other than Stanford to contain Oregon's explosive offense in regular season games two years running. And Arizona's defense a year ago was one of the smallest in the conference. The front line went 6-1, 246 (Scooby Wright), 6-4, 277, 6-4, 262, 6-1, 265, with a bunch of safeties and corners behind them. That's a defense set up to match what the spread does.

 

[Cougatron]

Arizona didn't do well in the 2014 Pac-12 championship game, but the Wildcats were the only team other than Stanford to contain Oregon's explosive offense in regular season games two years running. And Arizona's defense a year ago was one of the smallest in the conference. The front line went 6-1, 246 (Scooby Wright), 6-4, 277, 6-4, 262, 6-1, 265, with a bunch of safeties and corners behind them. That's a defense set up to match what the spread does.

that's correct, and what does Arizona run? A 3 3 5 stack. 5 db defenses will be important in the future in the Pac-12 going forward.

 

[CougEd]

I'd be surprised if the defense had as much improvement as you think. New faces, new coaches, new schemes don't add up to significant improvement. I think they'll be better, I don't think they'll line up and play as well as you think.

Im not a fan of 425/335 hybrid or any hybrid defense at all. Not in college football anyways. Too many things to teach to too many new faces at WSU. Grinch will be an exception coach if he can pull it off.

The real improvement will come in 2016. While they were in a 4-3 base in 1994, what made them really effective is having the two DT's, the middle linebacker, one really good corner, and they never had to bring out a player for down or distance. Childs and Hayes were like having two more safeties out there. And I loved Rushing explosion in a 20 yard area.

 

[CougEd]

This is total bs. Rahmel Dockery is a perfect example of how kids DO NOT want to play defense now if they are an offensive star in hs on the west coast. And you can't just "move them" over. They will transfer if you lie to them which is what you will have to do to get them to switch sides, because why would they commit to playing defense for a team if what they want to play is offense. They just won't do it.

And this isn't just us. It's everybody in the Pac 12.

Here's the national defense ratings

Total Defense
#3 Stanford
#60 Utah
#65 UCLA
#76 Oregon State
#78 USC
#80 Washington
#83 Arizona State
#89 Oregon
#99 WSU
#105 Arizona
#114 Colorado
#124 Cal

Look at that. THE ONLY team not in the bottom half of the FBS is Stanford. 90% is in the bottom 1/3 of the FBS.

But but but that's total defense not scoring defense...

#76 Arizona State
#80 Arizona
#98 Oregon State
#117 Washington State
#119 Colorado
#123 Cal

Same thing. So why is this a problem for EVERYBODY? Because the best athletes don't want to play defense. This conference values offense. That's why you see so many offensive coaches. Almost every single coach in the Pac 12 has an offensive background. There is a reason why they were hired. That's the brand of football people like, that's the brand people want to play.

So this idea of "you have to put the best athletes on defense" is total bs. The second you tell the kid I want you to come play defense for us is the second they take the offer from th 5-7 other explosive offenses that offer them an offensive sport instead.

What you have to do is get a scheme that can combat the spread and people who can teach it.

Missouri beat Oklahoma State (air raid variant) with a 4-2-5/335 hybrid
TCU? 4-2-5 - Best defense in the Big XII beating Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor etc (All Air Raid spread hybrids)

If the scheme isn't geared to beating the type of offenses you are facing then you are going to lose games period. It's not about athletes. It's about scheme. But there are few DCs that are running the new defenses that can stop it.

What is the most common defense? 4-3 cover 2. most places STILL run that. The air raid was invented to destroy that defense. The 3/4 is the next common defense, while better it STILL has issues with the spread (See Nick Saban vs Texas A&M (Air Raid variant)

The 5 DB schemes are the ones that slow down the spread offenses. If you don't have one of those in it will be rough.

What was Auburns and Ohio State's keys to beating Oregon in their bowl games?

In terms of moving offensive players to defense, it can be done. You have to profile the right player. There are plenty high school receivers who really don't have the route running ability or the hands to be a top flight receivers in the Pac 12. You just have to recruit the "right" kid.

 

[Cougatron]

What was Auburns and Ohio State's keys to beating Oregon in their bowl games?

Not recruiting in the bottom 20% of the FBS for 4 years.

 

[CougEd]

Not recruiting in the bottom 20% of the FBS for 4 years.

Yeah but we now have 4 recruiting classes under leach, what kind of defense did OSU and Auburn use to stop Oregon?

 

[YakiCoug]

This is absolutely correct. The spread came into being as a means to counter nasty 4/3 cover 2 defenses.

By making the LBs have to cover fast WRs / spreading out the defense it exposed those defenses and exploited their weaknesses instead of playing to their strength by trying to run in between the tackles / to the outside.

Once the spread came into effect the small fast teams that got their players into space would just destroy the traditional 4-3.

So what is the response to that? Well if the offensive philosophy changed...then so too must the defense. thus the nickel formation defenses are coming in to be the answer adding an extra safety to add more speed/extra coverage. Yet have the pursuit to stop the run.

The reason why Stanford is able to do what they do is that school is all about lineman and smart players. They could leverage their academic standard as a carrot to get the biggest and smartest players. If they have smart players that can control the line of scrimmage in a smart way they knew they could win some games, couple that with power running to give their defense more rest and eat up clock, and that's stanford.

But even with that top defense...8-5 is where they are at now, and if they can't refill those trenches they will sink quickly.

In the NC game, Ohio State's offense had the ball nearly 38 minutes (296 yards rushing on 61 carries). The Ducks, playing without two key offensive players and with a key O-lineman limited by a previous injury, managed only 132 yards rushing on 33 carries, but the Ducks do not face teams with great running games and stout defenses every week during the regular season. When you combine stout with savvy (scheme), even Oregon can look human.
As far as Oregon's other NC appearance goes, well, Cam Newton and 254 yards rushing on 50 carries had something to do with limiting Oregon's offense. Auburn's offense had the ball nearly 33 minutes.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

What was Auburns and Ohio State's keys to beating Oregon in their bowl games?

In terms of moving offensive players to defense, it can be done. You have to profile the right player. There are plenty high school receivers who really don't have the route running ability or the hands to be a top flight receivers in the Pac 12. You just have to recruit the "right" kid.

You are correct that you have to recruit the "right" kid. Auburn and Ohio State both have defensive lines that are physically more talented than the guys that Oregon had.....or at least as talented. The nice thing when most of your recruits have four stars beside their names is that you are statistically more likely to get a total stud on the field.

 

[YakiCoug]

You are correct that you have to recruit the "right" kid. Auburn and Ohio State both have defensive lines that are physically more talented than the guys that Oregon had.....or at least as talented. The nice thing when most of your recruits have four stars beside their names is that you are statistically more likely to get a total stud on the field.

1994 was just one season at WSU, the proverbial exception to the rule, and it was an exception created mostly by the play of Mark Fields, and some great interior d-line play by Eaton and Sasa. That trio consisted of JC transfers and a Prop 48 prospect. Finding this "right kid" today is difficult, mostly because of tougher academic requirements which would have prevented Mark Fields' return to WSU after he had to sit out and attend another school in '93 (failure to show academic progress toward a degree). And there are no more Prop 48 kids.

 

[Cougsocal]

This is total bs. Rahmel Dockery is a perfect example of how kids DO NOT want to play defense now if they are an offensive star in hs on the west coast. And you can't just "move them" over. They will transfer if you lie to them which is what you will have to do to get them to switch sides, because why would they commit to playing defense for a team if what they want to play is offense. They just won't do it.

And this isn't just us. It's everybody in the Pac 12.

Here's the national defense ratings

Total Defense
#3 Stanford
#60 Utah
#65 UCLA
#76 Oregon State
#78 USC
#80 Washington
#83 Arizona State
#89 Oregon
#99 WSU
#105 Arizona
#114 Colorado
#124 Cal

Look at that. THE ONLY team not in the bottom half of the FBS is Stanford. 90% is in the bottom 1/3 of the FBS.

But but but that's total defense not scoring defense...

#76 Arizona State
#80 Arizona
#98 Oregon State
#117 Washington State
#119 Colorado
#123 Cal

Same thing. So why is this a problem for EVERYBODY? Because the best athletes don't want to play defense. This conference values offense. That's why you see so many offensive coaches. Almost every single coach in the Pac 12 has an offensive background. There is a reason why they were hired. That's the brand of football people like, that's the brand people want to play.

So this idea of "you have to put the best athletes on defense" is total bs. The second you tell the kid I want you to come play defense for us is the second they take the offer from th 5-7 other explosive offenses that offer them an offensive sport instead.

What you have to do is get a scheme that can combat the spread and people who can teach it.

Missouri beat Oklahoma State (air raid variant) with a 4-2-5/335 hybrid
TCU? 4-2-5 - Best defense in the Big XII beating Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor etc (All Air Raid spread hybrids)

If the scheme isn't geared to beating the type of offenses you are facing then you are going to lose games period. It's not about athletes. It's about scheme. But there are few DCs that are running the new defenses that can stop it.

What is the most common defense? 4-3 cover 2. most places STILL run that. The air raid was invented to destroy that defense. The 3/4 is the next common defense, while better it STILL has issues with the spread (See Nick Saban vs Texas A&M (Air Raid variant)

The 5 DB schemes are the ones that slow down the spread offenses. If you don't have one of those in it will be rough.

Your head is so far up Leach's arse, I'm amazed you haven't suffocated already. We suck on defense, not because Ucla and Arizona suck on defense, but because we haven't recruited well on defense. Defense is relative to the conference you play, no doubt, and in the P-12 we have been and remain bottom rung. It isn't like we have studs at DL, LB and DB, who just aren't in the right scheme. We are loaded with kids that 8-9-10-11 other teams in the conference said no thanks to. How do you change that? We have seen it happen in Pullman, dreadful to #1 in 3 seasons by changing emphasis, and a HC believing in a young, bright DC. Scheme all you want, but let's not kid ourselves, that we are slow and unathletic in the back 8 and have been out of shape and less than dynamic up front.

We have 18 WRs on the roster and only one CB who isn't a massive liability. We could play dime on every down, but unless we have 6 DBs who are fast, athletic and can cover, we are wallpapering over dry rot. We have a talent problem. On offense you can get by with less talent, Price and Leach made a career on it. Price finally realized the same doesn't apply on defense. Offense's find and exploit weaknesses on defense. Offenses can and do avoid their own.

Four years in, the only person to blame for the mess our defense is in, is Mike Leach. It isn't the league, it isn't numb nuts, in isn't the kids today, it isn't the type football people like to watch, it isn't any other excuse you can think of.

As for kids who insist on playing one position or one side of the ball, If you sign a walking cancer like that, you get what you deserve.

 

[CougEd]

Your head is so far up Leach's arse, I'm amazed you haven't suffocated already. We suck on defense, not because Ucla and Arizona suck on defense, but because we haven't recruited well on defense. Defense is relative to the conference you play, no doubt, and in the P-12 we have been and remain bottom rung. It isn't like we have studs at DL, LB and DB, who just aren't in the right scheme. We are loaded with kids that 8-9-10-11 other teams in the conference said no thanks to. How do you change that? We have seen it happen in Pullman, dreadful to #1 in 3 seasons by changing emphasis, and a HC believing in a young, bright DC. Scheme all you want, but let's not kid ourselves, that we are slow and unathletic in the back 8 and have been out of shape and less than dynamic up front.

We have 18 WRs on the roster and only one CB who isn't a massive liability. We could play dime on every down, but unless we have 6 DBs who are fast, athletic and can cover, we are wallpapering over dry rot. We have a talent problem. On offense you can get by with less talent, Price and Leach made a career on it. Price finally realized the same doesn't apply on defense. Offense's find and exploit weaknesses on defense. Offenses can and do avoid their own.

Four years in, the only person to blame for the mess our defense is in, is Mike Leach. It isn't the league, it isn't numb nuts, in isn't the kids today, it isn't the type football people like to watch, it isn't any other excuse you can think of.

As for kids who insist on playing one position or one side of the ball, If you sign a walking cancer like that, you get what you deserve.

Socal, while I don't disagree with you, Price made a living out of getting kids that 8 other teams passed on cause they didn't see where the kid could help. Trufant was a RB,and as a RB probably 10 out of 10 Pac 10 teams would pass, along with several Mountain West schools, but as a CB, which some could not see, he clearly was the best DB we had by the end of 1999.

Putting the kids in the right scheme has to help them. My personal opinion DEstiny would excel at a 4-3 DT. I just never saw any benefit of playing him at Buck, even if it was for two games.

What Grinch has to do is get his DB's to be in the screen on pass plays. No more uncontested plays. Horton was a virtual slug, he had really good quickness and did well on short patterns, but ask the kid to cover a 25 yard post pattern and he did not have the top end speed. Some of that can be covered up against certain offenses. But he at least contended most pass plays, and he knew where to be and who to cover. The kids from last year had no idea.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Dockery had an enormous amount of success in high school with the ball in his hands. I can see why he'd be underwhelmed about a move to defense.

If a kid wants to play a certain position and not move, fine. He is welcome to pursue another opportunity elsewhere. I don't always agree that a kid is a cancer because he wants something other then what the coaching staff wants.

 

[Coug1990]

Dockery had an enormous amount of success in high school with the ball in his hands. I can see why he'd be underwhelmed about a move to defense.

If a kid wants to play a certain position and not move, fine. He is welcome to pursue another opportunity elsewhere. I don't always agree that a kid is a cancer because he wants something other then what the coaching staff wants.

True. Still, Marcus Trufant had even more success than Dockery on the offensive side of the ball in HS. Plus, Dockery did start out under Leach at WR, but when others were deemed better, he was moved to CB. It is not as if Dockery is lighting it up at OSU at WR. He had a total of 7 receptions last season for a team with a senior QB that liked to pass the ball.

I do not blame Dockery in the least for leaving to follow his heart. However, he is not as good as he thinks he is.

 

[CougEd]

Dockery had an enormous amount of success in high school with the ball in his hands. I can see why he'd be underwhelmed about a move to defense.

If a kid wants to play a certain position and not move, fine. He is welcome to pursue another opportunity elsewhere. I don't always agree that a kid is a cancer because he wants something other then what the coaching staff wants.

Not sure that makes him a cancer. I think it may a but shortsighted on his behalf, maybe he would have been a great corner and just an ordinary receiver. Truth be told, I sometimes think you could walk in a 10 mile radius of any LA high school for example and put together your WR corp.

WSU has really never been hurting for WR except in 1998 and again in 2008-2010. But DB's are money. The coaching staff just has to make sure after they sell them on being the next great RB, Childs wanted to be Broussard, that when push comes to shove they embrace the move.

 

[YakiCoug]

True. Still, Marcus Trufant had even more success than Dockery on the offensive side of the ball in HS. Plus, Dockery did start out under Leach at WR, but when others were deemed better, he was moved to CB. It is not as if Dockery is lighting it up at OSU at WR. He had a total of 7 receptions last season for a team with a senior QB that liked to pass the ball.

I do not blame Dockery in the least for leaving to follow his heart. However, he is not as good as he thinks he is.

Much of Dockery's acclaim was based on kick returns, with some INT returns as well. I hope he lights up the Ducks and fuskies with a few kick returns and receiving TDs.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

Biggs, I agree with much of your post. But what I believe you under appreciate is the performance improvement due to improved health. We had one of those "once in a decade" snake bit injury seasons on the D side of the ball last year, particularly the LB's and DB's. Your points about a new coach and system are valid. But what a new coach and system can do with an average (or even better than average) injury season, as opposed to what happened last year, is a huge difference. And I think that when the season is done, we'll look back and recognize that a relatively healthy season was a big part of why our D made such huge strides this year. In all areas, but the turnover ratio in particular will be a dramatic change.

 

[Cougatron]

Scheme all you want, but let's not kid ourselves, that we are slow and unathletic in the back 8 and have been out of shape and less than dynamic up front.

We have 18 WRs on the roster and only one CB who isn't a massive liability. .

-So Pole and Cooper who were most of our up front on defense are out of shape and less than dynamic. Just making some notes here.

Did you ever wonder WHY there are 18 receivers? Because WR are easy to recruit, and because we rotate them constantly in a game putting fresh legs out there.

Where are all the national rank DBs in recruiting? they aren't on the west coast, and there is a reason they aren't on the west coast. Talented athletes on the west coast all want to play offense. That's where they go.

Don't believe me. Sherman at Stanford started at what? WR. He switched because it was either switch and place CB or not play and he didn't want to leave Stanford.

Getting kids to convert to defense is not easy in the Pac-12 and in the initial stages of recruiting kids will not sign with a team that doesn't offer them first choice at the position they want.

You can blame Leach all you want, but it's not a Leach problem. It's a Pac-12 west coast problem. Why does the SEC not have that problem? Because they value defense, and kids take pride in being good at defense.

Tyrann Mattieu, Patrick Porter, JaDaveon Clowney, Haha Clinton-Dix, Nick Fairely etc. their defensive players are just as much super stars as the offensive players.

Pac 12... not like that at all. Goff, Reggie Bush, Marquis Lee, Andrew Luck, Toby Gerhart (even stanford's most famous national players are offense)

 

[Coug1990]

Much of Dockery's acclaim was based on kick returns, with some INT returns as well. I hope he lights up the Ducks and fuskies with a few kick returns and receiving TDs.

Dockery had 8 PR's for 49 yards and 5 KR's for 115 yards. Zero return TD's. His long PR was 20 yards (so other 7 PR's were for 25 yards ) and his long KR was 26 yards. Actually, very pedestrian.

 

[YakiCoug]

Dockery had 8 PR's for 49 yards and 5 KR's for 115 yards. Zero return TD's. His long PR was 20 yards (so other 7 PR's were for 25 yards ) and his long KR was 26 yards. Actually, very pedestrian.

But that, with a few receptions included, could fill up most of a YouTube highlight tape.

 

[Coug1990]

But that, with a few receptions included, could fill up most of a YouTube highlight tape.

If he were a WR on WSU's, where would you rank him. I'll get you started, 1-3 in any particular order would be Marks, Williams and Cracraft. I would also put Green, Baker and Lewis ahead of him as well. At best, he would be the 7th best WR.

 

[Cougatron]

If he were a WR on WSU's, where would you rank him. I'll get you started, 1-3 in any particular order would be Marks, Williams and Cracraft. I would also put Green, Baker and Lewis ahead of him as well. At best, he would be the 7th best WR.

Bartalone is better than him, Barry Ware is better, Lilienthal, Kyrin Priester is definitely better. (Sad to not see him till 2016), There was no way he was going to crack even the two deep with how we recruit WR.

 

[Coug1990]

Bartalone is better than him, Barry Ware is better, Lilienthal, Kyrin Priester is definitely better. (Sad to not see him till 2016), There was no way he was going to crack even the two deep with how we recruit WR.

I mostly agree. Bartelone was ahead of Dockery when they are on the roster together. However, Bartelone cannot stay healthy. So, if you are not playing...

I would think that Ware is better, but he has not played yet. So, it is just a guess on our part. I think Sweet is already better too.

 

[YakiCoug]

Bartalone is better than him, Barry Ware is better, Lilienthal, Kyrin Priester is definitely better. (Sad to not see him till 2016), There was no way he was going to crack even the two deep with how we recruit WR.

Priester is something special, and it's a shame he has to sit out this season. I do believe that Daniel Lilenthal is going to surprise a lot of people. He reminds me of a Chris Jackson but faster.

 

[YakiCoug]

I mostly agree. Bartelone was ahead of Dockery when they are on the roster together. However, Bartelone cannot stay healthy. So, if you are not playing...

I would think that Ware is better, but he has not played yet. So, it is just a guess on our part. I think Sweet is already better too.

Sweet reminds me of that pesky guy who simply gets open again and again. Ware has some great tools and size. Word is he's faster and taller than Mayle, but not as developed just yet.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

Sweet reminds me of that pesky guy who simply gets open again and again. Ware has some great tools and size. Word is he's faster and taller than Mayle, but not as developed just yet.

I was thinking about this and your post made me wonder about Ware and how he will fit in. If you take a look at the evaluations of Mayle after his senior season and prior to the draft, there is a lot of talk about his lack of polish and need for development. When you say develop for Ware, do you mean physically develop or work on his understanding of the system and his role in it? I do think Mayle was a little under-appreciated outside of WSU because he had a habit of relying on his physical skills at times and would miss opportunities.

 

[YakiCoug]

I was thinking about this and your post made me wonder about Ware and how he will fit in. If you take a look at the evaluations of Mayle after his senior season and prior to the draft, there is a lot of talk about his lack of polish and need for development. When you say develop for Ware, do you mean physically develop or work on his understanding of the system and his role in it? I do think Mayle was a little under-appreciated outside of WSU because he had a habit of relying on his physical skills at times and would miss opportunities.

You must keep in mind that Mayle hasn't been playing football all that long. Ware is just a redshirt freshman. He will develop both skills and body. Stands to reason.