Jump to content

JBJ

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    5205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

4384 Surly 10%

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It does make a shit because his premise is wrong. Those teams would have actually been in the playoffs in the system that he is arguing against. In fact, Boise State would have been in several times that decade. They weren't the equivalent of George Mason - more like Gonzaga.
  2. Boise State and Utah were ranked in the top 12 those years.
  3. Dude, Gideon has been here for 9 months and there's not a high standard to be considered successful.
  4. I would disagree that Muschamp will be more physical defense than a PK or tell his players to take dumb risks, and it's not what I meant by a "more complex defense with more aggression." I think coverage is actually more telling for overall complexity, because it causes more ripples across a defense.
  5. No, but it's one of the easier measures to find about playcalling. I think people just confuse sound defense with aggressive (they are usually opposites), or like hard-hitting LB aggression with defensive philosophy aggression. Punching balls out and jumping passes aren't inherently indicative of an aggressive philosophy on defense.
  6. I don't think we have advanced stats from then, but no. They had a dominant front 4. Very low blitz rate, Cover 2. Essentially, the last notable Cover 2 defense.
  7. But to seriously respond to this. Take a perfect DC who knows exactly when he needs to be aggressive to beat an offense: - this DC will not do much with an outmatched defense because he knows none of his players can execute anything beyond simple and the offense will exploit any openings he creates - this DC will use aggression and complexity to cover up his defensive weaknesses with strengths when his defense has both, relative to the offense's weaknesses and strengths - this DC will not do anything to compromise the soundness of his defense when he knows his players can defend everything the opposing offense can throw at them And, like, we can look at Tech, Toledo, Texas, Mizzou, SMU from this year and see that the good defenses tend to be the most simple. That doesn't mean necessarily that Oklahoma/Michigan don't exist, either. And we just know from advanced stats guys that blitz rate and coverage diversity tend to increase a defense's EPA.
  8. There can always be exceptions. Here's a meme instead:
  9. The greatest defenses of all time are decidedly both simple and passive. They are well-coached and lean on being elite at a few things. Think Legion of Boom.
  10. No, not necessarily. The best and worst defenses tend to be simpler and more conservative.
  11. I was poking fun at the people grasping at straws to rationalize that PK wasn't good during his time here. Muschamp was good, PK was good. I expect the defense will change more due to personnel overturn than coaching. But I do expect a more complex defense with more aggression.
  12. Yes, but also notice the CBs 7 yards back and dropping at the snap.
  13. I just ordered one last week at a place I've never been to in Phoenix and the bartender made sure to point out they didn't have rye and asked if a bourbon was okay. But you probably do order more martinis than me,
  14. I'm no purist and think people can enjoy bourbon manhattans and vodka martinis. But if you order a martini it will come with gin by default and if you order a manhattan it will come with rye by default.
×
×
  • Create New...