Griz "Defense"

[bgbigdog]

You know what you can do with your damned statistics! As Mark Twain said about statistics, "......" Well, you know what he said.

Where is '75, who harped on one stat that proved to him that our QB should be Simis, not BG....

Actually the "stat" was an entire game, forced to play a "simplified" offense, which turned out to be at that point our most successful game, point-wise, of the season against an opponent with a credible defense, a team that won over PSU and MSU.

The winning margin in that game, incidentally, was a full touchdown more than our win today and that team had beat MSU by six points; so you can call it a 13 point difference in the UND game over the MSU game. I suppose there is a different way to spin it if you wish.

Please tell me you didn't just apply the transitive theory to football.

Of course it is. If a = b and b = c, then a = c. Personally, I think this is close to Galois theory, but I only play @ math on egriz.

 

[Grisly Fan]

Funny, thought AG1 just stood for AlphaGriz1, know it also stands Anti-Griz1. He seems to root against the Griz about every chance he gets. The Bobcats were going to get yards and points -- they have done it for most of the season. They have a good offense, just no defense. Most of what they got was Prukop scrambling for his life, keeping plays alive with excellent scrambling. Its really hard to cover receivers that long. The OL did a great job for him.

 

[SoldierGriz]

As long as you are happy getting rolled in the playoffs............then good on you.

I have a higher standard, just like the Rhodes scholar selection group.

Takin shots at someone reppin the school on a high level and hell of a football player? Hopefully the next time some drops something in your drink it's battery acid. Fuvkin freak.

This. Talk about the defense is fine...anything negative about the incredible academic performance we've seen from DC is pathetic, misplaced, and just wrong. Never should have hit send on that piece. :bad: :bad: :bad: :bad:

 

[Maxim]

Look the reality is the team beat some good teams but struggled when we weren't healthy. However we made the playoffs, we have a home playoff game which is the best thing a fan can look forward to. No matter what the results we have made good strides with a brand new coach and offense and can build on that for next year.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Look the reality is the team beat some good teams but struggled when we weren't healthy. However we made the playoffs, we have a home playoff game which is the best thing a fan can look forward to. No matter what the results we have made good strides with a brand new coach and offense and can build on that for next year.

And, with a couple exceptions, we're healthy.

Notables:

Peevy not 100% and limited in playing time
Counts probably gone for rest of season
Logwood gone for season?

 

[Atlanta Griz1]

Alpha is 100% correct that you don't start telling us how great a defense we have when we give up 500+ yards! Any moron who knows jack about football understands this.

I usually agree with Alpha on most points, because he knows football and is unafraid to be critical when justified, unlike 90% of the jokers who post here. But I gotta say that Alpha was 100% out of line dissing Crittendon. Derek is the epitome of what I want in a football player...... a class-act, intelligent, a great on the field. If we had about a dozen more players like him, we would never lose! Shame on you Alpha!

 

[grizindabox]

Add me to the list that can not say a defense that gave up over 500 yards is a great defense.....they maybe the class of BSC defenses....but comparing yourself to other BSC defenses is not the greatest standard for overall comparison...

 

[AZGrizFan]

I don't care if we win games 10-7 or 57-55.

A win is a win and they don't award the victory to the team that gains the most yards.

 

[PlayerRep]

Add me to the list that can not say a defense that gave up over 500 yards is a great defense.....they maybe the class of BSC defenses....but comparing yourself to other BSC defenses is not the greatest standard for overall comparison...

No one has said the Griz have a great defense, or played great yesterday. Add yourself to the list of posters who can't stick to the subject, and has to address something that no one has even suggested.

 

[grizindabox]

I don't care if we win games 10-7 or 57-55.

A win is a win and they don't award the victory to the team that gains the most yards.

No one is arguing about winning games....the discussion is about how "great" the Griz defense played....

 

[grizindabox]

Add me to the list that can not say a defense that gave up over 500 yards is a great defense.....they maybe the class of BSC defenses....but comparing yourself to other BSC defenses is not the greatest standard for overall comparison...

No one has said the Griz have a great defense, or played great yesterday. Add yourself to the list of posters who can't stick to the subject, and has to address something that no one has even suggested.

Good...because it is not...glad to see egriz be objective for a change....

 

[Atlanta Griz1]

Look, instead of blanket statements about how good, or how bad, or defense is, let's just break it down for the uniformed who get off on final scores against weak teams like MSU.

Here is how I see our defense. The strong points of our defense are two. First, we are very good at rushing the passer, getting sacks, pressures, disrupting timing, etc. Second, we FINALLY have two solid starting CBs, who can cover, and actually play man instead of relying only on zone defenses. That is HUGE because it opens up lots of defensive blitz package options.

However, our defensive front is only average against the run. To make matters worse, our LBs are small, and quick, but the only one who is able to shed blocks from O-linemen to make plays is Van Akeran (sp). Gamboa is very over-rated, and Kose gets out of position on too many plays which leads to huge runs. I think Lebsock plays smarter than Gamboa and should be starting. Because our LBs are very light, they do not tackle strong RBs without being carried for extra yardage, which hurts our ability to stop running plays for short gains.

The biggest weakness on defense, however, is our safeties. They just don't seem to have a feel for which receiver to cover, and we can count on them giving up several big plays every game due to blown coverages. We might get by with these gaffs against many teams, but against solid play-off caliber teams, it can cost us the game, and may very well do so in the near future. Just the facts, mam.

 

[PlayerRep]

Alpha is 100% correct that you don't start telling us how great a defense we have when we give up 500+ yards! Any moron who knows jack about football understands this.

I usually agree with Alpha on most points, because he knows football and is unafraid to be critical when justified, unlike 90% of the jokers who post here. But I gotta say that Alpha was 100% out of line dissing Crittendon. Derek is the epitome of what I want in a football player...... a class-act, intelligent, a great on the field. If we had about a dozen more players like him, we would never lose! Shame on you Alpha!

Anyone who can't understand that, against a terrific and prolific offense, (a) holding them to its second lowest point total all season and to its 4th total offense all season, (b) holding them to 7 of 17 on 3d/4th down conversions, (c) keeping its very good qb and good running back in check, (d) and handily beating its rival on the road, is a good defensive effort---doesn't have a clue about defense or football. And obviously never played the game. NDSU gave up 544 yards to UM. Does that make NDSU a bad defense, or not a good defense?

Against conference teams, UM held 7 of them to below their season scoring average. ISU got 5 over its average; Weber got 1.5 more. So, in those 9 games, UM averaged holding those teams to about 9 points below their season averages. Based on averages prior this weekend's games, for those 9 teams (as conference website wasn't updated when I checked).

 

[PlayerRep]

I don't care if we win games 10-7 or 57-55.

A win is a win and they don't award the victory to the team that gains the most yards.

No one is arguing about winning games....the discussion is about how "great" the Griz defense played....

Again, no one has said the defense is great, or had a great performance yesterday. Feel free to point anyone who has said that since the Cat game--or even before it.

 

[grizindabox]

I don't care if we win games 10-7 or 57-55.

A win is a win and they don't award the victory to the team that gains the most yards.

No one is arguing about winning games....the discussion is about how "great" the Griz defense played....

Again, no one has said the defense is great, or had a great performance yesterday. Feel free to point anyone who has said that since the Cat game--or even before it.

Good...because it is not...glad to see egriz be objective for a change....

 

[PlayerRep]

Look, instead of blanket statements about how good, or how bad, or defense is, let's just break it down for the uniformed who get off on final scores against weak teams like MSU.

Here is how I see our defense. The strong points of our defense are two. First, we are very good at rushing the passer, getting sacks, pressures, disrupting timing, etc. Second, we FINALLY have two solid starting CBs, who can cover, and actually play man instead of relying only on zone defenses. That is HUGE because it opens up lots of defensive blitz package options.

However, our defensive front is only average against the run. To make matters worse, our LBs are small, and quick, but the only one who is able to shed blocks from O-linemen to make plays is Van Akeran (sp). Gamboa is very over-rated, and Kose gets out of position on too many plays which leads to huge runs. I think Lebsock plays smarter than Gamboa and should be starting. Because our LBs are very light, they do not tackle strong RBs without being carried for extra yardage, which hurts our ability to stop running plays for short gains.

The biggest weakness on defense, however, is our safeties. They just don't seem to have a feel for which receiver to cover, and we can count on them giving up several big plays every game due to blown coverages. We might get by with these gaffs against many teams, but against solid play-off caliber teams, it can cost us the game, and may very well do so in the near future. Just the facts, mam.

The UM safeties are not weak. They are pretty good, especially Whitted. I've talked to the defensive coaches about this subject. Yes, safeties and all players make mistakes sometimes, and don't make plays sometimes. You don't have a clue.

 

[PlayerRep]

This is or should be the topic. Was the UM defense and defensive effort good yesterday? Yes, they gave up several longer drives. However, overall the defense had a good day. Not good on the first drive, not good on the 2 back-to-back drives in 2d half, but still good overall. Kept Prukop in check. Used the d-line only for the pass rush most of the time. Kept in their lanes. Didn't lose contain. This without Derek K. Lost some receivers during scrambles and 2 trick plays. This happens, but it happened too much yesterday. That's my biggest criticism.

 

[Atlanta Griz1]

Look, instead of blanket statements about how good, or how bad, or defense is, let's just break it down for the uniformed who get off on final scores against weak teams like MSU.

Here is how I see our defense. The strong points of our defense are two. First, we are very good at rushing the passer, getting sacks, pressures, disrupting timing, etc. Second, we FINALLY have two solid starting CBs, who can cover, and actually play man instead of relying only on zone defenses. That is HUGE because it opens up lots of defensive blitz package options.

However, our defensive front is only average against the run. To make matters worse, our LBs are small, and quick, but the only one who is able to shed blocks from O-linemen to make plays is Van Akeran (sp). Gamboa is very over-rated, and Kose gets out of position on too many plays which leads to huge runs. I think Lebsock plays smarter than Gamboa and should be starting. Because our LBs are very light, they do not tackle strong RBs without being carried for extra yardage, which hurts our ability to stop running plays for short gains.

The biggest weakness on defense, however, is our safeties. They just don't seem to have a feel for which receiver to cover, and we can count on them giving up several big plays every game due to blown coverages. We might get by with these gaffs against many teams, but against solid play-off caliber teams, it can cost us the game, and may very well do so in the near future. Just the facts, mam.

The UM safeties are not weak. They are pretty good, especially Whitted. I've talked to the defensive coaches about this subject. Yes, safeties and all players make mistakes sometimes, and don't make plays sometimes. You don't have a clue.

Oh gee, your coaching buddies who coach our defense stick up for their defense, and that makes it true??? You are a joke! Our safeties blew 4-5 coverages yesterday resulting in 3 TDs that I can remember. Total blown coverages!

 

[PlayerRep]

Look, instead of blanket statements about how good, or how bad, or defense is, let's just break it down for the uniformed who get off on final scores against weak teams like MSU.

Here is how I see our defense. The strong points of our defense are two. First, we are very good at rushing the passer, getting sacks, pressures, disrupting timing, etc. Second, we FINALLY have two solid starting CBs, who can cover, and actually play man instead of relying only on zone defenses. That is HUGE because it opens up lots of defensive blitz package options.

However, our defensive front is only average against the run. To make matters worse, our LBs are small, and quick, but the only one who is able to shed blocks from O-linemen to make plays is Van Akeran (sp). Gamboa is very over-rated, and Kose gets out of position on too many plays which leads to huge runs. I think Lebsock plays smarter than Gamboa and should be starting. Because our LBs are very light, they do not tackle strong RBs without being carried for extra yardage, which hurts our ability to stop running plays for short gains.

The biggest weakness on defense, however, is our safeties. They just don't seem to have a feel for which receiver to cover, and we can count on them giving up several big plays every game due to blown coverages. We might get by with these gaffs against many teams, but against solid play-off caliber teams, it can cost us the game, and may very well do so in the near future. Just the facts, mam.

The UM safeties are not weak. They are pretty good, especially Whitted. I've talked to the defensive coaches about this subject. Yes, safeties and all players make mistakes sometimes, and don't make plays sometimes. You don't have a clue.

Oh gee, your coaching buddies who coach our defense stick up for their defense, and that makes it true??? You are a joke! Our safeties blew 4-5 coverages yesterday resulting in 3 TDs that I can remember. Total blown coverages!

It wasn't just the safeties blowing coverage, and it was often in the scramble. You don't understand secondary play, or defensive schemes.

 

[Atlanta Griz1]

This is or should be the topic. Was the UM defense and defensive effort good yesterday? Yes, they gave up several longer drives. However, overall the defense had a good day. Not good on the first drive, not good on the 2 back-to-back drives in 2d half, but still good overall. Kept Prukop in check. Used the d-line only for the pass rush most of the time. Kept in their lanes. Didn't lose contain. This without Derek K. Lost some receivers during scrambles and 2 trick plays. This happens, but it happened too much yesterday. That's my biggest criticism.

It happens every game you pin head! It happened against ISU, it happened against EWU. The reason it happens is exactly what I stated.... our safeties are horrible! You think Trey Young, Colt, Shillinger, Huntsburger, et al would give up that many blown coverages????? Spin that one!