Our 2009 Defense?

[mrydel]

From all reports we have more speed on defense. But, speed was not as much a problem last year as failing to tackle. What I want to see out of the defense this year is aggressive tackling. If this group will tackle and then if you add speed and a little more finesse in defending the pass, it will be night and day better than last year.

Yes, the tackling was terrible, but that has a lot to do with being a half a step late in getting to the ball carrier. When you are reaching you are not going to tackle well. More speed means better position, means better tackling.

[SmooBoy]

[PerunaPunch]

Several thoughts here.

#1 the 3-4 matches up much better against the pass happy CUSA (not to mention SFA). So maybe that'll hurt us a bit against Navy or TCU, but overall this scheme is an improvement for 80% of our opponents. And I'd probably be willing to go out on a limb and say it fits our personnel better.

I would've loved to have Serge back this year, but in general our D-line looks completely different this year. They're huge. It also moves Yenga off the line and gives him a running start at the QB.

I really thought, with the exception of McCann, our DBs played poorly last year. But I think Banjo was solid and is a monster in the making. Bell should improve immensely with some more experience under his belt and some coaching. The report is the Rock is getting coached to take better angles (maybe it's just and adjustment to the speed difference between JUCOs and D1), which should improve his game. And having Hudman back, I believe, is huge whether you look at him as a force at DB or a 5th LB.

So on paper, these guys look pretty darn good.

The weakness continues to be depth. We're another couple of recruiting classes away from having it. And whether the O goes 3 and out or goes 2 and a TD, they don't use up much clock in this offense, so our defense will get tired.

But seeing these guys practice, makes me optimistic.

[panhandle_pony]

Thanks PerunaPunch, well stated.

[ponyboy]

Okay, see that was funny. A.

Was that BUS's first A? I was a little shocked that he dropped that wit so smoothly.

Well done BUS.

[San Antonio Mustang]

From all reports we have more speed on defense. But, speed was not as much a problem last year as failing to tackle. What I want to see out of the defense this year is aggressive tackling. If this group will tackle and then if you add speed and a little more finesse in defending the pass, it will be night and day better than last year.

Yes, the tackling was terrible, but that has a lot to do with being a half a step late in getting to the ball carrier. When you are reaching you are not going to tackle well. More speed means better position, means better tackling.

Good point.

[JasonB]

I'd be careful about saying that the d-line looks huge, because sometimes when they go against a young offensive line, any d-line looks huge...

One comment about the tackling. Tired players tackle poorly. That is something important to consider. The depth at linebacker, corner, and saftey is going to help the team be better tacklers this year. I think at each of those positions, we run two deep with players who won't embarass themselves on the field, which simply wasn't the case last season.

[Dooby]

Need to also note that there is not a lot of full speed contact in camp. The year Bennett did this, the tackling was aweful the entire year.

The argument is you risk injury, so you can't blame Jones for being conservative with a lack of depth. Still....

[George S. Patton]

If your 3-4 is going to be effective, you better have two things:

1. A really good nose guard so he can funnel things through. I can't remember who we even have as candidates there.

2. Linebackers who can run, especially your outside guys. Looks like Yenga can do that.


I said it last year, if this group can keep people to about 20-24 points and about 350 yards per game, then consider that great improvement. They just have to be credible not stalwart.

[Dooby]

I said it last year, if this group can keep people to about 20-24 points and about 350 yards per game, then consider that great improvement. They just have to be credible not stalwart.

This is not based on reality. I don't think you realize what a monumental jump that would be. That would make SMU one of the top three defenses in Conference USA. That is cutting the yards per game by more than 125 and the points by more than a full two touchdowns.

THAT. IS. NOT. GOING. TO. HAPPEN.

A great improvement would be half that.

And as I keep saying, in this league, it doesn't need to. If SMU wins this year, it will be because of offense, not defense. A Conference USA team can go to a bowl with the 111th defense in the country (Rice did it in 2008); a Conference USA team can go to a bowl with the 100th defense in the country (ditto, Houston).

[Stallion]

I think some of you are grading on the SMU scale again. We are 2-Deep at LB? Really? I think we are one deep at only 1 LB spot-and that's a guy who hasn't ever played the position before. None of these guys have proven they can be QUALITY LBs although Felps has proved he can make a lot of tackles on a bad team. 23 in one game in which Navy was 80% on 3rd and 4th down and we never came close to stopping them. The guys that can run unfortunately are not the guys who are starting. The fact that all these freshman are expected to play immediately should be your sign that SMU ain't very happy with who they got in place. I'm hopeful that Davis and Henderson especially can be players who can develop into the type of quality LBs we actually need-but it likely won't be this year. Take a look over at Ft. Worth for about the last 4 years-that's the definition of quality 2 Deep at LB. Their second string guys become All-Conference contenders once they start.

[kull]

stallion is correct.

I believe that we are two years out from a respectable CUSA defense. The offense will carry this team, and the D will be statistically improved from last year if the front 7 can generate a pass rush.

[George S. Patton]

I said it last year, if this group can keep people to about 20-24 points and about 350 yards per game, then consider that great improvement. They just have to be credible not stalwart.

This is not based on reality. I don't think you realize what a monumental jump that would be. That would make SMU one of the top three defenses in Conference USA. That is cutting the yards per game by more than 125 and the points by more than a full two touchdowns.

THAT. IS. NOT. GOING. TO. HAPPEN.

A great improvement would be half that.

And as I keep saying, in this league, it doesn't need to. If SMU wins this year, it will be because of offense, not defense. A Conference USA team can go to a bowl with the 111th defense in the country (Rice did it in 2008); a Conference USA team can go to a bowl with the 100th defense in the country (ditto, Houston).

I knew I was being unrealistic here with the numbers I was throwing out but just some kind of improvement would be a step in the direction. You might have taken it the wrong way.

I'll leave it with, it would be nice if the defense could mix in a stop or two in a given game.

[Dooby]

stallion is correct.

I believe that we are two years out from a respectable CUSA defense. The offense will carry this team, and the D will be statistically improved from last year if the front 7 can generate a pass rush.

FYI, "Respectable," for a Conference USA defense, means about 400 yards and 31 points per game.

[Dooby]

BTW, I am fairly confident we will be top 30-35 in total offense and top 50-60 in scoring offense.