Do you agree with Dickert?

[chugspig]

In his weekly Thursday show, Dickert was speaking on the defense going forward. He said, and this is basically the quote, “the main problem we’ve had on defense is not getting/creating turnover and building off them”.

To me, that is farther down the list than:
1. Very poor tackling
2. Very poor linebacker coverage skills against TEs and RB go/wheel routes
3. Inability to generate any real pressure on the QB
4. Losing contain continually

I disagree with his assessment pretty heavily. We could have won 1-2 of the last couple games if we could just play solid fundamental defense…tackle, pressure, and contain. Turnovers are a huge bonus, but shouldn’t be counted on to solve what stems from fundamental issues.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

In his weekly Thursday show, Dickert was speaking on the defense going forward. He said, and this is basically the quote, “the main problem we’ve had on defense is not getting/creating turnover and building off them”.

To me, that is farther down the list than:
1. Very poor tackling
2. Very poor linebacker coverage skills against TEs and RB go/wheel routes
3. Inability to generate any real pressure on the QB
4. Losing contain continually

I disagree with his assessment pretty heavily. We could have won 1-2 of the last couple games if we could just play solid fundamental defense…tackle, pressure, and contain. Turnovers are a huge bonus, but shouldn’t be counted on to solve what stems from fundamental issues.

Sheesh, I sure hope that CJD wasn't serious when he said that. I'm sure there'll be some overlap, but I could add to your list:

Zero DL play of any sort - qb pressure or run stop
LB's - again, they run directly into their blocker and then dance. They look like they're on roller skate
DB's - I'll give them a pass since the front 7 are wholly ineffective
entire defense - poor angles, poor tackling, and overall small and slow.

I'm pretty sure you can't coach up the last one.

Oh, one last thing: given the last four games, you could generate 20 turnovers in the game and it wouldn't change the score any as the O is as feckless as the D recently.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Sheesh, I sure hope that CJD wasn't serious when he said that. I'm sure there'll be some overlap, but I could add to your list:

Zero DL play of any sort - qb pressure or run stop
LB's - again, they run directly into their blocker and then dance. They look like they're on roller skate
DB's - I'll give them a pass since the front 7 are wholly ineffective
entire defense - poor angles, poor tackling, and overall small and slow.

I'm pretty sure you can't coach up the last one.

Oh, one last thing: given the last four games, you could generate 20 turnovers in the game and it wouldn't change the score any as the O is as feckless as the D recently.

Yeah, completely agree with both of you. The shitty missed arm tackles, yards after contact, and crappy angles are the problem.

 

[Coug90]

Sheesh, I sure hope that CJD wasn't serious when he said that. I'm sure there'll be some overlap, but I could add to your list:

Zero DL play of any sort - qb pressure or run stop
LB's - again, they run directly into their blocker and then dance. They look like they're on roller skate
DB's - I'll give them a pass since the front 7 are wholly ineffective
entire defense - poor angles, poor tackling, and overall small and slow.

I'm pretty sure you can't coach up the last one.

Oh, one last thing: given the last four games, you could generate 20 turnovers in the game and it wouldn't change the score any as the O is as feckless as the D recently.

Turnovers are what kept us in the UCLA game, the first one in this slide.

We do need turnovers. This D isn’t going blow for blow with many P5 offenses. They get worn down if they can’t get off the field with a TO and also generate some energy.

 

[Stretch 74]

Turnovers are what kept us in the UCLA game, the first one in this slide.

We do need turnovers. This D isn’t going blow for blow with many P5 offenses. They get worn down if they can’t get off the field with a TO and also generate some energy.

Turnovers are what COST us the game vs ucla. Yes, we did get a couple, but we gave up four!

Here is what I posted earlier about key stats the determined why we lost the past four games:

I like to look at the stats for the games with intent to try and identify the real key stats that drive the outcome of the games. Yards per pass or run, turnovers, penalties, etc. It seemed to me that there has developed a pattern through the past 4 games, so I went back to look at it and I think I have confirmed my suspicions that the Cougs have been getting pummeled on plays that determine changes of possession. Not just turnovers, but plays on third and fourth down, where you are giving the ball away if you don't convert the first down play. No surprise to anyone here, I suppose, but we are getting beat by both offense and defense in these categories.

Here is the data, with WSU listed first:
UCLA- Third down conversions 2/13 vs 8/25; fourth down conversions 0/1 vs 3/3; turnovers created 2 vs 4
Arizona- Third down conversions 4/11 vs 10/17; fourth down conversions 0/3 vs 1/1; turnovers created 0 vs 3
Oregon- Third down conversions 4/14 vs 5/10; fourth down conversions 1/4 vs 0/0; turnovers created 0 vs 0
ASU- Third down conversions 3/12 vs 8/11; fourth down conversions 2/3 vs 0/0; turnovers created 0 vs 0

Bottom lines:
Third down conversions we lose 13/50=26% vs 31/63=49%. Getting ass kicked here.
Fourth down conversions we lose 3/11=27% vs 4/4=100% Small sample size, but getting drilled here also.
Turnovers we are losing at 2 vs 7, and the worst part of it is that we haven't created a single turnover in the past three games. UGH!

I remember thinking earlier in the season how much improved the downfield coverage by the DB's seemed to be from the past couple years, guys being tighter and making more plays. I no longer think that.

 

[Coug90]

Turnovers are what COST us the game vs ucla. Yes, we did get a couple, but we gave up four!

Here is what I posted earlier about key stats the determined why we lost the past four games:

I like to look at the stats for the games with intent to try and identify the real key stats that drive the outcome of the games. Yards per pass or run, turnovers, penalties, etc. It seemed to me that there has developed a pattern through the past 4 games, so I went back to look at it and I think I have confirmed my suspicions that the Cougs have been getting pummeled on plays that determine changes of possession. Not just turnovers, but plays on third and fourth down, where you are giving the ball away if you don't convert the first down play. No surprise to anyone here, I suppose, but we are getting beat by both offense and defense in these categories.

Here is the data, with WSU listed first:
UCLA- Third down conversions 2/13 vs 8/25; fourth down conversions 0/1 vs 3/3; turnovers created 2 vs 4
Arizona- Third down conversions 4/11 vs 10/17; fourth down conversions 0/3 vs 1/1; turnovers created 0 vs 3
Oregon- Third down conversions 4/14 vs 5/10; fourth down conversions 1/4 vs 0/0; turnovers created 0 vs 0
ASU- Third down conversions 3/12 vs 8/11; fourth down conversions 2/3 vs 0/0; turnovers created 0 vs 0

Bottom lines:
Third down conversions we lose 13/50=26% vs 31/63=49%. Getting ass kicked here.
Fourth down conversions we lose 3/11=27% vs 4/4=100% Small sample size, but getting drilled here also.
Turnovers we are losing at 2 vs 7, and the worst part of it is that we haven't created a single turnover in the past three games. UGH!

I remember thinking earlier in the season how much improved the downfield coverage by the DB's seemed to be from the past couple years, guys being tighter and making more plays. I no longer think that.

Well we were taking about the defense not the offense.

 

[dgibbons]

In his weekly Thursday show, Dickert was speaking on the defense going forward. He said, and this is basically the quote, “the main problem we’ve had on defense is not getting/creating turnover and building off them”.

To me, that is farther down the list than:
1. Very poor tackling
2. Very poor linebacker coverage skills against TEs and RB go/wheel routes
3. Inability to generate any real pressure on the QB
4. Losing contain continually

I disagree with his assessment pretty heavily. We could have won 1-2 of the last couple games if we could just play solid fundamental defense…tackle, pressure, and contain. Turnovers are a huge bonus, but shouldn’t be counted on to solve what stems from fundamental issues.

Zero turnovers since UCLA I believe. Pass rush has been non-existent, obviously can't stop the run. Poor tackling is partially attributable to being smaller, weaker and slower than the opponent.

What can you actually fix or improve upon? This defense isn't particularly stout, or good at any particular thing. Generating turnovers masks the deficiencies. And hey- if they pick off a pass or two that will mean they're actually close to the receiver, right? If they rip the ball away from the ball carrier, it means they're making a tackle, right?

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Turnovers are what kept us in the UCLA game, the first one in this slide.

We do need turnovers. This D isn’t going blow for blow with many P5 offenses. They get worn down if they can’t get off the field with a TO and also generate some energy.

No one is asking them to win a battle in the trenches (although they should be competitive in the trenches as a minimum expectation), but saying that the entire problem with the defense is lack of turn overs is like saying the problem with meth addiction is the horrible dental decay.

 

[95coug]

I think the problem is far more fundamental. Lack of effort and lack of on-field awareness.

Your odds of getting turnovers or making tackles go way up when you know what’s going on and you’re actually trying. I’m not convinced of either.

 

[CougPatrol]

Tackling always looks poor when you're getting blown off the line and your safeties are having to make repeated 1-on-1 tackles in space.

 

[spongeandshoot]

He is putting the cart before the horse

Being in a position to make a play and be a good tackling team...like we have been through most of his tenure...then we will be in position to create turnovers.

You don't just go oh gee...I would like some more turnovers please.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Imagine what 2 socks in a dryer looks like.

Now watch WSU defense.

Similar???

 

[Coug90]

He is putting the cart before the horse

Being in a position to make a play and be a good tackling team...like we have been through most of his tenure...then we will be in position to create turnovers.

You don't just go oh gee...I would like some more turnovers please.

I think regardless of what he was trying to get across, point remains we do need turnovers to be competent on defense. Our best defenses have always been towards the top of the conference in takeaways. Yes, plenty of other things that lead to turnovers. Arm tackles and blown assignments usually aren’t them.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

I think regardless of what he was trying to get across, point remains we do need turnovers to be competent on defense. Our best defenses have always been towards the top of the conference in takeaways. Yes, plenty of other things that lead to turnovers. Arm tackles and blown assignments usually aren’t them.

You're missing the point.

Why isn't he addressing the elephant in the room instead of running interference with "we need more turnovers"? Yeah, no shit sherlock - why don't you address the recent spate of matador impersonations your defense has decided to roll out for gameday?

 

[dgibbons]

Imagine what 2 socks in a dryer looks like.

Now watch WSU defense.

Similar???

So, bench Ward, right?

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

So, bench Ward, right?

Geezus you're dense.

Fire Dickert is the answer, of course.

 

[Stretch 74]

Well we were taking about the defense not the offense.

Yeah, so half of the post was about the defense. When comparing third/fourth down conversion rates half of that is showing the the offenses performance vs the opponent's defense and the other half is comparing our defense's performance vs the other team's offense. That's pretty elementary, isn't it?

Plus the last comment was about the defense.

 

[etowncoug]

Zero turnovers since UCLA I believe. Pass rush has been non-existent, obviously can't stop the run. Poor tackling is partially attributable to being smaller, weaker and slower than the opponent.

What can you actually fix or improve upon? This defense isn't particularly stout, or good at any particular thing. Generating turnovers masks the deficiencies. And hey- if they pick off a pass or two that will mean they're actually close to the receiver, right? If they rip the ball away from the ball carrier, it means they're making a tackle, right?

Only one sack versus AZ and none sense. We forced a fumble against ASU but weren't able to recover it. This team needs a big defensive play in the worst way. I'm glad this is a focus and I'm glad Dickert has inserted himself into the game plan.

Cleaning up the angles would be the number 2 weakness. Better pass rush by the four down lineman would be 3.

But the defense has no shortage of issues to resolve, I just think being able to force some turnovers would mask a lot of those issues.

 

[spongeandshoot]

Well we give it up on 3rd down almost as much as apparently all of the women Loyal meets....so there's that.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Well we give it up on 3rd down almost as much as apparently all of the women Loyal meets....so there's that.

Where the F did I show up in this?

 

[Coug90]

You're missing the point.

Why isn't he addressing the elephant in the room instead of running interference with "we need more turnovers"? Yeah, no shit sherlock - why don't you address the recent spate of matador impersonations your defense has decided to roll out for gameday?

Im not missing any point. We need more turnovers. We need more tackles. We need more covering of receivers. We suck everywhere. Just because Dickert mentioned turnovers doesn’t mean it’s lost on him that every other aspect of the defense has been dog shit. You guys are jumping to conclusions because of one comment. I’m sure he’s addressing it all. Every play you’ve seen he’s watched 5 times.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Where the F did I show up in this?

Dude, you insert yourself everywhere... literally.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Dude, you insert yourself everywhere... literally.

That's not true at all. But it does take me down memory lane.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Im not missing any point. We need more turnovers. We need more tackles. We need more covering of receivers. We suck everywhere. Just because Dickert mentioned turnovers doesn’t mean it’s lost on him that every other aspect of the defense has been dog shit. You guys are jumping to conclusions because of one comment. I’m sure he’s addressing it all. Every play you’ve seen he’s watched 5 times.

“the main problem we’ve had on defense is not getting/creating turnover and building off them”.

I beg to differ. Tackling first. Positioning second. THEN you can worry about trying to punch the ball out or hawking a pass. Focusing on creating turnovers, for a bunch of kids who haven't proven they have a firm grasp or ability to execute the fundamentals, is going to exacerbate the issues that are already present.

But hey, f me. He's the one with the D1 coaching job, so lets see how 11 kids running around trying to punch the ball out works out for them. I'd say rip the ball out, but you'd actually have to involve your arms in the interaction which our defense is apparently unable to do.

 

[spongeandshoot]

Dude, you insert yourself everywhere... literally.

Now that's funny!

 

[grahamcoug]

Dickert doesn't want to throw the poor play under the bus. Pro Football Focus does it for him. Instead, he is diverting the focus away from skill based areas like angles and tackles, to a focus on we are just unlucky- we need more turnovers.

I hope he doesn't really believe this. His action is kind of like an Arbuckle screen that doesn't work. Nobody is fooled.