OKLAHOMA STATE RECAP: The Front Seven And The Gameplan

In the past two seasons there were games where regardless if we executed perfectly or not we didn’t have a chance. It seemed like yesterday we were in position to make some plays but didn’t execute. Dropped balls, missed tackles, poor throws those sort of things can improve.

It’s still not where it needs to be but linebackers being in position and missing tackles is better than linebackers on their backs pancaked as we’ve seen in the last two seasons. Same can be said for the DB’s, they still got beat but getting beat in close coverage by a good throw and catch is an improvement over blown coverages.

Hopefully this game gets some of the nerves out of the young guys and gives the coaches some good film against an actual opponent they can use as a teaching tool. Cleaning up some of the mistakes, even against a lesser opponent, would be a positive sign for the program.

I can appreciate everybody giving an honest attempt to analyze last night’s debacle, but to me it looks clear that there simply isn’t the personnel on this team to win football games. The size difference between OSU and WSU was apparent in the way that WSU players just went down hurt time after time. I stopped watching altogether at 45-10 (flipped over to Oregon State-TCU, but just in the time I did watch I saw player after player having to be helped off the field. They talk about the program having “bad luck” with injuries, but to me it seems clear that these injuries are resulting from having to play against bigger, faster, superior athletes.
The case seems pretty evident that Paul Wulff doesn’t know what competitive Division I BCS conference players look like or he simply isn’t capable of recruiting them to come to Pullman.

I’ve been on vacation in Louisiana for the past week or so and I haven’t seen any of the game. I think the local FSN feed (which switches from FSHouston to FSSW seemingly at whim) will show the game tonight at 2 am local. Is it worth it to see how we look, strengths, weaknesses etc, or would a repeated bludgeoning of my forehead with a baseball bat be a more constructive, less painful way to spend 2 hours?

Also, in regards to our convo on the South a while back, the sweet tea is making my teeth hurt and I’ve already eaten more fried chicken than I have in the last 3 years or so.

And its filter is rough. Basically any site with video, banned. Every other blog I’ve tried to access besides this one (thank god), banned. Facebook, banned. Youtube, banned. I don’t have a twitter but I’m sure its banned, too. I love the south.

Seriously, I do like visiting here. But this is ridiculous. Thanks for the link, I’ll try it on the drive back.

I do feel they will improve, and I agree with the schematic idea presented herein, however- the idea that they are to ‘absorb the lineman’ so the LB can make the play is not the Coug game plan. Nor is it the ideal of the 4-3. They require a push- the slants, stunts and gap selections all are based on a push. The d-line did not achieve the goal of the front 4- which was and is and ever shall be- penetration. Five linemen on 4 creates the mismatch if the offense is required to double someone- in this game they weren’t. When the d front 4 are handled by 4 as they were all day Saturday; the gap LB’s are engaging a 290 pounder play in and play out. Beck and Ledge and Hoff faced that size each play that came into their slots. Thus, Toomer led the squad in tackles and the trailing off side LB was second. Chase tackles… was wat we called them waaaaaay back in my day. There were many, many chase tackles in this contest. We lost up front play in and play out and that blew up the game plan. Rankin was completely held in check and frequently did not require a double team. This freed the center to head hunt Ledgerwood at MLB, which he did effectively. He or the guard, who left the center on Rankin. The lack of a true 1 tech will be telling all season. Schematically they will be forced to adjust- of course- but they were beaten badly up front all day. Frankly on both sides of the line. But we are talking defense here so I will not digress. There simply was not effective penetration on passing or running downs. The new QB for OSU had all day. The All American stud RB Hunter has gigantic holes to gather momentum and was rarely slowed at the line of scrimmage. This game was lost up front, not in the secondary— (although that was a RS’s getting hard NCAA lessons horror show) or by the LB’s.

I read Brian’s stuff and I enjoy his tactical analysis. Most of the time I agree and often I enjoy a lesson on some aspect of the D. But I whole heartedly disagree with the take that Wulfgramm and Rank and company got it done inside. Don’t misread me- I’m not saying ‘they suck’. I think they had decent moments. But they did fail vs. OSU with regularity. They simply did not create a need for a double nor did they close the desired hole to the O. When the RB isn’t required to side step or alter course- the line has not done their job. They didn’t create piles, they didn’t deny gaps- they got blocked. All day. Hunter didn’t beat the Cougs outside, he shot the 2, 4 and 6 hole with ease all day. The d-line got pushed around. They often guessed wrong. We lost the trenches early and with smallish speedy attack LB’s that cannot happen with regularity.

I do agree that there will be improvement with adjustments… I also think that the spreads will be tightened a great deal. The DE’s were so darn wide. But I remain steadfast in my call that w/o a 1 tech, the Cougs must mask and alter looks far more frequently to free up pass rushers and get any sort of surge. It is a battered senior, a juco transfer and a lot of youth at DT. It is going to take some reps to figure out how to close gaps…

I agree that tackling will improve. They played jittery and clearly weren’t expecting a full blown run attack. They played on the heels. But regarding 3/4 and 4/3 pricipals- it is that simple. It has nothing to do w/ being fooled by a look. We clearly fooled no one. They did not win point of attack. No penetration means no closing of gaps. The O-line took the angle they desired at impact. Our DT’s got steered all day. The LB has to cover two holes- shoot a gap post read of the lead block- not so easy when none close. That read is entirely based on the snap and the 1/2 second it takes the D lineman’s body to fill the desired gap in front of the LB. In either a 3-4 or a 4-3; it matters not. It isn’t real complicated unless every hole is open. And vs. OSU every hole was open most every play. The d-line simply got beat off the ball w/ regularity.

I am saying that Hunter didn’t have to alter his path. He wasn’t strung out, he didn’t have to leap over a pile or even attempt a misdirection at the point of attack. He was down hill every play. That means our D-line got moved where OSU wanted them- with regularity. Mostly w/ single man up blocks too- no doubles needed. There were few hurries for the QB- he had all day. The front 4 lost the battle at the snap nearly every play. They didn’t control gaps. The lone sack came w/ the 2nd unit line and the third string QB. The ‘pokes ran it where they wanted any time they wanted. The first TD was 2 direct dives right over the DT’s. They were easy. The next series they rumbled right, testing the 2 and 4 holes. Easy. The next series they hit the 6 for a long gainer and then back to the 2 for the touchdown. No need to experiment further- they had the holes and they exploited them. They ran right.

It doesn’t alter the responsibility of the DE if he is standing or down. Clearly sometimes he drifts to the flat and the LB angles the gap for a different fill. But filling the gap is the goal. There are gaps for which each defender has a job. In most sets they they shoot one of the two, or they accept contact and attempt to fold the block to the hole. ..hoping the pair of tangle bodies fills the gap. it didn’t go that way. We got muscled.

I do feel the wide splits of the DE’s made for some real huge holes prior to snap. Also i don’t understand not tightening splits significantly once you realize the run game in on and they aren’t going run and shoot. I didn’t see very good recognition of the full house and that was my problem w/ the LB’s reads. Same thing in the red zone… I am amazed that out Lb’s are 4 yards deep in the end zone— seem like coming up and giving the appearance of a plug might case a play to be strung out- or encourage an audible, or which we saw very few.

I am not giving up on Wulffgram and Rankin and the rest— I just am calling a spade a spade. Beat off the ball is beat— whether it is 3/4 or 4/3 or LEO or anything else.

I’m not a doomsayer- i still think they look improved. But they got pushed around, like it or not.