Quantifying something that we already knew

(I posted this on another board)



BYU under Bronco's 3-4 scheme is as only as good as their linebackers.



2006- The linebackers had 49.6% of all tackles made by BYU. The defense had 5.27 tackles for loss per game. They finished 38th in total defense and 10th in scoring defense.



2007- The LBs had 50.5% of all tackles. The defense had 6.12 TFLs per game. BYU finished 10th in total defense and 9th in scoring defense.



2008- The LBs had 45% of all tackles. 5.46 TFLs per game. BYU finished 58th in total defense and 39th in scoring defense



2009- The LBs have 40% of all tackles. 4.13 TFLs per game. Right now the team is 53rd in total D and 67th in scoring defense.



Now in fairness to the 2008 and 2009 teams their schedule is much tougher than the 2006 and 2007 schedules. However, when BYU has linebackers that are very productive, the defense is awesome. When they are merely average the defense struggles. Look at the rosters of the 2006 and 2007 defense guys like Jensen, Kehl, Nixon, Poppinga were very productive and made big plays.



I think the emotion issues spoken of ad nauseum on this forum and other forums are waaaay overblown. This is a talent and production issue. Linebacker is the most crucial position on this team besides QB. We just don't have guys at that position who can make enough big plays to beat the great teams, and we are playing more great teams.

great post.



the scary thing of this...is if the linebackers aren't making the tackles...and we KNOW it's not the d-line making these tackles...that means we're depending more on our safeties right?



That can't be good.

CougarClaw wrote:
great post.



the scary thing of this...is if the linebackers aren't making the tackles...and we KNOW it's not the d-line making these tackles...that means we're depending more on our safeties right?



That can't be good.

I was thinking the same thing. I'd love to see a similar breakdown that lists each year and what percentage of tackles were by the d-line, what was by the LBs and what was done by the secondary.

It all starts in the middle with Bauman. Is he possibly the slowest guy on the field? I know he is probably a great leader, but he just is not that good. I know that he usually leads the team in tackles, but when does he really do it in a game changing manner? We've been spoiled with guys like Morris and Jensen. Let's recruit another nasty middle linebacker. When are Shay Muirbrook's kids going to be college age...

hawkwing wrote:

great post.



the scary thing of this...is if the linebackers aren't making the tackles...and we KNOW it's not the d-line making these tackles...that means we're depending more on our safeties right?



That can't be good.

I was thinking the same thing. I'd love to see a similar breakdown that lists each year and what percentage of tackles were by the d-line, what was by the LBs and what was done by the secondary.

Done.



2006- 13.6% of tackles were by the DL

2007- 19.2%

2008- 13.8%

2009- 18.59%



Why I emphasized our linebackers is that they are just as critical on the passing game as the running game. They need to make sure the 5 yard passes and dump offs to the RBs don't go for any additional yardage among other responsibilies.

In the TCU game, the D-line along with the other defensive players were not FIGHTING to get off the blocks. Same thing in the FSU game.



When BYU played against OU, they were doing just that, FIGHTING to get off the blocks.



Players can't just show up and think they will automatically win. I think in the losses to FSU and in the TCU game, it has to do with a bit of everything. From Players not showing up, to in-game adjustments, going for it on 4th down, maybe running a bit more of Unga to other intangibles.



Just my 2 cents. :twisted:

Greta post. The 3-4 is a linebacker driven defense. Bronco was smart to make the switch when he did, but the fact is, the guys we have now are not playmakers like those guys were in 2006-2007. Our LB core has probably one guy who would play with the 2006 core and that is Pendleton. The rest would sit, guaranteed. So the LB position is a huge issue.



Trouble is, we do not have the depth this year at D line to merit switching to a 4-3 either. So we are sort of stuck with what we have.



By the way, our secondary is awesome in run support. Great tacklers for the most part, FSU game excluded. huge upgrade from last year. On pass plays, well, I think they would be fine if we ever got pressure on the QB. When we do, they look good. When we get none they are sitting ducks and it shows.



Front 7 as a unit is down this year. Back 4 are solid. Put it this way--put this back 4 with the front 7 from 2006 and it would rank wit hthe best D's of all time at BYU.

Lawboy, your post seems to call for the 3-3-5. I have seen a few post this week calling for that switch. I remember when Bronco switched to the 3-4 he told the media that he was taking advantage of the talent which was at LB.... so if the talent is now in the backfield... maybe we should be playing an extra DB and pull the weakest LB?

wazzucoug97 wrote:
Lawboy, your post seems to call for the 3-3-5. I have seen a few post this week calling for that switch. I remember when Bronco switched to the 3-4 he told the media that he was taking advantage of the talent which was at LB.... so if the talent is now in the backfield... maybe we should be playing an extra DB and pull the weakest LB?

After the '05 season the Cougar Club had a little impromptu gathering with Bronco and Holmoe in Mesa. They were in Arizona for a little wine and dine sponsored by the Fiesta Bowl.



Anyway, I asked Bronco at that gathering if the switch to the 3-4 was permanent or if it didn't work this year he would go back to the 3-3-5. He said the 3-4 is pretty much here to say not only because of the type of athlete he had on the current roster, but also because that is the type of athlete he feels he can attract to BYU going forward.



Of course he could change his mind, but it is unlikely BYU will be running anything but a 3-4 anytime soon.

I am not calling for the 3-3-5 either, because that D requires 3 very good safeties, and we do not have depth there either. We did before Te'o left, but not sure now. I agree that BYU is best suited for the 3-4, but in year's past, we had some very good 4-3 defenses too. And as we can recruit good D-lineman and LB's typically, those are the best fits for BYU. Looking at the incoming guys from 2009 and 2010, we might have potential in a 4-3, if Peck and Kaufusi are as good on the outside as I hope they will be. But that is 3 years away.

I'd really prefer to see BYU switch to a 4-3. Our "d" has certainly not gotten any better under the 3-4.

bostoncoug wrote:
I'd really prefer to see BYU switch to a 4-3. Our "d" has certainly not gotten any better under the 3-4.

I would argue that it has. Although our D hasn't been stellar this year, two years ago we had one of the best defenses BYU has known in quite some time because we had strong linebackers and could have more of them on the field.

The 3-4 relies on 2 things to work well. The first is a NG position that disrupts, gets penetration and is tough to run on. I think from a run perspective, the NG has done pretty well. Not so much is the pass defense. The 2nd thing is LBs that fly around, cause havoc and make plays. And this year our LB position has not been up to par. At least not as good as 2007, when we had Kehl, Poppinga, Nixon anc co. Those guys were faster, more disruptive and made more plays than the current crew of LB's.



Think Pittsubrgh Steelers. Their NG is tough, their LBs are huge and fast, and then add Paulamoulu in the mix, and it explains why they are so good, even though the corners they have are average from an NFL perspective. Based upon this formula, and with the recruits coming in, I think this D will work well next year if the freshman perform. I think 2010 is going to be a rebuild year for sure.