Will Mark Stoops Bring The Pass Rush Back To Florida State?
Florida State's 2009 defense was one of the worst defenses in the history of the ACC. And while the run defense was absolutely worse and fixing it must be the top priority, FSU also had trouble pressuring the passer. The 'Noles relied on old techniques that college coaches have long since schemed around (mainly thinking that using only speed off the edge will get the job done). Too often FSU did not push the pocket. We warned in the 2008 season review that the lack of blitz coordination and the general lack of a pass rush plan would probably render the 2009 pass rush less effective. And it did, but worse than any of us ever expected.
The graph at right shows how often teams sacked the quarterback in ACC play. The way to figure this out is quite simple: Sacks divided by pass plays (pass attempts + sacks). This measure is for ACC games only as that controls for differences in non-conference scheduling. And yes, this does not account for QB scrambles, but it is the most effective measure we have for this. As you can see, sacking the quarterback is not essential to playing good defense. But getting pressure relative to the resources a team devotes to playing coverage is how great pass defenses work. The best example of playing great defense without sacking the quarterback is Boston College. The Eagles rarely if ever send more than 4 men at the passer. They prefer to play coverage. And they've had one of the best 5 defenses in the country for 2 years running. It's clear that finding the optimal mix of pressure and coverage is the key. But FSU did neither well last season, and it came up with sacks on only 4.2% of pass plays. And while that might have worked if the 'Noles preferred to play coverage, it was downright disastrous because FSU devoted most of its resources not to coverage, but to pressure. Also keep in mind that FSU did not get to play its own offense, which was the best pass protecting unit the ACC has seen in some time.
Coach Jimbo Fisher hired Mark Stoops of Arizona to fix the defense. Stoops has quite the track record as a defensive guru. His Arizona defense finished 28th in the country. But I wanted to know how effective his Arizona defense was at pressuring the passer. Did they do it well? How did they do pressure the passer? Was the pressure more a result of personnel, or coaching/ scheme? Let's go to the chart:
This measure is for Pac-10 games only as that controls for differences in non-conference scheduling. As you can see, no team sacked the quarterback more often than Arizona. For those who do not like the frequency measure, 'Zona recorded 28 sacks in conference play. FSU recorded 9. Additionally, Arizona did not have a single 1st-team ALL-Pac 10 player on defense. They did have several on the 2nd team. Most of those were seniors and none of those seniors are getting serious NFL consideration. Certainly none of them are likely 1st-day draft picks. That's consistent with the recruiting talent available to Arizona.
We often hear the popular refrain from FSU fans that "FSU's defense doesn't have that dominant defensive end and that is what's wrong with the defense." But Stoops defense did not feature dominant, NFL-prototype defensive linemen either. I've watched a bit of Arizona recently and one thing that you don't see from them that unfortunately you do see from the 'Noles is guys running past the pocket. "The worst place for a pass rusher to be is behind the quarterback." -- Bill Belichek. They might not have the fastest guys, but Stoops' players effectively shrunk the pocket and the various zone blitzes he threw at the quarterbacks in the Pac-10 (some pretty good QBs) confused them. Often the quarterback would pull the ball down after realizing his target was not open. Then came the sack. When 'Zona blitzed, it was clear that the goal wasn't for everyone to get to the quarterback, but for everyone to execute their assignment (occupying a blocker) so that the player designated by the scheme could get to the passer.
Sacking the quarterback more often than any other team in a major conference like the Pac-10 is not an easy feat. Doing so without top-level talent is even tougher. I'll get into the scheme later this off-season when I have more time and a better feel for it. It will take time for FSU to adjust to this scheme and defenses typically take two years to fully adjust, but his results at Arizona are certainly encouraging for Florida State fans.
149 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
He will have much more to work with in Tally than Tuscon
It all just depends on how fast the players can pick it up…
EXCITING!
PLEASE Stoops!!!
I hate to sound like a whiner, but PLEASEEEE make our D better. Last year was so frustrating. It was like watching our basketball team on offense. Just plain brutal.
by jimmygnole on Mar 24, 2010 9:18 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Better against the run and spread, too.
Not relying just on speed off the edge also makes the defense less vulnerable to draw plays and running plays (when the d was expecting a pass).
This is probably a big reason why our sack numbers were down – it was easy for QBs to scramble between the ends and tackles for easy yardage.
Shuddering
I just had terrible flashbacks to BJ Daniels running all over us last Sept.
"I got a PBS mind in an MTV world"...Jimmy Buffett
by The Ryno and I Know on Mar 24, 2010 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions
pass rush lanes
Just like in the offensive running game there are “running lanes” there are also pass rush lanes. When you run up the field uncontrollably those langes become wide open and it allows for the QB to step up into said lanes. Also allows the QB open vision down the field which in turn makes it easier to complete passes.
Kudos oline
That would explain how we made a RS Frosh look like a friggin All-American. I also like it better than the previous response given “Boy oh, boy they surprised us. They were much better than we saw on film. They’re good, ya know.”
"I got a PBS mind in an MTV world"...Jimmy Buffett
by The Ryno and I Know on Mar 24, 2010 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I doubt there is anyone to chart this, but I would bet that part of the reason sacks were down last year is that we could not stop the run.
It is a lot easier to take short drops and avoid sacks on 3d and 3 than 3d and 10.
It is your mission
should you choose to accept it.
by Jamil Dawson on Mar 25, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Any idea if our overall TFL numbers were similarly bad?
Assume they are proportional but would be interesting if they weren’t.
Don't remember if those were our final numbers but yes they were down

It's a beautiful day in Tallahassee
The TFL dropoff seems to be a lot worse than the sacks.
Looks like about a 19% reduction in sacks in 09 from our 06-08 average, compared to 31% in TFL.
at one point
we had allowed more TDs than tallied TFLs.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 10:12 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yet another reason we should be optomistic...my little sister could coach our defense better than it was last year.
A moderatly okay coach would improve this defense.
A quality coach would do wonders.
And a great coach may have a bit more to work with than some might realize.
Stoops is at least Quality and may prove to be better…. how long it takes is key.
Yeah, right!
We had 12 sacks in non-conf games last year?
Speak softly, and carry a big Spear
by tdchrisdavis on Mar 24, 2010 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions
You know, I have to say it because it needs to be said.
I was an economics major at FSU for all of 20 minutes. But the one thing I took away from that line of thought was that ANY graph needs to have a baseline of 0. Otherwise, it is fundamentally flawed. These two bar graphs have baselines of 3.5 and 2.5 percent respectively. Bit of a pet peeve of mine…
I bleed Garnet and piss Gold.
This came up a while ago
Can’t remember which post. The conclusion we came to was that it was ok to show differences within a range. Can anyone remember where the discussion was or why it was?
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 10:10 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
It is ok in several circumstances.
I modify my graphs’ axises all the time for my biology, chemistry, and physics lab reports. In fact, in some circumstances, kids will get points taken off because they left the baselines at zero, which can make it harder to determine what the graph is telling you. If you graph the products formed in a reaction vs time, it may make little sense to leave the baseline at zero because it could be hard to see smaller differences (if it’s a slow reaction, for example) quickly and distinctly, which is the whole point of graphing data in the first place.
by PadraicTheSeminole on Mar 24, 2010 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Not sure but
The reason you can’t start at something besides 0 is that then you have an exaggeration of the differences between data groups. For example say the maximum number for a given set of data is 10 and the minimum is 8, the % increase between 8 and 10 is 25%. Say you used 4 as a base instead of 0, visually it appears look like an increase from 4 (8-4) to 6 (10-4) or a 50%. It simply is a visual exaggeration, that congress and other politicians sadly use to fool people all the time.
However, I would guess you could say, despite not following convention, that if a number higher than 0 was fair baseline. For example if you said, well 3.5% is a fair base over 0% because 3.5% is the minimum rate you achieve when defense is simply fielded (i.e. In theory a defense can NEVER have a worse success rate, so this is the actual true minimum). Then the quality of execution,talent, etc. is what brings it above that rate.
3.5% is a bit too high of a rate to assume that. Technically anything above 0% is not completely defensible but if you add some qualifications it can be close enough. Perhaps if you made the minimum the lowest % of any D1 team that would be a fair compromise, but also qualify this in a footnote or something.
Juggernaut, Definition: Christian Ponder
EJ's response to his own role in 2010 Offense: "You still haven't seen what all (Ponder) can do."
Ponder's 09 regular season projections pre-injury: 21 TD: 2 Int, 3738 yards
Scale
The scale can be calibrated to account for what you mentioned.
by PadraicTheSeminole on Mar 24, 2010 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions
I think the main point was to show that
FSU was last in the ACC in sack % and that Arizona was first in the Pac 10. The results were conveyed with the baseline set to what it is now. If it were at zero, the graphs would be unnecessarily taking up more space. I agree that a graph can be manipulated exaggerated by changing the baseline, however I don’t believe this is the case. One of the first steps to reading a graph is to know what information you are trying to get out of it.
Has noone consulted "the eBay" on this?
Surely the eBay knows!
Meh.
I think I prefer starting at 2.5 for comparative purposes over starting at zero but then jumping forward to, say, 2,000,000 to compare GDPs or something (as in the Wikipedia GDP bar graph comparing international GDPs). It seems that as long as the graph is understandable, the base shouldn’t have to be zero.
But, then, I’m an English major. Doh!
First of all - Bud you rock!
Great analysis. I am so pumped up for football season it can’t get here fast enough!
Dutch – I get your point, the presentation might be “cleaner” in appearance baselined at zero, but I disagree that the graph is “fundamentally flawed.” Baselining at 2.5 and 3.5 doesn’t skew or alter the data in any way. The accurate percentages are still displayed.
Maybe skewing the data is not such a bad thing.
So we’re not constantly reminded of the carnage we actually witnessed on the field.
To Hersty's point,
Changing the baseline can skew visually and “exaggerate” what the data is telling you. What I was referring to when I said it doesn’t “skew” is that it doesn’t actually change the raw data.
I think the key is to look at the y-axis and see the difference in sack % from one team to another and not get too caught up in how big the bar looks.
the idea of using the theoretical minimum makes sense.
I’ll do that next time.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 11:08 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Good catch.
But it’s not as big a deal when FSU is last and AZ is first in their respective conferences/graphs. The point is clear.
It has been awhile since I took statistics
in the B School, but IMO, you need a zero base line to correctly show a visual representation of the ratios and relationships of each result to the other. Whether the base line is 2.5% or 3.5%, all of the columns that would appear below the chosen base line would be filled in if the base line were to be lowered to zero. Using Washington State and Cal. as an example, and assuming that WS is 3% and Cal. is 4.5%, then WS column should be 2/3 as high as WS’ column. However, looking at the two columns in the graph, the Cal. column is four times as high as the WS column. The ratio between the two is skewed because the columns below the base line are not shown. I am no expert and this is only IMO.
this indepth discusion of statistics is hilarious when compared to the “you’re an idiot.. No, you are” threads on Warchant and other sights.
The credit belongs to the content posters for sure.
If I find time this afternoon I will change the graphs.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions
If you read my comment below, and have time, a comparison with 2008 might be nice.
>-----:----:------>Spear 'em then Scalp 'em
+1
This site has very thoughtful discussion, and ideas are supported with data. The comments are generally helpful and (at least for the internet) respectful of opposing points of view.
For this I am thankful.
This is
by far the funniest discussion that I have ever seen on this site or any other football site. We obviously have a very well educated group posting here, but it is just one of the funniest things I have ever seen. Guess it beats the heck out of the arguments on Gator sites over who has the dopest double-wide.
by SoCalNole on Mar 24, 2010 3:48 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Um... Thanks. I think.
For the record, MY trailer would kick your trailer’s a$$.
I bleed Garnet and piss Gold.
Guess that explains why mobile QB's sometimes had a field day against our D
by CSI Nole on Mar 24, 2010 10:12 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Oh, it explains more than that.
It explains why so many posters on other boards who excused the coaches over the last decade were clueless. So many said things like “the coaches aren’t out there missing tackles” or “it ain’t the Xs and Os but the Jimmy’s and Joe’s’” while berating anyone who criticized the coaching. They apparently thought that if we only still had the ridiculous level of talent we had in the 90’s to bring pressure off the edge and man coverage in the secondary we’d be fine.
But this article indicates why that even with our 90’s talent we weren’t able to stop a Joe Hamilton-led GT team that effectively applied misdirection against our scheme. It explains why no matter who we have on defense now, modern spread offenses have been designed to exploit our old scheme. And they did.
Bring back Peter Tom- a true Nole!
by PeachTreeNole on Mar 24, 2010 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Nice bit of information on Stoops' D at AZ.
Can’t wait to see what he does with legit FL talent.
At least we were positive in sacks per pass play (4.2%) versus sacks given up per pass play (3.4%)
Here’s a look at who is getting it done in preventing sacks on offense and getting them on defense as a function of their differences:

(data source: the above article and Bud’s 2009 Offense Review piece)
that shows how anemic our pass rush was
since be only managed to be .3% positive, and we as Bud mentioned above, was the best pass protection unit the ACC had seen in a while
I remember hearing Todd McShay
go to town on how our man scheme doesn’t work without a great D-line. I imagine we’ll use man coverage again with a re-built line?
So multiple man means sometime man?
Once we get a good line I suppose we can use man but prolly zone more often than not until then
by rabidnole21 on Mar 24, 2010 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Multiple can mean multiple coverages, multiple alignments, or both.
Judging from the reports I have received from practice, it means both.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Ok got it, thanks
These new schemes may take a while for us to comprehend as well so look forward to TN’s continued breakdown on this so I know what’s going on. it will be fun to watch and learn though.
by rabidnole21 on Mar 24, 2010 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Being Multiple on D is Key!
In today’s game you have to be multiple on defense as well as on offense. When an opponent knows you are going to play an entire game only using one scheme, a talented offense will tear you apart. Hate to praise that team but look at the gaytors when they played us knowing they were going to get a man defense and look at them when they crushed Ohio State knowing they were going to get zone coverage only. That is why even a terrible passer (tebow) can have success because the QB’s reads are simplified. I love to hear Jimbo stress the importance of being multiple and he cited when he was asked what qualities he was looking for in a coordinator.
by NationWideNole on Mar 24, 2010 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Jimbo is multiple on offense, so it is not surprising he believes in being multiple on defense.
Not knowing what coverage we are going to be in all the time is going to be a big adjustment for the ACC teams used to us lining up in man. I think the days of unheralded quarterbacks lighting us up are over. But we were not bad on defense last because we played man—we were just bad.
Even a terrible passer like Tebow can have success...
I loved the back handed compliment. Excellent work.
"I got a PBS mind in an MTV world"...Jimmy Buffett
by The Ryno and I Know on Mar 24, 2010 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions
We're going to play primarily zone
Largely because of the QB run threat that UF, NC State, Clemson, GTech, VTech present. Need to have 11 eyes on the football.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Telling point by Bert Reed the other day
Basically said that if you beat one man in the old defense, you’re open.
And there's nothing wrong with playing man defense.
There are bad zone defenses as well.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Exactly
So I won’t be surprised if I see it then.
by rabidnole21 on Mar 24, 2010 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions
our old defense...
was fine in theory. It was just lousy execution, adjusting and coaching. There’s a thousand ways to skin a cat.
Bud, apparently we are doing alot of Monte Kiffin quarters\cover 2 stuff. Thats what I heard anyway.
Probably the same way we ran Leak in 06
Little, and only moderately effective.
FWIW, Burton looked real impressive as a short yardage runner in scrimmage the other day. He might be our 3rd and 1 guy this year, but I’d rather roll with Moody and Gillislee.
by PullingGuardGator on Mar 24, 2010 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I know the Gators don't want to call it the wildcat
but I do see them using Burton to run this year. He’s a good runner and he makes Tebow look like a pinpoint passer.
You could roll with Moody and Gillislee and Burton. Part of what makes y’all’s offene so effective is the threat of the QB run.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Is Van at spring practice or is he coming this summer?
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Cool
He’s from my hometown and I’d like to follow his progress. Someone thought he wa from NY but thats just where he he went to prep school
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Really? Where is that?
I just assumed he was from NY. It’s weird to see us signing two guys from NY high schools.
by PullingGuardGator on Mar 24, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
San Diego, Ca
He went to Reggie Bush’s old HS. The coach there now (Troy Starr) was on Meyer’s staff for a year I think
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
His HS class actually graduated in June of 09
Went to Milford Prep to get his grades up for college admission I presume
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Immagine that westcoast
I’m in La Mesa (a small city on the border of San Diego for those who aren’t in the know). I never would have thought there would be another Nole diehard like me out here.
by SoCalNole on Mar 24, 2010 4:39 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I've never met another here in SD in over 22 years (Funny how there's a few gator bars out here that have popped up)
I grew up primarily in Paradise Hills and spent some time in Skyline and Southcrest ( Two areas in southeast San Diego. The home of most of our four heisman winners for those that don’t know)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast_San_Diego#Athletes
So yeah, I grew up being the only Nole diehard I knew. My whole family are Sooners so it’s rather interesting. Lincoln HS Hornets one more win from being state b-ball champs(How’d that taste on Saturday Compton HS!?). Sorry, I rarely get the chance to plug my city of this site, so when the opportunity presents inself I do like to take full advantage
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm relatively new to San Diego,
And was wondering if there are sports bars in the area the show Nole games. I’ve been here for ~3.5 years having moved from Jax.
Chipauger that makes 3 fans, which sounds like a club to me.
The only thing left to decide is where the meet is. We have one corner of the map covered, who has the other three?
by SoCalNole on Mar 24, 2010 8:57 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think this spot would have them
http://www.playerssportsbar.com/ Although I don’t get to see as many games as I like since I film youth football games most Saturdays. We’d have to wade our ways thru enemy fans though. Just a warning
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 10:56 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm in
I lived in Oklahoma for a few years and watched some Bucs games at a Packers bar. I doubt it will be any worse then that.
Plenty of Gators by my count
I grew up in Jax Beach and pretty much any kid that didn’t go off to college b/w 1994-99 headed due west to San Diego or just north, and they were all Gators. Not surprised they’ve invaded the west coast too. After all, it is a Gator Nation…we’re just living in it. I FN hate those commercials.
"I got a PBS mind in an MTV world"...Jimmy Buffett
by The Ryno and I Know on Mar 25, 2010 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions
1994-99 in J-ville...
It was a wonderful time and place to walk among the gaggles of gators in your Nole gear and exacerbate their anguish?
Indeed
All they really had in that time was Noah Brindise to Jaquez Green in ’97 and the Nat Champ game that should have never been.
"I got a PBS mind in an MTV world"...Jimmy Buffett
by The Ryno and I Know on Mar 25, 2010 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Spring game chess match?
I know i’m prolly jumping the gun topic wise here but anyone expect a chess match of sorts between Coley/CP7 & Stoops/Hud in the spring game?
I.e. will JF tell Stoops/Hud to do his best to confuse Coley/CP7 (or just CP7 in a Manning like command)?
I think Spring Games are somewhat rigged
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Like pro-wrestling rigged?
In that case, I want to see Jimbo blow up on some ref and then DiamondCutter him.
Like I think they tip their hands a bit.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
The players don't know
The coaches do. They will sometimes call a play to put the D in position to make a play. The Spring Game is largely a PR tool. The coaches see what they need to see in the scrimmages.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
That's interesting.
How specific do they get with tipping the plays based on personnel? Say there’s a safety whose confidence they’re trying to improve. Will the offense tip a play to the defensive coaches so that safety can be in position to make the play and subsequently help improve his confidence or is it just general?
My dad came in and freaked out once when he was doing the "signal" for the diamond cutter
Evidently he thought the “diamond” looked like something else. That’s when I had to learn to program the VCR to tape WCW when the old parents weren’t looking.
by Randall W. Spetman on Mar 24, 2010 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
They are going to kill our defense
Or at least they should
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Especially in the 1st scrimmage
where they don’t know what they’re doing yet.
by rabidnole21 on Mar 24, 2010 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the O might tip some plays
To increase the confidence of the defense.
Speak softly, and carry a big Spear
by tdchrisdavis on Mar 24, 2010 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Remember us saying at the time and everyone jumping us?
Then the next scrimmage BOOM 650 yards of offense in a half.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Bud, based on the Arizona film you've watched, what coverage does Stoops run the most in general?
Also, do you have any statistics on what coverages he calls based on down and distance situations?
It's really hard to get much on Arizona
Their fans must hate youtube. I don’t have those stats. Looks to me like he runs cover-3 and cover-2 and I know he liked Quarters against spread run teams (OHST copied his oregon gameplan for the rose bowl which worked great for AZ for 3 quarters), which Va Tech runs as well.
by Bud Elliott on Mar 24, 2010 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Gotcha.
I figured my questions may be difficult to answer due to limited resources, but I took a shot at it anyway. I like watching Va Tech’s Quarters coverage. They run it almost to perfection. That’s pretty neat that Ohio St. used AZ’s gameplan to beat Oregon. Guess Tressel should thank their staff for getting them over the BCS hump.
While I do not dispute the point behind Bud's story, and by no means am I siding with the naysayers that he quoted in his story, there is SOME truth and validity to their claim that
“FSU’s defense doesn’t have that dominant defensive end and that iswhat’s*ONE OF THE THINGS wrong with the defense.”
There is absolutely no doubt that bigger, stronger, and smarter DT’s in the middle will collapse the pocket and push back their blockers into the QB’s face and block some of the passing lanes. Throw in some well timed zone blitzes, and a good zone-based secondary where the players know their assignments and know how to pass off receivers while continuing to maintain coverage in their zone, and I expect our defense to become a top third ranked defense by 2011, instead of the defensive laughingstock of the NCAA we fielded last season.
However, I don’t believe anyone will argue that a well coached, smart, and fast defensive end is also instrumental in reaching that goal, and that the loss of Everette Brown was a huge factor in our defense collapse to ineptness.
In the 13 games he started in 2008, Everette accounted for 13.5 sacks (#4 in the nation), 3 QBH, 21.5 TFL, forced 4 fumbles and recovered one, had 30 unassisted tackles with another 6 assists for a total of 36 tackles, broke up 2 pass attempts, and defended 2 passes.
The loss of this type of dominating player is only one of the main reasons why FSU finished ranked nationally 33rd in 2008 [in simple total defense without any advanced metrics] and dropped to #108 in 2009, after Brown forsake us for the NFL.
This is why, all things even, a defensive end with speed off the edge, while indeed an old technique that college coaches can scheme around if not back up by a solid secondary and LB’s, is essential and unquestionably very important for any successful defense to have.
What I would find interesting would be to see is the difference between the first graph (ACC Sack Frequency) in the story compared to the same graph for 2008.
>-----:----:------>Spear 'em then Scalp 'em
The NFL know all too well the value of such players
Thats why Suggs petitioned the league to designate him as an end as opposed to a LB when he got the francise tag. Way more $. I’ve long thought 2010 will be a “Process” year on D and a top 60 finish as a product of that would suffice. It’s really about having kids unlearn what was taught by the previous regime and setting 2011 as being the year in which we are truly nasty on D.
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Yesterday one of my friends was telling me about a poll he saw.
It asked a bunch of NFL coaches, scouts, and GMs what’s more valuable to an NFL defense, a dominant DT or a dominant edge rusher? He said the results were overwhelmingly in favor of the dominant edge rusher.
Frank I completely agree with a lot of that
Perhaps I didn’t do it well, but I meant to convey that not having an NFL type DE is not an excuse or a crutch when other teams are getting it done without them.
And that is not to say that I don't expect to get that type of player (I do, and I think we have some on the roster now who are not yet developed)
But I think our D in 2008 was worse than its performance showed, largely because of our ability to injure quarterbacks (and some ridiculous tactics used by opposing offensive coordinators).
I agree
Our defense in 08 got some lucky breaks and caused some qb injuries. I believe this inflated their stats.
Striker: "Surely you can't be serious!" Rumack: "I am serious... and don't call me Shirley."
The chart was pretty easy for me
Stoops finished first in sacks in his conference and FSU finished last. Those kind of results are hard to skew.
I agree some sites are discouraging simply due to the clueless rhetoric of some fans. Maybe it is designed that way. Sign up for the real stuff and getaway from the nonsense. It is hard to imagine any large segment of the fan base actually advocating keeping the status quo at FSU last year.
Maybe the defense can pick up the scheme faster than we believe right? FSU is due for some kind of miracle. It can’t continue to be walking miles of bad road.
" Fisher’s approach to building a winner is lifted from Saban’s playbook. Right down to the terminology such as becoming more "process oriented" as opposed to "results oriented."
" Nick and I are friends," he said. "That guy is one of the best football coaches I’ve ever been around. God knows he’s brilliant. … A lot of the things he believes are a lot of things I believe. We’re very similar!
The process begins!
Oh I absolutely believe that some site authors/administrators
Have 8 or 10 screen names. One in which they use to present material/chat/post. The other ones are used to post such idiotic stuff that it forces the user to purchase premium content, just to try to have an intellectual conversation with someone.
TN, obviously, is the exception to this, but I refuse to believe there are that many idiots in the world.
by Randall W. Spetman on Mar 24, 2010 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions
like Jeff Foxworthy says,
just go to the state fair and look around sometime, and you’ll feel like dang near royalty!
Bring back Peter Tom- a true Nole!
by PeachTreeNole on Mar 24, 2010 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you are right Randy
" Fisher’s approach to building a winner is lifted from Saban’s playbook. Right down to the terminology such as becoming more "process oriented" as opposed to "results oriented."
" Nick and I are friends," he said. "That guy is one of the best football coaches I’ve ever been around. God knows he’s brilliant. … A lot of the things he believes are a lot of things I believe. We’re very similar!
The process begins!
by DocHoliday2 on Mar 24, 2010 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions
I would like to see us knock down a few passes now and then.
Our defensive line almost never reached up to knock down passes. Not that it mattered much since they were rarely in the passing lanes.
Completely agree
Oline0175’s post above tlaks about this, but we gave QBs huge throwing lanes. Killer-Whales would find our passing lanes accommodating.
I wish I knew more about Stoops' D
I’d like to know what sort of multiples we’ll be running (and why); how much man we’ll be running; and if our players’ experience playing man under Mickey will help playing man under Stoops. The upshot, however, is that I probably won’t be able to understand everything about his D!
Nothing can stop us....
At the very least...
can we expect that when we run man it will be Cover 2 man, and not Man Free? Possibly some Cover 1 Robber similar to Saban?
I wouldn't mind seeing some "Robber" packages employed
I think maybe the Stoops would like for the defense to have a good grasp of the base schemes first before we try to actually “Force” turnovers. It would be a good look to throw ar people once the base schemes have been scouted by opponents
by westcoastnolefan on Mar 24, 2010 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions
You almost got me
I am not taking the juicy bait you laid out for the grammar police, but you almost had me!
It is actually genius because the word could be just misspelled.
Not a reply to your post Ricobert, but just a chime in:
I have been doing something like this on Madden for years. I take the 4-3 base, and I put 3 DT’s and 1 DE/OLB type with speed on the edge. I take the quickest DT and put him on the strong side end position and ran a zone with some blitzing.
I never could get to the QB in any defense, so I was forced to control the running lanes and the pocket because of my Madden ED defensive play or MED. It worked like mad. My MED was cured, and my defense was rock solid.
by LincolnHighNole on Mar 25, 2010 2:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Defensive improvements will be self-reinforcing
Last year (ok, laster) our defense found myriad ways to not stop anyone. Consequently, in many games we were behind, tied, or barely ahead. So the defense rarely got to play downhill.
If our offense is as good as last year (damn, laster), and our defense can make stops, force turnovers, etc. once in a while – we should find ourselves in better situations with commanding leads and force our opponents into playing more one-dimensionally on offense. For example the late 3rd quarter/ 4th quarter of the BYU game and the end of the WVU game. And all of the 2008 Maryland game.
If we can do that a few more times this year, our defensive ranking (NCAA not so much DFEI which adjusts for garbage time) will improve accordingly. Even DFEI will improve however somewhat – playing defense with a 21-14 lead is much easier than when you’re down by 10 or so (like we were against BC or UF). The opponent has the advantage of running their entire playbook at you at that point.
by GraniteStateNoles on Mar 24, 2010 6:55 PM EDT reply actions
Ahhhh blitzing
that long lost art form that hasn’t been seen in ages at Doak Campbell. Last year our defense performed blitzes that were ill-timed, poorly planned, and poorly executed. I think some guys hit it on the nail above with some of their comments as well. FrankDNole’s assessment of the end position is accurate and I believe we have some ends that can perform at Everette Brown’s level. The improvement of the entire defensive line will be crucial however into how well our overall defense performs. GraniteStateNoles comment that playing from behind last year was not helpful for our defensive ranking was also on point. If we can gain some leads this year and make some opposing teams offense predictable then I think we can improve our ranking as well this year. I saw Arizona play a few times (my wife is from AZ) and their defense has always been impressive. A lot of diehard AZ fans were hoping they could get back to the “Desert Swarm” defensive years. Expect to see a lot of zone with blitzes mixed in throughout. He also uses fire zone blitzes. Multiple alignments of 4-3 and 3-4 should be expected as well and all of Stoops’s alignments are built to confuse the qb. The talent level here compared to AZ’s talent though is noticably different(as you noted above Bud) and if the defense can improve at least to top 50 then we are going in the right direction. Anything in the top 30 next year and I might pass out. It should be noted as well some AZ fans believe that Mike Stoops was the real man behind the Wildcat’s defense and Mark was simply a figurehead. I never saw that and I expect our defense as well as our blitzing to improve.
Striker: "Surely you can't be serious!" Rumack: "I am serious... and don't call me Shirley."
Forgot to add
If you want to find out about Mark’s defense then a good place to look would be the link I’m adding below. (warning it is a .pdf) It is Bob Stoop’s 2002 Oklahoma Defensive playbook and Mike was the defensive coordinator on that staff. He left a year later to Arizona and promptly hired Mark. The Stoops brother’s defense might have evolved a bit since then, but I bet some of the same philosophies, blitzes and reads are still relevant.
warning .pdf file. right click to save or read in browser.
http://www.fastandfuriousfootball.com/collegedefense/2002%20oklahoma%20defense.pdf
Striker: "Surely you can't be serious!" Rumack: "I am serious... and don't call me Shirley."
Wow. Thanks a lot for posting the link.
I saw a link with the playbook before, but I’ve been hoping somebody would post it in a file, so that I could save it to my cpu.
I'm also scheduled to lose consciousness with a Top 30 D.
We should look into buying Life Alerts in bulk to cut costs.
A Top 30 Defense
Is a Pipe Dream! But hopefully, it’s a lead pipe that can be used to bludgeon opposing offenses… that would rock.
BB's golf cart could actually tansform into an ambulance, a well kept secret, which is what he spent a lot of his money on developing - contrary to the popular belief that he lost a lot of money in real estate.
"I am the way, the truth, and the life...no one gets to the Father but through Me"

by 































