Best Defensive Scheme for C-USA

by **StallionsModelT** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:46 am

I was mulling this over after the JJ hire and now with another "spread" offense added to the league, I think teams are going to have to start making some wholesale schematic changes on the defensive side of the ball. I wouldn't mind us switching to a base 3-3-5 just to get more "coverage" guys on the field. The concern here naturally is whether or not we are physical enough up front to play this style of defense. I say, take your chances. Teams in this conference like to sling it around. I'd like to see us employ an attack that isn't so transparent (see Tech game last year when everyone and their dog knew when we were going to blitz). I don't know. Just a topic to break the cycle of JJ talk (not that I'm tiring of it at all!). Thoughts?

by **ponyinNC** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:50 am

"all out, all out"...

by **Beanman** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:50 am

I think teams are going to have to start making some wholesale schematic changes on the defensive side of the ball.

Then SMU needs to find the best running back in the country and turn him into a Doak winner. We need to bring the trophy home again.

by **SMU 86** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:51 am

Does anyone know what type of defense UH ran last year?

by **StallionsModelT** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:52 am

With June Jones at the helm, I doubt we are going to be major players for elite talent at the RB position.

by **SMUer** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:02 am

I don't know...

There were five CUSA teams ranked in the Top 35 in passing offense (Tulsa, Memphis, Rice, Houston, UTEP) and five CUSA teams ranked in the Top 35 in rushing offense (UCF, Houston, So. Miss, Tulane, E. Carolina). I'm not convinced that CUSA is statistically more of a "slingin'" conference. In CUSA, the first team to field a semi-proficient defensive unit wins!

by Me » Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:05 am

I don't think we have the players for the 3-3-5. I really don't like that defense to be truthful. I know some teams have a lot of success with it but it has never convinced me. I would like to stick with the 4-3 look and if we really want that 5th coverage man maybe have a strong nickel package. Who knows, with the right guy in charge I'm not saying the 3-3 wouldn't work.

by **PonyPatrol** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:52 am

The problem with the 3-3-5, or even 3-4 for that matter, is that the three down lineman have to be large enough space eaters to nuetralize the line of scrimmage, allowing LB's to make plays. We currently do NOT have the defensive personnel to run this scheme. 250(-) pound DE's like Smart and Younga would be completely inneffective.

Our best bet is to hope some of the young guys: McCann, Bell, Bailey, etc. develop into a solid/good defensive backfield. Anybody know a good secondary coach?

by **StallionsModelT** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:14 am

Highly unlikely but with Duane Akina's demotion back to secondary coach at Texas, would be nice if we could add him as DC. He's a proven recruiter and has a sterling reputation for developing DB's.

by **DiamondM75** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:17 am

I like the 4-4-4 defensive scheme, but the officials keep throwing their yellow flags.

by **me@smu** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:17 am

Tim Walton is an outstanding DB coach that is currently looking for a spot.

*EDIT - Take it back..>Walton was hired to be DC at Memphis. This is bad news for CUSA passing attacks, as this guy is one of the best in DB development*

by **huskerpony** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:37 am

PonyPatrol wrote:The problem with the 3-3-5, or even 3-4 for that matter, is that the three down lineman have to be large enough space eaters to nuetralize the line of scrimmage, allowing LB's to make plays. We currently do NOT have the defensive personnel to run this scheme. 250(-) pound DE's like Smart and Younga would be completely inneffective.

Our best bet is to hope some of the young guys: McCann, Bell, Bailey, etc. develop into a solid/good defensive backfield. Anybody know a good secondary coach?

We also don't have the speed. You have to have lightning fast LBs and DBs who can play man-coverage. The only team I have seen run this REALLY effectively was WVU in the Fiesta Bowl. Did you see how fast their LB's were? They were in the backfield before the OU lineman were off the ball.

by **JasonB** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:19 pm

I think the 3-4 works really well for us. There are a lot of undersized HS DEs that we try to fatten up into college DEs. A lot easier to just make them OLBs in the 3-4. Get a bunch of big fat guys to plug up the front three. It makes recruiting the front 7 a lot easier, because there is less competition for certain positions.

by **StallionsModelT** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:25 pm

How many college teams even run the 3-4? I know Virginia does but I can't think of another one off the top of my head. The 3-4 is a very sophisticated, elaborate defensive scheme. Hell it takes NFL teams at least a year or two to fully adjust to all its nuances.

by **me@smu** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:45 pm

The 3-4 works when everyone in the front 7 is large for their position...instead we have the exact opposite situation, with everyone being undersized.

Biggest problem with our pass defense is that our little d-lineman can't get pressure on the QB so the WR gets about 7 seconds to get open. Whatever the base system, we need to dial up the pressure

Best Defensive Scheme for C-USA

Best Defensive Scheme for C-USA

Who is online