UM, Stitt, Defense, and QB Talk

[catatac]

Ok, it's the off season, let's keep tabs on the enemy.

So I've had this ongoing debate with a Griz fan buddy of mine since they hired Stitt. He doesn't buy into the concept that their Defense is going to likely have worse stats due to how many plays the offense is going to run. So this gets into that whole argument we had when Ash said our defense was going to be worse when we decided to run more plays. I guess we'll see what happens. If the Griz almost double the number of plays they run and their defensive stats look about the same in 2015 as they did in 2014 then I guess we'll have our answer!

The other thing I was thinking about is their QB play. Think about how hard it is for a QB to make it through a season in a NORMAL system without getting injured, especially if the offense has the QB running the ball. Now consider doubling the number of plays the QB is going to run? Sounds like the chance of injury goes way up. My buddy also said the Stitt will likely platoon QB's.... should be interesting to see how that all plays out.

Maybe saying "doubling" the number of plays is an exaggeration, I don't know. Maybe the average # of plays is 60 and I've heard people say Stitt is committed to running as many plays as possible, someone said School of Mines let the country in plays ran? 120 plays in a game?

[[cat_bracket]]

Past 10 years Mines has been:
2014 - 2nd scoring, 2nd yards allowed, finish in W-L 10-2
2013 - 1st, 1st, 8-3
2012 - 3rd, 6th, 6-5
2011 - 4th, 7th, 8-3
2010 - 5th, 5th, 9-3
2009 - 5th, 5th, 8-3
2008 - 2nd, 4th, 8-4
2007 - 3rd, 2nd, 7-5
2006 - 7th, 5th, 4-7
2005 - 5th, 8th, 6-5

Mixed bag. Probably doesn't mean anything regarding how he does at um.

[77matcat]

In my opinion the whole defense gets worse as the number of offensive plays increase only applies to average to below average defenses. If the defense is frequently off the field after three plays I don't think their butts are unusually tired by the end of the game.

The whole topic is a red herring IMHO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BWahlberg]

Got to come to BN to actually talk Griz football! Haha

I actually agree that there's no way our defense will be better than last years. Even though Stitt's defense at CSM was usually pretty good I think it's a hard comparison to the Big Sky level. His offense can help the defense but I don't think simply because of his offensive system the defense will become even better. 50% of our primary defensive coaches return from the last few years teams, they've had nothing to do with Stitt's system until now.

For the point mentioned, there will be a lot of plays on offense but according to Stitt it's a ball control system. We'll see but I assume that could equate into more quick trips back onto the field for the defense.

Another point that hasn't been mentioned. 3/4's of our d line is gone including the best defensive end we've ever had and one of the best interior tackles we've ever had as well. Additionally our only experienced safety is gone too, we'll be relying on new guys in key positions on defense.

Add in this system is new for our offense so we'll have some growing pains too, meaning more mistakes and 3 and outs.

It all points to a decrease in efficiency. I just don't see how it can improve this year.

[CatBlitz]

I really don't think you can compare much to what he did down there. I watched a few of their highlight videos and some of those teams are just atrocious. Like just awful at the fundamentals of tackling and angles. September should be petty telling.

[catatac]

Got to come to BN to actually talk Griz football! Haha

I actually agree that there's no way our defense will be better than last years. Even though Stitt's defense at CSM was usually pretty good I think it's a hard comparison to the Big Sky level. His offense can help the defense but I don't think simply because of his offensive system the defense will become even better. 50% of our primary defensive coaches return from the last few years teams, they've had nothing to do with Stitt's system until now.

For the point mentioned, there will be a lot of plays on offense but according to Stitt it's a ball control system. We'll see but I assume that could equate into more quick trips back onto the field for the defense.

Another point that hasn't been mentioned. 3/4's of our d line is gone including the best defensive end we've ever had and one of the best interior tackles we've ever had as well. Additionally our only experienced safety is gone too, we'll be relying on new guys in key positions on defense.

Add in this system is new for our offense so we'll have some growing pains too, meaning more mistakes and 3 and outs.

It all points to a decrease in efficiency. I just don't see how it can improve this year.

Thanks for the info... I agree with all that. Do you think you'll be using multiple QB's on a regular basis?

[BWahlberg]

Got to come to BN to actually talk Griz football! Haha

I actually agree that there's no way our defense will be better than last years. Even though Stitt's defense at CSM was usually pretty good I think it's a hard comparison to the Big Sky level. His offense can help the defense but I don't think simply because of his offensive system the defense will become even better. 50% of our primary defensive coaches return from the last few years teams, they've had nothing to do with Stitt's system until now.

For the point mentioned, there will be a lot of plays on offense but according to Stitt it's a ball control system. We'll see but I assume that could equate into more quick trips back onto the field for the defense.

Another point that hasn't been mentioned. 3/4's of our d line is gone including the best defensive end we've ever had and one of the best interior tackles we've ever had as well. Additionally our only experienced safety is gone too, we'll be relying on new guys in key positions on defense.

Add in this system is new for our offense so we'll have some growing pains too, meaning more mistakes and 3 and outs.

It all points to a decrease in efficiency. I just don't see how it can improve this year.

Thanks for the info... I agree with all that. Do you think you'll be using multiple QB's on a regular basis?

Hope not, for the sake of consistency. We'll have a more clear picture in 45 days time.

[AlphaGriz1]

Why is nobody worried about the RBs oe WRs getting hurt because we run more plays?

QBs get hurt because of coaching not running extra plays.

[tdub]

Why is nobody worried about the RBs oe WRs getting hurt because we run more plays?

QBs get hurt because of coaching not running extra plays.

Honestly I think that is one reason that Stitt has so many on the roster, especially WR's. They can rotate more still giving players a similar amount of plays. Say a traditional offense runs 60-70 plays, and the new offense runs 90-100, the deep stable of WR can rotate taking the extra 30+ play load per game. Now you won't have your best 3-5 on the field at all times, but sometime the fresh legs of WR #6 is better than a tired #3.

[kwcat]

It looks like they should have some good talent at QB. Will be interesting to see if any of them will have Johnsons competitive drive.

[BWahlberg]

Why is nobody worried about the RBs oe WRs getting hurt because we run more plays?

QBs get hurt because of coaching not running extra plays.

Honestly I think that is one reason that Stitt has so many on the roster, especially WR's. They can rotate more still giving players a similar amount of plays. Say a traditional offense runs 60-70 plays, and the new offense runs 90-100, the deep stable of WR can rotate taking the extra 30+ play load per game. Now you won't have your best 3-5 on the field at all times, but sometime the fresh legs of WR #6 is better than a tired #3.

I'm told his plan is to heavily use 8 to 10 WRs....

There has to be a crap-ton of rotation going on.

[09griz]

I just hope/wish we get it figured out before the first game, NDSU...
Seriously sick of those fat, gloating, asshat North Dakotans.

Would be so funny to lay 40+ on them in WaGriz.

[MT2AK_CAT]

I just hope/wish we get it figured out before the first game, NDSU...
Seriously sick of those fat, gloating, asshat North Dakotans.

Would be so funny to lay 40+ on them in WaGriz.

Probably better if you both could lose!

[onceacat]

Good defenses won't give up any more yards per play against a NHHU (No huddle hurry up offense). But they will give up a lot more yards and points per game (4 yards per play X 60 plays looks way better than 3.5 yards per play X 90 plays) Basic arithmetic. My 5th grader understands this. The better defense looks worse based on the most commonly used metrics. Again, 5th grade math.

BUT: the most important metric in all of football is points per drive, both offensively and defensively. On offense, the best result is a 6-8 point TD, next is a 3 point FG, and there is some sort of "moral" victory in giving the opposing offense a long field.

On D: 0 points is best, 3 points is middle, and 8 points is worst case scenario. Every score is a failure, but a FG is less bad than a TD.

OK, here is the really tricky point. I made some really snarky comments a year ago about how bad the EWU defense was, specifically in regard to allowing big TD plays in 2013. But, after lots of attention, here is the really tricky point: When you are as good on offense as MSU (or EWU, or Oregon) it is way better to allow a TD on 3 plays than on a 5-8 minute drive. Every additional possession your D gives to your O is a benefit. The worst possible scenario is when your D allows 3 yards per play, but a conversion on 4th and 1 (like against CPSU last year) Much better to allow the TD early on, and let DP and co take over on offense, rather than kill the clock with 2.6 yard rush after 2.6 yard rush.

A 3 and out that results in an opponents TD is VASTLY preferable than a great defensive series when we can't stop 4th and 2.

I've made this point in numerous other threads (and everyone ignores me there too ) BUT Football has officially entered a new era, and everything you ever learned about defense is WRONG WRONG WRONG.

WRONG WRONG WRONG. Its a new era. Unfortunately, I think the Griz made the right choice-I hope they struggle to keep up with us!

[allcat]

Good defenses won't give up any more yards per play against a NHHU (No huddle hurry up offense). But they will give up a lot more yards and points per game (4 yards per play X 60 plays looks way better than 3.5 yards per play X 90 plays) Basic arithmetic. My 5th grader understands this. The better defense looks worse based on the most commonly used metrics. Again, 5th grade math.

BUT: the most important metric in all of football is points per drive, both offensively and defensively. On offense, the best result is a 6-8 point TD, next is a 3 point FG, and there is some sort of "moral" victory in giving the opposing offense a long field.

On D: 0 points is best, 3 points is middle, and 8 points is worst case scenario. Every score is a failure, but a FG is less bad than a TD.

OK, here is the really tricky point. I made some really snarky comments a year ago about how bad the EWU defense was, specifically in regard to allowing big TD plays in 2013. But, after lots of attention, here is the really tricky point: When you are as good on offense as MSU (or EWU, or Oregon) it is way better to allow a TD on 3 plays than on a 5-8 minute drive. Every additional possession your D gives to your O is a benefit. The worst possible scenario is when your D allows 3 yards per play, but a conversion on 4th and 1 (like against CPSU last year) Much better to allow the TD early on, and let DP and co take over on offense, rather than kill the clock with 2.6 yard rush after 2.6 yard rush.

A 3 and out that results in an opponents TD is VASTLY preferable than a great defensive series when we can't stop 4th and 2.

I've made this point in numerous other threads (and everyone ignores me there too ) BUT Football has officially entered a new era, and everything you ever learned about defense is WRONG WRONG WRONG.

WRONG WRONG WRONG. Its a new era. Unfortunately, I think the Griz made the right choice-I hope they struggle to keep up with us!

All of your explanation still applied before the so called new era. The whole thing with a good defense is they rely on themselves to get off the field. Any defense that relies on the offense just to keep them in the game is very weak.

[77matcat]

[emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]
Well said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk