Post Game Observations....

[ClausentoTate]

The only thing I want to say about the game is: The Chicken Dance? Really? You stay classy, Michigan.

 

[Dr. Lou]

Unfortunately we are back to our old ways. All offense no defense. We will go 6-6 this year. That is a horrible defense I am so disappointed in Notre dame football. We have regressed back 3 years.

 

[aubeirish]

Zaire is not going to be better than Rees. True freshman quarterbacks are not ready for this stage. He needs to mature and get comfortable with the play book. Tommy did well yesterday(minus that brain fart of an interception). We can win with him. We got to keep working hard and clean the mistakes. This season can still be a very good success.

Go Irish!

 

[irishff1014]

Anyone have breakdown of stats from last night? I know Tommy went for over 300, but total yards, rushing, rushing/pass balance?

I keep hearing about Diaco's bad game plan. I agree, although I can't quite put my finger on what was wrong with it. Too aggro? not enough contain?

I think Diaco thinks we have the athleticism to blitz and go man coverage. Against better teams, as we saw last night, there are some players that simply do not have the athleticism to do this. I'm afraid Bennett and Farley are two of them.

We weren't close to being balanced. 53 passing attempts to 19 rushes.

19 rushes for 96 yards. 5.1 per rush

29-53 314 passing yards 5.9 per pass. (only .8 yards better then our rushing ouch)

 

[IrishLax]

I'll watch the game again at some point, but I didn't have any problem with declining that penalty. It's easy to second guess knowing the outcome, but you take 3rd and long every time. If you can't trust your defense to get off the field on 3rd and long then you have big problems. Also, wasn't there a sequence later in the game where we had them 2nd and 25 and they converted the first down? If BK had accepted the penalty, put them in 2nd and 19 and they convert, we're calling him a dumbas$ for accepting. Declining there is the right call. Our defense just didn't execute.

I disagree (obviously). Everyone in the thread was calling it a dumb decision (myself included) BEFORE they picked it up. Here's why:

A 2nd & 19 = ~30% chance of conversion. 3rd & 9 = ~35% chance of conversion. That's a big 5%. You take the penalty every time because of the math.

 

[potownhero]

The defense did lose the game, but they really gave 34 because of that Tommy Pick. I accept Tommy is our QB and I will support him, but 23 is not enough to beat a good team.

I have a slightly different take; mind you unfortunately, I was at an event that didn't allow me to concentrate 100% on the game, but this is what the group with me thought.

No doubt about it; our defense is slow again. Temple QB ran on us as did DG last night (for the record - temple lost yesterday to Houston). While Manti was great and people noticed, Spond's play was almost as crucial last year - he graded out well just about every game and is missed.

While our defense didn't win us the game, neither did the Offense. In order to be a top team, an offense should be able to score more than 23 points. Does anyone really think that 23 points should be enough for any offense in any game? Add to that the fact that via the 1st half INT we gave UM the ball at the ND23 yard line, this translates into needing even more points.

So the Defense gave up 41 total. Net out the 7 (Tuitt INT) and the defense gave up a net 34. Add in the fact that the Offense gave Michigan a present (at ND23) via the INT at the end of Q2, reduce that number by another 7 = 27. Even if you, blame the D for the TD, use a FG (-3) points => 34-3=31. So even by the most stringent analysis, The D gave up a net 31 points. Is that too much to expect an offense to score?

Where do you stand?

Do you think an offense scoring 23 points is enough? If so, the defense lost the game.

If you think an offense should score more than 30 (27 for the less stringent), the offense lost the game.

 

[Sicko]

I think the Offense is fine, thought Rees played very well besides the INT's of course and the only reason why he threw 2 INT's was because the Defense could not get stops so it forced Tommy to throw the ball to try and keep up on the scoreboard.

Our own defense took away our running game because they could not get stops because Atkinson III and Carlisle ran the ball well when they did get carries!

Now on to the Defense...we are weak and slow up the middle, our Middle Linebackers and Safeties are extremely slow and lack athleticism and Michigan exposed it last night with Gallon just having his way over the middle of the field then when Gardener took of running I did not see any of our Linebackers anywhere near the guy.

Not to call out one guy because I hate doing that to these kids but Jarrett Grace (#59) struggled BADLY and looked completely lost on that field. I know 3-4 Middle Linebackers are suppose to be bigger Thumping Linebackers like Fox and Calabrese but you still have to be able to RUN and have some Athleticism. I think Jaylon Smith Athleticism is needed IN THE MIDDLE!

Still think we will have a good season but some adjustments need to be made on Defense especially at Middle Linebacker and Safety!

 

[kmoose]

Does anyone really think that 23 points should be enough for any offense in any game?

23 points yesterday would have beaten Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, and USC.

 

[C!C!4oND]

I have a slightly different take; mind you unfortunately, I was at an event that didn't allow me to concentrate 100% on the game, but this is what the group with me thought.

No doubt about it; our defense is slow again. Temple QB ran on us as did DG last night (for the record - temple lost yesterday to Houston). While Manti was great and people noticed, Spond's play was almost as crucial last year - he graded out well just about every game and is missed.

While our defense didn't win us the game, neither did the Offense. In order to be a top team, an offense should be able to score more than 23 points. Does anyone really think that 23 points should be enough for any offense in any game? Add to that the fact that via the 1st half INT we gave UM the ball at the ND23 yard line, this translates into needing even more points.

So the Defense gave up 41 total. Net out the 7 (Tuitt INT) and the defense gave up a net 34. Add in the fact that the Offense gave Michigan a present (at ND23) via the INT at the end of Q2, reduce that number by another 7 = 27. Even if you, blame the D for the TD, use a FG (-3) points => 34-3=31. So even by the most stringent analysis, The D gave up a net 31 points. Is that too much to expect an offense to score?

Where do you stand?

Do you think an offense scoring 23 points is enough? If so, the defense lost the game.

If you think an offense should score more than 30 (27 for the less stringent), the offense lost the game.

The only series our defense really punched DG and UM in the mouth was the series we got the gift of a pick 6. Aside from that, our defense didnt really do anything.

Scoring 23 points should be enough to win the game.

I was left scratching my head at the defense many more times than I was scratching my head at the offense last night.

 

[NDohio]

Gardner was just really, really impressive last night. Some of the passes that he hit were put in the only spot that would make the pass a completion. And his running skills were top notch last night. I don't think the defensive plan was all the bad, He just made plays - a lot of plays.

I feel great about our offense in between the twenties, but we still struggle to finish. That is frustrating.

I still feel great about this team. If you are going to lose a game, losing it early is best. I am still confident they will get a good BCS Bowl.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

23 points yesterday would have beaten Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, and USC.

And it would have beaten every team on our regular season schedule last season except for Pitt, which didn't pass 23 until overtime.

 

[cody1smith]

Serious question. Could we beat mizzou? Im in the heart of Mizzou country and the texts and **** are already rolling in about them being the better team. And to be honest they may be. I know it was Toledo but they looked faster and better coached than we did.

Im totally blown away that they sign 30-60 recruiting classes and we sign top 10 nearly every year. But they send as many or more players high in the draft as we do.

Maybe its because im still sick over last nights disaster of a game, but im feeling like maybe we do not develop players like we should.

I know there will be people post lots of names both low and high star that are studs on both levels. Of which have developed from notre dame.

Not saying Michigan is one because they get as much talent as we do, but I think we could loose to BYU. And they do not have even close to the projected talent as we do. How does that happen?

We get the better recruits.
It comes down to either development or coaching. Right? Or am I missing something?

 

[GO IRISH!!!]

I took some time to reflect on the game before coming on here. I finished my first cup of coffee and started sifting through the posts. Glad to see the usual venom after a loss. You can always tell the vibe of the board after a loss just by scanning the thread titles on the first page.

All my points have already been made prior in this thread so I won't re-hash them.

However, I do have one question - why do we not see Hendrix more? Does he just not have the skill set for Kelly's offensive scheme? Seeing his hail mary at the end of the first half really showed the kid can fling it a good distance. Arguably farther than Rees.

I'm not saying replace Rees with Hendrix, but I would love to see him get several reps. Especially with how he can run.

I am no expert and I am not say Hendrix would have changed the outcome, but I really felt we needed to switch things up some last night and get the other team back on their heels a bit. A couple series of a different look QB might have done some good.

My last point - Niklas was the biggest bright spot for me. He really showed he is going to keep the legacy going from Rudolph, to Eifert, and now to Troy. He is going to be the kind of TE where even if you know the ball is going to him, he is still going to get it. They didn't throw to him nearly enough in my opinion.

This team has the potential to win out the rest of the year. However, I am starting to think this is going to be a long, frustrating season. Today, I don't feel really confident about any games on our schedule. I hope that feeling changes soon or my liver might not be able to take the abuse that will surely follow.

 

[potownhero]

23 points yesterday would have beaten Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, and USC.

Exactly. And that's why 3 out of those 4 lost yesterday.

Please note how many points EVERY other top 25 team scored.

Notice where we rank among them?

 

[potownhero]

And it would have beaten every team on our regular season schedule last season except for Pitt, which didn't pass 23 until overtime.

Which is exactly why we all agree that our Defense WON us most of our games last year...not our Offense.

 

[Irishman77]

After re watching the game and listening to Kelly's post game press conf, I will say...

1. He has very unrealistic expectations for Rees.
2. He has very little expectations for our defense.

Michigan had one weapon and tore us up. Why we didn't roll a safety to double him is stupid. Why does our offense and defense have to be so dame complicated?

TJ, Daniels, brown, and Niklas are every bit as good as Gallon and we can't find a way to get one of them the ball?

Staring down the first read and dumping it off to a back that can't catch is a joke.

We badly need a huge power back that can plant his foot and run forward. Our line played very well.

The lack of any emotion on D and the inept play of our DL baffles me.

 

[NDWorld247]

I disagree (obviously). Everyone in the thread was calling it a dumb decision (myself included) BEFORE they picked it up. Here's why:

A 2nd & 19 = ~30% chance of conversion. 3rd & 9 = ~35% chance of conversion. That's a big 5%. You take the penalty every time because of the math.

These percentages are nice, but I assume they don't account for anything specific to the game conditions and they are close enough where it's not an obvious decision. I'll poll the coaches in my program/coaches I know because I'm curious how people that are put in these situations would respond.

The way I look at is, would you rather ask your defense to get one stop at 9 yards or give the offense two chances at 19 yards? Personally, I'd rather ask my defense to get me one stop and I thought at the time it was the right decision.

And, for clarification, was the the 3rd quarter drive (Michigan's 2nd) in which Gardner ran 10 yards for the conversion and then later threw a TD pass to put Michigan up 14 again?

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Exactly. And that's why 3 out of those 4 lost yesterday.

Please note how many points EVERY other top 25 team scored.

Notice where we rank among them?

Those top 25 teams were playing Virginia, South Carolina State, San Diego State, San Jose State, Sam Houston State, Eastern Kentucky, UAB, UTSA, etc.

There were only a handful of decent matchups.

 

[dmort]

They key will be the defense.If they can't stop a team from scoring its going to be a long season.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Humble thoughts:

a). Tommy Rees is just fine. He will have one of the most productive passing seasons in ND history.

b). Coach Kelly is just fine. He will scheme and direct us to a massive yardage and points total --- as much as he's allowed to do by Diaco's "give them the 20-to-20 yardlines" philosophy of eating time on the clock.

c). Maybe Coach will finally fall out of love with George Atkinson, and play RBs who can catch the ball. Dropping passes stops drives.

And now the really painful things.....

d). although I agree with all that BGIF has said about the defense and replacing Te'o, KLM, and Zeke [let alone Danny], we STILL should be better than we are showing so far. Sheldon Day is very good. Collinsworth is, supposedly, very field smart. The rest of the returning stars are a year older --- they should have improved ... but, no. We seem to have gone backwards.

e). My, and practically every green-koolaid drinker's, optimism about this team was founded upon the belief that the defense would be one of the top-5 if not THE best defense in the country. So far, we're OK, but far from top-5. Why?

f). some of this is what BGIF has said... loss of great leadership. But I believe that it's "worse" than that. This is my very unpopular breakdown:
1]. secondary is flawed. NOT Keivaree Russell. That TD pass was as well defended as one could ask. The ball was placed preternaturally. Farley still takes the wrong road and isn't instinctive. Sometimes he looks great; sometimes.... BJ will be generally "good". Collinsworth will improve with reps. We need him for his brains.
2]. Linebacking isn't productive. Councell and Smith seem athletic and eager enough. So does Grace. So does Shembo. So, in their own strange way would Foxabreese if they were back to sharing WILL situationally. What's wrong??
3]. Nix is efforting his a$$ off; so is Kona. So also seems Day. Tuitt?? I swear he's taking plays off. Is he still sub-par health-wise and everyone's keeping it mum??

But none of that seems sufficient to explain our gap between last year's play and this. If it's not the players [so much], then what?

What if Saban showed the world how to scheme this team, and "we" cannot effectively adjust?? Every opponent has that tape. What if, despite Big Lou elevating his motor to Olympian proportions [I have never seen a man of his size hustle so much], the opposing OCs "see" the ways to neutralize what last year we did so well?? But why haven't WE adjusted??

On the surface it seems like we are trying to with the increased blitzing, but it doesn't seem to work. Why not??

There are coaches who coach a "pretty good" game, and will forever be only pretty good. There are coaches who coach a perfect "fixed" system --- they are the Watchmakers. They are remarkably good at systematizing something that if you are not extremely "ready" for it, "it" will beat you. The Great Clockwork defensive system is what Diaco makes. As Barrett Jones said: they are good because they're simple. But they're simple.

When opponents figure out Great Clocks, IF they have great personnel themselves, the Clocks will not keep good time. The Clockmaker must adjust. Our DC is young at this job; I don't think that he's yet up to it. [I have yet to see a really good adjustment to defensive problems until we have had a halftime to think about them]. Lots of DCs are this way... but they are not the elite DCs. I have watched VT for years. Budd Foster watches the first one or two series, and figures it out before halftime.

And... despite linebacker training, some DCs know how to scheme and time and disguise and change blitzes, and some haven't quite got it [yet]. Watching us, we ain't got it.... lots of big effort to little real effect.

This defense for whatever the reasons has not improved, AND the opposing OCs have done so. .... Very disillusioning. Very off-putting for enthusiasm for another great season. Where I felt that we'd control almost every game on the schedule due to a suffocating defense, now.............. hah!, we better pray that Tommy really shines. He's going to have to outscore a bunch of teams now.

 

[potownhero]

The only series our defense really punched DG and UM in the mouth was the series we got the gift of a pick 6. Aside from that, our defense didnt really do anything.

Scoring 23 points should be enough to win the game.

I was left scratching my head at the defense many more times than I was scratching my head at the offense last night.

I think we got spoiled with our D last year. How many top teams would we have beaten this week by only scoring 23?

 

[kmoose]

Exactly. And that's why 3 out of those 4 lost yesterday.

Please note how many points EVERY other top 25 team scored.

Notice where we rank among them?

Only 3 teams not named Notre Dame played ranked teams, yesterday........

Michigan
South Carolina
Georgia

We ranked last amongst those 4. But don't try to compare our offensive production to the offensive production of teams that played the likes of South Carolina State, San Jose State, Sam Houston State, Eastern Kentucky, UAB, UTSA, and Tennessee Tech.

 

[IrishFan4L]

ND needs to be more balanced especially in the Red Zone. Losing to Michigan hurts but losing early gives us time to bounce back. OU isn't that good from what little I watched of them WV was moving the ball by running right at them & there offense is far from what they were last year, they do have a some what mobile qb with Trevor Knight but he got pulled After 2nd or 3rd series and Bell took over. Bell is mobile but nothing like Knight.
USC must be awful, haven't seen them play but that loss to WSU looked pretty ugly. At our worsed we should be 9-3, I personally would like to be 11-1 even 12-1 with a bowl win. Beating Stanford will be tuff but we should & hope we get better week by week.

 

[TheSunIsRising]

After re watching the game and listening to Kelly's post game press conf, I will say...

1. He has very unrealistic expectations for Rees.
2. He has very little expectations for our defense.

Michigan had one weapon and tore us up. Why we didn't roll a safety to double him is stupid. Why does our offense and defense have to be so dame complicated?

TJ, Daniels, brown, and Niklas are every bit as good as Gallon and we can't find a way to get one of them the ball?

Staring down the first read and dumping it off to a back that can't catch is a joke.

We badly need a huge power back that can plant his foot and run forward. Our line played very well.

The lack of any emotion on D and the inept play of our DL baffles me.

TJ alone had more receptions than Gallon. Gallon gained more yards though (and scored 2extra TDs), but that was in part augmented by the blown tackling on his first TD. Niklas and Daniels both were only two receptions short of Gallon's

 

[potownhero]

They key will be the defense.If they can't stop a team from scoring its going to be a long season.

So, do you not think our Offense is capable of winning a shootout?

 

[irishfan]

1) Getting tired of our Defense not making any adjustments until the 2nd half.

2) Tuitt isn't the same player as last year as a pass rusher.

3) Our offense is so vanilla. About 90% of our runs were dives up the middle out of the Pistol.

4) Honestly, I am sick and tired of seeing Niklas lined up in the slot in a goofy non-receiving stance, as it is a quick screen in that direction LITERALLY EVERY TIME. It is pathetic play calling.

5) Way too many delayed blitzes with Ishaq when we should have had him spy.

 

[palinurus]

Michigan stacked the box because they were confident Rees couldn't beat them. He's an acceptable QB, but not a star and not good enough to consistently beat good teams. He has a high percentage because he throws dinks and dunks and has pretty good receivers, but he will rarely make outstanding pass plays. The key flaws are his lack of a strong arm and lack of mobility.

Still, he is a smart kid, knows the system, and keeps his head. I am confident he is good enough, and they are good enough, to have a successful season. But I do think it's a mistake to put him in the position of having to carry the team on his arm. He is certainly good enough to be a management QB, but it's a mistake to try to make him otherwise.

edited: by "good teams," I mean "Top 15", i.e., the upper tier. I think he's definitely good enough to beat the Michigan State type teams; I think he could have beaten Michigan with a different scheme. Of course, the defense must play better. Not many QBs are going to be able to score 35-40 mostly every week.

 

[koonja]

Humble thoughts:

a). Tommy Rees is just fine. He will have one of the most productive passing seasons in ND history.

b). Coach Kelly is just fine. He will scheme and direct us to a massive yardage and points total --- as much as he's allowed to do by Diaco's "give them the 20-to-20 yardlines" philosophy of eating time on the clock.

c). Maybe Coach will finally fall out of love with George Atkinson, and play RBs who can catch the ball. Dropping passes stops drives.

And now the really painful things.....

d). although I agree with all that BGIF has said about the defense and replacing Te'o, KLM, and Zeke [let alone Danny], we STILL should be better than we are showing so far. Sheldon Day is very good. Collinsworth is, supposedly, very field smart. The rest of the returning stars are a year older --- they should have improved ... but, no. We seem to have gone backwards.

e). My, and practically every green-koolaid drinker's, optimism about this team was founded upon the belief that the defense would be one of the top-5 if not THE best defense in the country. So far, we're OK, but far from top-5. Why?

f). some of this is what BGIF has said... loss of great leadership. But I believe that it's "worse" than that. This is my very unpopular breakdown:
1]. secondary is flawed. NOT Keivaree Russell. That TD pass was as well defended as one could ask. The ball was placed preternaturally. Farley still takes the wrong road and isn't instinctive. Sometimes he looks great; sometimes.... BJ will be generally "good". Collinsworth will improve with reps. We need him for his brains.
2]. Linebacking isn't productive. Councell and Smith seem athletic and eager enough. So does Grace. So does Shembo. So, in their own strange way would Foxabreese if they were back to sharing WILL situationally. What's wrong??
3]. Nix is efforting his a$$ off; so is Kona. So also seems Day. Tuitt?? I swear he's taking plays off. Is he still sub-par health-wise and everyone's keeping it mum??

But none of that seems sufficient to explain our gap between last year's play and this. If it's not the players [so much], then what?

What if Saban showed the world how to scheme this team, and "we" cannot effectively adjust?? Every opponent has that tape. What if, despite Big Lou elevating his motor to Olympian proportions [I have never seen a man of his size hustle so much], the opposing OCs "see" the ways to neutralize what last year we did so well?? But why haven't WE adjusted??

On the surface it seems like we are trying to with the increased blitzing, but it doesn't seem to work. Why not??

There are coaches who coach a "pretty good" game, and will forever be only pretty good. There are coaches who coach a perfect "fixed" system --- they are the Watchmakers. They are remarkably good at systematizing something that if you are not extremely "ready" for it, "it" will beat you. The Great Clockwork defensive system is what Diaco makes. As Barrett Jones said: they are good because they're simple. But they're simple.

When opponents figure out Great Clocks, IF they have great personnel themselves, the Clocks will not keep good time. The Clockmaker must adjust. Our DC is young at this job; I don't think that he's yet up to it. [I have yet to see a really good adjustment to defensive problems until we have had a halftime to think about them]. Lots of DCs are this way... but they are not the elite DCs. I have watched VT for years. Budd Foster watches the first one or two series, and figures it out before halftime.

And... despite linebacker training, some DCs know how to scheme and time and disguise and change blitzes, and some haven't quite got it [yet]. Watching us, we ain't got it.... lots of big effort to little real effect.

This defense for whatever the reasons has not improved, AND the opposing OCs have done so. .... Very disillusioning. Very off-putting for enthusiasm for another great season. Where I felt that we'd control almost every game on the schedule due to a suffocating defense, now.............. hah!, we better pray that Tommy really shines. He's going to have to outscore a bunch of teams now.

People that play because they have the schemes down and understand their position don't generally get better with 'reps'. Collinsworth isn't a super athlete; he's playing because he's smart. Furthermore, he's a senior. If he needs more reps at this point, our coaches are terrible and should lose their jobs.

Shummate is an example of a guy that would get better with reps, and ideally he'd be playing over Collinsworth, but he hasn't picked it up quick enough. Collinsworth is a decent player, but if you're waiting for him to get better because of reps, you're wasting your time. He's peaked, and that's fine; he's playing pretty well.

I think you're overrating to our defense. We stuffed the run for the most part; certainly better than Michigan did against us. We had the better team IMO, but they had by far the best play maker. We were the Celtics of a few years ago, and Gardner went Lebron in Cleveland on us. We're not as far off as you think.

Furthermore, that PI killed us, because our offense was moving the ball at ease on them in the 4th, and that should have been a turnover. And the last pass Gallon scored on was a great pass and a lot of luck. Jackson was right there. Everything had to go right for that to be complete (WR stops and turns at right time, falls into ball. QB throws it on time, and in the bottom corner - almost like a pitch the batter can't reach). The defense was there on that play, but it was a defenseless play.

 

[kmoose]

And now the really painful things.....

d). although I agree with all that BGIF has said about the defense and replacing Te'o, KLM, and Zeke [let alone Danny], we STILL should be better than we are showing so far. Sheldon Day is very good. Collinsworth is, supposedly, very field smart. The rest of the returning stars are a year older --- they should have improved ... but, no. We seem to have gone backwards.

e). My, and practically every green-koolaid drinker's, optimism about this team was founded upon the belief that the defense would be one of the top-5 if not THE best defense in the country. So far, we're OK, but far from top-5. Why?

f). some of this is what BGIF has said... loss of great leadership. But I believe that it's "worse" than that. This is my very unpopular breakdown:
1]. secondary is flawed. NOT Keivaree Russell. That TD pass was as well defended as one could ask. The ball was placed preternaturally. Farley still takes the wrong road and isn't instinctive. Sometimes he looks great; sometimes.... BJ will be generally "good". Collinsworth will improve with reps. We need him for his brains.
2]. Linebacking isn't productive. Councell and Smith seem athletic and eager enough. So does Grace. So does Shembo. So, in their own strange way would Foxabreese if they were back to sharing WILL situationally. What's wrong??
3]. Nix is efforting his a$$ off; so is Kona. So also seems Day. Tuitt?? I swear he's taking plays off. Is he still sub-par health-wise and everyone's keeping it mum??

But none of that seems sufficient to explain our gap between last year's play and this. If it's not the players [so much], then what?

What if Saban showed the world how to scheme this team, and "we" cannot effectively adjust?? Every opponent has that tape. What if, despite Big Lou elevating his motor to Olympian proportions [I have never seen a man of his size hustle so much], the opposing OCs "see" the ways to neutralize what last year we did so well?? But why haven't WE adjusted??

On the surface it seems like we are trying to with the increased blitzing, but it doesn't seem to work. Why not??

There are coaches who coach a "pretty good" game, and will forever be only pretty good. There are coaches who coach a perfect "fixed" system --- they are the Watchmakers. They are remarkably good at systematizing something that if you are not extremely "ready" for it, "it" will beat you. The Great Clockwork defensive system is what Diaco makes. As Barrett Jones said: they are good because they're simple. But they're simple.

When opponents figure out Great Clocks, IF they have great personnel themselves, the Clocks will not keep good time. The Clockmaker must adjust. Our DC is young at this job; I don't think that he's yet up to it. [I have yet to see a really good adjustment to defensive problems until we have had a halftime to think about them]. Lots of DCs are this way... but they are not the elite DCs. I have watched VT for years. Budd Foster watches the first one or two series, and figures it out before halftime.

And... despite linebacker training, some DCs know how to scheme and time and disguise and change blitzes, and some haven't quite got it [yet]. Watching us, we ain't got it.... lots of big effort to little real effect.

This defense for whatever the reasons has not improved, AND the opposing OCs have done so. .... Very disillusioning. Very off-putting for enthusiasm for another great season. Where I felt that we'd control almost every game on the schedule due to a suffocating defense, now.............. hah!, we better pray that Tommy really shines. He's going to have to outscore a bunch of teams now.

I think the biggest "problem" with the defense is no Manti Teo roaming the middle of the field. It appears to me that the DL is not able to just pin their ears back and get after the quarterback. I think they are being asked to do MUCH more run support, this year, without Manti behind them to corral opposing backs that might slip through. The DL seems to be taking much more deliberate routes to the QB, this year. Probably because Diaco doesn't want a RB to slip past them as they charge upfield, and end up in space against our second level defenders. Because the DL has (intentionally?) slowed their rush, the DBs have to cover longer. And it appears that they just aren't doing it/can't do it? That's my amateur opinion, anyway.

 

[Grahambo]

I figured it out:

We need to score more points then the other team to win!