My understanding of the Prevent Defense is that it is designed to not give up big plays, by keeping the receivers in front at all times. The defense is designed to make the offense make a number of plays to move the football thus eating up clock.
When NIU goes to its dime package Prevent it plays SOOO FAAARRR off the ball that the recievers catch the ball for 20 or 25 yards per clip thus earning first downs and stopping the clock. The prevent denfense should go the way of the dinasour....the phrase "prevent defense only prevents you from winning" is not some revolutionary epiphany. NIU does not, I repeat does not execute the prevent defense well in fact it is absolutely stomch churning to watch in action....ditch it and go back to the 4-3 at all times...like we saw on the final drive of the game...
Denny D has to go. I can understand why coach Novak would be reluctant to get rid of him when he has to deal with so much change with his coaching staff each and every year.
It does not matter much as this year or next year are very likely to be the end of the Novak era. I will miss him when he goes.
Your suppose to play a prevent defense when there are seconds left in the game not 5 minutes. The only thing our prevent philosophy prevents is us from winning.
For the life of me I can't figure out how we can give up 50 or 60 yards in 2 or 3 plays when we are running a defense whose sole purpose is to prevent such plays. We have seen it at least a handful of times already this year.
1.) The final 2 SIU touchdowns were scored in under 1 minute.
2.) EMU's score right before half went 50 yards in something like 35 seconds.
3.) The final 3 Idaho drives went for big play after big play...and the NIU defenders were playing each man with at least a 10 yard cushion.
Somebody please stop the beeding.
I stop by and quickly remember why I haven't been back in a while. Sheesh, pay attention, people.
This D is blitzing far more than the last few years. A prevent D, generally, is one that sits back in zone and doesn't attempt to put pressure on a QB - that was not the case in this game, but a lack of depth created some tired pass rushers late in the game, and thus a lack of pressure. When you blitz and don't get to the QB, you leave areas open, and Idaho found them late in the game.
HuskieDan Wrote:I stop by and quickly remember why I haven't been back in a while. Sheesh, pay attention, people.
This D is blitzing far more than the last few years. A prevent D, generally, is one that sits back in zone and doesn't attempt to put pressure on a QB - that was not the case in this game, but a lack of depth created some tired pass rushers late in the game, and thus a lack of pressure. When you blitz and don't get to the QB, you leave areas open, and Idaho found them late in the game.
Hi Dan,
I respectfully disagree...I was quite encouraged by the amount of blitz packages I wittnessed throughout this game. However, the final 2 drives bore witness to 3 or 4 man rushes and 7 or 8 defenders backed up well into the secondary....where the receives were given at least a 10 yard cushion. Thank you for honoring us with your prescene, but leave the patronizing, holier than thou comments on the main MAC board.
Huskie359 Wrote:HuskieDan Wrote:I stop by and quickly remember why I haven't been back in a while. Sheesh, pay attention, people.
This D is blitzing far more than the last few years. A prevent D, generally, is one that sits back in zone and doesn't attempt to put pressure on a QB - that was not the case in this game, but a lack of depth created some tired pass rushers late in the game, and thus a lack of pressure. When you blitz and don't get to the QB, you leave areas open, and Idaho found them late in the game.
Hi Dan,
I respectfully disagree...I was quite encouraged by the amount of blitz packages I wittnessed throughout this game. However, the final 2 drives bore witness to 3 or 4 man rushes and 7 or 8 defenders backed up well into the secondary....where the receives were given at least a 10 yard cushion. Thank you for honoring us with your prescene, but leave the patronizing, holier than thou comments on the main MAC board.
We blitzed late also, and they picked them up and found open guys in the vacated spots, just like you want your O to do. We disrupted them all game long with those blitzes, and it didn't work as well late.
Huskie359 Wrote:HuskieDan Wrote:I stop by and quickly remember why I haven't been back in a while. Sheesh, pay attention, people.
This D is blitzing far more than the last few years. A prevent D, generally, is one that sits back in zone and doesn't attempt to put pressure on a QB - that was not the case in this game, but a lack of depth created some tired pass rushers late in the game, and thus a lack of pressure. When you blitz and don't get to the QB, you leave areas open, and Idaho found them late in the game.
Hi Dan,
I respectfully disagree...I was quite encouraged by the amount of blitz packages I wittnessed throughout this game. However, the final 2 drives bore witness to 3 or 4 man rushes and 7 or 8 defenders backed up well into the secondary....where the receives were given at least a 10 yard cushion. Thank you for honoring us with your prescene, but leave the patronizing, holier than thou comments on the main MAC board.
and while in those packages NIU DROPPED two int's...
HuskieDan Wrote:Huskie359 Wrote:HuskieDan Wrote:I stop by and quickly remember why I haven't been back in a while. Sheesh, pay attention, people.
This D is blitzing far more than the last few years. A prevent D, generally, is one that sits back in zone and doesn't attempt to put pressure on a QB - that was not the case in this game, but a lack of depth created some tired pass rushers late in the game, and thus a lack of pressure. When you blitz and don't get to the QB, you leave areas open, and Idaho found them late in the game.
Hi Dan,
I respectfully disagree...I was quite encouraged by the amount of blitz packages I wittnessed throughout this game. However, the final 2 drives bore witness to 3 or 4 man rushes and 7 or 8 defenders backed up well into the secondary....where the receives were given at least a 10 yard cushion. Thank you for honoring us with your prescene, but leave the patronizing, holier than thou comments on the main MAC board.
We blitzed late also, and they picked them up and found open guys in the vacated spots, just like you want your O to do. We disrupted them all game long with those blitzes, and it didn't work as well late.
I am not disagreeing with you...there were many times when our blitzes were picked up and we got burnt, a couple of screen passes and one or two quick slants immediatly come to mind. ( I will go on record as saying I still like the aggressive play_....Anyway, the drive that is specifically etched in my mind was when the score was 42-28. We dropped back at least 7 on every play. I think the announcers even took notice and mentioned the spacing. I don't have a tape of the game to check but I am farily certain NIU was in an all-out prevent on that particular drive...
It wasn't until the ensuing drive following the on-side kick that we resumed our normal aggressive play that we witnessed throughout most of the game.
Scenario, opposing team is 4th and 4 yards for a first. the opposing team with the ball is losing big but is marching down the field just before halftime. There is about a minute on the clock before half and the ball is on your thirty + /- . The opposing team lines up in the shotgun and your corner is 15 yards off the #@$%#%^% ball. I hate that shtuff...............
The D blitzed a **** load tonight, and I didn't see us go in a prevent with the exception fo the 2nd to last drive.
7 Wrote:The D blitzed a **** load tonight, and I didn't see us go in a prevent with the exception fo the 2nd to last drive.
I for one loved the plethora of blitz packages we showcased tonight...my criticism in the execution of the blitzes was that I think our blitzers gave it away too soon many times tonight...maybe a bit of credit goes to the quarterback for altering or delaying his cadence. NIU will get better with the blitze...
Side note, wasn't it nice to see the Opposing QB placed under some pressure tonight???
To me, our biggest problem with our prevent is that we give up touchdowns. I'm cherrypicking here, but Toledo 2002, Akron 2005, and SIU two weeks ago are all examples of us playing a prevent, yet still letting guys get behind a four deep zone. Even forcing field goal tries (or better yet turnovers) are preferable.
The prevent was and always will be frustrating. However, tonight you have to say it worked. We kept the receivers in front of us. Unfortunately, given our experiences with it, we were playing the special olympics version which allowed 20 yard gains underneath. That's not really what the idea is, but 5 plays 60 yards in 2 minutes is still preferable to 1 play, eighty yards, 18 seconds.
The defense made Idaho take too much time to get their 35th point, provided we could fall on a f#^%*n' on-side kick (at which we are the worst team I've ever seen). We didn't, so we made them take another minute to go thirty yards and finally they crapped out on our twenty.
I wasn't happy. Believe me, I said many bad words listening to us play not to lose at the end. That leads to a lack of aggressiveness that will spell doom for a football team. Unfortunately, we've found ourselves trying to protect leads with a pretty one-dimensional offense. That means we can't move the chains and get that 7 minute meat-grinder drive that used to be our specialty.
With us 3rd down is a hope and prayer offense. Does anybody really feel confident in 3rd down situations that we have a shot at making first down? I sure as hell don't.
NIUbro Wrote:With us 3rd down is a hope and prayer offense. Does anybody really feel confident in 3rd down situations that we have a shot at making first down? I sure as hell don't.
No, because right now, I'm hoping to God we don't put it on the carpet or throw one that goes back the other way. Playing scared like that is not the way to play football. That's where this offense is right now. Hopefully, we will grow from here.
Our prevent D prevents us from winning.....
cawoo22 Wrote:To me, our biggest problem with our prevent is that we give up touchdowns. I'm cherrypicking here, but Toledo 2002, Akron 2005, and SIU two weeks ago are all examples of us playing a prevent, yet still letting guys get behind a four deep zone. Even forcing field goal tries (or better yet turnovers) are preferable.
The prevent was and always will be frustrating. However, tonight you have to say it worked. We kept the receivers in front of us. Unfortunately, given our experiences with it, we were playing the special olympics version which allowed 20 yard gains underneath. That's not really what the idea is, but 5 plays 60 yards in 2 minutes is still preferable to 1 play, eighty yards, 18 seconds.
The defense made Idaho take too much time to get their 35th point, provided we could fall on a f#^%*n' on-side kick (at which we are the worst team I've ever seen). We didn't, so we made them take another minute to go thirty yards and finally they crapped out on our twenty.
I wasn't happy. Believe me, I said many bad words listening to us play not to lose at the end. That leads to a lack of aggressiveness that will spell doom for a football team. Unfortunately, we've found ourselves trying to protect leads with a pretty one-dimensional offense. That means we can't move the chains and get that 7 minute meat-grinder drive that used to be our specialty.
Does the college rules that requires the clock to stop at every first down not make the prevent obsolete? Giving up a first down is almost akin now to spiking the ball. The rules of college football make the prevent a complete joke.
Huskie359 Wrote:cawoo22 Wrote:To me, our biggest problem with our prevent is that we give up touchdowns. I'm cherrypicking here, but Toledo 2002, Akron 2005, and SIU two weeks ago are all examples of us playing a prevent, yet still letting guys get behind a four deep zone. Even forcing field goal tries (or better yet turnovers) are preferable.
The prevent was and always will be frustrating. However, tonight you have to say it worked. We kept the receivers in front of us. Unfortunately, given our experiences with it, we were playing the special olympics version which allowed 20 yard gains underneath. That's not really what the idea is, but 5 plays 60 yards in 2 minutes is still preferable to 1 play, eighty yards, 18 seconds.
The defense made Idaho take too much time to get their 35th point, provided we could fall on a f#^%*n' on-side kick (at which we are the worst team I've ever seen). We didn't, so we made them take another minute to go thirty yards and finally they crapped out on our twenty.
I wasn't happy. Believe me, I said many bad words listening to us play not to lose at the end. That leads to a lack of aggressiveness that will spell doom for a football team. Unfortunately, we've found ourselves trying to protect leads with a pretty one-dimensional offense. That means we can't move the chains and get that 7 minute meat-grinder drive that used to be our specialty.
Does the college rules that requires the clock to stop at every first down not make the prevent obsolete? Giving up a first down is almost akin now to spiking the ball. The rules of college football make the prevent a complete joke.
Yeah, I can't argue with that logic. You just need to coach up your DBs to be smart about when to go for the INT, the kill shot, or just bring the guy down. From my point of view, though, the DBs are the dumbest ba$#ards on the planet, so it doesn't shock me that they constantly screw this up.
NIUbro Wrote:Our prevent D prevents us from winning.....
News flash - we won tonight.
HuskieDan Wrote:NIUbro Wrote:Our prevent D prevents us from winning.....
News flash - we won tonight.
Newsflash 2 - We were damn lucky.