Maybe some of you guys can help me out here. I just read that Hoke is unconcerned about pass completion stats. He is willing to give up the short passes and make any QB look like Joe Montana and the ball moves on down the field. What am I missing here??? I just don't understand his logic...Sure would like to hear from some of the more knowledgeable here as to where is he coming from..
Hoke, unconcerned about completion stats
- Thread starter Charlie Noble
- Start date
He runs the Tampa-2 bend but don't break defense. It was designed to stop the West Coast offense and is supposed to prevent the long plays. Problem is we break....and break.....and break........
Get used to it. The defense he ran at UF. It only works with great tackling and opportunistic turnovers. We need a pass rush and LBs who know how to blitz. Right now, we have neither.
The stupid thing Hoke is doing is having them play zone which they obviously can't do. Let them play man-to-man and have fun. When I had a team they didn't have players smart enough to play zone, I'd switch to man-to-man and challenge their manhood ("are you gonna let that guy beat you today?") and it usually worked.
The stupid thing Hoke is doing is having them play zone which they obviously can't do. Let them play man-to-man and have fun. When I had a team they didn't have players smart enough to play zone, I'd switch to man-to-man and challenge their manhood ("are you gonna let that guy beat you today?") and it usually worked.
He may be the most chilled out, laid back DC I have ever saw. Do coaches get drug tested before they are hired?
He is pretty mich saying that games are won in the turnover battle (takeaways) but the only issue is we can't have takeaways if we are playing 10 yds off the ball and unable to make the interception. It's really kind of idiotic to think we will get a bunch of turnovers after the 8-10 yard completion.
Yep that is what I gathered from the article, which I suppose I should not reveal on this site.
Meanwhile these mediocre QB's pile up the completion stats...If it is so great, why don't we see more of it in the SEC???
Hoke is on contract for how many years? Why should he be worried? He's getting paid a pile of cash no matter what happens.
And I guess he didn't want to play Lammons too much because he might be rusty. Better to keep the same players that broke an NCAA record on the field. Brilliant.
And I guess he didn't want to play Lammons too much because he might be rusty. Better to keep the same players that broke an NCAA record on the field. Brilliant.
I simply don't understand Hoke's position. He seems unconcerned with how accurate we're allowing opposing passers to be. His philosophy seems to be he'd rather give up 90% completion rates on short passes than give up the long ball... which doesn't make sense. We've allowed the last two SEC QBs we've faced to go 40 for 44 (91%). That's insane! We're giving up 5-10 yards minimum on every first and second down.
If we were giving up 5-10 yard runs on every first and second down I think Hoke's tune would be different. But essentially we are giving up 5-10 yard runs, because opposing passers are completing passes with over 90% accuracy. There's no difference between 5-10 yards in the air and 5-10 yards on the ground if passers can complete the ball at will.
Hoke has been awful this year, there's no way around it.
I think we were dumb to think Hoke would make a difference. His Bears' secondary routinely got torched.
Who hired him? Who is allowing this D to play such tactics? Who is overall in charge?
Who is overall in charge?
That is the 10 thousand dollar question. We may be scared of the true answer to this question.
That is the 10 thousand dollar question. We may be scared of the true answer to this question.
Hoke is a very smart man that knows how to run a defense, so he should know that LSU struggles to complete even short passes. He should also know that giving up so many short completions helps to build a QB's confidence, and helps the opposing offense get into a nice rhythm. He should also know that if we jam LSU's WR's at the line of scrimmage, then we would take away the short completions, and essentially eliminate their passing attack. He probably knows all of this right?
I really don't understand how we do not scheme differently based on our opponent. We seem to run the exact same defense no matter who we're playing. We don't need to run the Tampa 2 base defense against a non passing offense. That's as backwards as running a nickel defense against LSU. I'm just an armchair QB, or in this case an armchair LB, but I feel our best option against LSU is to run a cover 1 with 1 deep Safety (instead of 2), have the CB's jam the wideouts at the line of scrimmage, and have at least 1 LB crash the line of scrimmage on every play.
I really don't understand how we do not scheme differently based on our opponent. We seem to run the exact same defense no matter who we're playing. We don't need to run the Tampa 2 base defense against a non passing offense. That's as backwards as running a nickel defense against LSU. I'm just an armchair QB, or in this case an armchair LB, but I feel our best option against LSU is to run a cover 1 with 1 deep Safety (instead of 2), have the CB's jam the wideouts at the line of scrimmage, and have at least 1 LB crash the line of scrimmage on every play.
Hoke is a very smart man that knows how to run a defense, so he should know that LSU struggles to complete even short passes. He should also know that giving up so many short completions helps to build a QB's confidence, and helps the opposing offense get into a nice rhythm. He should also know that if we jam LSU's WR's at the line of scrimmage, then we would take away the short completions, and essentially eliminate their passing attack. He probably knows all of this right?
I really don't understand how we do not scheme differently based on our opponent. We seem to run the exact same defense no matter who we're playing. We don't need to run the Tampa 2 base defense against a non passing offense. That's as backwards as running a nickel defense against LSU. I'm just an armchair QB, or in this case an armchair LB, but I feel our best option against LSU is to run a cover 1 with 1 deep Safety (instead of 2), have the CB's jam the wideouts at the line of scrimmage, and have at least 1 LB crash the line of scrimmage on every play.
I really don't understand how we do not scheme differently based on our opponent. We seem to run the exact same defense no matter who we're playing. We don't need to run the Tampa 2 base defense against a non passing offense. That's as backwards as running a nickel defense against LSU. I'm just an armchair QB, or in this case an armchair LB, but I feel our best option against LSU is to run a cover 1 with 1 deep Safety (instead of 2), have the CB's jam the wideouts at the line of scrimmage, and have at least 1 LB crash the line of scrimmage on every play.
First to be fair to Hoke he isn't even playing his type of Defense (only parts of it) and what he is playing has been very limited because we simply don't have the talent in place to make it work.
Hoke is about the only guy at this point I cut some slack.......
Doesn't mean I think he is the solution but I can't say he is a problem at this point either....
Couple all of that with a staff put together by his Asst DC that wouldn't likely last at most 4A high schools in the state and, well, the guy doesn't have a lot to work with....
There was a reason that Hoke said no more tapes on recruits without a written evaluation to go along with them....he isn't stupid, neither are most of us, and there was a lot to being told in that statement.....
Hoke is about the only guy at this point I cut some slack.......
Doesn't mean I think he is the solution but I can't say he is a problem at this point either....
Couple all of that with a staff put together by his Asst DC that wouldn't likely last at most 4A high schools in the state and, well, the guy doesn't have a lot to work with....
There was a reason that Hoke said no more tapes on recruits without a written evaluation to go along with them....he isn't stupid, neither are most of us, and there was a lot to being told in that statement.....
What is Hoke's defense? Everything I read preseason said that he learned a great deal from Lovie, who basically created what's known as the Tampa 2 defense. I'm not being sarcastic btw, I'm asking a legitimate question.
I do agree that a few of the assistants are downgrades from their predecessors. I'd like to see Hoke assemble his own staff at the end of the season.
the problem is you did not have al harris and rico mcwillams as your corners, they cant beat anyone man to man
Bears fan here... Cut hoke some slack. Before the front office dismantled the def to pay cutler and keep some big names on offense, Hoke had some good units. His last year in chi was atrocious, but he had a depleted lb Corp, 1 decent cb and a rookie cb. And an old DL.
What we don't get credit for Safeties that are strangely called "down at the 1 foot line?" Spurrier is right to be angry. All those bad calls would have changed the tone of the game. And the Interceptions of Nunez most probably no longer happen.
I.e., Pharoh got OFFENSIVE interference--when he didn't even touch the receiver--
that leads to risky plays by a young QB.
Anyway, I think Spurrier is doing the right thing this week to "shake up the offensive unit". We could use a spark, there. And if we stack the box like we did on # 1 Alabama in 2010, who's to say we don't have a chance to win. I hope the LSU QB doesn't do anything different than up to now....
Go 'C O C K S ' !
I am torn between his scheme sucks, he doesn't have the talent he can call his own and also between him being handcuffed and asked to work with a defensive staff that was so bad last year it caused us to need him this year. Given all of those factors, and giving him the benefit of doubt, I still think he could at least TRY some different things and/or different players. It's the fact that we aren't attempting to fix it that jist frustrates me to no end.
BS. I don't know if Hoke or Wammy is in charge of the D because we are playing the same soft D we played last year. Safeties are no where to be found and corners play off. Clemson had a crippled QB playing last year that couldn't run so what did we do? Sit back and let him stand in the pocket. Hey coaches, ever thought about blitzing up the middle to force him to run around? No, let him make easy quick throws.
Then their RBs and WRs ran constantly around us on end arounds. Maybe bring the Safeties up in run coverage? Nope, we'll stay back 20 yards.
That Spurrier hasn't stopped this madness is the most dissapointing part to me. One of the greatest football coaches of all time and he can't see this or doesn't have the desire to challenge his coaches is a terrible end to a great career.
You can choose to see it however you believe. I just call it like I see it. I don't think there is any dispute he is trying to install a new defense with talent left there that is lacking, coaching that was in place when he arrived and he had no input on. Most of the assistants on D would have trouble getting a job at a larger HS based on their body of work at this point. He didn't cause that problem he is simply having to work through and around it at this time.
So you can choose to cut him (Hoke) some slack or not that's your choice. I'm just saying I can't really be critical of him at this point because I simply don't have enough to go on to do so....
Are we as bad as we were last year? I don't think so! Are we where we need to be? Not at all........
Just as PO'ed about the current state of affairs as many others but I choose to be realistic in whats wrong and who is to blame!
Last edited:
Help us! We keep giving up the baby slant. Make it stop! Please. Is there any decent coordinator out there who can hear me. Show us the way because Hoke the Joke isn't it
The main problem with our defense is the lack of defense. 3rd down defense has been atrocious. We haven't been able to get them off the field even when we get them in 3rd & long. Our defense needs to tighten up seriously. Our offense is still trying to figure a few things out. Our defense needs to be a lot better. We're making freshman QB's look like veterans. Have to do better.
Yes there is a dispute that he's trying to put in a new defense. If you watch the film as I have you'll see we are doing the exact same thing now that we were doing last year.
When players are not in the correct position to make plays, over and over and over again, that is on the coaches. Teams have 3rd and 3's on us and where are our players? 7 yards off the ball. Easy completion for the other team.
There is no imagination or unpredictability w our defensive scheme.
Sorry dude but we didn't play Cover 2 last year at any point......Your confusing the type of D being played with the skill of players playing it...
Not telling you I agree or disagree with his system because no matter what we played as far as scheme I don't see much working when you lack basic fundamentals.....
A few players are improved (see film of Moore) but that's not saying much at this point.......
You can't be imaginative when they can't even play the basic defensive scheme you need thus you can't build on that and make anything unpredictable.
If your concerned about the play of safeties and corners look who is the position coach......
http://www.thestate.com/sports/coll...otball/josh-kendall-blog/article36344367.html
This article may help you understand the problem we have and how one thing in this system depends on another as well.
Again it doesn't matter what you play if you don't have the athletes to play it you're in trouble.....
Blaming the secondary coach for the safeties being out of position to make plays? I'd have one conversation w that coach (if that was the case) and tell him to not let that happen again.
Secondly, it doesn't matter if it's cover 2 or any other coverage type. When it's 3rd and 3 and your D is 7 yards off the ball, that's coaching.
Yep, agree....we don't have the personnel to run the cover-2, We probably don't to run any other type of defense, but right now we rank 117th out of 119 teams in giving up plays of 10 yards or more. If it's not working by now, it's more than likely isn't going to....damn it, try....just try...something else.
Or do what? Fire him? He has a contract so that's out! Now what you gonna do? Try and coach it all yourself? Sorry but while you and I agree it sucks right now how you fix it is a completely different thing.
You only have so many options!
Ever think there is a reason they play zone instead of man? Perhaps they can't pay man coverage any better or its actually worse.....
Fire him later but take over the secondary calls yourself. This isn't brain surgery. It's 3rd and 3. Get up tight on somebody for Gods sake. But its completely demoralizing to players to watch the other team march up and down the field on you and the coaches keep telling you to stay back and not be aggressive...ever...
Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results (insanity).
Let's don't give too much credit where it ain't due. This was Bud Carson's defense (some parts) with the Steelers in the 70s. Dungy played there, and essentially kept the same thing. LBs had to start covering RBs and help more in the 70s/80s with more passing occurring. Dungy passed onto to Lovie and many others. So, Tampa 2 ain't no secret. Everyone at middle school up knows the weaknesses.... and the loose zone on the edge/coverage we're playing makes it easier than ever. Almost like we're playing quads all the way down field, and our LBs can't play the run inside out, and still can't get over to help in coverage near the numbers as our CBs are 45 yards downfield on a 30 yard route. Sorry.......frustrated.
Similar threads
