This was a very good team we faced yesterday. Only Towson may be as talented at the pass game, and we held Nova to the fewest points they have had this year.

Yes, secondary needs to continue to improve, but there is time for this before the playoffs. The good thing is that they stepped up in the 4th quarter when it was critical, and this is a team that digs down and finds a way to win. As the players noted in the post game, last year they wouldn’t have responded to adversity this way. They credited Cigs “never too high, never too low” philosophy.

The ONLY coaches I would consider “bringing back” are Trott, and perhaps our old DB coach Corico Wright (Furman is having a good year). Its way too early for this evaluation though, thus far we have zero FCS losses, and the team looks improved overall from last year.

Also keep in mind with the defense getting torched in the air they were without Amos most of the game and Robinson has been banged up and a shell of himself. They couldn’t blitz everybody all game and hang out our second string DBs with no help.

I don’t see an issue with the coaching staff. Our teams weakness is the secondary. Teams are exploiting that weakness as they should. That group will need to improve and I am sure they are working hard to do so.

The coaches see what everyone else sees. They are not ignoring it or failing to make adjustments. The players at those positions are just getting beat.

Like everyone else, I was worried yesterday. Then the tide turned very quickly and JMU scored 21 in a row. Kudos to the players and coaches for toughing out a big win against an undefeated #5 ranked team.

On to W&M who will be ready to pull the upset and derail our season.

(10-13-2019 08:16 AM)JMUDukes1750 Wrote:  Do people not remember that Bob Trott's defense wasn't very good until mid-November of his first year?

Yep, teams always develop thru the season, and a new staff/system add to the players learning curves. Take a look at ECU, even with 80% of our old staff, they have a LONG ways to go to be respectable. Wins over Gardner Webb, W&M, and eeked out a W at Oduh.

(10-13-2019 08:03 AM)#YEEHAWDUKES Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 07:59 AM)JMU1987UVA1998 Wrote:  Heatherton is no Bob Trott. Granted experience comes with age. Our defensive backs got torched for three quarters of the game then something clicked. Don't know whether adjustments were made or we just got lucky and put more pressure on Smith.

At one point after the two easy scoring drives in the 3rd Quarter, I made the foolish statement out loud of "Bring back Withers". You could have heard a pin drop in the two sections near us. I could almost hear people thinking "damn he didn't say that did he". One guy bailed me out by saying "Bring back Mickey".

We have got to adjust more quickly. We all need to say a prayers for a win yesterday because I didn't see it happening going into the 4th Quarter.

How drunk were you

Only two IPAs while tailgating before the game and not as drunk as our president who you've got a pic of with that black Cowboy hat on.

Giants defensive backs are just as bad as ours. When your family says "we didn't say it" you know you might have made a stupid statement.

(10-13-2019 08:16 AM)JMUDukes1750 Wrote:  Do people not remember that Bob Trott's defense wasn't very good until mid-November of his first year?

Seems pretty clear they don't.

Halftime of the Villanova game that year. I'm in a concession line, and I see I'm standing next to the dad of one of our defensive starters. We start chatting, and he says he sure hopes our QB is going to be able to come back for the second half. I broke it to him that Schor HAD come back to the sideline, with his pads off and his arm in a sling. I'll never forget the expession, heck the body language, of the father of a defensive starter. It was entirely consistent with what pretty much all of us were thinking, which was that we hadn't seen a lot to tell us we could win a game leaning on our defense (and hadn't seen it in years).

Of course the D stepped up big time and kept it up until the season was over and the team was lifting a trophy. And while we're reminding folks of things they have forgotten, Villanova was our next to last regular season game that year.

(10-12-2019 09:47 PM)Purple Wrote:  When Smith had all day to throw, we got waxed. When we were in his face, he threw air balls or picks. That's all I know.

I agree with stopping man coverage deep. We were getting killed there.

There are solutions to this - use a 6-man zone (4 under 2 deep), rush 5 men (including linebackers) and use a DE to cover one of the flat zones. Most offenses account for the DL and 1 LB at most. Rushing 2 LBs makes them think blitz, one OL is busy watching a DE who isn't rushing but is instead taking away the flat, and you have help on deep zones.

It's not a tremendous change, as far as defensive assignments go, if you're used to playing a zone at all, and it gives you a chance to apply heavy, disruptive pass pressure and limit your weaknesses deep. You're susceptible to bigger gains in the flat, but on 1st and 3rd down that's an acceptable tradeoff.

You can do a similar thing by only rushing 4 and having either a 3-deep or Tampa 2 zone. Tampa 2 is also very useful at stopping seam routes and limits your weaknesses on draw/screen plays by having a linebacker at middle depth rather than safety depth.

(10-13-2019 02:42 PM)94computerguy Wrote:  

(10-12-2019 09:47 PM)Purple Wrote:  When Smith had all day to throw, we got waxed. When we were in his face, he threw air balls or picks. That's all I know.

I agree with stopping man coverage deep. We were getting killed there.

There are solutions to this - use a 6-man zone (4 under 2 deep), rush 5 men (including linebackers) and use a DE to cover one of the flat zones. Most offenses account for the DL and 1 LB at most. Rushing 2 LBs makes them think blitz, one OL is busy watching a DE who isn't rushing but is instead taking away the flat, and you have help on deep zones.

It's not a tremendous change, as far as defensive assignments go, if you're used to playing a zone at all, and it gives you a chance to apply heavy, disruptive pass pressure and limit your weaknesses deep. You're susceptible to bigger gains in the flat, but on 1st and 3rd down that's an acceptable tradeoff.

You can do a similar thing by only rushing 4 and having either a 3-deep or Tampa 2 zone. Tampa 2 is also very useful at stopping seam routes and limits your weaknesses on draw/screen plays by having a linebacker at middle depth rather than safety depth.

That sounds great, at least worth trying. Didn't Lou Holtz used to run a defense that sometimes dropped smallish, fast D-linemen like Daka into coverage while rushing linebackers, confusing the O-linemen and giving the backers clear lanes to the backfield?

(10-12-2019 06:43 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  Maybe that 4th quarter is what turns this season around for this secondary. Need to start playing with more confidence.

This is what I'm hoping for. Defense stepped up big when it mattered most and when things looked their worst, maybe this will be a turning point just like Villanova was in 2016.

(10-12-2019 08:06 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  Secondary is a clear weakness at this point- Robinson isn’t the same player yet and gets burned one on one a lot. JMU tried to blitz from the outside (corner)but Nova picked it up. Our only real pressure came from the front four and when JMU blitzed it compromised our already porous pass defense.

Yeah Robinson has been getting burned much more than you would expect from him. Just before his pick, Hampton made a big play and almost got his second pick helping deep but I said to everyone around me "man, Rashad got torched that play." Then he goes and gets a pick the very next play. He was getting burnt against WVU too and I was hoping it was just rustiness since he's one guy I'd expect to have no problem stepping up to P5 competition. Now I'm wondering whether he lost a step with his injury or if he just quickly went from rusty to banged up. Hopefully the latter obviously, maybe the bye week will be a big help as long as he can get through these next couple games without anything new.

Have we shown any zone at all this year? I'm not trying to chart every play but whenever I look it appears we are always playing man. Sometimes there is a CB blitz called with a LB or safety rolling over to cover, but it's still man. If zone coverage is not something we've worked on, I'm not sure how realistic it is to try and plug it in mid way through the season. I feel like that's way more complicated in terms of having everyone on the same page. I could see going from zone to trying man, but the other way seems harder to do.

(10-13-2019 09:15 PM)DooX Wrote:  Have we shown any zone at all this year? I'm not trying to chart every play but whenever I look it appears we are always playing man. Sometimes there is a CB blitz called with a LB or safety rolling over to cover, but it's still man. If zone coverage is not something we've worked on, I'm not sure how realistic it is to try and plug it in mid way through the season. I feel like that's way more complicated in terms of having everyone on the same page. I could see going from zone to trying man, but the other way seems harder to do.

I need to go back and watch more games. I'm 99% sure that at least in the last few minutes of yesterday's game, they were in a zone. (or at least 2-deep help)

I *think* the pick-6 was a 4+1 zone with a blitz.

Even if they're running man, they need to run something with 2 high safeties and deep help. The long balls are just killing us.

(10-13-2019 10:17 PM)94computerguy Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 09:15 PM)DooX Wrote:  Have we shown any zone at all this year? I'm not trying to chart every play but whenever I look it appears we are always playing man. Sometimes there is a CB blitz called with a LB or safety rolling over to cover, but it's still man. If zone coverage is not something we've worked on, I'm not sure how realistic it is to try and plug it in mid way through the season. I feel like that's way more complicated in terms of having everyone on the same page. I could see going from zone to trying man, but the other way seems harder to do.

I need to go back and watch more games. I'm 99% sure that at least in the last few minutes of yesterday's game, they were in a zone. (or at least 2-deep help)

I *think* the pick-6 was a 4+1 zone with a blitz.

Even if they're running man, they need to run something with 2 high safeties and deep help. The long balls are just killing us.

But running Cover 2 (on other than obvious passing situations) takes away from the run defense, no?

(10-14-2019 12:46 AM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 10:17 PM)94computerguy Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 09:15 PM)DooX Wrote:  Have we shown any zone at all this year? I'm not trying to chart every play but whenever I look it appears we are always playing man. Sometimes there is a CB blitz called with a LB or safety rolling over to cover, but it's still man. If zone coverage is not something we've worked on, I'm not sure how realistic it is to try and plug it in mid way through the season. I feel like that's way more complicated in terms of having everyone on the same page. I could see going from zone to trying man, but the other way seems harder to do.

I need to go back and watch more games. I'm 99% sure that at least in the last few minutes of yesterday's game, they were in a zone. (or at least 2-deep help)

I *think* the pick-6 was a 4+1 zone with a blitz.

Even if they're running man, they need to run something with 2 high safeties and deep help. The long balls are just killing us.

But running Cover 2 (on other than obvious passing situations) takes away from the run defense, no?

I think this is where coaching philosophy comes into play. Sacrifice the pass to protect the run. I guess there is statistics/probability involved. Our corners seem to cover differently and usually more successful when they see they have safety help.

lol at people overreacting when we get down against another top 10 team. We didn't exactly wax the competition in 2004, 2008, 2016, or 2017 as semifinalists or better.

Hope some of you enjoyed the win. Great game and great atmosphere last weekend. It's a great time to root for the Dukes!

(10-14-2019 10:56 AM)Deez Nuts Wrote:  lol at people overreacting when we get down against another top 10 team. We didn't exactly wax the competition in 2004, 2008, 2016, or 2017 as semifinalists or better.

Hope some of you enjoyed the win. Great game and great atmosphere last weekend. It's a great time to root for the Dukes!

Amen.

(10-14-2019 12:46 AM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 10:17 PM)94computerguy Wrote:  

(10-13-2019 09:15 PM)DooX Wrote:  Have we shown any zone at all this year? I'm not trying to chart every play but whenever I look it appears we are always playing man. Sometimes there is a CB blitz called with a LB or safety rolling over to cover, but it's still man. If zone coverage is not something we've worked on, I'm not sure how realistic it is to try and plug it in mid way through the season. I feel like that's way more complicated in terms of having everyone on the same page. I could see going from zone to trying man, but the other way seems harder to do.

I need to go back and watch more games. I'm 99% sure that at least in the last few minutes of yesterday's game, they were in a zone. (or at least 2-deep help)

I *think* the pick-6 was a 4+1 zone with a blitz.

Even if they're running man, they need to run something with 2 high safeties and deep help. The long balls are just killing us.

But running Cover 2 (on other than obvious passing situations) takes away from the run defense, no?

It does, to a degree. BUT not completely. And I think there's an issue with "we will commit to stopping the run." I mean, that's nice, but if by doing that you're giving up 20 yard passes every other play, that's decidedly sub-optimal. Also, while you can commit to taking the run away, the offense gets to pick what they do, and if we make passing super easy, they'll just do that, even if it's their second choice.

What is really means is having your safeties make sure that a run is a RUN and not a fake. Once a lineman goes downfield or the receivers square up for a block THEN pursue the ball.

And in any event, I think that our run defense is so solid that we can afford to give a little there to limit the 20-yard passes.

(10-14-2019 10:56 AM)Deez Nuts Wrote:  lol at people overreacting when we get down against another top 10 team. We didn't exactly wax the competition in 2004, 2008, 2016, or 2017 as semifinalists or better.

Hope some of you enjoyed the win. Great game and great atmosphere last weekend. It's a great time to root for the Dukes!

Well, yeah, it's overreacting. But my thinking is that we're going to have to be ready to face a top-2 team in December, and whoever that team is, they'll look at film and think "well, I see something we could try...".

So we'll have to be ready for that. If we're not, we'll be stuck consoling ourselves with "at least we beat Villanova and Stony Brook."

(10-14-2019 12:26 PM)94computerguy Wrote:  

(10-14-2019 10:56 AM)Deez Nuts Wrote:  lol at people overreacting when we get down against another top 10 team. We didn't exactly wax the competition in 2004, 2008, 2016, or 2017 as semifinalists or better.

Hope some of you enjoyed the win. Great game and great atmosphere last weekend. It's a great time to root for the Dukes!

Well, yeah, it's overreacting. But my thinking is that we're going to have to be ready to face a top-2 team in December, and whoever that team is, they'll look at film and think "well, I see something we could try...".

So we'll have to be ready for that. If we're not, we'll be stuck consoling ourselves with "at least we beat Villanova and Stony Brook."

Sure but the best part is this is October. I think we have shown signs of improvement from week to week which means there is hope for December. A lot could happen between now and then, and hopefully it's all positive things.

One interesting adjustment mentioned in the presser this week:
Austin Douglas is moved to Corner for “depth” reasons. There is our RB for a DB “trade” the madden football crowd on here wanted.

Cig mentioned prior success moving offensive players to DB at places like Pitt. It sounds like he could see action this year rather than redshirting.

I think it’s a bit shortsighted to claim the coaches aren’t aware of our weaknesses and working to address them.

I think we just need to change the strategy - instead of taking away the run to make them one dimensional, we should take away the pass to make them one dimensional.