• 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!

Defense

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
GoBux20 said:
Great adjustments by Snyder at halftime. The young D played good. They played their hearts out. When your missing 4 starters on D it hurts. Tough loss today but I am proud of the way the team played today. They blew some key play late in the game. This season is just making us better next year. All we need on D is to develop a better pass rush with our d-lineman.
Click to expand...
and better db play. underwood blew 2 assignments, both of which resulted in an easy 6 for purdue. as outmatched as we were i was surprised we held them to 24.
 
Upvote 0
personally I was very dissappointed in the defense... regardless of the experience... overall, I thought the tackling was extremely poor... these new fellas are still thinking they're still in high school... where they'd make the 'big stick' and just knock an offensive guys head off... today they tried that crap and that man just kept coming... these 'big sticks' barely slowed them down...followed by 5-10 more yards with no one wrapping up and tackling...
 
Upvote 0
NJ-Buckeye said:
personally I was very dissappointed in the defense... regardless of the experience... overall, I thought the tackling was extremely poor... these new fellas are still thinking they're still in high school... where they'd make the 'big stick' and just knock an offensive guys head off... today they tried that crap and that man just kept coming... these 'big sticks' barely slowed them down...followed by 5-10 more yards with no one wrapping up and tackling...
Click to expand...
we haven't tackled well all year. we are slowely getting better. but we are a long way away from being a sound tackling team. personally this is my biggest issue with the d.
 
Upvote 0
Martin you misunderstood my point. No way would I assert that the defense is great. I would say slightly above average at best in spots. I agree with the scheme, but I disagree with blaming it entirely on the offense. The last Purdue drive was a cakewalk and in this case, one drive the did the game make. Blame it on the scheme or the offense, but the lack of any semblance of a pass rush on that drive, as I state above, makes it too easy for a QB like Orton to pick us apart. The problem with playing man against the spread is the crossing routes and mismatches along with a wide open middle of the field. We played some cover 5 and had good success but it disappeared. Add in the lack of a rush and you get trouble.

The zone is fine but there should have been some mixing of that zone coverage. People hear zone and assume that means everyone is bailing out but that isn't the case. There are so many combination zones that would work well...sky calls, cloud calls, etc. Each formation has a number of possibilities. Personally, I would have matched up AY on Stubblefield for the final drive and played a cover 3 look behind it. You would give up strong side flats, but I would match Hawk or Carp against a sitting duck receiver, TE, or H-back all day in that situation. Instead we dropped into a cover 4/soft cover 2 look and let Stubblefield catch the 8 yard out all the way down the field.

The offense could have done more and had opportunities to do so. However, when the game was in hand, it was the defense that let Purdue march down the field. Personally, I can find many aspects of the team to place blame....including a damn injury bug
 
Upvote 0
Yeah the tackling was poor, but the thing that sticks out to me is 3 things. Its been this way for 3 years now regardless of what our talent has been.

1) Give up 3rd down's
2) No Pressure from the front 4, and yes even last years group.
3) They play way too far off the ball.
 
Upvote 0
buckipower

change your 3 to 1 and you are correct....

no way for three years....180 degrees the opposite from dantonio.....

do you understand football buckipower....

for two years the buckeyes...against a spread would rush three and get pressure.....they would drop smith sometimes and rush him others....

scott, anderson, smith and simon could easily run the line.....

now...the lack of a d-line push has forced the db's to back off to the 6-8 range....with a great d-line like the past two years the d could play cover two or man and rule....
 
Upvote 0
Well they did alot more zone blitzes with Dantonio which I LOVED...... but seriously If you look at the numbers such as sacks, and passing yards against its not too far off I believe.

They do play way too off the ball.

I say they kinda are the same the past 3 years because we're kinda talking about just when a team passes against us in general. Now in the running game there's no question that Dantonio had his men better prepared to play the run than Snyder has to date. Thats what scews the numbers is the rush defense the past years.
 
Upvote 0
the difference between snyder and dantonio that i see is this....

dantonio said....i dare you....ill kick your ass...

snyder says....ok...you can have a few yards at a time...you are not getting the big play....
 
Upvote 0
Well Dantonio said BRING it when it came to them trying to run the ball, but still kinda played back in the secondary trying to prevent the big plays. Now its easy to say to do that when we've won as much as we have in the past 2-3 years, but I've never liked the way we play in the secondary from the start of the 2002 national championship season...... Rush defense has always been strong to memory, and while we're decent at the run this year I still think we're not nearly where we should be. I think this season probably went alittle array when our #1 priority left and thats our Defensive coordinator. Not to menchion he took what was it 4-6 assistants with him?
 
Upvote 0
buckipower...

how much of a luxury do you think it was to be able to drop will smith into coverage and rush three???

i cant tell you how important and effective it is to have scott, simon and anderson by themselves pressure the qb.....while smith roams....the dbs play tight and the lb's are free...

that is why dorsey was crying at the end of the game.....that just wasnt fair....
 
Upvote 0
osugrad21 said:
Martin you misunderstood my point. No way would I assert that the defense is great. I would say slightly above average at best in spots. I agree with the scheme, but I disagree with blaming it entirely on the offense. The last Purdue drive was a cakewalk and in this case, one drive the did the game make. Blame it on the scheme or the offense, but the lack of any semblance of a pass rush on that drive, as I state above, makes it too easy for a QB like Orton to pick us apart. The problem with playing man against the spread is the crossing routes and mismatches along with a wide open middle of the field. We played some cover 5 and had good success but it disappeared. Add in the lack of a rush and you get trouble.

The zone is fine but there should have been some mixing of that zone coverage. People hear zone and assume that means everyone is bailing out but that isn't the case. There are so many combination zones that would work well...sky calls, cloud calls, etc. Each formation has a number of possibilities. Personally, I would have matched up AY on Stubblefield for the final drive and played a cover 3 look behind it. You would give up strong side flats, but I would match Hawk or Carp against a sitting duck receiver, TE, or H-back all day in that situation. Instead we dropped into a cover 4/soft cover 2 look and let Stubblefield catch the 8 yard out all the way down the field.

The offense could have done more and had opportunities to do so. However, when the game was in hand, it was the defense that let Purdue march down the field. Personally, I can find many aspects of the team to place blame....including a damn injury bug
Click to expand...
i agree with that. my point is only that with the injuries, the turnovers, and the amount of time they spent on the field... i have a hard time pinning all the blame on the d. imo, atleast 60% has to be placed elsewhere. not that they are completely without fault. but when 3 guys are out on d, the offense has to pick it up a notch to compensate. same as if 3 guys were out on offense, in those cases you have to count on your d in the same. it would be different if the offense was simply "off" today. but we see the same thing week in and week out. an offense that struggles to put up 10+ per week and if the d AND special teams fail to score points we loose.

i think today proved why some people are the starters on d and why some people sit the bench.
 
Upvote 0
well you're definatly on mark Dihard, but Teams would just hold Smith in reality.


I got the numbers and we had 37 sacks last year...... which in my math is like 2 some sacks a game?? Thats not great number.... Now we did more pressure the past 2 years particularly from the outside..... Other teams still had ways to get around that with the short quick passes so I don't really remember our front really disrupting a team extreamly. That front is in my mind one of the best ever there's no deny'n that, but there strong point was definatly stopping the run. Pass rush was there and we had the option of dropping Smith and stuff like that which also made it harder on defenses..... I'm not sayin Smith and comp. sucked or anything but just saying I thought they played the run alot better than they did the pass. The pass defense hasn't really been extreamly strong for quite some time now.
 
Upvote 0
Rush defense has always been strong to memory, and while we're decent at the run this year I still think we're not nearly where we should be.
Click to expand...
I can't say that we are decent at rush defense this year. At best, we are average. The past 2 years, teams just couldn't run against our D; teams basically got double digit rushing yards for the whole game. When a D can make an offense 1 dimensional, then the D has the upper hand. And the key to doing that all starts up front with the line. I posted in another thread that the key to next year's team is the play of both lines. We need talent, depth, attitude, and desire. Who on this D line has the desire and attitude that Anderson had?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top