Would you rather...

[hoopitup]

1) ...continue to play the "bend but don't break" defense and still get beat over the top, but if if were working correctly, give up 8-10 yard plays down the field, OR

2) ...play press coverage and take chances on getting burned deep but blitz more and with more variety?

To me, it has to be option 2. We were beat over the top throughout the game when we didn't have a defender even close to the WR even when Mahomes had all day to throw.

If we drop 8, why do we give such a cushion? If we drop 8, why can't we move up closer to the line of scrimmage, say 3-5 yards off vs. 10-15 yards off?

At the end of the day, we were beat over the top numerous times so I would rather take my chances in press coverage. What am I missing?

As a coach, you have to put your team in position to make plays and give them a chance to win. If this was the game plan going in, why didn't it change and no adjustment made? I believe, at the end of the day, our defenders are not being put in position to make plays. It, potentially, is only going to be worse the next 2 weeks.

 

[AMarner32]

There needs to be a healthy balance. You can't rush six every play and try to get to the QB on every down and you can't drop eight in coverage every down either.

While our secondary definitely needs some work, you can't expect to stop an air raid offense if the QB has all day to throw every play.

 

[CyTwins]

We don't really even play a bend but don't break defense anymore. Our defense is broken so we might as well blitz

 

[Erik4Cy]

Most successful teams find ways to send disguised and exotic blitzes mixed in throughout a game running mainly their base defense otherwise. But on 3rd and long they always bring heavy blitzes. 3rd and long and ISU drops 8 because our coaching staff has decided giving up 1st downs on 3rd and 30 is what we're about.

 

[intrepid27]

1)
If we drop 8, why do we give such a cushion? If we drop 8, why can't we move up closer to the line of scrimmage, say 3-5 yards off vs. 10-15 yards off?

This!!
I'm not a strong Xs and Os person but I can't understand giving the opponent 6 free yards every fist down. We may as well just start out 2nd and 4 every time. Not very many Big XII QBs we face will not complete that pass very often. Can someone explain this strategy?

 

[MeowingCows]

I'd rather see a very aggressive defense. It's clear the some of the offenses we play are going to score on us, probably many times, regardless of whether we give cushion to prevent it or not. I'd at least like to force the other QB's to beat us. Giving 7-10 seconds to throw every play is a recipe for disaster. I'd rather see us blitz on most plays and make somebody beat us in 3 seconds instead of 7. Get up in the offenses' face, get up in the QB's face, maybe land a few hits from time to time. At least make it look like we're playing hard and making it hard instead of just waiting for it to come to us.

 

[klamath632]

I'd rather continue to play the bend over defense we've been playing. At least someone gets satisfaction in that scenario. I'm a Cyclone, so I'm used to not getting it.

 

[BigLame]

I'd be happy if we attempted to jump some routes, too. But we can't do that and/or blitz because that would potentially give up a big play. Thankfully we did not give up any of those Saturday. (insert jimlad)

Early on, Jakeem Grant ran a wheel route where he was completely uncovered down the sideline. Looking at the formation for TT, they had 4 WRs on their left side, 2 of which were on the line of scrimmage - means 1 of them is an ineligible receiver. We did this with but rather than have 2 WRs on LOS we had an OT vs KU (did this a couple times last year, too). The WR on the line of scrimmage closest to the ball is the one I believe is ineligible. On the snap this WR shows bubble & two of our DBs covered him and let Grant run free.

While we ran this play 'deceptively' on offense the prior week & split a tackle out wide, TT ran it with their WRs and got the ball to their best player. Seemed to me like a slap in the face from Kingsbury and the TT coaching staff. When we had Lanning at QB & Sam R stayed in & split out, the DB covering Sam ignored him & blitzed. The 1st time we showed that formation this season, we threw to Sam for a trick play. However, teams are not preparing for us to do that every single time. TT's game-planning & scouting were light years ahead of ours. Again, that is on the coaching staff. Notice how they used their time outs right before half to try and put more points on the board. Go for the jugular the entire time.

Coaches need to challenge themselves and our players. Over-simplifying is not the approach we need & zero risk taking leads to outcomes like this past Saturday.

 

[chuckd4735]

Id rather fire Paul, and let the new guy decide.

 

[HardcoreClone]

1) ...continue to play the "bend but don't break" defense and still get beat over the top, but if if were working correctly, give up 8-10 yard plays down the field, OR

2) ...play press coverage and take chances on getting burned deep but blitz more and with more variety?

To me, it has to be option 2. We were beat over the top throughout the game when we didn't have a defender even close to the WR even when Mahomes had all day to throw.

If we drop 8, why do we give such a cushion? If we drop 8, why can't we move up closer to the line of scrimmage, say 3-5 yards off vs. 10-15 yards off?

At the end of the day, we were beat over the top numerous times so I would rather take my chances in press coverage. What am I missing?

As a coach, you have to put your team in position to make plays and give them a chance to win. If this was the game plan going in, why didn't it change and no adjustment made? I believe, at the end of the day, our defenders are not being put in position to make plays. It, potentially, is only going to be worse the next 2 weeks.

Completely agree. I actually have liked the general idea of the move to 3-4. Problem is, Wally doesn't try to capitalize on key 3rd situations by bringing pressure, forcing a quick throw, and rallying to the football. Instead, he gets as conservative as possible, drops 7 or 8 into soft zones, and waits for the quarterback to convert 1st down throws.

I think Peavy, Wiltz, and Tribune are all capable of tightening up coverage and have shown ability to break on the ball and knock down passes. If this coaching staff believes they have any sort of Big 12 caliber athletes, then they need to stop restricting and let them play. The more I watch both sides of the ball, I've become reminded of the GMac days. He recruited plenty of Big 12 caliber athletes, but held them back and didn't fully maximize their talents.

I'm tired of seeing our teams be reactive instead of proactive. Like was mentioned, Big 12 teams are going to score no matter what. Why don't we go down swinging and at least do our part to try to force some mistakes? Utilize some of the fast backers and nickels we have. If we sit back and do nothing, we have seen that the QB's and WR's are too good and will always pick us apart. Wally is so predictable. Ever since he has been here I have never seen a CB blitz! Short side why don't you bring that boundary corner once in a while? You can let your guys play aggressive, while still teaching them how to be disciplined and minimize mistakes.

 

[Wesley]

Completely agree. I actually have liked the general idea of the move to 3-4. Problem is, Wally doesn't try to capitalize on key 3rd situations by bringing pressure, forcing a quick throw, and rallying to the football. Instead, he gets as conservative as possible, drops 7 or 8 into soft zones, and waits for the quarterback to convert 1st down throws.

I think Peavy, Wiltz, and Tribune are all capable of tightening up coverage and have shown ability to break on the ball and knock down passes. If this coaching staff believes they have any sort of Big 12 caliber athletes, then they need to stop restricting and let them play. The more I watch both sides of the ball, I've become reminded of the GMac days. He recruited plenty of Big 12 caliber athletes, but held them back and didn't fully maximize their talents.

I'm tired of seeing our teams be reactive instead of proactive. Like was mentioned, Big 12 teams are going to score no matter what. Why don't we go down swinging and at least do our part to try to force some mistakes? Utilize some of the fast backers and nickels we have. If we sit back and do nothing, we have seen that the QB's and WR's are too good and will always pick us apart. Wally is so predictable. Ever since he has been here I have never seen a CB blitz! Short side why don't you bring that boundary corner once in a while? You can let your guys play aggressive, while still teaching them how to be disciplined and minimize mistakes.

Sam Richardson also can cover tightly. Wally needs to change again if he wants to be around next year. Cushions are not made for B12, that is BIG football. Nine TT touchdowns says the plan/scheme/hope did not work. We need to confuse the opponents much more. We are just too stagnant on defense to play against.

 

[Doc]

I kind of think that they play this type of defense to help stop the run. It allows the CBs to see the ball better and defend the run. I don't think Wally is afraid to have these CBs play tight coverage, because they've done it before, but for some reason doesn't like it as much against the spread teams.

Obviously, they should maybe try something different. What's the worst that can happen? They give up 800 yards?

 

[ProhmanLegion]

I prefer that we mix it up. With no blitzing or extra pressure, we set our DB's up to run a marathon trying to stay locked up on their man. At the least, it would be nice to see more press coverage.

When we leave our corners 12-15 yards off the ball, our opponents will continue to nickel and dime us, or as I like to call it, the "Jamie Pollard Offense."

 

[cycloneworld]

The "bend don't break" defensive scheme gave up TD passes of 75, 33, 49, 37, 21 and TD runs of 54 and 53 yards.

That's bending AND breaking.

 

[CYdTracked]

I think it's obvious at this point on both sides of the ball that certain things just aren't working and it's time the entire staff starts to gamble a bit and try to change some things up in an effort to save their jobs. If you get beat you get beat but at least you get beat knowing that you tried something different instead of sticking with the same old that currently is not working. When CPR is fired after this season the entire staff needs to go with him and reboot this program with a fresh set of faces. I don't hate CPR, I really wish he was the guy that could have sustained some success in this program because I love his passion and the person that he is but we just can't continue down this same path with the same faces calling the shots and blindly believe that things are going to turn around. I'm sure all this losing and the fan base getting tired of this is not helping on the recruiting trail either which is why barring a huge turn around in these remaining games I don't see how Pollard can justify believing that next season is going to be any better than this one.

 

[thrillcat]

1) ...continue to play the "bend but don't break" defense and still get beat over the top, but if if were working correctly, give up 8-10 yard plays down the field, OR

2) ...play press coverage and take chances on getting burned deep but blitz more and with more variety?

To me, it has to be option 2. We were beat over the top throughout the game when we didn't have a defender even close to the WR even when Mahomes had all day to throw.

If we drop 8, why do we give such a cushion? If we drop 8, why can't we move up closer to the line of scrimmage, say 3-5 yards off vs. 10-15 yards off?

At the end of the day, we were beat over the top numerous times so I would rather take my chances in press coverage. What am I missing?

As a coach, you have to put your team in position to make plays and give them a chance to win. If this was the game plan going in, why didn't it change and no adjustment made? I believe, at the end of the day, our defenders are not being put in position to make plays. It, potentially, is only going to be worse the next 2 weeks.

Our problem has historically been less about the scheme we play and more about A) personnel, and B) aggressiveness. This season the personnel has been addressed, and I think we have some talent out there. But in the Big 12 today, I don't care if you play a 3-4, a 4-3, 9-2, or a 1-10, you have to play it aggressively. You have to take chances, you have to take the other team out of their rhythm. That's what opens up the opportunity for sacks, TFLs and interceptions.

Wally seems to think trotting 11 talented players out onto the field and telling them to play like ******* ******* is going to win games.

 

[hoopitup]

Our problem has historically been less about the scheme we play and more about A) personnel, and B) aggressiveness. This season the personnel has been addressed, and I think we have some talent out there. But in the Big 12 today, I don't care if you play a 3-4, a 4-3, 9-2, or a 1-10, you have to play it aggressively. You have to take chances, you have to take the other team out of their rhythm. That's what opens up the opportunity for sacks, TFLs and interceptions.

Wally seems to think trotting 11 talented players out onto the field and telling them to play like ******* ******* is going to win games.

I couldn't agree more. We have talent on the defensive side of the ball. But these guys are not really getting a chance to showcase it in a game like Saturday and the next 2 ball games. As a couple people have stated, I'm all for sticking with the 3-4...I like the scheme. But you do have to mix it up in a variety of ways because while we are improved on that side of the ball, we still are not in the upper half of the Big XII in terms of talent. So you have to find ways to keep the other team guessing. I don't think we do that. We will get the same results if we continue with this. Take a chance and let's get more aggressive on defense, Wally.

 

[indycyclone]

The coaches are going with the Insanity Defense. Do the same thing over and over and over. It'll work eventually right?