Which will be true of our defense this year?

A few thoughts -



I thought our D-line looked great, and I starting to wonder if we could trade in "Quarterback U" back to Miami and start sharing "Linebacker U" with Penn State.



I don't think Ol' Miss really gave our secondary any true test. I fear our secondary may not be the strongest, but I'm hoping that the guys up front can put enough pressure on the QB that doesn't become a glaring weakness.



I don't think I can completely trust a BYU defense in the early season after the 2008 10-quarter shutout of UCLA, Wyoming and Utah State. Our D just went to pieces after that.

Went with C. Run D was better than awesome, but I am more than "a little concerned about the safety/DB play."

C. But what is new. We knew backfield would be leasat experienced.

AND, their 3rd string qb and their weakest component of their O, the passing game-- did pretty dang good against our #1 Dbackfield.



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

The back field really concerns me. At times they made Stoudt look like an All American. Was perplexed why Ole Miss didn't go to the air more because we sure weren't covering them well and if it weren't for our LBs and DBs breaking through and putting pressure on the QB it would have been a long 2nd half.

Stoudt never looked like an All-American. He had two or three nice plays before the half when they went no-huddle, hurry up. He was mediocre after that.



Our OLBs will continue to put pressure on opposing offenses.



Ole Miss returned 77 OL starts, which is twice as many as Texas, and 15 more than Utah. Our DL and OLBs tore their supposed strength to shreds. Good cover guys in the defensive backfield aren't what's most important to a good pass defense. It's a good front seven that can get a consistent and fierce pass rush.

Gunk wrote:
The back field really concerns me. At times they made Stoudt look like an All American. Was perplexed why Ole Miss didn't go to the air more because we sure weren't covering them well and if it weren't for our LBs and DBs breaking through and putting pressure on the QB it would have been a long 2nd half.

If they started going to the air more, BYU's defense would have scored more TDs! :evil:

SpiffCoug wrote:



Our OLBs will continue to put pressure on opposing offenses.



Ole Miss returned 77 OL starts, which is twice as many as Texas, and 15 more than Utah. Our DL and OLBs tore their supposed strength to shreds.

Naw, Ole Miss' o-line just stinks, that's why BYU's D looked good.



Kitic, it's fine to admit that the other team was good/decent/challenging, and it makes BYU look like they actually accomplished something. I find it more sportsmanlike to just say that while Ole Miss' line was big, strong and powerful but BYU's D was simply overpowering. BYU does beat good teams too. ;)

Guys, Bronco had NO film to work with on this team's offense. The starting QB was not a throwing threat. Bronco had to re write the game plan after they put in a throwing QB and once he had that in place, BYU's defense played the pass pretty well. Don't panic, our defense is going to be scary good.

frdbtr wrote:
Guys, Bronco had NO film to work with on this team's offense. The starting QB was not a throwing threat. Bronco had to re write the game plan after they put in a throwing QB and once he had that in place, BYU's defense played the pass pretty well. Don't panic, our defense is going to be scary good.

totally agree. While watching the game, I was much more excited, and comfortable, with the defense on the field.



And we might as well just get used to a big play happening every once in a while. Does anyone completely shut down the big plays?

declocoug wrote:

Guys, Bronco had NO film to work with on this team's offense. The starting QB was not a throwing threat. Bronco had to re write the game plan after they put in a throwing QB and once he had that in place, BYU's defense played the pass pretty well. Don't panic, our defense is going to be scary good.

totally agree. While watching the game, I was much more excited, and comfortable, with the defense on the field.



And we might as well just get used to a big play happening every once in a while. Does anyone completely shut down the big plays?

Agreed and good point. But I would ask, do you think BYU has big play potential to counter with? I haven't seen any signs of that since Collie left. If Heaps can't figure out his long ball accuracy then we'd better not let teams make big plays or the game will be quickly over.

Hoffman/Heaps had some big time connections, but I haven't seen anything like that unless we are playing a team with a losing record. :(

declocoug wrote:
Hoffman/Heaps had some big time connections, but I haven't seen anything like that unless we are playing a team with a losing record. :(

True.



Without getting into the "our offense improved/our opponents worsened" debate regarding last year, I do think it's worth pointing out that in the past, bad teams made up a big chunk of our schedule. It was non-conference play, the other two of the "big three" and whatever member of the MWC happened to have an up year, like AFA. A 7-5 or even 8-4 MWC team still generally had less than stellar defense.* Heaps may not have the same chance to air it out and pad the stats like pretty much all of the early greats had.



Back in the day, our offense had 7 or 8 opportunities to post pinball numbers and deep plays. This year we've got the WAC teams, and maybe not even all of them. Hawaii was a blitz machine last night. I'm not sure Heaps, or any of his successors, should necessarily be judged by that rubric.



(*I feel like I'm buying into all the lame BCS arguments that "non-AQ" competition = a significant drop off, but in terms of defense I think it's sort of true. AF was always supposed to have this vaunted pass defense, and until last year we always carved it up.)