Venable's defense BUSTED coverage!!!
- Thread starter HypeBrown
- Start date
He's right actually. As soon as the Mouth from the South for Clemson went down. BVs D is more complex but outstanding with an experienced back 7. One injury, and Bama's QB looked like an AA.
Actually... on the 2nd busted coverage that cost Clemson a TD, I have to admit I was thinking the same thing. I remember a few times seeing OU players looking at each other confused as hell.
BrentV had nothing to do with it. Players either make plays or they dont. At least that's what we've been told. 
Can't understand how anyone could blame any coach when a player busted coverage. You are faulting the player for not following his assignment....yet including the coach for the player's error. How does that work EVER? Coaches get plenty of deserved blame so there is no reason to pile on unless you just like finding fault, however stupid it may be, simply to rag on someone.
It is the complicated scheme. Safeties and linebackers read the play, think then react. Result, bites on play action. Consequence, no safety support or late getting there.
Clemson played tough, take away those busted TE coverages and that trick onside and it would have been a blow out for Clemson.
I put the blame on the coach and the player. Either the coach didnt prepare the player for TE coverage or the player just did his own thing. I tend to think the player wasnt prepared properly before the game AND again at the half.How the heck do you let a TE go for 200 yards and different TE for a long TD unless you didnt prepare properly for it.
I put the blame on the coach and the player. Either the coach didnt prepare the player for TE coverage or the player just did his own thing. I tend to think the player wasnt prepared properly before the game AND again at the half.How the heck do you let a TE go for 200 yards and different TE for a long TD unless you didnt prepare properly for it.
DBs/LBs in BV's D have a lot of read/responsibility...why it's not easy to learn. One mistake can leave a GAPING hole...ala his time at OU when we didn't have an experienced back 7.
Oklahoma would have beaten Alabama. My opinion and dont feel like going into the details to substantiate my claim. If you agree like the post if not... let me have it
I "like" and reply in violent agreement!Oklahoma would have beaten Alabama. My opinion and dont feel like going into the details to substantiate my claim. If you agree like the post if not... let me have it
Yep, what hath been done less than two years before can be repeated with a monster QB like Baker Mayfield.
Of course, I'm asking WHY couldn't have the MOUTH CB from Clemson not gotten hurt in OUR game????????????Yep, what hath been done less than two years before can be repeated with a monster QB like Baker Mayfield.
You're going to have to define "prepare for it".
Sometimes, kids aren't perfect. And no matter how well you "prepare" for another team, kids make mistakes. Is that on a coach because every player didn't execute every play perfectly every time? Sounds like an impossible standard, one that we don't adopt for ourselves in our daily lives. Do all your employees make perfect decisions every single time? If they don't (which they don't), are you to blame for not preparing them properly? Even if you've shown them what to do?
I agree it's likely a combination of both, but I usually think player first. Unless I can just see that a wrong scheme was called for (see continuously only rushing three against a spread offense).
This makes sense. One can not completely expect their team of players or employees to always be perfect. But it is also incumbent that managers of people recognize the same mistakes that are repeatedly made and adjust accordingly. What I saw Monday night was very similar to what we witnessed here at OU w/ BV at the helm. There is no doubt that Saban's team tapped into this area and most likely designed and called a few plays that was believed to be a weakness.
But EVERY team has weaknesses, risks that are repeatedly there. Even Alabama. You can not construct a perfect defense that never has the same types of risks. If you run a 4-3, there are inherent risks in that defense against some offenses. Same thing for the 3-4.
Brent's philosophy at OU (and Clemson) is to take away certain areas (maybe the underneath). It's always a risk then that another part of the field is exposed. You do the best you can to minimize those risks, but each and every philosophy on how to defend offenses come with risks. So you may call it a weakness on Venables part, but if he were to change it up and decide that he'll give up the underneath but makes sure he never ever gets burned, people will switch their tune to "He's always giving up the easy 5-10 yard passes. He doesn't prepare his team well enough for that." The problem is you can't do both. It's an impossibility people are searching for.
I'm not saying Brent doesn't have flaws, I'm saying his defenses (all defenses) come with certain risks, and they're going to be exposed by those who can expose them. OU couldn't, and he had the same philosophy against us as he did Alabama. Were his players just more prepared against us, or is it his style of defense just matched up better against us than Alabama?
Brent's philosophy at OU (and Clemson) is to take away certain areas (maybe the underneath). It's always a risk then that another part of the field is exposed. You do the best you can to minimize those risks, but each and every philosophy on how to defend offenses come with risks. So you may call it a weakness on Venables part, but if he were to change it up and decide that he'll give up the underneath but makes sure he never ever gets burned, people will switch their tune to "He's always giving up the easy 5-10 yard passes. He doesn't prepare his team well enough for that." The problem is you can't do both. It's an impossibility people are searching for.
I'm not saying Brent doesn't have flaws, I'm saying his defenses (all defenses) come with certain risks, and they're going to be exposed by those who can expose them. OU couldn't, and he had the same philosophy against us as he did Alabama. Were his players just more prepared against us, or is it his style of defense just matched up better against us than Alabama?
I agree that no one is perfect and therefore no team is going to be perfect. The game itself consists of 'downs'. Each down is a challenge and each down will offer a winner & a loser. If one tends to lose the same type play repeatedly, that's a problem of scheme and.or the called play. Especially if multiple players are losing. Although, it looks easy to fault the player for a mis-read as they are the ones that can be visibly witnessed. All the while are on the sidelines venting in frustration.
Well, he has a top ten defense in the nation, so I'd be willing to say he's losing less single downs than 118 other teams. That's a stat I could live with.