Suggestion for the defensive side of ball. Call me crazy

[andreIGUODOLLAsigns4UK]

Given Meant's departure from the team. Why don't we switch to a 3-3-5 defense? Yeayeayea. Sounds silly. But apparently this is our best secondary ever. The depth we have at the CB and Safety spots are as good as its ever been. Why not throw players like a West as a 5th defensive back and have him Play sort of a modified OLB position? Or any hard hitting safety like him to take the position instead of playing inexperienced players that aren't ready? Move Miggins to DT. Bell at DE. Ware at OLB along with Love in the middle, whoever at the other inside LB spot and play an unorthodox 'position-less' football with somebody like a Darius Weat or Marcus McWilson at a hybrid OLB/DB spot depending on if it's a passing or running situation? In this scenario you'd be putting your most talented players on the field instead of having inexperience/unreadiness play way too many minutes in vital situations, and considering this is possibly our best secondary ever we would just be letting more players from that unit see the field. I don't know. Just seems with the loss of Meant as silly as it sounds but maybe 'Positionless' defense would be our best option. You would be sacrificing size for speed but IMO that has its benefits and would be way more beneficial than say having players who aren't ready without experience playing big time minutes in the SEC.

I know sounds crazy but food for thought maybe? Thoughts? Another suggestion of mine would be change to a 4-2 and have Ware and Bell at the DE spots, Miggins and Elam at the DT spots so you can have size on the field still and with the 5 DB's playing you would have tons of options and you'd be allowing the speed of the secondary to Impact the game. If our safeties are as good of tacklers as we're told we should believe. As cliche and cheesy and stupid and terrible and just flat out dumb what I'm about to say may sound. But..... Why not? I think the 4-2 defense would most definitely be our best option considering how our roster is currently looking on that side of the ball with how thin we are at LB and how good we apparently are in the secondary. Would almost seem like the most logical solution to our defensive woes at this point. Scheme accordingly to the roster's talents. Ehhh? EHHHHH???? Promote me from realistic/pessimistic fan to DC, RIGHT NOW!!!!

 

[NamelessOne]

I kinda like the idea but I'm not sure how long it would take for the defense to adapt to a new scheme this late in the process. Also, I'm sure someone here knows the requirements needed to run it efficiently...I dont, but I'm gonna guess we don't have the requirements.

 

[BigBlueTuckian]

Teams were going to run on us no matter what. Now you want to put more people in coverage? If anything it needs to be a 5-3-3 defense.

UK's problem has always been the lack of SEC caliber DTs in abundant numbers and SEC quality pass rushers. Even Bud and Z were average SEC pass rushers.

5 DBs isn't going to solve that. The 5 best DBs in history can't cover for more than 3-5 seconds if the DL fails to generate a pass rush. Also there's a reason our DBs are DBs. If you ask them to constantly be making tackles at the LOS or taking on TEs in coverage, someone is going to get hurt.

That idea will result in teams running the ball down our throat for 6-8 yards a play, making our defense dog tired, and when we finally bring 8 or 9 to the box to stop the hemorrhage they will toast the DBs who are in coverage. Bad, bad idea.

 

[andreIGUODOLLAsigns4UK]

Teams were going to run on us no matter what. Now you want to put more people in coverage? If anything it needs to be a 5-3-3 defense.

UK's problem has always been the lack of SEC caliber DTs in abundant numbers and SEC quality pass rushers. Even Bud and Z were average SEC pass rushers.

5 DBs isn't going to solve that. The 5 best DBs in history can't cover for more than 3-5 seconds if the DL fails to generate a pass rush. Also there's a reason our DBs are DBs. If you ask them to constantly be making tackles at the LOS or taking on TEs in coverage, someone is going to get hurt.

That idea will result in teams running the ball down our throat for 6-8 yards a play, making our defense dog tired, and when we finally bring 8 or 9 to the box to stop the hemorrhage they will toast the DBs who are in coverage. Bad, bad idea.

I didn't say put more players in coverage. Just let a couple safeties man the OLB spots or one safety in a 4-2 and allow his speed impact the game I at no point said they needed to be in coverage. Just kinda replacing the OLB's with zero experience and zero readiness for safeties who are game ready.

 

[WildCard]

A base 5 DB scheme (3-3-5 or 4-2-5) is a lot more than simply inserting a 5th DB. There are different gap responsibilities and cover schemes. Five man secondaries usually require 2 "hybrid" DB/LB types who are the key "adjustment personnel". IOW, a lot to teach as well as "un-teach" in the summer practice if moving in this direction.

Furthermore, the 33 Stack front still requires 3 DLs playing on or inside the OTs so they would still face the same D-line issues as with the current 3-4 front (less Meant).

As for the 4-2-5, I have always liked this scheme and never really understood why it is not more popular. Patterson at TCU has run this for many years and is the undisputed master of this scheme. I agree that UK's personnel probably fits that scheme better than a 3 down front but, IMO, it is too late to move in that direction.

I think some of the defensive "problems" of the past few years is the "teaching curve" for a staff that has a strong background in the 4-3 but no real expert (at least to my knowledge) in the 3-4 scheme. It is not just as simple as dropping a guy off the LOS. Stoops and Co. came in as a 4-3 bunch and it has taken a couple of years to get where they are now as a 3-4 base. All JMO.

Peace

 

[ThePhoenix_rivals211191]

Like others said there's a lot more to it than that.

Plus, I would still want to be thinking of next year as well. Prefer not to "rely" on them, but gotta get the young DL guys some experience. That and reps in the system will both help next year's D potentially be awesome.

I'm NOT saying screw this year. Just that I don't think you throw away the scheme, because of a bunch of factors.

 

[JasonS.]

I think some of the defensive "problems" of the past few years is the "teaching curve" for a staff that has a strong background in the 4-3 but no real expert (at least to my knowledge) in the 3-4 scheme. It is not just as simple as dropping a guy off the LOS. Stoops and Co. came in as a 4-3 bunch and it has taken a couple of years to get where they are now as a 3-4 base. All JMO.

Here's hoping. This is the year I think we find out.

We're going on 10 straight years without a Top 50 defense ... which is a pretty difficult feat to pull off as a Power 5 program.

 

[foggyblue]

Well since we're talking defensive schemes. Can anyone elaborate on how the wide tackle six worked that Jerry Claiborne implemented.

 

[BigBlueTuckian]

I didn't say put more players in coverage. Just let a couple safeties man the OLB spots or one safety in a 4-2 and allow his speed impact the game I at no point said they needed to be in coverage. Just kinda replacing the OLB's with zero experience and zero readiness for safeties who are game ready.

If that worked out, wouldn't more teams make their safeties be linebackers? Like I said, you're asking these safeties to man OLB spots in a 3-4 system. That means being at the second level and going up against OL, TEs, and Fullbacks who are reaching the second level looking to pancake someone. So all of a sudden you want players like McWilson (6'0 208), Mike Edwards (6'0 200), Blake McClain (5'10 195), and Darius West (6'0 206) to be going up against much bigger blockers on every down? They're gonna get their lunch eaten or worse get injured. Yes, strong safeties do come up to the LOS and make tackles..........occasionally. If a team has one doing that constantly then he's in the Sean Taylor mold at 6'3 230.

If we do this then what do we do with our LBs? Where do Ware, Jones, Firios, and Kash go? Make them down linemen to replace Meant? Right...........................

We are down a big body on the DL. Next man up!

And by the way andre, by definition the 3-3-5 you suggested means 5 DBs IN COVERAGE. Otherwise it would be a 3-4-4 and you just sub the players not the alignment while remaining in the same 3-4-4. But don't look at me, you're the one who spouted off the 3-3-5 nonsense.

 

[BIGBLUEQ]

If that worked out, wouldn't more teams make their safeties be linebackers? Like I said, you're asking these safeties to man OLB spots in a 3-4 system. That means being at the second level and going up against OL, TEs, and Fullbacks who are reaching the second level looking to pancake someone. So all of a sudden you want players like McWilson (6'0 208), Mike Edwards (6'0 200), Blake McClain (5'10 195), and Darius West (6'0 206) to be going up against much bigger blockers on every down? They're gonna get their lunch eaten or worse get injured. Yes, strong safeties do come up to the LOS and make tackles..........occasionally. If a team has one doing that constantly then he's in the Sean Taylor mold at 6'3 230.

If we do this then what do we do with our LBs? Where do Ware, Jones, Firios, and Kash go? Make them down linemen to replace Meant? Right...........................

We are down a big body on the DL. Next man up!

This is exactly right, and it is going to have to be DT and NT by committee, Elam can't play every down, even if he is in the best shape of his life, Miggins, Bell, Hyde, and some of the young guys are going to have to step up and be players and help keep the opposing OL off of our LBers so they can make tackles at the LOS not after a 5 or 6 yard gain.

 

[Bryo72]

Good luck Andre, I hope your 3-3-5 works out for your d...since you lost a player

 

[Ctroberts1024]

We run a ton of nickel. Whether it's a 3-3-5 or 2-4-5, we use the 5th DB quite a bit. I think we will do it even more now. McWilson and McClain are really good in the box and basically serve as a 5th LB. I think we'll see even more of the nickel this year