Defensive Scheme

[bcsoonerfan]

I'm just spit balling here folks and I'd like to hear some feedback for both my thoughts and your rebuttals, agreements, whatever.

For starters, I'm just not a fan of this '3 down lineman' front. I've rarely seen us control the line of scrimmage since its implementation. I've mentioned it a few times or more here, but when speaking with friends who follow the Sooners, this is usually a subject I harp on. I don't like it. I feel like it's where are short comings start on defense. I think we need to return to a true 4 down front.

To continue on this scheme, does anybody else think we're running this hybrid 3-4/3-3 front because of our personnel (Striker, Bond type linebackers) or because the staff thinks it's best suited to combat the spread offenses of the Big XII? I feel like Mike and Bob are out of their wheelhouse with this defense as compared to their traditional zone blitzing nickel. I understand we've got a lot of guys that can play on the back 7, but it seems to me we aren't getting to the quarterback unless it's via Striker.

I would really like to see a rotation of Walker/Romar/Wade inside and 2 true defensive ends on the outside. I know that puts another linebacker or defensive back on the sideline, but an extra big body at the point of attack would help with holding the line and penetrating without blitzing.

Any thoughts? This is something that had me frustrated yesterday as Texas ran at will on us and the coaches refused to put another big body up front.

 

[veritas59]

Heck if I know, BC, but I'm much more concerned about the offense. We won't win many games in the B12 with 17 points. The o-line play has been poor all year, and Mayfield is a little slow with his decision making. Before yesterday, he made a lot of plays after things broke down.... but against lesser athletes. Yesterday, against better talent, reality came crashing down.

 

[bcsoonerfan]

Can't argue with that V. It's just been on my mind for the last couple seasons. I'd like to see Mike give it one more crack with his old, aggressive nickel that he brought in 99.

The offensive line is disappointing but Bedenbaugh's track record suggests this won't be the norm. The defense though, looks like a mish mash of 3 different schemes, and we lack an identity.

 

[BillyRay]

bc, I totally agree with your idea about putting another DB or linebacker on the sidelines for what happened yesterday. But it might not be best suited when playing spread/air raid type offenses. Yesterday Texas simply came out and attacked OUs defense since they found out it's pretty soft. Oddly enough, Damien Mackey made a comment last week over on the pay board about how "soft" the middle part of OUs defense seemed to be, and it was glaringly obvious yesterday and all day long I couldn't help but keep thinking about how spot on Mackey was with his post.

But I'm with veritas in that I'm not putting yesterday on Mike and the defense. I know everyone loves to pile on Mike Stoops. But I'm not going to....not today. The defense no doubt could have been better, but in the end they held Texas to 24 points. The OL yesterday was absolutely horrendous. The OL is the engine that makes the entire offense go. And Texas exploited OUs awful OL all day long. It really was painful and embarrassing to watch. And I know OUs OL was gonna be a rebuilding job this year, and most will hang their hats on how young and inexperienced they are. Well hell....Nila, Ty, and St. John are all Seniors and they got their asses whipped all day long. So we cant' just sit back and blame that horrible performance on freshman or kids that have no playing time.

 

[bcsoonerfan]

Don' get me wrong, I'm not harping on the defense because of yesterday. I've held this opinion for some time now. It just so happens that I decided to share this afternoon.

Yes, yesterday it certainly would've made sense to put another hand in the dirt more so than against the likes of Baylor, but in general I'm just envisioning the early days of Mike's defenses. I know the league wasn't as explosive then, but I still recall dominating Mike Leach's spread attacks.

Texas used a 4 man front with blitzes and did a nice job shutting down our spread/air raid offense. Our defenses used to control the tempo and force offenses to try and get the ball out fast by using press coverage and zone blitzes.

It really has more to do with me wondering if Mike and Bob are just grasping at straws with this hybrid defense.

 

[BillyRay]

Yes, yesterday it certainly would've made sense to put another hand in the dirt more so than against the likes of Baylor, but in general I'm just envisioning the early days of Mike's defenses. I know the league wasn't as explosive then, but I still recall dominating Mike Leach's spread attacks.

Texas used a 4 man front with blitzes and did a nice job shutting down our spread/air raid offense. Our defenses used to control the tempo and force offenses to try and get the ball out fast by using press coverage and zone blitzes.

It really has more to do with me wondering if Mike and Bob are just grasping at straws with this hybrid defense.

Ya no doubt Mike had a lot of success shutting down Leach and TTech all those years ago running a spread offense. I'm definitely not a football genius, so I'm no sure what is different nowadays with these offenses compared to what OU was so successful at shutting down back then. I've always thought the key to stopping teams like Baylor these days is get pressure on the QB. Man Texas put on a clinic yesterday in how effectively you can shut down an air raid offense if you can get consistent pressure on the QB. But it may not be as effective as you get to teams like TCU or Baylor whom have a much better OL to compensate.
But ya your point is very well taken in wondering if this hybrid defense is really the way to go. It definitely has a feeling of Bob and Mike "learning as they go" as opposed to those great defenses we saw back in the day against those potent offenses Leach trotted out on the field.

 

[barkingwater2000]

Ya no doubt Mike had a lot of success shutting down Leach and TTech all those years ago running a spread offense. I'm definitely not a football genius, so I'm no sure what is different nowadays with these offenses compared to what OU was so successful at shutting down back then. I've always thought the key to stopping teams like Baylor these days is get pressure on the QB. Man Texas put on a clinic yesterday in how effectively you can shut down an air raid offense if you can get consistent pressure on the QB. But it may not be as effective as you get to teams like TCU or Baylor whom have a much better OL to compensate.
But ya your point is very well taken in wondering if this hybrid defense is really the way to go. It definitely has a feeling of Bob and Mike "learning as they go" as opposed to those great defenses we saw back in the day against those potent offenses Leach trotted out on the field.

BR in my opinion yesterday's loss boiled down to two things.......oline and tackling.

 

[bcsoonerfan]

There is risk in what Mike used to run, but IMO it is a risk you have to take in today's high scoring football. You're basically saying, "my 5-7 rushers are going to get to your QB before you're receivers can beat my DBs". It takes a confidence that I feel we lack in our DBs these days. You basically force a team to beat you over the top all game long if they want to score.

 

[Phaeded]

UT had what, 55 yards passing? Going in we knew we had one goal on D: contain Heard. The only wrinkle Mike did was to put in a LB in Lindley who is not fast enough to chase down Heard - there should have been another strong safety inserted to shadow Heard (hell, that should been Striker's sole assignment).

Mike has outlived his usefulness to OU - and if you think he muffed the most simple of tasks in Dallas, wait until we hit Waco where his bobble-headed brain will be overloaded before the second quarter.

 

[SoonerTulsan]

UT had what, 55 yards passing? Going in we knew we had one goal on D: contain Heard. The only wrinkle Mike did was to put in a LB in Lindley who is not fast enough to chase down Heard - there should have been another strong safety inserted to shadow Heard (hell, that should been Striker's sole assignment).

Mike has outlived his usefulness to OU - and if you think he muffed the most simple of tasks in Dallas, wait until we hit Waco where his bobble-headed brain will be overloaded before the second quarter.

I couldn't understand why Coach Mike couldn't swallow his pride and use a "spy" for Heard...and load the box and force him to throw. Lindley played because Bond was hurt.

We also need our new OC to realize that Perine is a North-South runner. He's an I-back...not a spread or zone read back.

 

[Phaeded]

I couldn't understand why Coach Mike couldn't swallow his pride and use a "spy" for Heard...and load the box and force him to throw. Lindley played because Bond was hurt.

I get that Bond was out, but did that mean we had to find the closest semblance to him (in Lindley)? The problem before us was not a Bama power running game but an elusive scatback of a QB...we needed more speed on the field, not muscle. Bond being hurt should have been a Godsend in forcing Mike into using a more mobile defender on the field, but ol' Mike outwitted the Godsend. At some point you would hope Bob would start over-riding this stupidity...but he'snot.

 

[SoonerTulsan]

I get that Bond was out, but did that mean we had to find the closest semblance to him (in Lindley)? The problem before us was not a Bama power running game but an elusive scatback of a QB...we needed more speed on the field, not muscle. Bond being hurt should have been a Godsend in forcing Mike into using a more mobile defender on the field, but ol' Mike outwitted the Godsend. At some point you would hope Bob would start over-riding this stupidity...but he'snot.

I STILL think our biggest weakness on D is at LB...especially MLB. Been missing a leader on the field since Lewis got hurt before the RRS.

 

[K2C Sooner]

I STILL think our biggest weakness on D is at LB...especially MLB. Been missing a leader on the field since Lewis got hurt before the RRS.

Did Frank Shannon see the field? Not that I completely agree with you, but it's strange FS isn't playing.

I personally like our linebackers. What I don't like is our safeties 18 yards deep when it was obvious Texas wasn't going to throw. The safeties were never a factor in the game. Hell, they blew the 81 yard TD run by Foreman and the touchy tackling on the first TD made,

Yes, I know Lindley got beat, but safeties your up next.

 

[SoonerTulsan]

Did Frank Shannon see the field? Not that I completely agree with you, but it's strange FS isn't playing.

I personally like our linebackers. What I don't like is our safeties 18 yards deep when it was obvious Texas wasn't going to throw. The safeties were never a factor in the game. Hell, they blew the 81 yard TD run by Foreman and the touchy tackling on the first TD made,

Yes, I know Lindley got beat, but safeties your up next.

Personally, I think we're missing leadership. Alexander isn't the guy. STILL tends to take 2 steps towards the line when the ball is snapped...before seeing where the ball is going too.

 

[bcsoonerfan]

I'd like to see us be more physical. Make opposing offenses bend to our will.

 

[wadster]

A Gerald McCoy type DTackle would fix the scheme problems. How many tackles did OU actually make in the Texas backfield? JGray didn't get much per average, but usually got 3 on first down so Heard rarely faced 2nd and very long.

 

[runningback43]

Our problems on both sides of the ball are in the trenches. We don't have any dominant defensive tackles and our offensive line is bad as well. Until we get some players that are dominant inside, we will have trouble beating teams. Need to find the next Gerald McCoy, Tommie Harris on defense.

 

[JConXtsy]

Personally, I think we're missing leadership. Alexander isn't the guy. STILL tends to take 2 steps towards the line when the ball is snapped...before seeing where the ball is going too.

This is what I was seeing as well. Not just Alexander. It seemed like all of the linebackers were coming up too much after the snap. The next thing you know, they were all blocked. Many times, it looked like their sole mission was to run up to the LOS and get themselves locked with a blocker. I didn't get it.

 

[rkhufu7]

The 3-4 with DB sized LBs will not work and isn't working as PREDICTED!!! Stanford, Michigan, Bama and others run 3-4s with 240-60 lb LBs and note Stanford has success with big LBs versus the Oregon and USC hurry-up offenses as well as Cal and WSU. The small LBs is a weakness in this defense, 3-3-5, 30 stack or whatever, front is not good enough.

 

[runningback43]

The 3-4 with DB sized LBs will not work and isn't working as PREDICTED!!! Stanford, Michigan, Bama and others run 3-4s with 240-60 lb LBs and note Stanford has success with big LBs versus the Oregon and USC hurry-up offenses as well as Cal and WSU. The small LBs is a weakness in this defense, 3-3-5, 30 stack or whatever, front is not good enough.

I agree. Sure would be nice to have bigger outside LBers. They would be more effective against the run and still be good in pass rush or coverage. Our linebackers are the size of safeties at some schools.

 

[SoonerTulsan]

This is what I was seeing as well. Not just Alexander. It seemed like all of the linebackers were coming up too much after the snap. The next thing you know, they were all blocked. Many times, it looked like their sole mission was to run up to the LOS and get themselves locked with a blocker. I didn't get it.

Shannon was the last LB I noticed that was more "disciplined". Still not sure why he's not on the field...must be some "other" issue.

Also, to me, leadership is huge. Haven't truly had that since Travis Lewis. Guys like Box, Reynolds, Calmus, Marshall...

 

[Plainosooner]

I'm just spit balling here folks and I'd like to hear some feedback for both my thoughts and your rebuttals, agreements, whatever.

For starters, I'm just not a fan of this '3 down lineman' front. I've rarely seen us control the line of scrimmage since its implementation. I've mentioned it a few times or more here, but when speaking with friends who follow the Sooners, this is usually a subject I harp on. I don't like it. I feel like it's where are short comings start on defense. I think we need to return to a true 4 down front.

To continue on this scheme, does anybody else think we're running this hybrid 3-4/3-3 front because of our personnel (Striker, Bond type linebackers) or because the staff thinks it's best suited to combat the spread offenses of the Big XII? I feel like Mike and Bob are out of their wheelhouse with this defense as compared to their traditional zone blitzing nickel. I understand we've got a lot of guys that can play on the back 7, but it seems to me we aren't getting to the quarterback unless it's via Striker.

I would really like to see a rotation of Walker/Romar/Wade inside and 2 true defensive ends on the outside. I know that puts another linebacker or defensive back on the sideline, but an extra big body at the point of attack would help with holding the line and penetrating without blitzing.

Any thoughts? This is something that had me frustrated yesterday as Texas ran at will on us and the coaches refused to put another big body up front.

The 3-4 seems to work a whole lot better when 23 AND 19 are both healthy and contributing. If they're not, then the 4-3 seems to be a better fit to personnel, though I thought Lindley didn't suck for the most part on Saturday.