Where were you when

[Carl Spackler]

These are fundamental SCHEMATIC problems that Coach P is allowing on Defense and Special Teams. This has nothing to do with talent, or with him recruiting "his" type of players.

Please elaborate. What is the schematic problem you saw?

 

[mattp]

I'll add a couple. The Ryan Griffin stepping out of bounds. The offsides on defense on 3rd and 10, I wasn't a huge Randy fan but those types of mistakes were seldom seen under him. Driving, third and one the QB takes a sack.

the fact that you pin Griffin stepping out of bounds on Pasqualoni is all the proof i need that you're not looking at this rationally. the playcalling in the first quarter was good and if we operated with even moderate competence we'd have scored on our first two drives, which would have made the game quite a bit different. JMac had simple plays to convert a couple of third down conversions, and the players didn't convert them. the guys were open, so the play calling was fine.

my big peave with P is that he doesn't put McCummings in more. there's no excuse for that when all he does is move the ball. i also hate the down field attempts by JMac. he seems to handle the 5-15 yard plays pretty well, why not stick to those?

 

[mets1090]

I think that the playcalling has been fine. We have seen people on defense getting burnt in man coverage which is always possible when you play man. The players simply need to be better at sticking with receivers. We have also seen missed tackles that would have limited gains to 2 or 3 yards only to turn into huge gains. There is no excuse for players to be missing tackles as consistently as this defense has.

Having said that, at some point the coaches need to be better at coaching these fundamentals. Our players are athletic enough that they should be able to stick with the competition and make these plays. I don't know that you can put slow development on this staff just yet as they have needed to spend time on implementing a new system which is slowly starting to show signs of potential. Early in the game the screens were killing us for 10 yards every time. Late in the game I saw some adjustments and it seemed that we had two people meeting the receiver in the screen almost immediately and they just failed to make tackles. The DC's message is getting through they are just not tackling.

The biggest downfall in our defense is that it creates pressure and relies on man coverage. When one player makes a mistake it makes the entire defense look awful. It turns out that we have one corner who consistently gets beat like a rented mule and another who is young but shows a lot of potential. He makes some plays and doesn't make others. The end result is that on a few plays during a drive they will get beat and if the other more reliable players don't play to their ability (see: Sio Moore missing tackles, Reyes not getting pressure etc.) then the entire defense looks absolutely terrible which we saw last night.

I think it's probably a case of the player's having a lot on their tables. I'm not excited about this coaching staff but I think that next year we will see a lot less of these frustrating missed tackles. That kind of long term improvement is 100% on the coaches, especially once their system is fully in place. Game to game I don't know that you can put that strictly on them but if these problems aren't basically eliminated by the start of next season then this staff is probably gone after 2 seasons.

 

[noeynox]

I

the fact that you pin Griffin stepping out of bounds on Pasqualoni is all the proof i need that you're not looking at this rationally. the playcalling in the first quarter was good and if we operated with even moderate competence we'd have scored on our first two drives, which would have made the game quite a bit different. JMac had simple plays to convert a couple of third down conversions, and the players didn't convert them. the guys were open, so the play calling was fine.

my big peave with P is that he doesn't put McCummings in more. there's no excuse for that when all he does is move the ball. i also hate the down field attempts by JMac. he seems to handle the 5-15 yard plays pretty well, why not stick to those?

IT is not a playcalling thing. It is a focus and attention to detail thing. I like P. I'm rooting for him to succeed. Rooting hard. However, I have to call it like it I see it. I'm seeing a lack of attention to detail under P that we didn't see under Edsall and it is concerning. I'd add the late hit by Smallwood in that category as well. Dudes need to be held accountable for those types of things to make sure they don't happen in the future.

 

[freescooter]

I am not in any way blaming this on Hughes. But I don't think you're getting Orlando back to be the sort-of DC where he's reporting to Hughes again. I would just bit the bullet and go younger.

Got you. I think you just bring Orlando back ad DC, leave Hughes with the Dline. You want to call him Assitatnt head Coach, that's fine. Or maybe you promote Hughes to DC. I have no idea whether of if he could handle the job, but I like the guy and think he has been a very solid position coach.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I'll try to explain the McCummings thing again. I don't see practices, but I'm making the assumption that he's not a reliable thrower of the ball 25+ times a game. Big assumption, but is it unreasonable? I don't think so.

In any given game, there are going to be about 60-65 plays plus minus a couple, over 4 quarters, and probably 12 offensive drives plus minus one or two.

If we try to run 65 plays a game with McCummings at QB, he's going to be forced to throw the ball, or pitch it out to somebody, probably 40-45 times.

Now let me ask you this, do you think that if McCummings is forced to throw, on the run, 20-25 times, and/or we're forced to pitch the ball to McCombs or Moore 20-25 times on a sweep, that we've got the ability to get around the corner and make people miss on te run, or complete passes more than 55-60% of the time? How many times has the sweep out of the option worked?

My answer is NO.

So until McCummings becomes a reliable passer, or we get another 2 or 3 backs in the backfield that provide te burst around the corner, or the ability to run over people, and break tackles in traffic, the 10-15 plays we get a game, with McCummingsin there, is the best we're getting out of that offense. We don't have the backfield options to run the ball on the pitch outs or inside handoffs on a run, McCummings isn't reliable enough to put in te position to throw 25+ times a game (assumption) and without those threats, it's not a great offense to run in close to the goal line, because there's less space on the field that the defense needs to cover.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I
IT is not a playcalling thing. It is a focus and attention to detail thing. I like P. I'm rooting for him to succeed. Rooting hard. However, I have to call it like it I see it. I'm seeing a lack of attention to detail under P that we didn't see under Edsall and it is concerning. I'd add the late hit by Smallwood in that category as well. Dudes need to be held accountable for those types of things to make sure they don't happen in the future.

Edsall's systems also didn't put a lot of pressure on players to make plays in isolation on the field. The personal fouls, yes, that's an issue. Can't have that.

We had 4 penalties for 25 yards last night. I don't know - that says something about discipline to me. It's too many penalties, but it's not the 8 penalties that Pitt had.

 

[businesslawyer]

Edsall's systems also didn't put a lot of pressure on players to make plays in isolation on the field. .

But that's the entire point, isn't it? We won a lot of games, and stopped a lot of people, where we didn't put so much pressure on individual defenders to have to make one on one plays all over the field.

 

[Excalibur]

I'm much more willing to be patient with Brown than I am with DeLeone. Brown has run successful defenses in a bunch of places. DeLeone hasn't run a successful offense in a very long time. My opinion is based on more than 8 games.

 

[noeynox]

Edsall's systems also didn't put a lot of pressure on players to make plays in isolation on the field. The personal fouls, yes, that's an issue. Can't have that.

We had 4 penalties for 25 yards last night. I don't know - that says something about discipline to me. It's too many penalties, but it's not the 8 penalties that Pitt had.

It is a radically different defensive system than these players have played. I get that. The late hit, some of the down and distance stuff. On third and short your QB can't take a sack.

I'm willing to chalk up this first year to transition, growing pains, but I really need to see an improvement in some of the mental stuff next year.

 

[BlueMAB]

I was smack in the middle of January, 2011 when I realized it was a bad hire. Never like it. Thought is was ridiculous to think that a 62 year old former college coach, former NFL assistance was gonna put together a long term plan for the program. Hire him as a steering committee consultant if you must, but not as the head coach.

Rich Rod? "We'll never get him", "We wouldn"t want someone like him".

Mike Leach? "We'll never get him" "We stop making alumni contributions if the university ever stooped so low". "We don't wanna become some SEC football factory" (No worries there, mate).

Addazio? He was only good cuz he was at Florida.

McGee (from Arkansas)?"He's not from New England", "He's more 'pass oriented' and we're UConn we run the ball" Blah, blah, blah.

Are these Hathaway's responses, or responses from the posters on the boneyard? Did Hathaway hire Coach P, or did the posters on the boneyard?

 

[BlueMAB]

I fully expect that these guys will be practicing a little different after this game.



I expect practices to be harder than ever, and reduced down to the basics of blocking and tackling and positional skills.

I appreciate your contributions to the board, but after every bad loss you say you expect practice will be different and expect things will change (improve?).

One of these weeks I sincerely hope you're finally right about that.

 

[Excalibur]

It is a radically different defensive system than these players have played. I get that. The late hit, some of the down and distance stuff. On third and short your QB can't take a sack.

I'm willing to chalk up this first year to transition, growing pains, but I really need to see an improvement in some of the mental stuff next year.

The problem is that the talent level next year is going to be behind where it is this year in a lot of places, particularly on the lines.

 

[businesslawyer]

We will be returning 9 starters on defense. I don't accept that the overall talent level will be lower next year.

 

[zls44]

I appreciate your contributions to the board, but after every bad loss you say you expect practice will be different and expect things will change (improve?).

One of these weeks I sincerely hope you're finally right about that.

It will be! You'll see! Because they're running stadium steps at 3 AM and because I use inspirational quotes with no bearing on anything! Yeah! We'll show 'em!

 

[coachRD]

Please elaborate. What is the schematic problem you saw?

EDIT: Carl, I don't "know you" yet, so I want to make sure my post comes across as intended. I'm not sure how deep your football knowledge is and I am not trying to be condescending, and I'm not saying I'm an expert...many posters here ask GENERAL "X and O" questions and I'm not sure if that is what you were looking for in a response from me, or if you wanted something more specific. In any event-this wasn't meant to be a "snide" response to your question or anything. EDIT OVER.

Carl-We don't get the camera angles that show many of the schemes "unfolding" so to speak as a play develops since the TV cameras just follow the ball, but the tail end we see of Kick Return for example shows the fact that the opponents ALWAYS have 3-4 players running free within about the 20 yard line to try and make a tackle. We don't get a camera angle that allows the viewer to follow the blocking scheme, but obviously, it isn't working. If it WERE working, there wouldn't be so many opponents running free when our ballcarrier hasn't even reached the 20 yard line yet. There are always blown assignments, that happens on occasion no matter how good a scheme is. The only way we ever get a good KR this year is if Williams has a GREAT individual effort. At some point ballcarriers need to make someone miss, but he has to do way too much work on his own just to reach the 30.

As for the defense and our blitzing....Basically, there are 2 approaches to blitzing. Bring LB/DB('s) in addition to your down linemen. If you do this, you have to play tight man-to-man coverage on WR's so they aren't open in the very short time the QB has before he will get sacked (like all the quick hitters out wide ["Bubble Screens"] to WR's teams get against us, or the quick slants to slot receivers, or the short 5-10 yard crossing patterns that have decimated us....all of these are quick hitting patterns that are available before a blitzer can reach a QB). Or, you can bring a Zone blitz where you bring a LB/DB on a blitz, but you replace their coverage responsibility with a DL who unexpectedly drops back into coverage, rather than rushing. Zone blitzing is safer in that you are still covering the defensive backfield, but obviously you are using a DL in coverage which isn't ideal, and you are relying on the element of SURPRISE to confuse the OL. When you do a "straight" blitz, you aren't necessarily trying to surprise the OL, you are just trying to overwhelm them with superior numbers.

I know blitzing is a risky process overall, but if you dont' have the personnel to play man-to-man behind the blitz, and/or you don't drop defenders into zones to help cover up the zones vacated by blitzers, you will have WR's with ACRES of open space like Pitt (and other teams) WR's had. If done schematically correct, called at the appropriate times, and with the right personnel, you should only get burned on occasion. The shear amount of times they had WR's WIDE open with short crossing patterns-over and over again- highlighted the fact that we either needed to stop blitzing since our DB's couldn't cover their WR's in Man, or we needed to do zone blitzing so there would have been defenders in the gaping holes 5-10 yards past the LOS-we blitzed LB's, and they proceeded to dump a pass to their WR's in the exact spot our LB's just left to go blitz. We didn't seem to adjust our blitzing strategy when they showed they had plays to effectively counter our blitzes.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I'd like x's and o's, and I appreciate your thoughtful response.

I completely understand the camera angles. I've advocated for years that coach's game film should be available to fans. Charge for it. People will buy it. what's so secret about it? If people understand what they're looking at, they're not going to be able to tell anybody that's actually game planning anything that they wouldn't already be able to figure out, and people who don't know what they're looking at? What's the need for secrecy there? anyway - I get it.

Practice film, totally different story. But game film that's already happened? I think it should be available to the public. Different topic.

I'm not going say much about kick returns and coverages, except that we've got a new coach, and since week 1 against Fordham, I've remarked that the energy on those units doesn't seem to be same, across the entire units, as it was in the past. Players, coaches? Don't know why. Some guys have it, but the entire units are not making bodies fly like they did in past years. I don't think it's that much a matter of scheme, b/c there's not much that really changes scheme wise, it's all about maintaining your lanes and spaces and either making the block, or shedding the block in your lane. I don't understand how that reflects so poorly on Pasqualoni, except that he hired the new coach, and more importantly, the kicking game is not what's hurting this team in being 3-5.

As for the blitzing, that's wehre I was looking for x's and o's. I understand every word you wrote, very nice explanation. But I don't understand wehre you see the problem in the scheme. Personnel fit to scheme? I can see that, I have no idea why were doing some of things we were doing with the players we had on the field last night.

It's nice to have espn3.com b/c you can look at the play calls. I see a defense that is showing piss poor recognitition skills from the backers and DB's on pass route runners coming out from scrimmage, and therefore are always 2 steps late and 5 yards off the hot read receivers.

I really don't see a problem with the scheme, I think we need to be really careful about what we try to do on defense based on who's on the field. I think that we're seeing linebackers, db's and safeties that simply aren't putting up very good film on the ability to understand offensive formations, apply whatever the defensive play call is, and pass defend. That's not scheme to me.

What ticks me off, is that I don't understand the personnel groupings were using. That's what makes no sense to me. And for te life of me, I can't understand why we've got multiple linebackers and safeties that are not even putting a hand on TE's and receivers releasing off the LOS through the middle of the field. I can't believe that they're being taught to do that.

Are there any specific plays you are looking at / thinking of? Love to talk x's and o's.

The entire game is right here.

http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index/_/source/espn3/#type/replay/

 

[Husky68]

Hmm. Think maybe WM and WV games were enough to get the "defensive adjustments" figured out? Not like slants, passes to RB's and TE's is a new concept or new to Pitt. The D plays like they don't believe they have a chance. So much wandering around, not flying to the ball. Something is wrong with how the D is viewing schemes, their individual assignments, who should be on field, something is causing these guys to (not sure of the right word) "play like they are pissed off that stuff is going wrong and dwelling on that rather than just playing".

No scheme will work on offense if you have the wrong QB. I don't care if Nebrich throws 5 interceptions in a game, get him playing time and see how that helps and/or have McC run some "regular" plays along with his package.

This team looks really bad out there. Somewhere in that the head coach carries a lot of that weight.

 

[willie99]

we're 3-5, and looking inept on far too many plays

McEntee is scary bad, we know that beyond a shadow of a doubt. He's also not the QB of our future. Why are we wasting more time with him?

McCummings was very effective when he was in the game

We are regressing across the boards, and the coach walks the sidelines looking like a sad lost child, pouting for heaven's sake. Just a pathetic display of leadership

I can't even comprehend trying to defend the man at this point. I don't believe he will be successful, we'll just have to let time do it's thing.

 

[Northbound]

I'd like x's and o's, and I appreciate your thoughtful response.

I completely understand the camera angles. I've advocated for years that coach's game film should be available to fans. Charge for it. People will buy it. what's so secret about it? If people understand what they're looking at, they're not going to be able to tell anybody that's actually game planning anything that they wouldn't already be able to figure out, and people who don't know what they're looking at? What's the need for secrecy there? anyway - I get it.

Practice film, totally different story. But game film that's already happened? I think it should be available to the public. Different topic.

I'm not going say much about kick returns and coverages, except that we've got a new coach, and since week 1 against Fordham, I've remarked that the energy on those units doesn't seem to be same, across the entire units, as it was in the past. Players, coaches? Don't know why. Some guys have it, but the entire units are not making bodies fly like they did in past years. I don't think it's that much a matter of scheme, b/c there's not much that really changes scheme wise, it's all about maintaining your lanes and spaces and either making the block, or shedding the block in your lane. I don't understand how that reflects so poorly on Pasqualoni, except that he hired the new coach, and more importantly, the kicking game is not what's hurting this team in being 3-5.

As for the blitzing, that's wehre I was looking for x's and o's. I understand every word you wrote, very nice explanation. But I don't understand wehre you see the problem in the scheme. Personnel fit to scheme? I can see that, I have no idea why were doing some of things we were doing with the players we had on the field last night.

It's nice to have espn3.com b/c you can look at the play calls. I see a defense that is showing piss poor recognitition skills from the backers and DB's on pass route runners coming out from scrimmage, and therefore are always 2 steps late and 5 yards off the hot read receivers.

I really don't see a problem with the scheme, I think we need to be really careful about what we try to do on defense based on who's on the field. I think that we're seeing linebackers, db's and safeties that simply aren't putting up very good film on the ability to understand offensive formations, apply whatever the defensive play call is, and pass defend. That's not scheme to me.

What ticks me off, is that I don't understand the personnel groupings were using. That's what makes no sense to me. And for te life of me, I can't understand why we've got multiple linebackers and safeties that are not even putting a hand on TE's and receivers releasing off the LOS through the middle of the field. I can't believe that they're being taught to do that.

Are there any specific plays you are looking at / thinking of? Love to talk x's and o's.

The entire game is right here.

http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index/_/source/espn3/#type/replay/

there isn't a right scheme if you don't have the right personnel for it.....That's like saying I'm jumping off the building and when I go splat, someone saying if I had wings he'd have flown a real far distance. If you are talking theoretical schemes, sure, but we're talking actually schemes in practice in live game action. Do you really say that scheme would work if we had the right guys and excuse the staff for employing the scheme when they must know that they don't have the personnel to be successful using that scheme?

I just don't give them that type of latitude.

 

[sportsart]

There was a reason RE wasn't aggressive with the defense he had ( 9 out of 11 returning starters on defense).

When you throw in 2 new LB's who haven't developed their pass coverage skills yet you get a 3-5 record.

This is still a bend but don't break defense that Brown is trying to mold into something they are not.

 

[Carl Spackler]

to coach - I'm looking at the game now, I don't see anything that makes me think we're better in pass defense right now playing zone and not bringing a 5th or more in pressure, than we are when we are blitzing. It just looks worse when we're blitzing.

 

[Carl Spackler]

there isn't a right scheme if you don't have the right personnel for it.....That's like saying I'm jumping off the building and when I go splat, someone saying if I had wings he'd have flown a real far distance. If you are talking theoretical schemes, sure, but we're talking actually schemes in practice in live game action. Do you really say that scheme would work if we had the right guys and excuse the staff for employing the scheme when they must know that they don't have the personnel to be successful using that scheme?

I just don't give them that type of latitude.

Huh? I don't know why we've got guys on the field that clearly have demonstrated problems in coverage, over guys that have shown they can do it.

Bottom line is that our pass defense has been absolutely terrible the past few weeks. It looks a lot worse when you blitz, than when you've got 7 guys dropped back covering the field, because there's more open space on the field.

 

[coachRD]

to coach - I'm looking at the game now, I don't see anything that makes me think we're better in pass defense right now playing zone and not bringing a 5th or more in pressure, than we are when we are blitzing. It just looks worse when we're blitzing.

Unfortunately, I don't have ESPN3, but sadly, you're probably right-it probably looks bad BOTH ways. I think if you have players who may be strong and conditioned, and solid but not stellar athletes (probably the most common type of player we have had in the past, and currently), you need to go with the approach that Edsall did-keep plays in front of you as a Defense and bank on the fact that college offenses will eventually stall out more often than not.

I think I didn't communicate it well in my earlier post, but I think exactly what Sportsart and Northbound said-a scheme is only "good" if you have the personnel to fit it. Since we don't have that type of personnel, we are making a huge mistake in trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. That's what I meant with my "scheme" complaint.

We don't have the speed to blitz from the outside unless it is 3rd and long and you can expect longer, slow developing pass plays, and if we consistently blitz from the inside, teams can tighten down their OL splits and make it hard for interior blitzes to get penetration. In defense of our players, even great athletes can't realistically be expected to follow WR's effectively if they are running crossing routes....to me that generally dictates more zone coverage, or at most, partial man coverage with at least 1 player zoning up the middle at the 2nd and 3rd level-that helps slow down those crossing routes.

I love your idea about selling video from angles that coaches/teams film games-THAT would be awesome! I also don't understand why we don't seem to do a great job of disrupting/rerouting WR's. It's hard to get hands on, but at the very least we should be able to do that with the slower TE's who aren't in as wide open a space as WR's.

 

[businesslawyer]

It looks a lot worse when you blitz, than when you've got 7 guys dropped back covering the field, because there's more open space on the field.

Patient to Doctor: "My right shoulder hurts when I do this.
Doctor to patient: "Don't do that."

I am totally at a loss understanding your posts on this. What everyone (but you) is saying is it is a lot worse when we blitz so stop blitzing almost every down.