Tape Doesn't Lie Podcast

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

DallasOSUCowboys34

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Sep 24, 2008
1,480
1,440
1,743
Fort Worth, TX
#2
In case you haven't listened to these, here are links for depth chart breakdowns as well.

https://soundcloud.com/tapedoesntlie/episode-twenty-three-defense-breakdown

https://soundcloud.com/tapedoesntlie/episode-twenty-two-offensive-breakdown
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,578
6,684
1,743
Landlocked
#8
Good stuff, guys! It'll be interesting to see how the defensive scheme performs in conference play. I'm one of those people you mentioned on the 'cast that isn't impressed with the defensive scheme so far, and don't like the 3-down look (unless its a blitzing 3-4). I'm willing to concede if it performs well against legit opponents, but I'm skeptical at the moment.

I also wholeheartedly agree with the idea that you need to get Sanders some reps throwing more difficult passes now, against weaker opponents, so he isn't facing that situation for the first time against Texas on the road when its 3rd & 11. We should have been trying a lot more of those concepts in these first three games. Maybe Tulsa will force us to try some passes over the middle? Maybe Gleeson's offense is similar to Yurcich and just doesn't utilize pass plays between the hashes?
 

OSUMIKE17

Property of The Oklahoman and NewsOk.com
A/V Subscriber
Apr 11, 2009
53,017
56,715
1,743
Tulsa
#9
Good stuff, guys! It'll be interesting to see how the defensive scheme performs in conference play. I'm one of those people you mentioned on the 'cast that isn't impressed with the defensive scheme so far, and don't like the 3-down look (unless its a blitzing 3-4). I'm willing to concede if it performs well against legit opponents, but I'm skeptical at the moment.

I also wholeheartedly agree with the idea that you need to get Sanders some reps throwing more difficult passes now, against weaker opponents, so he isn't facing that situation for the first time against Texas on the road when its 3rd & 11. We should have been trying a lot more of those concepts in these first three games. Maybe Tulsa will force us to try some passes over the middle? Maybe Gleeson's offense is similar to Yurcich and just doesn't utilize pass plays between the hashes?
Iowa State runs an extremely similar version of the defensive scheme and you’ve seen the success they’ve had with their limited talent on that side of the ball.

We basically use the three down linemen to pinch the middle of the gaps, forcing the run to the outside where we have linebackers and safeties waiting to run downhill and make tackles for very small gains.

I like it as a base defense because it lets Knowles be imaginative with his blitzes and cover schemes. That AJ Green pick six was ingeniusly drawn up (I kind of wish we would have saved it for Texas). We baited the QB with an open slot receiver whose defender was 10 yards off the line. Presnap, the QB thought he had an easy 5-7 yards at least. AJ spies it the whole time from the boundary and jumps on it once he sees the QB is taking the bait. Just a really well drawn up, executed play.
 
Last edited:
Jul 9, 2011
2,284
1,350
743
64
Yankees Tavern, Carlos Texas
#10
Good stuff, guys!

I also wholeheartedly agree with the idea that you need to get Sanders some reps throwing more difficult passes now, against weaker opponents, so he isn't facing that situation for the first time against Texas on the road when its 3rd & 11.
I hear you, but we have inexperienced QB's - so I'm guessing the thought process was to give them a good amount of time just reading the D and running the base offense in a real game situation - first steps first. Nothing in practice is like doing it in a real game. I think Tulsa is going to be the non-conference competitor that will force our QB's to make some of the more difficult throws; they played some salty D versus MSU.
 

DallasOSUCowboys34

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Sep 24, 2008
1,480
1,440
1,743
Fort Worth, TX
#11
Good stuff, guys! It'll be interesting to see how the defensive scheme performs in conference play. I'm one of those people you mentioned on the 'cast that isn't impressed with the defensive scheme so far, and don't like the 3-down look (unless its a blitzing 3-4). I'm willing to concede if it performs well against legit opponents, but I'm skeptical at the moment.

I also wholeheartedly agree with the idea that you need to get Sanders some reps throwing more difficult passes now, against weaker opponents, so he isn't facing that situation for the first time against Texas on the road when its 3rd & 11. We should have been trying a lot more of those concepts in these first three games. Maybe Tulsa will force us to try some passes over the middle? Maybe Gleeson's offense is similar to Yurcich and just doesn't utilize pass plays between the hashes?
People being skeptical is completely fair, actually I'm not even sure if it will work. But I love that they're trying it. Actually the defensive structure isn't that far off from a 3-4, but Ill save that for another day.

The one huge advantage of this defense is the coverage flexibility and also where pressure is coming from. (see sack/fumble last year by TC vs. Iowa State) Since you're basically playing with 6 DB's (2 CB's, 3 Safeties and Rodriguez), you can roll all kinds of different coverages on the table. Thats the problem with the spread offense is it stretches defenses out so much that it limits their options, when you can have 2 guys covering down on WRs and safety help over the top AND an overhang player on each side it really opens doors up.

1568224559572.png


@OSUMIKE17 referenced this play and good example of the type of confusion you can cause. Pre-snap QB sees 1 on 1 on the outside with a big cushion, and a 9 yard cushion on an easy out route from the slot. He knows they have inside support from both overhang players. Given the outside cushion and the fact that AJ Green is the best CB on the defense, this should be an easy completion to the out route from the slot.

However, Green isn't carrying with the outside WR vertical. He's sitting down against either WR on either slant from outside WR or out route from the slot. OSU has intermediate inside support from Amen O and Tre Sterling slide over to take the slot IF he gets vertical. Meaning the only part of the field that won't be covered is down the sideline in between Green and the rolling Safety, basically where the score is listed on the screenshot. Which is going to take Matt Stafford to make that type of throw on opposite hash.

QB sees Bernard get depth right off the snap and knows he will have easy completion to the out route. Doesn't read Green at all and its an easy Pick 6. None of these options were possible with a 4 man front previously.

I think the biggest question mark will be can OSU find a consistent DT who can hold up in the middle. A bigtime DT and bigtime LB are pretty critical in this scheme to work.
 

DallasOSUCowboys34

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Sep 24, 2008
1,480
1,440
1,743
Fort Worth, TX
#13
Looks to me like without a blitzing LB it leaves the D line open to a lot of double teams by the o line for running plays. Like you say, you need a salty D tackle and MLB to make it work.
You want to entice double teams, I know that sounds crazy. That is why the DL is clamped together in the middle. Condense the middle of the line and occupy as many OL as possible, to prevent zone scheme run blocking units from getting OL to the 2nd level defenders. Your gaps are covered from 2nd/3rd level defenders. Force RB to bounce the run outside, where you have numbers advantage, more athletic tacklers and no blocking.

The reason you need a good 0 Tech DT is generally your most powerful run blockers will be Center/Guard, and you can't let them blow you off the ball. Need to atleast hold your ground.

https://youtu.be/XguVAlj6-6M?t=306



Here is good example. Watch the duo on the DT. He holds his ground to fill the hole. Hill bounces behind pulling Keyes, and several 2nd/3rd level defenders are there ready to fill the hole.


https://youtu.be/XguVAlj6-6M?t=321



Here is another one. Specifically watch all 5 OL. The alignment makes it incredibly hard for them to get any other blocks outside of the 3 DL. So your LBs/Safeties run free, and you can see when you have great pursuit what can happen.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,578
6,684
1,743
Landlocked
#14
People being skeptical is completely fair, actually I'm not even sure if it will work. But I love that they're trying it. Actually the defensive structure isn't that far off from a 3-4, but Ill save that for another day.

The one huge advantage of this defense is the coverage flexibility and also where pressure is coming from. (see sack/fumble last year by TC vs. Iowa State) Since you're basically playing with 6 DB's (2 CB's, 3 Safeties and Rodriguez), you can roll all kinds of different coverages on the table. Thats the problem with the spread offense is it stretches defenses out so much that it limits their options, when you can have 2 guys covering down on WRs and safety help over the top AND an overhang player on each side it really opens doors up.

View attachment 73007

@OSUMIKE17 referenced this play and good example of the type of confusion you can cause. Pre-snap QB sees 1 on 1 on the outside with a big cushion, and a 9 yard cushion on an easy out route from the slot. He knows they have inside support from both overhang players. Given the outside cushion and the fact that AJ Green is the best CB on the defense, this should be an easy completion to the out route from the slot.

However, Green isn't carrying with the outside WR vertical. He's sitting down against either WR on either slant from outside WR or out route from the slot. OSU has intermediate inside support from Amen O and Tre Sterling slide over to take the slot IF he gets vertical. Meaning the only part of the field that won't be covered is down the sideline in between Green and the rolling Safety, basically where the score is listed on the screenshot. Which is going to take Matt Stafford to make that type of throw on opposite hash.

QB sees Bernard get depth right off the snap and knows he will have easy completion to the out route. Doesn't read Green at all and its an easy Pick 6. None of these options were possible with a 4 man front previously.

I think the biggest question mark will be can OSU find a consistent DT who can hold up in the middle. A bigtime DT and bigtime LB are pretty critical in this scheme to work.
I understand the idea. I just want to see us implement it well. I think Rodriguez is the perfect "guy" in this scheme. He's great. But we need our DL to step up and actually occupy that space.

I also don't think we've been quiet as aggressive in run support as the ISU video you posted above. Their guys appeared to be basically run blitzing from the snap (brought 2 extra guys in the second video). It seems like our guys are dropping at the snap and vacating the LOS or just lining up in straight coverage. I'm not seeing us jam that space up like a 3-4 look would do. ISU looks like a 3-4 alignment a lot of times, even though 1-2 of those guys are hybrid/safety type players, they're still lined up near the LOS. Maybe that's because our safeties need help? Maybe its just playing vanilla in the first two games?

Either way. I'm curious how this will hold up against
1. True dual-threat QBs (ones that can actually pass)
2. A more run-heavy team
 
Last edited:
Jul 9, 2011
2,284
1,350
743
64
Yankees Tavern, Carlos Texas
#15
I understand the idea. I just want to see us implement it well. I think Rodriguez is the perfect "guy" in this scheme. He's great. But we need our DL to step up and actually occupy that space.

I also don't think we've been quiet as aggressive in run support as the ISU video you posted above. Their guys appeared to be basically run blitzing from the snap (brought 2 extra guys in the second video). It seems like our guys are dropping at the snap and vacating the LOS or just lining up in straight coverage. I'm not seeing us jam that space up like a 3-4 look would do. ISU looks like a 3-4 alignment a lot of times, even though 1-2 of those guys are hybrid/safety type players, they're still lined up near the LOS. Maybe that's because our safeties need help? Maybe its just playing vanilla in the first two games?

Either way. I'm curious how this will hold up against
1. True dual-threat QBs (ones that can actually pass)
2. A more run-heavy team
That's what it looks like to me as well - you MUST have linebacker(s) aggressively run blitz/attack for this to work. If they attack the wrong gap and get hung up, or if the LB's think pass and fall back in protection it appears there are some big gaps for draws and shuttle passes. But it does give you more speed to play sideline to sideline, and when it works it's really good.

I'm an old fart that played in a base 4/3 defense so it's hard for me to wrap my mind around it.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,578
6,684
1,743
Landlocked
#16
People being skeptical is completely fair, actually I'm not even sure if it will work. But I love that they're trying it. Actually the defensive structure isn't that far off from a 3-4, but Ill save that for another day.

The one huge advantage of this defense is the coverage flexibility and also where pressure is coming from. (see sack/fumble last year by TC vs. Iowa State) Since you're basically playing with 6 DB's (2 CB's, 3 Safeties and Rodriguez), you can roll all kinds of different coverages on the table. Thats the problem with the spread offense is it stretches defenses out so much that it limits their options, when you can have 2 guys covering down on WRs and safety help over the top AND an overhang player on each side it really opens doors up.

View attachment 73007

@OSUMIKE17 referenced this play and good example of the type of confusion you can cause. Pre-snap QB sees 1 on 1 on the outside with a big cushion, and a 9 yard cushion on an easy out route from the slot. He knows they have inside support from both overhang players. Given the outside cushion and the fact that AJ Green is the best CB on the defense, this should be an easy completion to the out route from the slot.

However, Green isn't carrying with the outside WR vertical. He's sitting down against either WR on either slant from outside WR or out route from the slot. OSU has intermediate inside support from Amen O and Tre Sterling slide over to take the slot IF he gets vertical. Meaning the only part of the field that won't be covered is down the sideline in between Green and the rolling Safety, basically where the score is listed on the screenshot. Which is going to take Matt Stafford to make that type of throw on opposite hash.

QB sees Bernard get depth right off the snap and knows he will have easy completion to the out route. Doesn't read Green at all and its an easy Pick 6. None of these options were possible with a 4 man front previously.

I think the biggest question mark will be can OSU find a consistent DT who can hold up in the middle. A bigtime DT and bigtime LB are pretty critical in this scheme to work.
Also, what happens on that rolled coverage if they fake handoff to the right and run the QB to the left or run a screen to the left or sweep left? Best case scenario is 6 run blockers in the box vs 5 defenders, and worst case there's nobody within 10 yards of the ball carrier.

It worked great in that case, because 1) Its McNeese and 2) our defensive call was the perfect call against their offensive play call. But we won't play a team as bad as McNeese all season, and complex rolling coverages won't matter against a team that lines up and runs right at us. The counter argument might be that our DC would call a different defensive alignment against a team prone to running right at us. But still, I think those types of calls/alignments are very exploitable.
 

OSUMIKE17

Property of The Oklahoman and NewsOk.com
A/V Subscriber
Apr 11, 2009
53,017
56,715
1,743
Tulsa
#17
That's what it looks like to me as well - you MUST have linebacker(s) aggressively run blitz/attack for this to work. If they attack the wrong gap and get hung up, or if the LB's think pass and fall back in protection it appears there are some big gaps for draws and shuttle passes. But it does give you more speed to play sideline to sideline, and when it works it's really good.

I'm an old fart that played in a base 4/3 defense so it's hard for me to wrap my mind around it.
The linebackers don’t have to worry about playing the pass first. That’s the beauty of having 5 or 6 DBs on the field.

They sit lower in the box and play the run first or look for shallow crossing routes, RB swing passes, screens, etc.

Have you watched Iowa State’s defense?
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,578
6,684
1,743
Landlocked
#18
The linebackers don’t have to worry about playing the pass first. That’s the beauty of having 5 or 6 DBs on the field.

They sit lower in the box and play the run first or look for shallow crossing routes, RB swing passes, screens, etc.

Have you watched Iowa State’s defense?
I think you're missing our point. Yes, we have watched ISU's defense. But we don't line up like they do (or haven't much yet). We line up with 3 down and 2 true LBs near the LOS, then have some hybrid guys lined up way out wide not near the LOS, and they usually drop into coverage.

In two cases against McNeese, we did that and blitzed our only two LBs around one side of the line, so the QB scrambled and easily picked up big yards. Nobody was near him when he took off.
 
Jul 9, 2011
2,284
1,350
743
64
Yankees Tavern, Carlos Texas
#19
The linebackers don’t have to worry about playing the pass first. That’s the beauty of having 5 or 6 DBs on the field.

They sit lower in the box and play the run first or look for shallow crossing routes, RB swing passes, screens, etc.

Have you watched Iowa State’s defense?
Yes, and it looked like the LB's were selling out to stop the run. The plays that worked were draws, shuttles, etc when we showed pass first and then got the ball to the running back.
 

OSUMIKE17

Property of The Oklahoman and NewsOk.com
A/V Subscriber
Apr 11, 2009
53,017
56,715
1,743
Tulsa
#20
I think you're missing our point. Yes, we have watched ISU's defense. But we don't line up like they do (or haven't much yet). We line up with 3 down and 2 true LBs near the LOS, then have some hybrid guys lined up way out wide not near the LOS, and they usually drop into coverage.

In two cases against McNeese, we did that and blitzed our only two LBs around one side of the line, so the QB scrambled and easily picked up big yards. Nobody was near him when he took off.
How are we not lined up like they are lined up? This is the very first play of the first video posted above:
1C6B2595-4900-4E1F-894E-3AFF0E09838A.jpeg

Three condensed down linemen, three linebackers, five DBs.

Here is the same graphic of the AJ Green pick six play from above:
1B91F594-E18F-4677-AC72-E42569E87432.png

Three condensed down linemen, three linebackers, five DBs.

The only difference is one play is backed up to the goal line and in our picture, the slot LB is spread out a bit more due to where the slot receiver is lined up.

You’re using specific plays to try to describe an overall scheme. We aren’t always going to blitz two LBs to one side. We aren’t always going to drop one into coverage. Those specific plays do not define the scheme as a whole.