Let's examine the 3-3-5 | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Let's examine the 3-3-5

Duncan Idaho said:
They are simply not fast enough to play this defense, yet. Thats it.
Expand ...

Concur. Every level of defense is slow. Slow off their stances, slow in straight ahead speed and slow changing directions.
 
kris1 said:
You do know that #30 (Jordan Swann) is a defensive back, right?
Expand ...


I do believe Jordan (30) took more than one snap from O from in the backfield, but he should take more !! Quick and fast and good decision makinf. A star will be born
 
Last edited:
Chin Diesel said:
Concur. Every level of defense is slow. Slow off their stances, slow in straight ahead speed and slow changing directions.
Expand ...
Levenberry was big loss. He was more capable in coverage too.That lb from Lackawanna? is prototypical of what they are looking for, his film shows all the attributes you listed that we lack. Its going to take a while longer to recover the entire roster. Hope fans can have a couple more years in them.
 
UConn was 33rd in the country last year in total defense. I don't think they are any slower this year.

Through two games this year, one versus an FCS opponent, they are 124th out of 129 teams.
 
The problem with the permanent 3-3-5 is that you scheme against it to exploit two areas, confuse the DBs with motion and unbalanced WR sets and to train your OL to take advantage of the 3 DL format. That said, the other under appreciated aspect of the 3-4-4 or 4-3-4 is that you have a better shot of crowding throwing lanes and putting pressure on the QB.

So far we have not seen the 3-3-5 create one cintilla of 'chaos' and I am not sure it ever will even with the 'right' players.

Crocker needs to get an LB out there that can rush the QB and we need to play more downs in a 3-4 to keep it all honest. You have to see what we look like with Santana out there (and Eli Thomas can't get here fast enough)

Lastly, this is the worst tackling and least willing hit D I ever recall seeing at UConn.
 
Last year we couldn't field 4 competent DBs, hence Jamar bouncing between safety and corner. Take out Obi, John Green, Jhavon and what do you get? Trouble. Don't have good DBs. That's why the new staff has recruited about 10 DBs already. Talent is there, hopefully, just not FBS ready yet.
 
.-.
We simply do not have the LBs for this defense. If I understand the 3-3-5, you need LBs who can run and bring pressure. We simply don't have them.

To my eye we lost a lot of speed in the secondary. Bell got lit up yesterday. Our tackling yesterday was total s@@t.

Other than that, the D is sound.........
 
Palatine said:
UConn was 33rd in the country last year in total defense. I don't think they are any slower this year.

Through two games this year, one versus an FCS opponent, they are 124th out of 129 teams.
Expand ...

Do you want Diaco back or something?
 
whaler11 said:
Do you want Diaco back or something?
Expand ...
Will you ever make any sense? So you think that giving up 1,100 yards in two games is great because Diaco is gone? Do you watch the games? You like this defense?
 
Palatine said:
Will you ever make any sense? So you think that giving up 1,100 yards in two games is great because Diaco is gone? Do you watch the games? You like this defense?
Expand ...

So you want Crocker to install a different scheme?
 
Palatine said:
Will you ever make any sense? So you think that giving up 1,100 yards in two games is great because Diaco is gone? Do you watch the games? You like this defense?
Expand ...
This thread is why you are an idiot.

2 games giving up a lot of yards is NOT GOOD.

But instead of being a rational thinking human being who realizes that new systems take TIME and require a certain skill set to execute.... you jump to the conclusion that the entire scheme is worthless despite plenty of evidence that WHEN EXECUTED WELL, the scheme works just fine.

Abandoning ship after 2 games is an AWFUL idea. Just another variation of your "backup must be better" mantra. Instant gratification, or tear it down. Thank god you are not the coach.
 
CTMike said:
This thread is why you are an idiot.

2 games giving up a lot of yards is NOT GOOD.

But instead of being a rational thinking human being who realizes that new systems take TIME and require a certain skill set to execute.... you jump to the conclusion that the entire scheme is worthless despite plenty of evidence that WHEN EXECUTED WELL, the scheme works just fine.

Abandoning ship after 2 games is an AWFUL idea. Just another variation of your "backup must be better" mantra. Instant gratification, or tear it down. Thank god you are not the coach.
Expand ...

They would have to fire him. They hired him to implement this system. But ya know - details.
 
.-.
At one point yesterday we had 3 freshmen dbacks out there. Last year these guys were covering 16 year olds. As to speed, 2 things make players slow. 1 is physical. But the other is uncertainty/having to think about where to be rather than just being there. Not much you can do about the first problem but I am hoping that over time the second corrects itself.
 
Palatine said:
UConn was 33rd in the country last year in total defense. I don't think they are any slower this year.

Through two games this year, one versus an FCS opponent, they are 124th out of 129 teams.
Expand ...

As we all figured out, Diaco's defensive stats are overstated as he used the offense to control the ball to keep the other team off the field.

End of the day, the defense was slow last year and the 3-3-5 is exposing the weaknesses of the current defensive players on the roster. We had no pass rushers last year and we still don't this year. Our LBs were slow last year and they are still slow this year. And, we lost most of our best DBs from last year. Going into this year, I was more concerned with the defense than the offense due to the change of scheme and our defensive roster.

All that said, I was hoping that the new DC would make some adjustment to his defense this season to play to the players strengths, but he seems to be all in on full scheme change and the initial results aren't good.
 
Palatine said:
UConn was 33rd in the country last year in total defense. I don't think they are any slower this year.

Through two games this year, one versus an FCS opponent, they are 124th out of 129 teams.
Expand ...

The four best players from that D are not with us. Throw in a scheme change and problems are likely.

And don't forget that our offensive scheme provides for more possessions sir the opposing offense as well.
 
CTMike said:
This thread is why you are an idiot.

2 games giving up a lot of yards is NOT GOOD.

But instead of being a rational thinking human being who realizes that new systems take TIME and require a certain skill set to execute.... you jump to the conclusion that the entire scheme is worthless despite plenty of evidence that WHEN EXECUTED WELL, the scheme works just fine.

Abandoning ship after 2 games is an AWFUL idea. Just another variation of your "backup must be better" mantra. Instant gratification, or tear it down. Thank god you are not the coach.
Expand ...
Read my original post. I said that "It is still early. Maybe once the kinks are ironed out it will be great. But so far, it is a disaster." I even posted at some alternatives for the awful play.

So by your definition I am a rational thinking human being. But instead of actually reading and reacting to what I wrote, you are acting more confused than our secondary.
 
Last edited:
UConnJim said:
As we all figured out, Diaco's defensive stats are overstated as he used the offense to control the ball to keep the other team off the field.

End of the day, the defense was slow last year and the 3-3-5 is exposing the weaknesses of the current defensive players on the roster. We had no pass rushers last year and we still don't this year. Our LBs were slow last year and they are still slow this year. And, we lost most of our best DBs from last year. Going into this year, I was more concerned with the defense than the offense due to the change of scheme and our defensive roster.

All that said, I was hoping that the new DC would make some adjustment to his defense this season to play to the players strengths, but he seems to be all in on full scheme change and the initial results aren't good.
Expand ...
I think most of that that is right on. But I do think Carrezola has proven to be effective getting after the passer.

But during camp, were we told in the press that this would be an attacking defense that used confusion to get pressure and force bad decisions. What we have seen is a timid, passive defense. Exactly the opposite of hat was promised. QBs are sitting in a rocking chair waiting for receivers to get open.
 
NEforceUConn said:
I do believe Jordan (30) took more than one snap from O from in the backfield, but he should take more !! Quick and fast and good decision makinf. A star will be born
Expand ...
I'm pretty sure he didn't. I think you might be confusing him with Mensah (34).
 
.-.
kris1 said:
You do know that #30 (Jordan Swann) is a defensive back, right?
Expand ...
Not sure who he is referring to but it's pretty common to have offensive and defensive players who share a number. We have at least two such cases with Joseph and Hopkins(11) and Carrezola and Williams (15).
 
Dream Jobbed 2.0 said:
Not sure who he is referring to but it's pretty common to have offensive and defensive players who share a number. We have at least two such cases with Joseph and Hopkins(11) and Carrezola and Williams (15).
Expand ...

There is only one #30 on the roster.
 
bigAbruns said:
Crocker probably doesn't know another system, hence why he was at Villanova
Expand ...
Well, I think it is fair to say that he has a history of using it and feels that with FCS caliber players (which is what UConn has in terms of talent) that it produces the best results. Whether that viewpoint comes from an intellectual analysis, experience, or both is probably a moot question.

My view is that if you are gonna make a major departure from what the team the year before already knows, you better have a darned good reason for it because new systems are almost impossible to learn down to the instinct level in one off season. We have seen that time and time again.

At this point I would start edging back to something more traditional because this clearly ain't working and is unlikely to work before half the season is gone. Things certainly can't get any worse in the short term.
 
.-.
THere is nothing wrong with a 3-3-5 defensive scheme and it's a tactical and strategic sound decision for this football program both short term and long term. We need to focus heavy on recruiting decent lineman, and you need to hit on a lot more decent linemen on the offensive side than you do on the defensive side - and we have a history of producing NFL talent in the defensive backfields for over a decade now - to draw from in recruiting. Short term, we are paper thin on depth, and seem to have a huge gap in depth charts between PP's red shirt seniors and Edsall's freshmen.

It's not schematic problem when you've got a defense that has the LB's and DB's that need to communicate and identify the strong side/weakside formations, and Y,H,TE whatever terminology need to match up in coverages. I saw a lot of pointing and heads turning with our defense pre-snap in what I watched, but based on results it seems like instead of screaming"I got that guy, or "You got that guy" - there was probably a lot of soft questioning: "Who's got that guy? " "Do you have that guy?" That only gets fixed with practice and film and using your voices on the field.

THere is a lot of screaming in football, if you are playing right and fast.

That was a terrible game for the defense yesterday. THe offense didn't do much better. DOesn't matter if you put up 500 yard games if you turn it over on the goal line. Changes everything.

Lots of room to improve.

Got a league game coming up.
 
RSTuthill said:
Not just a league game, but a must win league game. A loss to a team like ECU and the Huskies are looking at 2-10 or 1-11 for the year.
Expand ...

All league games are must win.

This is a home game and we need to build up that home field advantage again. Somebody on the defensive side of the ball needs to be the leader and "QB'ing" the defense vocally, pre-snap, typically it's got to be somebody that's standing and has a good view of the entire field and loud enough and knowledgeable enough to make sure everybody is doing their jobs and filling their gaps and got their assignments pre-snap. The D needs to talk to each other in this scheme. We've looked good at times on some run plays filling the gaps and some pass plays, when everything seems lined up properly pre-snap, but when it seems like our D has needed to communicate pre-snap - we fall apart.

Just my observations. If I'm right, it's somethign that gets fixed by practice, film, and using your screaming voices on the field.

That was virtually non-existent yesterday, by what I observed.
 
RSTuthill said:
Well, I think it is fair to say that he has a history of using it and feels that with FCS caliber players (which is what UConn has in terms of talent) that it produces the best results. Whether that viewpoint comes from an intellectual analysis, experience, or both is probably a moot question.

My view is that if you are gonna make a major departure from what the team the year before already knows, you better have a darned good reason for it because new systems are almost impossible to learn down to the instinct level in one off season. We have seen that time and time again.

At this point I would start edging back to something more traditional because this clearly ain't working and is unlikely to work before half the season is gone. Things certainly can't get any worse in the short term.
Expand ...


So you would rather we switch schemes yearly?
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,263
Messages
4,560,472
Members
10,452
Latest member
WashingtonH


Top Bottom