Game Ball to the Defense

[Nostical]

While I could also take a bow after calling out the D scheme and Crocker for weeks, that's beneath me--lol.
So here's the reality from yesterday. We DO have players. The reason we could have lost this game was the continued playing of a soft porous zone. The scheme continues to need evolution. Give us more press coverage and intermittent pressure on the QB and I won't cancel my Bowl Game plans.

 

[JMick]

If you go back and watch the game replays for the past few weeks (not just highlights) they have been running the 3 lineman w/ hand in dirt and 1 upright offset alignment set more than a few times a game in the past. This week it clicked (could be Temple offensive line vs other teams or it could be that pride/repetition had a bigger impact this week.) Looking forward to its continued development.

It clearly made a difference this week but it really wasn’t a new wrinkle just because Crocker was “threatened”.

shh facts get in the way of feelings

 

[BlueDogs]

If you go back and watch the game replays for the past few weeks (not just highlights) they have been running the 3 lineman w/ hand in dirt and 1 upright offset alignment set more than a few times a game in the past. This week it clicked (could be Temple offensive line vs other teams or it could be that pride/repetition had a bigger impact this week.) Looking forward to its continued development.

It clearly made a difference this week but it really wasn’t a new wrinkle just because Crocker was “threatened”.

Wow, that's some revisionist history.

If you go back and watch the game replays for the past few weeks (not just highlights) they have been running the 3 lineman w/ hand in dirt and 1 upright offset alignment set more than a few times a game in the past. This week it clicked (could be Temple offensive line vs other teams or it could be that pride/repetition had a bigger impact this week.) Looking forward to its continued development.

It clearly made a difference this week but it really wasn’t a new wrinkle just because Crocker was “threatened”.

LMAO..right whatever

If you go back and watch the game replays for the past few weeks (not just highlights) they have been running the 3 lineman w/ hand in dirt and 1 upright offset alignment set more than a few times a game in the past. This week it clicked (could be Temple offensive line vs other teams or it could be that pride/repetition had a bigger impact this week.) Looking forward to its continued development.

It clearly made a difference this week but it really wasn’t a new wrinkle just because Crocker was “threatened”.

O.K. I guess My eyes were deceiving me and other folks. I don't recall a single pass to the flat in 5 games being contested by an outside rush, or outside-in pocket pressure. But, it just clicked with reps if that makes you happy. As long as they improve I don't care.

 

[huskymedic]

Wow, that's some revisionist history.

LMAO..right whatever

O.K. I guess My eyes were deceiving me and other folks. I don't recall a single pass to the flat in 5 games being contested by an outside rush, or outside-in pocket pressure. But, it just clicked with reps if that makes you happy. As long as they improve I don't care.

So you never saw UConn in the “pseudo 4 man front” before yesterday?

 

[metsfan2323]

The three man rush backed up by soft zone coverage has been a S-H-I-T show all season. Thankfully we are running less of that but we still use it. (sad)

I was curious about Yale's defense since they shutout Holy Cross, they are multiple front (4 down and 3 down) but seldom do they rush three. Reading the bio's of their coaches it turns out their Defensive coordinator worked under Don Brown at BC, shocker. I don't care what you think of Diaco's recruiting, there is no way Yale has better athletes on defense than we do. Yale held Pujals to 10 - 22 passing for 89 yards. I doubt they played a soft zone. Pujals threw for over 500 yards last week against Monmouth.

Holy Cross fired their head coach today.