Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic
Posted
5 hours ago, yourout said:

Here is a fine example of really awful defensive front seven play. 

https://twitter.com/RiseNDraft/status/1836206426449956951

I think that was more of a poor seal by the outside defender.  The play was going to the left but on the backside of the play there was no seal.  So when the RB cut back there was a huge hole.

You can see the outside player notice this but far too late.  They were already engaged with the blocker and left their assignment.  The safeties also over committed to the left side and left no coverage in the right hand side.  If they did a play action off of this it would have been an easy TD to the receiver on the right.  There was no high coverage to the right.  All of the defenders were on the left side except for two defenders.

This was more of a chase the play instead of reacting to the play.  

Posted
2 hours ago, nate82 said:

I think that was more of a poor seal by the outside defender.  The play was going to the left but on the backside of the play there was no seal.  So when the RB cut back there was a huge hole.

You can see the outside player notice this but far too late.  They were already engaged with the blocker and left their assignment.  The safeties also over committed to the left side and left no coverage in the right hand side.  If they did a play action off of this it would have been an easy TD to the receiver on the right.  There was no high coverage to the right.  All of the defenders were on the left side except for two defenders.

This was more of a chase the play instead of reacting to the play.  

In your opinion, is it poor personnel or poor coaching?  I was not a fan of Tressel and am still not a fan.

Posted
21 minutes ago, Samurai Bucky said:

In your opinion, is it poor personnel or poor coaching?  I was not a fan of Tressel and am still not a fan.

Honestly probably both.  The chase the play is something that is hard to coach against.  This is especially true for more athletic players.  It tends to take them longer to realize they can’t cover up their mistakes by their physical abilities alone.

Coaching wise I think Tressel is fine.  He just doesn’t have the linemen to do what he wants.  The Badgers have the LB’s they want and the CB’s they want but they are missing the linemen.

Posted
10 hours ago, yourout said:

At Rutgers is not going to be an easy task.

It's not, but Washington is not good.  They lost almost their entire starting lineup from last year - top 2 QBs, top 2 RBs, top 2 TEs, top 3 WRs, starting LT and RT, and starting C followed their head coach to Alabama.

Posted

Really looked to me like SC got the early score & convinced themselves they could mail the rest of the game in. But as poorly as the Trojans played in the 1st half, gotta hand it to UW. O-line is physical, defensive backfield is mostly holding their own against some very impressive talent & as for Hills---he impressed me the first three weeks, but took it up another notch today. It looks like SC just can't block the guy. And it's great to see Locke get off to the good start & play with confidence.

Lean on the offensive line in the 2nd half, make them put another defender in the box--they already started gambling late in the half w/a run blitz or two--and keep pressure off Locke to HAVE to make tougher throws.

Posted
2 minutes ago, yourout said:

I think we each get a half a jinx for that second half. 

Me for turning it on and you for that post.

If it wasn’t for that muffed punt return the score would have been a lot closer.

Posted
Just now, nate82 said:

If it wasn’t for that muffed punt return the score would have been a lot closer.

Probably but I'm just so underwhelmed with this coaching staff.

Brewer Fanatic Contributor
Posted

well now

 

 

"Dustin Pedroia doesn't have the strength or bat speed to hit major-league pitching consistently, and he has no power......He probably has a future as a backup infielder if he can stop rolling over to third base and shortstop." Keith Law, 2006
Posted
5 hours ago, yourout said:

Probably but I'm just so underwhelmed with this coaching staff.

I think three things combined to change the game around. 1)You really had USC in a miserable place late in the half, and putting up one more score just before halftime could've been huge, considering you received to start the 2nd half. 2) The fumbled punt, and 3) If I'm a coach and my opponent is looking to pick up 4th & a foot I know I'd be in a tough position to stop it, but my hopes would be buoyed at least a little if the opposition lined up in a shotgun. Not that I was particularly surprised because we've done that before.

Overall, this staff needs more time before they're deemed a failure. But there are instances, including today, that point directly at some real issues regarding discipline & smart play. I thought they played hard today, they're playing more physically than before, and given the talent they faced at the offensive skill positions I felt the back end competed pretty well most of the time. It was no surprise the defense would run out of gas near the end given that the offense isn't exactly built to keep them off the field.

Posted

Yeah, seems like he has hung on and on to get his crack at the NFL, but that looks very unlikely now. He is just too injury prone. Hopefully there isn't more to it behind the scenes (i.e. either fed up with the coach or seeing a losing season and giving up).

"Rock, sometime, when the team is up against it, and the breaks are beating the boys, tell 'em to go out there with all they got and win just one for the Uecker. I don't know where I'll be then, Rock but I'll know about it; and I'll be happy."

Posted
On 9/28/2024 at 6:32 PM, homer said:

well now

 

 

I'm not usually one for rumor-mongering, and I would assume that whatever was "going-on," was probably nothing earth-shattering. Probably just challenges of bringing outsiders into a pretty insular group of decision-makers.

I'm new and naive to the thread, but I have an unrelated question for those that are bigger football guys than me... Isn't the difference between Tressel and Leonhard just a difference in defensive philosophy? I don't mean scheme or anything, which I realize plays a part, but isn't Tressel more of a "bend-don't-break," philosophy, whereas Leonhard's (and all of the previous 3-4 guys), ultra-aggressive defenses?

If the above is accurate, it's insane to witness the pole-shifting changes in philosophies on both sides of the ball. Also, I would think that the two philosophies don't pair very well. If everything works well, wouldn't the other team dominate time of possession to such a degree as to wear down your defense?

Posted
2 hours ago, Playing Catch said:

I'm new and naive to the thread, but I have an unrelated question for those that are bigger football guys than me... Isn't the difference between Tressel and Leonhard just a difference in defensive philosophy? I don't mean scheme or anything, which I realize plays a part, but isn't Tressel more of a "bend-don't-break," philosophy, whereas Leonhard's (and all of the previous 3-4 guys), ultra-aggressive defenses?

If the above is accurate, it's insane to witness the pole-shifting changes in philosophies on both sides of the ball. Also, I would think that the two philosophies don't pair very well. If everything works well, wouldn't the other team dominate time of possession to such a degree as to wear down your defense?

It is a mess in Madison for sure.  McIntosh, the Athletic Director, felt that the old school smashmouth type of football was not going to cut it anymore.  Chryst made that very easy by taking a major crap on the recruiting bed.  Fickell was the best coach available and I felt he had a better ceiling than Leonhard.

Tressel came along for the ride.  I think the biggest difference between the two (although your take is very accurate) is the use of the Linebackers.  Leonhard's use of the linebackers was genius at times.  He would mix it up in such a way that the offense would be taken off guard.  That would require, however, a good Defensive Line.  Unfortunately, I don't think Wisconsin's Defensive Line is very good.  There were times where the D line wasn't good with Leonhard and he was able to take his Linebackers and fill the gaps.  I don't see that With Tressel.

With that said, I think the defensive backs are good, but either too green or just not able to step up.  Of course, it would help if Wisconsin would win the Time of Possession -- something that was a staple of the Ground and Pound philosophy.

So Tressel's lack of having good defensive games may be a result of being on the field too long.  That is directly attributed to Longo's offense.  There have been flashes of being good, but they haven't been able to string it together, yet.  I feel a little better with what I have seen this year vs. last year, though.

Let's see how they do against Purdon't this weekend.  The line is -13.5.  Hopefully they are able to put up some big numbers.  If they do, then my pessimism may be curbed... a little.

  • Like 2
Posted

As of right now, Purdue and Northwestern are the only 2 games Wisconsin is projected to win, big favorites over Purdue and slight favorites over Northwestern.  They are expected to not really be competitive in any of the other games except Minnesota.

Posted
2 hours ago, endaround said:

As of right now, Purdue and Northwestern are the only 2 games Wisconsin is projected to win, big favorites over Purdue and slight favorites over Northwestern.  They are expected to not really be competitive in any of the other games except Minnesota.

That would be my take as well. Especially without anything resembling a decent quarterback.

Posted
4 hours ago, Samurai Bucky said:

It is a mess in Madison for sure.  McIntosh, the Athletic Director, felt that the old school smashmouth type of football was not going to cut it anymore.  Chryst made that very easy by taking a major crap on the recruiting bed.  Fickell was the best coach available and I felt he had a better ceiling than Leonhard.

Tressel came along for the ride.  I think the biggest difference between the two (although your take is very accurate) is the use of the Linebackers.  Leonhard's use of the linebackers was genius at times.  He would mix it up in such a way that the offense would be taken off guard.  That would require, however, a good Defensive Line.  Unfortunately, I don't think Wisconsin's Defensive Line is very good.  There were times where the D line wasn't good with Leonhard and he was able to take his Linebackers and fill the gaps.  I don't see that With Tressel.

With that said, I think the defensive backs are good, but either too green or just not able to step up.  Of course, it would help if Wisconsin would win the Time of Possession -- something that was a staple of the Ground and Pound philosophy.

So Tressel's lack of having good defensive games may be a result of being on the field too long.  That is directly attributed to Longo's offense.  There have been flashes of being good, but they haven't been able to string it together, yet.  I feel a little better with what I have seen this year vs. last year, though.

Let's see how they do against Purdon't this weekend.  The line is -13.5.  Hopefully they are able to put up some big numbers.  If they do, then my pessimism may be curbed... a little.

Pretty good analysis. JL had defensive linemen that could either make plays, or at the very least be good enough to occupy blockers. Thompson was a big loss. But I'm encouraged by flashes Hills has shown the last two games.

It's hard for me to compare who is better AFA scheming is concerned because it won't work either way if you're out of position, over-pursue, etc & there's a lot of this going on. Now, maybe THAT can be put on the coaches. I feel there's a lot of emphasis under this staff of athleticism, making plays, speed. Perhaps being more assignment-sure is a bit more important? I loved the way Leonhard coached the defense, But Tressel deserves to have some leash remaining.

 I feel they made some strides last week against a QB & group of receivers the likes of which I doubt they will see from here on out. And there was some semblance of pressure compared to the previous weeks. They certainly ARE on the field too long, and yes much of that is on the offense.

Not to get biblical, but if they struggle tomorrow, hoo boy, there will be wailing & gnashing of teeth among the fan base.

  • Like 2
Posted
22 hours ago, nate82 said:

Seems like a quality young man who wasn't dealt the best of hands, to say the least. Good luck to him.

From a football standpoint at least it's a spot on the field where there are other options, unlike previous personnel losses.

  • Like 1
Posted

It really sucks for Mellusi but he hasn't looked right all year so far.  He hasn't had that spring in his step where he can hit a hole and go.  It looks like he can't plant and cut right now which is a serious issue for a RB.  I hope he gets healthy and he can come back and finish the season. 

But his career is probably done now. 

Posted
2 hours ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

Not to get biblical, but if they struggle tomorrow, hoo boy, there will be wailing & gnashing of teeth among the fan base.

We might have to gird up our loins.  😉

  • WHOA SOLVDD 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Brewer Fanatic Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Brewers community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of Brewer Fanatic.

×
×
  • Create New...