As a fan and former corner, I too thought UM played way too much man coverage last season. I was making that comment fairly early in the season. However, when I talked to coaches a couple times, they said that some of the big plays had actually come from zone coverage. Stitt says several of big plays came from 3-deep zone coverage against Valpo. This says to me that there were significant mental mistakes, and the coaches absolutely have to correct those mental mistakes. When a player is in deep zone coverage, he absolutely has to cover the deep zone and deepest player as the first priority. Otherwise, it's a big play if the qb sees and hits the open receiver. I just don't understand how a secondary makes that kind of mistake. Man coverage on the other hand, is very difficult against a good receiver and good qb.
Funny how the Valpo coach says UM is an in your face kind of defense and not a bend but not break defense. Funny because lots of Griz fans complain about UM being too much of a bend but not break defense. Stuff like this leads to my comments about knowledgeable fans.
I'm a bend but not break guy. I like zone mixed with man. Zone is designed to not give up big plays, and it's much easier to get interception from zone coverage because the defender is generally playing facing the qb, and not with his back to the qb. If you play mostly zone, tho, OC's will eventually exploit the weaknesses in the zones.
...
