The way Wake Forrest just rolled at the end, with wide open receivers and going the length of the field in one minute or less, what are thoughts about improvements on defense to watch for next week?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We are a bend don’t break defense. We must get more stops and stop giving teams break when we put them in 2nd and long or 3rd and long. I’d like to see more blind side blitz packages with our LB’s. They’ve shown they are our best pressures on QB while our line is the weak spot. It just seemed to take forever to get any up field surge with Wake using that Leveon Bell crap against us.The way Wake Forrest just rolled at the end, with wide open receivers and going the length of the field in one minute or less, what are thoughts about improvements on defense to watch for next week?
The way Wake Forrest just rolled at the end, with wide open receivers and going the length of the field in one minute or less, what are thoughts about improvements on defense to watch for next week?
So, what adjustments can be made, or are you saying that there aren't any to be made?I understand what you mean but keep in mind last year's team, which had more depth and more talent, would have lost 62-10 or something similar.
The way Wake Forrest just rolled at the end, with wide open receivers and going the length of the field in one minute or less, what are thoughts about improvements on defense to watch for next week?
So, what adjustments can be made, or are you saying that there aren't any to be made?
Do you really need to see stats to have an idea of which half, best or worse, our D ranks in?Without looking it up, how does our defense ranked among the Power 5 teams?
If that’s all you got, don’t bother to respond. Anybody with some sense knows our D is giving up too many points and yardage but since we are in conference play, it might be helpful to see what other ACC teams are doing against common opponents. I know that’s above your pay grade though.Do you really need to see stats to have an idea of which half, best or worse, our D ranks in?
I apologize for a poor attempt at humor, and meant it only for my disdain of statistical overload. I guess I will always be old school. Today’s analytics are a bit overwhelming for someone that believes more in intangibles not measured than stats shown 10 ways to 1.If that’s all you got, don’t bother to respond. Anybody with some sense knows our D is giving up too many points and yardage but since we are in conference play, it might be helpful to see what other ACC teams are doing against common opponents. I know that’s above your pay grade though.
I apologize for a poor attempt at humor, and meant it only for my disdain of statistical overload. I guess I will always be old school. Today’s analytics are a bit overwhelming for someone that believes more in intangibles not measured than stats shown 10 ways to 1.
I guess I do like to see signs of improvements in the numbers.
Someone mentioned Wake dictated the tempo. I respectfully disagree. We dictated it and CSS had a great game plan that bestowed pressure on Wake from the get go. Tempo was mainly due to Wake being in the hole and playing catch up for 4 quarters.
Sacks are the ultimate drive stoppers as are penalties. Get them behind the chains and improve our odds. You made an excellent point wit one on one blocking against our line. For this, I’d like to show more weak side blitzing packages but can our line get to the QB to hurry a pass when we are pulling 1 or 2 defenders from coverage. You seemed to answered my question. We can’t gamble if the line isn’t more effective.This is correct ... Wake only scored 27 against a poor BC defense because they had the lead and were holding it. Against UofL, they scored 59 and amassed 668 yards of offense because they were way behind and had to play that way to have any chance of catching us.
They have an outstanding offense - top 5 in the nation in terms of total offense. You’re not going to stop that team’s offense without a great defensive line that can get in the backfield with just three or four rushers.
3) They played 102 Snaps against a hurry up offense and we have very little depth.
Lmao. Can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not. I guess we could tell a ball carrier to fake a cramp near the 10 and just lay down.average game is 70-80 plays for most teams.
would have helped if we actually used some clock on offense instead of just scoring at will and running back kicks. let's use some clock, drive the length of the feild sometimes instead fo these quick hitters. sheesh, dang offense and specials teams making the defense worse by scoring too quick!
Teams are coming out and running this no huddle so that adds to a play count - either way - it looks like we get personnel locked and that's how you exploit that. We start off showing pressure and give a lot of single safety (if any) looks while the secondary runs this "jam them up" man press on the outside. If theres a play action (which we see a lot of because an RPO sucks your LBs down) our linebackers are having a hard time dropping back into any kind of zone. It's why BC ate us up with a TE over the middle and slot WRs are getting a lot of yards after the catch.
Teams get quick first downs, we sub out 5 guys that do better in downfield coverage and then they start cashing in on the run until we sub out again. Rinse and repeat. So bottom line - we don't have the depth nor the the ideal personnel to run this aggressive 3-4. Build some DL depth, find us a lockdown safety on the bigger side of things and keep our LBs speedy then I think we can really start giving offenses a tougher read and add less transparent adjustments we can call in quick.
That said, we seem to figure it out in the Red Zone a little bit and we're forcing turnovers. Our guys give 110% every play and we throw down some flat out awesome open field 1v1 tackles. If our offense keeps clicking and we get good production out of those then I'll gladly watch shootout after shootout and be grateful for VanGorder being nowhere near the building.
Go cards beat everybody
Problem is, WF negates ANY depth.This boils down to a problem that we all knew existed, and that is depth
I agree with this, but on the other hand, if you have depth, then you play the second string guy for a series, and weigh that drop off versus playing the starter who is gassed. That is not even an option for us at most positions, but I'm pretty sure that Clemson can plug in number two and not miss a beat.Problem is, WF negates ANY depth.
We could be 3 deep in 5 stars and it does no good if you can’t get them in the game.
You can’t sub against the no huddle w/o either being out of position or getting an illegal sub penalty.
That’s why they run it. To compete against more, better athletes.
Even Clemson better stop in 3 or 6 and out, and THEay probably will, or they are going to “run out of gas” by the 4th quarter too.
Problem is, WF negates ANY depth.
We could be 3 deep in 5 stars and it does no good if you can’t get them in the game.
You can’t sub against the no huddle w/o either being out of position or getting an illegal sub penalty.
That’s why they run it. To compete against more, better athletes.
Even Clemson better stop in 3 or 6 and out, and THEay probably will, or they are going to “run out of gas” by the 4th quarter too.
I appreciate Cardfan's analysis. We knew coming in the Defense was going to be thin. Despite the points scored the effort was good, the tackling was sharp. We just ran out of gas. Obviously, CSS will focus on increasing the depth with each new class.I believe the Wake Forest hurry up offense was ultimately our down fall. At the end of the game, our guys were GASSED, but if you compare their first five drives with their last five, it brings home the point. Their first five drives were:
Punt
Fumble
Punt
TD
Punt
Their last five drives were:
Punt
TD
TD
TD
TD
In the first half, they had nine possessions, but only scored on three of them. In the second half they also had nine possessions, but scored on six of them, and really scored on six of their last eight, as we forced them to punt on their opening possession of the second half.
What this tells me is that when our guys were fresh, they played pretty well. Not great, but better than what the ultimate score showed. This boils down to a problem that we all knew existed, and that is depth. The coaches are working on that with recruiting, but it will take time.
At the end of the day, the coaches are doing the best they can with the hand they were dealt, so no need to hit the panic button. We will get better over the coming years if these coaches stick around.
The main problem I see with our defense is that we have two defensive linemen (Robinson and Goldwire). Everybody else playing a DL spot for us is a linebacker playing out of position.
I’m definitely having a sense of deja vu here, regarding Petrino’s inability to recruit and develop quality DL. We had similar hangover symptoms like this after he left for the Falcons.
The way Wake Forrest just rolled at the end, with wide open receivers and going the length of the field in one minute or less, what are thoughts about improvements on defense to watch for next week?
We've got to get better coverage and tackling from Anthony Johnson and Chandler Jones. Their play in the 4th qtr was just well, awful. Could have been fatigue I guess.
Fatigue didn’t help but in reality - #14 for weak forest is just better than most guys he goes against - including Johnson and Chandler.We've got to get better coverage and tackling from Anthony Johnson and Chandler Jones. Their play in the 4th qtr was just well, awful. Could have been fatigue I guess.
WF won the first 5 games, score is not the only metric on offence that matters...they controlled the ball with the lead.I agree with this, but on the other hand, if you have depth, then you play the second string guy for a series, and weigh that drop off versus playing the starter who is gassed. That is not even an option for us at most positions, but I'm pretty sure that Clemson can plug in number two and not miss a beat.
For teams not named Clemson, WF's hurry up is definitely a problem, but for teams like us, it is a killer. Wake has scored:
38
41
24
49
27
59
in their games this season, so obviously other teams have been able to overcome their hurry up offense, so I will fall back to the depth problem.
Until we have a couple of recruiting classes, we will not be able to judge our defensive coaches on their own merits, but from what I have seen this year I believe they can coach. Time will tell.