Re: New football roster released... « Reply #40 on Apr 21, 2012, 3:00pm »
Luca Brasi is going to play nose? we should be fine. Godfather, I am honored and glad that you have invited me...let the first child be a masculine child.
Re: New football roster released... « Reply #41 on Apr 21, 2012, 3:13pm »
I went and checked out usd's football roster and they do list 5 DL from 275 to 300 pounds. Doesn't mean they are any good though. If they were good, they would be at DI schools with scholarships, just remember that.
I take from what you're saying is that virtually none of the top 50 teams handle defense this way. And yet, here we are trying to reinvent the wheel with not even a whiff of seeing our ranking get to the top 25. Swell.
Did you not read what he wrote? He named three teams that are powers that run 335s and 425s which are pretty much the same thing.
WVU has won a few BCS bowls running the 335.
Yes, I read what he wrote. But the stark dearth of examples (especially with regard to the top 30 or 40 programs) only served to make my point.
Rocky's 3-3-5 is centered on the idea that if you "win" 1st down (often w/a run/safe blitz), creating a 2nd and long situation, in essence a passing situation...you therefore negate the need for big interior linemen since you're going to want to stunt and twist and get after the passer. And as Rocky has said, on known passing situations, they usually should get to the QB, therefore 2nd and long is expected to become 3rd and long, again negating the need for big interor dlinemen.
The problem is when team runs smashmouth football repeatedly...like a stanford-type, or in our case, michigan or a physical spread time like TCU. If you dont win on 1st, and youre in say, a 2nd and short, then you're in total gamble mode having to bring the house to stop the run opening yourself up to the big pass play...which is why this is a high risk/high reward defense. Im not against the 335, just not a fan of our lack of size and numbers. if we had 3 sam merideths or 3 jerome longs on the line, i'd have no problem with the scheme. And 3 sam merideths or jerome longs are not THAT hard to find. Teams like Utah St and Boise St have done a good job of finding them. i think our recruiters aren't that strong esp. w/ linemen but that's a different discussion.
I think this group has recruited offensive lineman better than any we've had in a while, as for defensive line, it remains to be seen.
I agree, I think they've collected a group with great potential on the OL side. Now we'll see what our coaching can do with them.
I went and checked out usd's football roster and they do list 5 DL from 275 to 300 pounds. Doesn't mean they are any good though. If they were good, they would be at DI schools with scholarships, just remember that.
My brother-in-law's kid is 22 and since he got sober a year or so ago, he's substituted food for drugs and gained a buttload of weight. At 6-3, I'll bet he's up to 275 now. I'll bet if he could be accepted to USD, he's make a great defensive lineman for them. After all, just how big and skillful are the offensive linemen of USD opponents?
I see what you're saying and I agree that the 3-3-5 is not a system that would seem conducive to beating Washington. (Now watch it happen. )
It's looks like a permanent prevent defense, and we all know what the prevent defense prevents...
I've always felt this way about the 3-3-5 scheme. Whenever the offense failed to answer back the defense eventually collapsed. Size does matter, they wore out in such games. We were able to get away with it with the lesser MWC competition. Those bad teams seemed to screw up more than as a result of what our defense did.
Bottom line, our offense will have to make more clutch plays than we ever did during the Lindley years. If Katz struggles, we can't rely on the defense to hold the entire game. But then, we'll be facing the same bad MWC teams. What I fear is going into the BE with this scheme and smurf players running it.
If Katz struggles, we are screwed. You'll notice that after Rocky has "chosen" his man, he's loathe to change QB's. If I'm wrong I'll hear about it, but did he take Lindley out even once for poor performance?
Re: New football roster released... « Reply #46 on Apr 21, 2012, 4:25pm »
We have a lot of posters that should apply for the DC job. It's so obvious that they know more than Rocky and the rest our our D coaches. You guys kill me.
"Small and fast" defenses are what teams like Hawaii uses. They won every WAC (DIAA) game they played one year and then got schooled by Georgia or whoever it was in their BCS "game."
When it comes to linemen (on either side) you gotta go big or go home.
thanks for mentioning EITHER side since I also see a bunch of Olinemen under 300 although while we're talkling small, its not just the Dline - look at those backers at 205 and 210 - I know, they're fast, tough, smart and dedicated - they better be.
"Small and fast" defenses are what teams like Hawaii uses. They won every WAC (DIAA) game they played one year and then got schooled by Georgia or whoever it was in their BCS "game."
When it comes to linemen (on either side) you gotta go big or go home.
thanks for mentioning EITHER side since I also see a bunch of Olinemen under 300 although while we're talkling small, its not just the Dline - look at those backers at 205 and 210 - I know, they're fast, tough, smart and dedicated - they better be.
Some on this thread are saying the the sizes/weights reported are under stated and that the new strength coach has gotten their weights up. That may be the case, but I'm not clear on why this would be published by the school without accurate measurements.
Some on this thread are saying the the sizes/weights reported are under stated and that the new strength coach has gotten their weights up. That may be the case, but I'm not clear on why this would be published by the school without accurate measurements.
No need to put much stock in the sizes reported in any media guide or press release. If anything, they're usually overstated (especially in basketball).
All I know is that for decades (with few exceptions) our guys looked like midgets compared to most good teams we've played.
JYP, in spite of the weak schedule, you are REALLY making me nervous about this coming year. I guess that's why Rocky is preparing us with his underwhelming praise of the team.
I've always felt this way about the 3-3-5 scheme. Whenever the offense failed to answer back the defense eventually collapsed. Size does matter, they wore out in such games. We were able to get away with it with the lesser MWC competition. Those bad teams seemed to screw up more than as a result of what our defense did.
Bottom line, our offense will have to make more clutch plays than we ever did during the Lindley years. If Katz struggles, we can't rely on the defense to hold the entire game. But then, we'll be facing the same bad MWC teams. What I fear is going into the BE with this scheme and smurf players running it.
If Katz struggles, we are screwed. You'll notice that after Rocky has "chosen" his man, he's loathe to change QB's. If I'm wrong I'll hear about it, but did he take Lindley out even once for poor performance?
Because Rocky also is a smart man and it would be plain stupid to bench a sr starting QB with a winning record.
Rocky's 3-3-5 is centered on the idea that if you "win" 1st down (often w/a run/safe blitz), creating a 2nd and long situation, in essence a passing situation...you therefore negate the need for big interior linemen since you're going to want to stunt and twist and get after the passer. And as Rocky has said, on known passing situations, they usually should get to the QB, therefore 2nd and long is expected to become 3rd and long, again negating the need for big interor dlinemen.
The problem is when team runs smashmouth football repeatedly...like a stanford-type, or in our case, michigan or a physical spread time like TCU. If you dont win on 1st, and youre in say, a 2nd and short, then you're in total gamble mode having to bring the house to stop the run opening yourself up to the big pass play...which is why this is a high risk/high reward defense. Im not against the 335, just not a fan of our lack of size and numbers. if we had 3 sam merideths or 3 jerome longs on the line, i'd have no problem with the scheme. And 3 sam merideths or jerome longs are not THAT hard to find. Teams like Utah St and Boise St have done a good job of finding them. i think our recruiters aren't that strong esp. w/ linemen but that's a different discussion.
Hope you will keep explaining college football here to those who just don't understand anything but the score. Your post is instructive for many. I remain to be convinced that Sam Meredith is the next Jerome Long. I fear we are in a world of hurt on DL this coming season.
As to the apparently serious assertion by "Rick" that because USD's D-line weights are purportedly the equal of ours, that's just laughable. USD's players are not on scholarship, presumably have no paid strength coach (well, maybe he earns $10 an hour) and have no training table. So if their weights are comparable to ours it's probably because they're carrying about 20-30 lbs. each more on their gut than our guys are.
1. The guy didn't say USD was our equal on the D line. He said USD's D line was bigger.
2. According to SDFF, it's true if you go by the media guides.
3. We don't have a training table either. I'll bet USD's eating program for athletes is better than ours if only because there's more money there.
Blackouts we don't need need no stinking blackouts! We are SDSU!
jasweaver Guest
Re: New football roster released... « Reply #55 on Apr 22, 2012, 11:39am »
"He's the one telling us to flip our skirt up because the 8th weakest schedule is something you can't navigate unless you have 35 seniors" --i dont recall Brady or the Don ever pounding their chests and saying how we were going to kick everyone's ass and every game would be a walk on the beach at low tide --what i do recall them saying is the next opponent was bigger and stronger than Goliath, quicker than Jesse Owens, smarter than Einstein and was kept in a cage at night so he wouldnt go out and tear up the town---and as for the Don, he was correct when the next opponent was MCRD --and if you 'flip' your skirt up i am pretty sure that will empty the stadium and have the players standing in awe
"He's the one telling us to flip our skirt up because the 8th weakest schedule is something you can't navigate unless you have 35 seniors" --i dont recall Brady or the Don ever pounding their chests and saying how we were going to kick everyone's ass and every game would be a walk on the beach at low tide --what i do recall them saying is the next opponent was bigger and stronger than Goliath, quicker than Jesse Owens, smarter than Einstein and was kept in a cage at night so he wouldnt go out and tear up the town---and as for the Don, he was correct when the next opponent was MCRD --and if you 'flip' your skirt up i am pretty sure that will empty the stadium and have the players standing in awe
I can't speak for Monty, but many of us have become frustrated that in spite of some obivious improvements in the team from where we were 4 years ago, we're not making big leaps. Maybe it's just not possible here. But Michigan made HUGE progress within the very first year with Brady Hoke. We now have Rocky who has repeatedly downplayed expectations, while we downgrade our schedule AND at the same time has continued talking about a 5-year plan--a continuation of what Hoke started when he took over. So WHERE are we going into year 4 of that plan? Last year, year 3, we underperformed or underproduced in my opinion and we now have a coach admonishing us to not get our hopes up. What? With a horrilby weak schedule? Really? Thus I'm left to conclude, if all the above is true, what the hell was the talk about a 5-year plan and how is that going to look? In the top 100, like we are now...maybe? Or in the top 50? I'm pretty sure Hoke and Rocky meant top 25 at least. But we are NOT heading in that direction and the clock is ticking.
"He's the one telling us to flip our skirt up because the 8th weakest schedule is something you can't navigate unless you have 35 seniors" --i dont recall Brady or the Don ever pounding their chests and saying how we were going to kick everyone's ass and every game would be a walk on the beach at low tide --what i do recall them saying is the next opponent was bigger and stronger than Goliath, quicker than Jesse Owens, smarter than Einstein and was kept in a cage at night so he wouldnt go out and tear up the town---and as for the Don, he was correct when the next opponent was MCRD --and if you 'flip' your skirt up i am pretty sure that will empty the stadium and have the players standing in awe
I can't speak for Monty, but many of us have become frustrated that in spite of some obivious improvements in the team from where we were 4 years ago, we're not making big leaps. Maybe it's just not possible here. But Michigan made HUGE progress within the very first year with Brady Hoke. We now have Rocky who has repeatedly downplayed expectations, while we downgrade our schedule AND at the same time has continued talking about a 5-year plan--a continuation of what Hoke started when he took over. So WHERE are we going into year 4 of that plan? Last year, year 3, we underperformed or underproduced in my opinion and we now have a coach admonishing us to not get our hopes up. What? With a horrilby weak schedule? Really? Thus I'm left to conclude, if all the above is true, what the hell was the talk about a 5-year plan and how is that going to look? In the top 100, like we are now...maybe? Or in the top 50? I'm pretty sure Hoke and Rocky meant top 25 at least. But we are NOT heading in that direction and the clock is ticking.
It takes effing time. It doesn't happen over night. Hell, look how long it took Jesus Fisher and he only had to change over a roster of 12.
You have to become a perennial bowl team before you become a perennial top 25 team.
I can't speak for Monty, but many of us have become frustrated that in spite of some obivious improvements in the team from where we were 4 years ago, we're not making big leaps. Maybe it's just not possible here. But Michigan made HUGE progress within the very first year with Brady Hoke. We now have Rocky who has repeatedly downplayed expectations, while we downgrade our schedule AND at the same time has continued talking about a 5-year plan--a continuation of what Hoke started when he took over. So WHERE are we going into year 4 of that plan? Last year, year 3, we underperformed or underproduced in my opinion and we now have a coach admonishing us to not get our hopes up. What? With a horrilby weak schedule? Really? Thus I'm left to conclude, if all the above is true, what the hell was the talk about a 5-year plan and how is that going to look? In the top 100, like we are now...maybe? Or in the top 50? I'm pretty sure Hoke and Rocky meant top 25 at least. But we are NOT heading in that direction and the clock is ticking.
It takes effing time. It doesn't happen over night. Hell, look how long it took Jesus Fisher and he only had to change over a roster of 12.
You have to become a perennial bowl team before you become a perennial top 25 team.
Then---and this is not smartass---do you have any insight into what both Hoke and Rocky meant/mean, when talking about a 5-year plan?
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/home.png "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/help.png "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/search.png "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/login.png "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/register.png "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/search2.png "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/print.png "[Print]")
Author
Logged
)
