I would have thought we would have stuck 8-9 in the box and said beat us with the pass.
Defense: Why were we running cover two for much of the 2nd half?
- Thread starter Toms Wife
- Start date
I was wondering the same. At some point we needed to admit that our line was getting an *** whooping and needed help. We needed 8 in the box. Probably would have backfired though. Desperate schemes usually do.
Ask 4.6.3. It's Parella's fault.
But hey, Diaco wasn't going to get beat with the deep ball, right?
Puke
Yeah i said the same thing right after they went 90 yards all but one pass... but i noticed reed didnt play much and dismuke was on the field alot in the 2nd half
I didn't count how many times, but I thought we had 8 in the box many times in the 4th and Wisconsin was still running at will on us.
Maybe we didn't have 8 in the box as often as I thought though...
Maybe we didn't have 8 in the box as often as I thought though...
of course, a**coalition would have complained on the deep ball...
The entire loss falls squarely on the tradition coalition and any coach who has previous ties to NU.
Because we know how awesome all the coaches with zero ties to NU have been the last 2 decades.
That's not fair... 4.6.3.1 stated earlier he wants Frost to get the job (see other thread)..... but you guys aren't gonna like the reason
No matter what Nebraska did, Wisconsin was the vastly superior physically and coached team... like I said yesterday I'm sad and tired
What I think hurt the most was staying in a 3-4 vs multiple TE sets, it just allows for too many good angles against our three down lineman.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Lol. You guys think 2 safeties means 2 high. That's cute. Lineman and fullback were running free into backers and the safety. But yes "2 high" was the problem. Like it or not the current defense requires lineman to try and occupy blockers to keep 2nd level clean. They sucked so bad the fullback did not have to touch ANYBODY until he got to a corner of safety. Bad, bad effort. This was a bad scheme and a terrible match-up, combined with lineman getting singled. Recipe for disaster.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
By the way... everyone saying Diaco needs to stay with Frost needs to be honest. Even when they run-blitzed that **** got shut down easily. Outside backer talent needs to get way better if the plan is to just get single-blocked all damn night.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
It was bad enough that they corner and safety blitzed off the backside a TON in the 2nd half (hoping to catch the RB from behind before they got downhill). 2 high my rear end.
For one thing, "cover 2" means something completely different than most on here think.
In addition, many times it's easier to get that 8th and 9th man in the box out of a two high alignment.
In addition, many times it's easier to get that 8th and 9th man in the box out of a two high alignment.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Still was rarely if ever "2 high". Just because they line up with 2 safeties does not mean cover 2, or 2 high. A safety led us in tackles. If we are going to beat B1G rush-heavy teams, the backers need to be able to have a chance to do that instead.
Last edited:
Methinks you don't know what you are talking about or maybe stopped watching the 4th quarter.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Once again. Just because there are 2 safeties on the field does not mean 2 high. Good gravy woman. They were not playing 2 safeties in a zone.
What is this look? We are down two scores at this point in the game. They are trying to pour salt in the wound. What does this look like to you when one safety is ten yards off the ball and the other is twelve?
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Just that. A LOOK. Where is the corner on this end? Straight head up with the TE playing inside run. See that H Back basically uncovered because we have a single corner out there on 2 receivers with a linebacker hedging. Go ahead and walk that safety all the way up. The guard will blow his *** up because the lineman couldn't hold up anything last night.What is this look? We are down two scores at this point in the game. They are trying to pour salt in the wound. What does this look like to you when one safety is ten yards off the ball and the other is twelve?
Screen shots are neat. Kalu played up a bunch last night. Deal with it.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Can you post the screen shot of the d-lineman that was in a 3 point stance 6 freaking yards off the LOS in the NIU game? Solid d-line coaching going on this year.
Why are we giving a two deep look with safeties playing 10+ yards off the line of scrimmage and a corner playing 8 yards off? Are we trying to scare them out of their passing game and into running the ball at this stage of the game?
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Then I guess we should put a safety on the line so he can get used even worse than the lineman. You are right, my bad.Why are we giving a two deep look with safeties playing 10+ yards off the line of scrimmage and a corner playing 8 yards off? Are we trying to scare them out of their passing game and into running the ball at this stage of the game?
Toms wife two safeties doesn't mean cover two. In fact if we were in cover two it means corners will be dropped in run support anyway covering flats if pass.
However, our alignment was questionable a lot.
Watch the long TD before half from end zone view. I understand not having a bunch in the box in that situation, but what we have there is questionable and wisky coulda done a lot of things to us. Made it easy on them.
However, our alignment was questionable a lot.
Watch the long TD before half from end zone view. I understand not having a bunch in the box in that situation, but what we have there is questionable and wisky coulda done a lot of things to us. Made it easy on them.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
I was in that end zone (he ran directly way from us). What happened? Looked to me like there was no 2nd level at all. Was that the start of them realizing they could block our safety with lineman because they could single everyone else with H backs and fullbacks?
I never said put them on the line of scrimmage. However, it would be nice if they weren't 12 yards off giving a 2 deep look. That is a sign of bad coaching.unless Diaco was trying to trick them. Then he's a genius.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Who was gonna make a tackle after they went through the line and backers literally untouched?I never said put them on the line of scrimmage. However, it would be nice if they weren't 12 yards off giving a 2 deep look. That is a sign of bad coaching.unless Diaco was trying to trick them. Then he's a genius.
In that alignment who do you think has the flat? It will be the corner. Otherwise they are playing three deep...which is even more stupid considering the slaughter happening at the line.
If they are playing one high with man to man across everyone else, why is your safety playing man 12 stinking yards away from his receiver...especially when you know you are needed in run support.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Because he is a SAFETY. Would linebacker depth be better for him to be flattened? So there was zero chance at stopping them?
I don't know how to put up a frozen image of the replay that showed the angle I'm talking about, of someone can it will help.
And I'm not saying the D line did a good job either.
The alignment, however, opened us up to a lot of different run plays.
There was also a string in the second half where they ran off right tackle numerous times, and we were often lining up in what was essentially a 4 but three of the d line were on our right side, with a LB lining up over the uncovered guard side, allowing easy access to block him.
I'm not saying our D line played well esp in 2nd half, but Wisconsin definitely used line calls to take advantage of our alignment at times.
Now you can't be perfect with calls and you need to be able to win some one on ones but some of the set ups seemed odd.
I have to watch it live but if they are playing three deep it's cover three, not cover two.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
If this is as simple as putting someone in every gap on the line.... then why is none of the other D staff saying anything? Are they mailing it in? Do they care?
Yes, which would be really dumb. Diaco isn't really dumb. This is why it is either cover 2 or perhaps man to man with one high. However, the alignment is the problem. If you don't stack the box against Wisky who threw three passes in the 2nd half then who do you stack it against?
No, it's not that simple, and my post reflects that as I acknowledge that you can't be perfect with calls and you have to win one on ones.
Don't take everything to the extreme. While alignment isn't everything, it is part of it. There were some things I noticed that didn't look right.
I don't think you know what you're arguing here. Not an insult, but you're all over the place.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Not referring to you. I generally agree with your points.
I'm not sure you understand reading a defense. If this is their alignment, what would you as a qb read?
It is immediately aligned as cover two. The wideside corner should roll to the flat.
I gave you a couple other options. It could be cover three where the outside backer has the flat and the others are running zone across the back. However, cover three would be stupid in that situation considering what Wisky is doing.
The other possibility is one high. man underneath. The problem is that you don't run man high with a 12 yard cushion...especially when they are ramming it down your throats.
If you watch the play unfold, you know that it is cover two. The corner doesn't give any ground with the receiver running right at him. If he had the outside deep third he has to give ground. The safety to the wide side immediately gets width right away especially with the flow going his way. So the point stands, why are we running Cover 2 most of the 4th quarter with our safeties so deep? It doesn't make sense.
Do not tell me I don't know how to read a defense. You have no idea what my experience is with football. You're not making sense in arguing your point and you're all over the place.
What coverage would you prefer in that situation? Cover two is much better against the run than cover three or quarters. Man to man with one safety perhaps? Ok, but you realize that running off defensive backs basically puts you in a cover three anyway and LBs have to worry about covering flats if pass, whereas in cover two they simply drop into a hook zone if they see pass and read the qbs eyes.
If you want our dbs walked down closer to the line, just say so. Cover two does not negate that possibility and can allow for 9 players to be close to the line, not just 8.
You are the one who looks at the alignment and talks about them playing three deep. That's incredibly stupid at this point in the game. When you get gashed that badly you need to go to cover zero or at best one high man underneath. They averaged over seven yards a carry.
You mention running off our corners. Who give s a rip. I would rather have my safety up trying to make tackles instead of our corners.
By not adjusting we allowed their receivers to go after our safeties. It was Chryst's gameplan and worked to perfection. They essentially left our corners unblocked...put their receivers on our safeties...and bet their back could beat our corners. It worked.
You mention running off our corners. Who give s a rip. I would rather have my safety up trying to make tackles instead of our corners.
By not adjusting we allowed their receivers to go after our safeties. It was Chryst's gameplan and worked to perfection. They essentially left our corners unblocked...put their receivers on our safeties...and bet their back could beat our corners. It worked.