4 man front to 3 man front & now back to a 4 man front

[WhyNotaSooner]

I'm not sure if Mike Stoops doesn't know what to do or if he's been changing his defenses to fit what he believes are the strengths of his players. Either way, the Sooners defense will be learning & playing another new defensive scheme in 2015.

Four man defensive front is back

 

[Plainosooner]

Not a big surprise. I think one of the reasons they used a three man was because of a monster nose tackle. Problem was, Phillips was only disruptive ten times a game. I think they saw other teams defending the pass better with a four man front and since that is what Mike and Bob know better, it made sense to teach what they do best.

It may be a little different than what they've done in the past, but if they're playing Striker at defensive end, where he is really most effective, then it's not that much different than last year's three man front. I think they thought they could make him more effective as a pass rusher if the other guys didn't know when he was coming. But it wasn't nearly as well disguised as they'd hoped. He is best, lining up on the LOS and beating a tackle with his quickness. He seemed much less effective last season.

I suspect the individual techniques won't change much. But especially since Bob's offensive theme was to go back to where they started with the spread, it's not surprising that they are doing the same thing on defense. I believe we'll be better. And we'll still do some three man line stuff.12 years ago, when we had Dan Cody and Jonathan Jackson playing defensive end, those guys were dropping into coverage some, and Cody was playing occasionally at something they called a Spinner. So it's not like we'll always line four up and bring them every play.

But it only makes sense that you can get a better pass rush from lining up four big guys and telling them: "Sik em." I think we're better off in a four man front, and that a lot of the reason we were more successful with three in 2013 was that nobody spent the off season preparing for us to do what we were doing. Last year, they seemed to know.

 

[roygbell]

Scheme won't make a bit of difference unless we have some DL folks who can get some pressure and some DBs who can cover along with some LBers who can plug some holes in the opposition running game. Otherwise, Riley will just have to outscore out opponents.

 

[WhyNotaSooner]

Originally posted by roygbell:
Scheme won't make a bit of difference unless we have some DL folks who can get some pressure and some DBs who can cover along with some LBers who can plug some holes in the opposition running game. Otherwise, Riley will just have to outscore out opponents.

I think this is the plan for 2015. Averaging 45+ pts/game maybe needed.

 

[Plainosooner]

We averaged. 44.5 my junior year. It's doable.

 

[Soonersincefitty]

I believe it's doable too.

It seems the 'new think' is, with the prolific offenses everyone faces, holding someone to 21 or less points a game is an exercise in futility.
Ergo, overcome, circumvent this by making your offense more prolific than the other guys. IMO

 

[Plainosooner]

Unless you control the ball and the clock, you are not going to outscore Baylor scoring 30 ormaybe even 35. At least not down there.

Michigan St is known for their defense and they needed 42 to win by a point. AndBriles thought they got a little help from an odd face mask penalty. Right call.

But in conference games, those calls only seemed to go against them in Morgantown. And maybe Austin.

 

[BillyRay]

Originally posted by WhyNotaSooner:
I'm not sure if Mike Stoops doesn't know what to do or if he's been changing his defenses to fit what he believes are the strengths of his players. Either way, the Sooners defense will be learning & playing another new defensive scheme in 2015.

I think it has all the indications of being completely disfunctional. The thing that confuses me is whether the 1999-2003, or the current version of Mike Stoops is the real Mike Stoops??

 

[Plainosooner]

Mike is the same DC he always was. But in 1999 through 2003, the only time he had to face a spread offense was in practice. Mike's defense was always great when he could account for every gap and have disciplined defenders learning how to do that.

But with a spread, there is one gap that you cannot account for and that changes everything. And even defending a spread team with not much run threat at quarterback, they still, if they have great speed, have the ability to make you put so many defenders in the back half that you still cannot account for every gap.

One gap defenders have a totally different technique than two gap defenders. And offenses these days can exploit knowing which gap isn't accounted for. The only way to play great defense these days, is to have dominating DLinemen who require lots of extra attention. Maybe three or four, and you can put the offense in a bind. But how many dominating DLinemen have we put out there in the last three years? And how many guys can play that many snaps.

TCU had a terrific defense last season. Baylor put up 61 on them, including three scores in the last five minutes. Some offenses are just hard to defense, no matter how good your defense is, if they are talented at quarterback and have enough speed on the wings to back you're corners off. Makes it really tough to stop their run, three man, four man or howevermany men you have on the front half.

 

[sooner_mike]

Originally posted by Plainosooner:
Mike is the same DC he always was. But in 1999 through 2003, the only time he had to face a spread offense was in practice. Mike's defense was always great when he could account for every gap and have disciplined defenders learning how to do that.

But with a spread, there is one gap that you cannot account for and that changes everything. And even defending a spread team with not much run threat at quarterback, they still, if they have great speed, have the ability to make you put so many defenders in the back half that you still cannot account for every gap.

One gap defenders have a totally different technique than two gap defenders. And offenses these days can exploit knowing which gap isn't accounted for. The only way to play great defense these days, is to have dominating DLinemen who require lots of extra attention. Maybe three or four, and you can put the offense in a bind. But how many dominating DLinemen have we put out there in the last three years? And how many guys can play that many snaps.

TCU had a terrific defense last season. Baylor put up 61 on them, including three scores in the last five minutes. Some offenses are just hard to defense, no matter how good your defense is, if they are talented at quarterback and have enough speed on the wings to back you're corners off. Makes it really tough to stop their run, three man, four man or howevermany men you have on the front half.

Very good post, this is spot on. There is a way to defend Baylor, might be risky...you have to get in their QB's face all game. Swat balls, knock him down, and sack him. For the love of Jesus take away the 3 to 7 yard passes away. OU used to do this to Tech regularly.

 

[BillyRay]

Plaino, you bring up Baylor. Go back and watch the OU/Baylor game and how could you not walk away from that game without the word dysfunctional in your head when describing the OU defense? Particularly the 2nd half. I really think Mike is simply scared and unsure about what to do. Sure Baylor is going to have games and times when they put up tremendous numbers. But OUs defense looked bad in more games than just the Baylor game. Sorry, but this is NOT the same Mike from 1999-2003.

 

[Plainosooner]

I don't agree. Baylor's offense scored 40 on OUr defense, on a day when OUr offense sucked. You're yelling at the wrong co-ordinator. OUr quarterback wasn't very good. OUr receivers were worse.

But mostly, Baylor is a thug team that commits a lot of penalties, but that day, the officials couldn't see them. The same team that got called in Morgantown for over 200 yards in penalties, earning every one of them, and who led the country in penalties, got call for no personal fouls and only one ten yarder. That included a late hit dirty play that paralyzed our quarterback. No call.

When Baylor plays dirty, that's Baylor being Baylor. When Baylor doesn't get called for it, it's hard to beat them. I would have thought they were wearing burnt orange. We were also dealing with not having Sterling. And had a bunch of untimely mistakes.

You guys keep complaining about the cushion that the corners were giving, but if we'd have been up on them and having them run by us for easy scores, then you'd have complained about that.

OUr offense put OUr D in an impossible situation. I personally think that Petty is the best pro prospect in this draft. We'll see.

TCU scored 58 on Baylor in Waco and lost. We scored 14, with nothing after the first quarter. Against Baylor, you'd better control the ball and score points. We did neither.

 

[Soonersincefitty]

Well, I don't know about that.
I think it's the same Mike.

The difference is Mike, the first go around had some bad ass defenses that naturally come in the wake of winning a national title. (2000)

So clearly, all this program has to do is win another natty title and we're off and running again.

 

[BillyRay]

Plaino you just proved my point. Go back and watch the game and tell me that Baylor couldn't have scored 60 or 70 that day. Baylor pull the foot off the gas on the 2nd half. OUs offense never had a prayer in the game because Mikes defense couldn't get off the field unless Baylor dragged it's feet and let it. So yes, I'm blaming the correct coordinator. The fact you want to blame it on the offense makes me wonder if you even watched the game.

And please don't start going down the road in blaming other teams of being thugs or getting away with penalties to win. Those things had absolutely no factor in the beating Baylor gave OU.

 

[Plainosooner]

We didn't score after the first quarter and you're blaming the defense. Makes perfect sense. After the first quarter, the Bears scored more points when OUr offense had the ball than we did. That is not the fault of our defense. They never got a rest, because OUr offense made like four first downs after the first quarter.

We were missing key guys. But mostly OUr quarterbacks and OUr receivers didn't play worth a darn. And that is not Mike's fault.

 

[BillyRay]

Originally posted by Plainosooner:

We didn't score after the first quarter and you're blaming the defense.

Yes I am. I'm not saying the offense played perfect or didn't deserve criticism. There was plenty of criticism to go around on both sides of the ball for the entire season. But seriously, if you watched the game it's amazing how you can actually lean more towards blaming the offense, rather than the defense. There was NO WAY the offense was going to outscore Baylor that day. None.

 

[CTOkie]

OU's offense, even with all of its issues last season, still scored 30 or more points is 11 of its 13 games, except the Baylor and Clemson games. In those two games, OU's offense would not have been enough even if it had scored its 38 point season average.
My observation was that the defense was more problematic yielding an average of 38 points per game in the team's 5 defeats.....and it was not that good even in the games won.
This team plays poorly on defense in a not-so-strong conference. It's my hope that Coach Mike has learned from his mistakes and can turn things around....but until he does I think he's very overrated, to say the least.

 

[Jaaa]

WVU didn't beat Baylor because of penalties. They harassed Petty all night and locked up tight on the wides. Our plan against Baylor last year reminded me of when Jerry's Cowboys went to Miami to play Jimmy' s fish in his first or second year there. Aikman/Irvin played catch on 7 yard outs all night because Jimmy played off.

If you can't knock Baylor's wides off their routes you are done for.

 

[bcsoonerfan]

Good. Mike needs to get back to what he knows. We never looked sure of what we were doing in the 3-4. Outside of Phillips, I never thought we had the guys to run the 3-4.