BYU defense

Once, following a punt by BYU that pinned NMSU at the 8, KVN played loose coverage that allowed a 12-yard reception. He might have been able to dive for a tackle just inside the first down, or at least stop/slow him for another to make the tackle. Do all of our coverage guys do this? 'Cause if they do, Bronco needs to whip them into shape and tighten down on all receivers.

BYU's defense is very good. Especially in pass defense.

So that was a rare play that we didn't cover closely?



Maybe I'm seeing things wrong, but to me it looks like we give receivers a few yards of space, then close during the hang time of the throw. On deep passes, it works. On short slants and posts...not so well.

No, we don't cover closely. We also don't get beat through the air. Here are our passing defensive rankings:

Passing Yards: 20th

Interceptions: 19th

PER Defense: 9th

Passing Touchdowns: 6th

Red Zone Defense: 11th

cougarnerd wrote:
Once, following a punt by BYU that pinned NMSU at the 8, KVN played loose coverage that allowed a 12-yard reception. He might have been able to dive for a tackle just inside the first down, or at least stop/slow him for another to make the tackle. Do all of our coverage guys do this? 'Cause if they do, Bronco needs to whip them into shape and tighten down on all receivers.

I wouldn't say that that single play is in any way indicative of how our pass defense has played this year. Defenses give up 12-yard receptions occasionally. It's not the end of the world, especially in this case where NMSU still had 80 yards to go after that play and wound up punting a few plays later.

BerliNY wrote:

Once, following a punt by BYU that pinned NMSU at the 8, KVN played loose coverage that allowed a 12-yard reception. He might have been able to dive for a tackle just inside the first down, or at least stop/slow him for another to make the tackle. Do all of our coverage guys do this? 'Cause if they do, Bronco needs to whip them into shape and tighten down on all receivers.

I wouldn't say that that single play is in any way indicative of how our pass defense has played this year. Defenses give up 12-yard receptions occasionally. It's not the end of the world, especially in this case where NMSU still had 80 yards to go after that play and wound up punting a few plays later.

SpiffCoug wrote:
No, we don't cover closely. We also don't get beat through the air. Here are our passing defensive rankings:

Passing Yards: 20th

Interceptions: 19th

PER Defense: 9th

Passing Touchdowns: 6th

Red Zone Defense: 11th

Thanks for clearing that up, guys.

This is a pretty standard way of playing pass D. I do think our outside corners give a couple yards too much, especially on short yardage plays, but you can't argue with results.

bronco's defense is not that fun to watch but it seems to be working. i do think that our corners are good enough to play close though if they chose to.

As soon as we get down line guys who can pressure, we will love watching our D. It is sound. Just need more pressure at times is all. We play the 3-4 the Steelers play.

Bronco has said as much. Corners play off, linebackers and safeties make the plays. Just need a Kiesel on our line tom get after the QB.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Ravens were playing off coverage a lot tonight in their dismantling of the 49ers tonight. One reason is that while the receiver is catching the ball you're picking up 3-5 yards worth of speed to really pop him one. Statistically, you're forcing the qb to throw it well, the receiver to catch it, the receiver to hold on to it and you keep everything in front where you can pick it off easier. As a defense, you only need one of those things to go wrong for it to be a positive for you, otherwise it's a relatively short gain. In college, that happens more often than not which is why I like the "boring" but effective philosophy.



And you also give the receiver a few bruises to remember the next time the ball comes his way.

We need more exposure. If we have better recruiting, our d-line gets bigger and faster. They not only prevent running holes from opening, but they also pressure the backfield. The corners are bigger, faster, and more athletic. Now, they can cover < 3 yards from behind the line of scrimmage, and still make plays. The LBs and Safeties also get bigger, faster and more athletic. They cover better, swarm faster, hit harder, and play more confusingly before the snap and more aggressively after the snap.



Sounds like an improved defense. Our only obstacle: better recruiting.

cougarnerd wrote:
We need more exposure. If we have better recruiting, our d-line gets bigger and faster. They not only prevent running holes from opening, but they also pressure the backfield. The corners are bigger, faster, and more athletic. Now, they can cover < 3 yards from behind the line of scrimmage, and still make plays. The LBs and Safeties also get bigger, faster and more athletic. They cover better, swarm faster, hit harder, and play more confusingly before the snap and more aggressively after the snap.



Sounds like an improved defense. Our only obstacle: better recruiting.

We will only get those as the LDS church continues to grow and more players who meet those criteria are LDS.

SpiffCoug wrote:

We need more exposure. If we have better recruiting, our d-line gets bigger and faster. They not only prevent running holes from opening, but they also pressure the backfield. The corners are bigger, faster, and more athletic. Now, they can cover < 3 yards from behind the line of scrimmage, and still make plays. The LBs and Safeties also get bigger, faster and more athletic. They cover better, swarm faster, hit harder, and play more confusingly before the snap and more aggressively after the snap.



Sounds like an improved defense. Our only obstacle: better recruiting.

We will only get those as the LDS church continues to grow and more players who meet those criteria are LDS.

If we can join a conference where we play coast to coast, plus in the middle, every year, we will get the exposure we need. If we win.

Our corners give too much space even for the style of 3-4 that we play... let me rephrase that, our field corner plays too deep. Many times the field corner is at 12 yards and at the snap he is bailing to 15+, watch the boundary corner and he is usually at 7-10 unless it is long yardage for a first. It is frustrating to watch wr's get 8 yards when it is due to scheme and not a good play. But our defense is pretty good.



The issue with having a better pass rush from the dline, we do need a better rush. But the guys we have are not schemed to give a great pass rush they are designed to two gap. This is part of the reason Jan Jorgensen went from 14+ sacks to 6, he went from pinning his ears back and going after the qb to playing 2 gap and trying to control the line of scrimmage. Our pass rush is predicated upon our big guys eating blocker and allowing the blazers to come free. They do need to get more push and create pressure by themselves.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Here's another thing that kind of bothers me. We're good, but...we're not completely aggressive all of the time. (It kind of ties in with the original post, KVN was playing off the line, etc. Whatever.) However, our corners guard way off the ball, our d-line eats up blocks instead of giving the opposing qb migraines, etc. I would like to go back to 2004 aggressiveness v. Notre Dame with out current scheme, if possible. It just kind of bugs and irritates me after the game and when I'm watching replays. Not to mention it's not as exciting during the game.



Another thing about if we changed our scheme slightly to the aggressive side: If our corners played bump-and-run, and we had 1-2 LBs (rotating throughout the game, the other guys blitz from different angles to keep it confusing) hanging out in the tackle box from the line of scrimmage 10 yards back towards the safeties, and everyone else in the front 7 blitzed, and safeties covered/stayed back to prevent the big play (probably shouldn't be a common occurence), we might get so many more big plays defensively. We finally get shut-outs against decent teams, our offense has so many more close oppurtunities, we get blow-outs, and we can hold our own against great/really good teams. This might be the key to getting a BCS bowl right here...

trueblue72 wrote:
Our corners give too much space even for the style of 3-4 that we play... let me rephrase that, our field corner plays too deep. Many times the field corner is at 12 yards and at the snap he is bailing to 15+, watch the boundary corner and he is usually at 7-10 unless it is long yardage for a first. It is frustrating to watch wr's get 8 yards when it is due to scheme and not a good play.

Look up our pass defense numbers and tell our scheme is no good.

Schmoe wrote:

Our corners give too much space even for the style of 3-4 that we play... let me rephrase that, our field corner plays too deep. Many times the field corner is at 12 yards and at the snap he is bailing to 15+, watch the boundary corner and he is usually at 7-10 unless it is long yardage for a first. It is frustrating to watch wr's get 8 yards when it is due to scheme and not a good play.

Look up our pass defense numbers and tell our scheme is no good.

Never said our defense wasn't any good, I guess I should have prefaced what I said with "in my opinion". It is frustrating to watch our corners line up so far off when it is a short yardage situation. We've had a good d this year, it's definitely much better than those last few years with Schmidt.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

That is the one situation where I think we need to adjust: When it's third and three or four, bring the corners up a couple yards.

The field corner usually backs up because his responsibility isn't the short route. His responsibility is the deep third in the back of the zone. He also watches how the QB is holding the ball (this is based on what coach said on one of his coaches show) to know what type of drop he's supposed to take. A LB also flows to the flat to cover the underneath route.



It's all by design, and the results are usually positive.

Our defense needs to make a statement Saturday. I think our offense might have some challenges with UH playing for a Bowl Game and with how they get up for BYU.



Neither our coaches or players have much experience tripping to Hawaii - hopefully they listen to Lance Reynolds re what they are in for.



UH just popped 35 or so points on Tulane. We need to hold them below half that amount. On paper, we should score 42 if Riley is full tilt healthy. Maybe nearly the same with Jake playing like the past two games.



My worry is that I have no idea how Jake will react to the pressure UH is likely to bring. If he gets jumpy - this will be a lot like our early games. If he is cool and calm and plays well for 4 quarters, UH will wear down.



Anyway, it will not get played on paper. Same tired old stadium and turf. EMO will be a factor. Could be a 17-16 kind of game. If D is flat - UH can score quickly. D needs to set the tone early.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">