The Return of the 3-3-5

[bbwvfan]

Your argument that any defense is too complex is just strange to me, and always has been. These guys aren't playing Pop Warner. If the kids don't understand a certain thing that is being asked of them, it's the coach's job to either make it make sense to them, or scrap the idea. That's what they get paid to do. And that goes for the 3-3, 4-3, 3-4 or any other look.

Oh well. I am tired of arguing it with you. Dan Conley would disagree with you.

You can only play the teams on your schedule. Casteel and his defense contributed to way more wins than losses. Call me crazy, but I'd rather give up 2000 yards, and 100 points in a game and win, than 50 yards and 3 points in a game, and lose. But hey, that's just me.

So, your crack about last year's defense being easy to learn but finishing #101 was meant to point out...?

 

[bbwvfan]

Let's see...DeForrest would have had plenty of time to show what he could have done with WVU's defense...if he didn't have them setting records for all-time worst performances. You think the fair thing to do would be to keep him in place another year? You think he was ready for the big time?

I thought my point was made clearly... maybe not. I stated that DeForest was reassigned, and I understood from Dan why this decision was made. He has remained friends with Coach Dunlap... who coached at SU for a number of seasons, and Coach Dunlap gave him the scoop on how things went our first year in the Big 12.

Coach Holgorsen obviously thought Coach DeForest was ready for the big time. Based on how the kids performed under his time as the DC, it does not look like he was ready to me.

But, to be fair... it was just one year. Coach Rodriguez did not look ready to be the WVU HC his first year either... going 3-8... losing to Temple, and beating only 1 AQ team in doing so... a terrible RU.

 

[Jeighmonee]

Oh well. I am tired of arguing it with you. Dan Conley would disagree with you.

Lol, I ignored the namedrop earlier, but you're really beating on that drum huh? Ok, here you go...

Personally I think it's kind of in poor taste (and kind of corny) to throw people's names around for the sake of trying to prove a point on a message board. But that's just me. I'm comfortable leaving my acquaintances anonymous...but you're not the only one here with D1 connections (or NFL connections for that matter) :tape2:

Anyway, there's a difference between not preferring a certain look, and saying that it's fundamentally poor (which, correct me if I'm wrong, is what you're saying). I'd be surprised if your buddy truly thought it was a "bad" scheme from a fundamental standpoint.

So, your crack about last year's defense being easy to learn but finishing #101 was meant to point out...?

Was meant to point out that ANY defense can look bad (or good) depending on many factors in any given game, during any given season. That's all. Once again, I think your friend would agree...

 

[Jeighmonee]

Coach Rodriguez did not look ready to be the WVU HC his first year either... going 3-8... losing to Temple, and beating only 1 AQ team in doing so... a terrible RU.

This is true.

But we couldn't very well fire RR after that one season - it would have been a financial/PR mess. It was much easier to move DeForrest to a spot on the staff where he could do less damage, and not have to throw away that ridiculous salary we owed him by firing him. But I get your point. I think the risk was just too high to keep him at DC, and everyone knew it.

 

[Slaton10]

If the 3-3-5 was so good, why isn't there more teams using it?

I think it works good every 4 years, then there is 2 years that are really down. The third year it is mediocre.

Well that's an easy answer...several teams do play it...they just don't use it as a base formation...

 

[Slaton10]

Your argument that any defense is too complex is just strange to me, and always has been. These guys aren't playing Pop Warner. If the kids don't understand a certain thing that is being asked of them, it's the coach's job to either make it make sense to them, or scrap the idea. That's what they get paid to do. And that goes for the 3-3, 4-3, 3-4 or any other look.



To be fair?

I would agree to a point...and I would also agree with BBW to a point...Defense's have maybe 20 to 25 play calls that include blitz packages on average..the formations vary based on offensive schemes...so Jeigh I get that, but I do agree with BBW regarding player "Keys" depending on offensive sets..a DC can make that a "3 READ"..and that is when you open yourself up to busted coverages...or not covering the TE!

Let's see...DeForrest would have had plenty of time to show what he could have done with WVU's defense...if he didn't have them setting records for all-time worst performances. You think the fair thing to do would be to keep him in place another year? You think he was ready for the big time?

I told BBW watching that defense play against JMU it was soft!...no press coverage...no real scheme behind blitz package...it was all about boundary coverage and deep third...and the team got torched between the numbers because of it...and the guy never waivered in play calling

Under Patterson the unit showed improvement, but they were also a group with more reps under their belts, so of course they would be better (plus, let's face it, they couldn't be much worse). Ultimately they got whacked with some injuries, and fell apart. But hey, that's football. Injuries are a part of the game.

And DeForrest being reassigned to more than just ST's only proves that he's a capable position coach (and I do believe he is a pretty good DB coach) - nothing more.

I can't really asses what Patterson did...they had so many guys injured or JUCO's playing they never seemed to find cohesion...



It happens.



You can only play the teams on your schedule. Casteel and his defense contributed to way more wins than losses. Call me crazy, but I'd rather give up 2000 yards, and 100 points in a game and win, than 50 yards and 3 points in a game, and lose. But hey, that's just me. Shutouts are hard to come by...especially in our league. You may require stellar defensive stats game in and game out, but all I want is to hold our opponents to less points than us.

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter what defense WVU runs, whether it be the stack, the 3-4, the 4-3 or whatever. There are so many contributing factors that go into whether a D is successful or not - injuries, coaching, recruiting, discipline, experience, attention to detail, etc. BB you and I have gone back and forth about the Stack for years, and not once have you ever heard me profess my love for it, or even say I prefer it over anything else...because I don't.

But I've always had to speak up in support of it because, from a fundamental football standpoint, it's a fine scheme capable of getting the job done. If we do go back to it (and I'll only believe it when I see it) and have some success, you won't see me throwing jabs at you, or throwing crap in your face. I'll just be happy that our team is competing and winning more regularly. That's it.

I agree...the 33 Stack is a solid fundamental defense that makes a lot of sense for spread formations..

 

[Jeighmonee]

. I would agree to a point...and I would also agree with BBW to a point...Defense's have maybe 20 to 25 play calls that include blitz packages on average..the formations vary based on offensive schemes...so Jeigh I get that, but I do agree with BBW regarding player "Keys" depending on offensive sets..a DC can make that a "3 READ"..and that is when you open yourself up to busted coverages...or not covering the TE!

I don't disagree that things can get complicated within a specific scheme (and this goes for all schemes), but this comes back to what the coaches are asking their players to do within it. A coach doesn't HAVE to make his kids use triangle reads. Sure, it's nice if you've got players who can grasp that, and at the collegiate level I'd hope most can (its not uncommon for high school teams to ask their players to do it), but if for whatever reason they can't it's a good idea to either "dumb it down", find another player who can do it, or figure out a different way to defend that formation. So again, this isn't a Stack-specific issue. All defenses can be simple or complex depending on the players within it, and the coach calling it.

 

[bbwvfan]

Personally I think it's kind of in poor taste (and kind of corny) to throw people's names around for the sake of trying to prove a point on a message board. But that's just me. I'm comfortable leaving my acquaintances anonymous...but you're not the only one here with D1 connections (or NFL connections for that matter)

Thanks for sharing your thoughts about this with me... I guess you're not impressed... and, my entire goal in dropping his name on you was to impress. I guess I look like a real dork!

Please don't think less of me...

Anyway, there's a difference between not preferring a certain look, and saying that it's fundamentally poor (which, correct me if I'm wrong, is what you're saying). I'd be surprised if your buddy truly thought it was a "bad" scheme from a fundamental standpoint

.

Weren't you remarking to me earlier today that you never understood why I thought the stack was too complex? Like I posted earlier... my feelings about the stack were shared by Dan as well.

Don't read anything more into it.

Of course the scheme is not fundamentally poor. You cannot have the defense end up the #3 and #5 or 7 defense in the country if it was a poor scheme.

Give me a break...

 

[Jeighmonee]

Of course the scheme is not fundamentally poor. You cannot have the defense end up the #3 and #5 or 7 defense in the country if it was a poor scheme.

Thank you. My work here is done.

 

[Slaton10]

I don't disagree that things can get complicated within a specific scheme (and this goes for all schemes), but this comes back to what the coaches are asking their players to do within it. A coach doesn't HAVE to make his kids use triangle reads. Sure, it's nice if you've got players who can grasp that, and at the collegiate level I'd hope most can (its not uncommon for high school teams to ask their players to do it), but if for whatever reason they can't it's a good idea to either "dumb it down", find another player who can do it, or figure out a different way to defend that formation. So again, this isn't a Stack-specific issue. All defenses can be simple or complex depending on the players within it, and the coach calling it.

We are on the same page...but when an offense uses a lot of motion or for instance a team like Syracuse who ran a pro set ..can take a player down a different read progression...

BBW..brings up the TE all of the time...if the TE is on the LOS and looks to be blocking the LB or Safety immediately goes to what ever the read progression tells him to do....so for the 33 the younger players clearly had a hard time with it...they had no trust that at times the play would come right to them if they were patient..

 

[WVUDAD]

DAD I have to ask you...you keep blaming DH when the offense doesn't show up...can't understand it really....it comes across the way you message is that no matter what lack of talent Wv throws out there..DH should still find a way to put up 60 points a game...

Slaton, I keep hearing about this lack of talent from a certain vocal few on here, when the offense puts up 50 points a game for five games, then puts up 14 in the next two games COMBINED, it aint lack of talent causing the problem. The coaches, players, hell maybe the trainers and waterboys are telegraphing plays to the other defense. I remember a year or two ago, one of the linemen moved his foot a certain way if a run was coming. One of my prime bitches at Holgorsen is that there is no effective adjustments made during games most of the time. How can this no talent team you guys claim manage to beat OSU, but lose to KU and IAST????? Lack of motivation is more to blame than any lack of talent.

 

[bbwvfan]

Thank you. My work here is done.

Not quite. I would love to read your comments on why Casteel's stack finished #122 in Total Defense in 2012? Wasn't that a worse finish than what happened that year at WVU?

Casteel is definitely a better coach than DeForest...more experienced....

Weird... huh?

 

[bbwvfan]

DAD,

I would like a response to this…

Where to go with that, you claim Holgorsen as a genius, yet forgive the games where the offense doesnt show up, YET you pick out a game where the defense was killed by the offense continually turning the ball over as evidence of poor defense?????????

You find my questioning of a couple of games in 2011 as ridiculous, yet you respond to Slaton10 with this…

Slaton, I keep hearing about this lack of talent from a certain vocal few on here, when the offense puts up 50 points a game for five games, then puts up 14 in the next two games COMBINED

Can you explain your logic to me? Cause it looks like you are being just as ridiculous as I am.

 

[bbwvfan]

And, I know Jeigh is a pretty sharp dude. Not sure why he got off track with my opinion of the 3-3-5, I have always been of the belief that the complexity and communication necessary to run it at a high level was an issue for college kids. I never spoke about it being fundamentally poor or unsound.

As I cited earlier in this thread, Coach Robinson and Coach Shafer were forced to run the Stack at UofM. Two very good coaches working with elite personnel. Robinson worked with kids recruited to the system. And, they both struggled to get results.

Maybe Jeigh could explain what happened at UofM for us in addition to what Casteel went through his first year at Zona.

 

[Jeighmonee]

And, I know Jeigh is a pretty sharp dude. Not sure why he got off track with my opinion of the 3-3-5, I have always been of the belief that the complexity and communication necessary to run it at a high level was an issue for college kids. I never spoke about it being fundamentally poor or unsound.

As I cited earlier in this thread, Coach Robinson and Coach Shafer were forced to run the Stack at UofM. Two very good coaches working with elite personnel. Robinson worked with kids recruited to the system. And, they both struggled to get results.

Maybe Jeigh could explain what happened at UofM for us in addition to what Casteel went through his first year at Zona.

Nah, I'm not really into playing guessing games, or arguing for the sake of arguing (I know, you probably won't like that...although I appreciate the baiting!). I gladly went back and forth with you about the merits of the Stack because your stance just didn't make sense to me (and I don't remember you ever saying that you thought the Stack was fundamentally sound. If you had, the conversation would have been put to bed years ago).

But I didn't follow Michigan all that closely when they were going through their struggles (and I didn't really follow Arizona all that closely in 2012 - to address your other post). I'm sure there are a number of reasons why they had issues (like all teams), and it probably wasn't solely an inability to grasp the concepts (though maybe that was part of it). Who knows? Maybe Casteel is a good coach but isn't a good teacher? Maybe Robinson was so used to doing things one way he had a hard time when he was told to do things differently? I really have no idea, and I don't really care enough to take a stance one way or the other. I'm sure the reasons/excuses for those results are pretty similar to the ones our fans have been making for why things have gone poorly at WVU. Just check out those threads, and I'm sure you'll find your answers somewhere in there (just apply them to UM and Zona).

 

[Jeighmonee]

We are on the same page...but when an offense uses a lot of motion or for instance a team like Syracuse who ran a pro set ..can take a player down a different read progression...

BBW..brings up the TE all of the time...if the TE is on the LOS and looks to be blocking the LB or Safety immediately goes to what ever the read progression tells him to do....so for the 33 the younger players clearly had a hard time with it...they had no trust that at times the play would come right to them if they were patient..

I agree, though again, this issue is not limited to just the Stack. It's an issue of discipline. Keying that TE can be HUGE, and players at every level get caught looking elsewhere and not doing their job (especially young or inexperienced players). When this happens it usually means trouble for any defense...unless you're Bama and have studs all over the field who can make up for those kind of mistakes.

 

[bbwvfan]

I gladly went back and forth with you about the merits of the Stack because your stance just didn't make sense to me (and I don't remember you ever saying that you thought the Stack was fundamentally sound. If you had, the conversation would have been put to bed years ago).

Not sure you ever asked me if I thought the scheme was fundamentally sound. You always questioned why I hated it.

Nah, I'm not really into playing guessing games, or arguing for the sake of arguing (I know, you probably won't like that...although I appreciate the baiting!).

No problem. I never expected you to do so... for obvious reasons.

 

[Jeighmonee]

No problem. I never expected you to do so... for obvious reasons.

I guess we're both pretty predictable.

 

[bbwvfan]

Rose Embraces More Change

"In this defense you may not make as many plays as you did last year when we we're in a three technique," Rose explained. "In a five technique you probably hold your block a little longer, but that's the key to having a good defense. You just need three unselfish guys. I don't think we have a problem with that."

 

[bbwvfan]

"In this defense you may not make as many plays as you did last year when we we're in a three technique," Rose explained. "In a five technique you probably hold your block a little longer, but that's the key to having a good defense. You just need three unselfish guys. I don't think we have a problem with that."

Just one difference between running a 3-3-5 stack and the 3-4...