3 games in what are your impressions of the 3-4?

[Youngsta71701]

This is how I feel.  When I watch this defense, I see improvements across the board but the big plays hurt us.  As a whole, I think we are a better defense but we still have a ways to go.

I can agree with that. I think it's time to show a little more confidence in our corners. Curl and Toliver isn't playing too bad. The soft scheme is holding them back.

[thebignasty]

Doesn't cover up the lack of athleticism or playmakers on defense when pitted against a team with SEC offensive talent.

[12247]

until we get better on D, I think we should just keep 15 men on the field on D and limit the offense to 5 yards per play.  Forcing the offense to 5 yards per play and taking a chance on them hitting  a big play against 15 defenders is a pretty good strategy.

[hawgon]

They haven't played anybody yet, but Minnesota has given up about 24 points in three games so far.

[IronHog]

The alignment doesn't matter if we're gonna keep on using the same soft scheme.

True.


Smith was ultra agressive and slowly got soft the longer he was at Arkansas.

[ShadowHawg]

Exactly where I thought we would be at this point in the season.

[31to6]

Is it what you thought it would be?

Scheme is irrelevant if your defense is passive and lacks fundamentals.

Should just send them out there and have them match up like pop warner. Would be just as effective.

[Porkchop#1]

A 5-2, 4-3, 3-4, 4-4, 2-7, 6-1, 6-2, 6-3 or even the gap 8....it doesn't matter as long as we are struggling so turrible badly with the safety position.

[Idahog]

Typical slow start and unprepared look to the team.

[secfan30]

It's had its moments where it looked good. Some good stops, 3 and outs. Then we gave up 5-6 huge plays against a$m.

[LRHawg]

Pretty much. Im rewatching the game right now and the defense was able to slow A&M's run game and defended their short passes pretty well. A&M absolutely wrecked our secondary. I don't think we have a defensive back with enough speed to properly defend someone like kirk

I have no issues with the scheme. I would like to see us blitz more. It's hard to blitz when Pulley and K Rich are both out, though. Those two were sorely missed, Saturday.

[Cletus]

The alignment doesn't matter if we're gonna keep on using the same soft scheme.

Right on.

[Bacons Rebellion]

For whatever reason the strategy has been to keep everything in front of them and for the A&M game to keep Mond in the pocket.

In short, we have a bend, but don’t break philosophy.

And we've had some great defenses over the years using that philosophy. But it doesn't work well when the problem with our bend but don't break philosophy is that it breaks often.

The defense looked good against TCU. We broke again and again against Texas A&M.

[Al Boarland]

And we've had some great defenses over the years using that philosophy. But it doesn't work well when the problem with our bend but don't break philosophy is that it breaks often.

The defense looked good against TCU. We broke again and again against Texas A&M.

TCU missed several opportunities that had nothing to do with the D.

[Youngsta71701]

I have no issues with the scheme. I would like to see us blitz more. It's hard to blitz when Pulley and K Rich are both out, though. Those two were sorely missed, Saturday.

I would like to see us TIMELY blitz a little more also. But you don't have to blitz to play aggressive in your face defense with at least one safety to help over the top.

[Youngsta71701]

TCU missed several opportunities that had nothing to do with the D.

Yep. They were self inflicted.

[GuvHog]

50 points to a very bad A$M team wit a freshman qb.

The overwhelming majority of A&M's points came on 4 big plays where either someone didn't stay home and cover the backside of the play (Mond's long run) or there was a blown coverage in the secondary. Other than those 4 plays, the defense played pretty well.

[GuvHog]

TCU missed several opportunities that had nothing to do with the D.

That's where you're wrong. The intent of the defense in the TCU game was to keep Hill in the pocket and limit his short passing game forcing him to throw long which he's very poor at doing. Under Rhoads game plan, the defense gave him some deep opportunities knowing that he wouldn't complete them.

[hawgon]

That's where you're wrong. The intent of the defense in the TCU game was to keep Hill in the pocket and limit his short passing game forcing him to throw long which he's very poor at doing. Under Rhoads game plan, the defense gave him some deep opportunities knowing that he wouldn't complete them.

He hit is receiver in the hands in the endzone and it was dropped and they fumbled a snap on the two.  If those were part of Rhodes' game plan then why doesn't he put his psychic abilities to use elsewhere and start getting us some wins?

[nwahogfan1]

This is the same old CBB defense in a different package.  CBs 7 yards off the ball even when its 3rd and 2.  Not much if any blitzing.  Giving up a butt load of yards and points.  Nothing new.

YARN!

[GuvHog]

He hit is receiver in the hands in the endzone and it was dropped and they fumbled a snap on the two.  If those were part of Rhodes' game plan then why doesn't he put his psychic abilities to use elsewhere and start getting us some wins?

Forcing TCU to throw long was part of the Hog defensive game plan because they knew Hill was poor at throwing the deep ball.

[Hogwild]

The overwhelming majority of A&M's points came on 4 big plays where either someone didn't stay home and cover the backside of the play (Mond's long run) or there was a blown coverage in the secondary. Other than those 4 plays, the defense played pretty well.

Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?

[Youngsta71701]

Forcing TCU to throw long was part of the Hog defensive game plan because they knew Hill was poor at throwing the deep ball.

Come on Guv. Give it up. No defense game plan is to let anyone wide open. Deep or not.

[12247]

Yer right.  TCU wasn't a very good team when we played them and neither were we.  TCU is better now and will continue to get even better.  We will improve some over time.  The 3-4 or any scheme won't work well until we have played it enough to understand it and we aren't there yet.  The scheme that needs the most work is mental attitude.  Only after we have an attitude adjustment will anything work well.

[12247]

It is my opinion that the biggest difference in our D is that the NEW COORDINATOR  is coaching them.  He hasn't bee totally BBed yet and these Guys seem to want to play for him.  They have a little spirit that hasn't sapped out by BB yet.  The formation really doesn't matter, not that one may be better than another.  This D is currently playing on attitude and trying  as best they've been taught to run the scheme the coaches want run.

As for second team help, we don't have any because we haven't trained any.  At any given time we have from 74 to maybe 90 players on the sideline when one of our teams is on the field.  Please don't tell me there isn't some of them that could sub in with a little training.  Lazy coaching, un-informed coaching.

[jm]

complete lack of any pass rush.  If the other qb has all the time he wants a receiver will get open no matter how good your defensive backfield is (ours isn't).  going to be a really long season in Fayetteville....

Complete lack of plan to rush the passer. We allow it to become 7 on 7 where the offense has the advantage.

[311Hog]

Complete lack of plan to rush the passer. We allow it to become 7 on 7 where the offense has the advantage.

^ this

If you blitz and give up a big play because you didnt get home i can live with that, but giving up 40+ yard gashes all while playing it "safe" on D should never happen.  I mean why in the world would you rush 3 and drop 8 only to let the QB run it 50 yards?  Bring the house and he hits the hot? so be it you tip your cap.

[HognotinMemphis]

My impression of the 3-4? This is a good impression of it:

Arkansas could run a 4-4-4 and still not defend against A&*M.

[31to6]

^ this

If you blitz and give up a big play because you didnt get home i can live with that, but giving up 40+ yard gashes all while playing it "safe" on D should never happen.  I mean why in the world would you rush 3 and drop 8 only to let the QB run it 50 yards?  Bring the house and he hits the hot? so be it you tip your cap.

In today's football your defense has to be disruptive. Even the definition of a "good defense" is evolving toward more emphasis on disruptive plays: TFL, sacks, QB hurries and, of course, turnovers. Good offenses are unstoppable. They are going to score. So the question, along with fundamentals like tackling, etc, is will your defense *force* mistakes? Will it score? Will it generate momentum-swinging big plays for you?  Will it steal possessions or flip the field?

The offenses are too good to just "make them earn it".

Every single good defensive game we have had under CBB has featured one key element: a bad opposing QB. A defensive philosophy predicated on your opponent sucking is just not going to win any championships. Apparently it won't even go .500.

Since spread offenses are so heavily focused on the abilities of the QB, both as a passing and running threat, you MUST HIT HIM.

Unless CBB changes *his* philosophy about defense, we are going to get to sit through more 4th quarter collapses.

[Sed76]

No rush on the QB. Can't consistently stop the run or pass. Still give up huge plays. Tackling is still an issue. On that long QB run the A&M guy had he pretty much just abused the last guy who was supposed to stop him. So pretty much exactly the same garbage we saw last year. Call it the 3-4 or whatever but so far it's not any better. Didn't expect to suddenly have a top 10 defense but expected some noticeable improvements but no so far.

[IronHog]

In today's football your defense has to be disruptive. Even the definition of a "good defense" is evolving toward more emphasis on disruptive plays: TFL, sacks, QB hurries and, of course, turnovers. Good offenses are unstoppable. They are going to score. So the question, along with fundamentals like tackling, etc, is will your defense *force* mistakes? Will it score? Will it generate momentum-swinging big plays for you?  Will it steal possessions or flip the field?

The offenses are too good to just "make them earn it".

Every single good defensive game we have had under CBB has featured one key element: a bad opposing QB. A defensive philosophy predicated on your opponent sucking is just not going to win any championships. Apparently it won't even go .500.

Since spread offenses are so heavily focused on the abilities of the QB, both as a passing and running threat, you MUST HIT HIM.

Unless CBB changes *his* philosophy about defense, we are going to get to sit through more 4th quarter collapses.

Agree 100%


Good offenses are going to get yards.  Can you force TO, FGs, and the occasional punt?


Bend but don't break is going to get abused

[hawgon]

In today's football your defense has to be disruptive. Even the definition of a "good defense" is evolving toward more emphasis on disruptive plays: TFL, sacks, QB hurries and, of course, turnovers. Good offenses are unstoppable. They are going to score. So the question, along with fundamentals like tackling, etc, is will your defense *force* mistakes? Will it score? Will it generate momentum-swinging big plays for you?  Will it steal possessions or flip the field?

The offenses are too good to just "make them earn it".

Every single good defensive game we have had under CBB has featured one key element: a bad opposing QB. A defensive philosophy predicated on your opponent sucking is just not going to win any championships. Apparently it won't even go .500.

Since spread offenses are so heavily focused on the abilities of the QB, both as a passing and running threat, you MUST HIT HIM.

Unless CBB changes *his* philosophy about defense, we are going to get to sit through more 4th quarter collapses.

Everything about Bert's philosophy is as if he plans and plays football like he wishes it was instead of how it actually is.  Even Saban has modified both his offensive and defensive philosophy but not Bert.  No, we'll just plodding away trying to play like some piss poor replica of the 1985 Bears or whatever the last team was that Bielema thought played "real American football" was.

[lstewart]

With the 3 - 4, we have more team speed on the field. So when we give up those 70 yard plays, our guys are only running 5 yards behind the player going in to score, instead of 10 yards behind him!

[Hoggish1]

50 points to a very bad A$M team wit a freshman qb.

I think you are wrong about the pretty bad part...

[johnny cash]

40 plus points not too impressive.

[311Hog]

I think you are wrong about the pretty bad part...

also the defense didn't stupidly kick the ball to Kirk for that lovely kick off return so it was only 43 points

[Smashmouth2004]

You can't have Agim stunting 2 gaps to his right, NT stunting to his right and then having the right end stunting to fill Agim's gap without the LB's filling! Yes, it's the scheme that caused the defensive break downs.

[31to6]

Bend but don't break is going to get abused

These days "bend but don't break" is pretty much "losing less quickly".

[31to6]

Everything about Bert's philosophy is as if he plans and plays football like he wishes it was instead of how it actually is.  Even Saban has modified both his offensive and defensive philosophy but not Bert.  No, we'll just plodding away trying to play like some piss poor replica of the 1985 Bears or whatever the last team was that Bielema thought played "real American football" was.

It is not really even his fault. The meta-game has changed. Smash-mouth defense is now *against the rules*. You just cannot physically punish the offense (esp the WRs and QBs) like you could even just 10 years ago. Offenses running the RPO are essentially running a scheme that is borderline cheating (illegal receiver downfield almost every play), but by convention it rarely gets called so defenses are back on their heels and cannot release their coverage and crash down on the RB/QB just because an OL is blocking 5 yards downfield. PI calls are getting more and more arbitrary and touchy-feely. And so on.

But when the meta-game changes, you have to be willing to change your guiding principles. He seemed to indicate that he had adjusted, by moving to a scheme that puts a bit more speed on the field. But he is still allowing or forcing his DC to call gutless, conservative plays even in close games.

Also, the days of a 10 point lead with 5 minutes go go in the 4th quarter being almost guaranteed are over. With offensive proficiency, even 21 point 4th quarter comebacks seem to happen all the time.

[Wildhog]

The 3-4 fits our personnel better.  We just can't recruit 4-3 linebackers at an SEC level.  We do, however, sign a ****load of LB/DE tweeners that are perfect for the 3-4.

[Quickdraw]

I like a 3-4 scheme. In order for it to work effectively  in the SEC you gotta have speed which is what we are missing.

[IronHog]

The 3-4 fits our personnel better.  We just can't recruit 4-3 linebackers at an SEC level.  We do, however, sign a ****load of LB/DE tweeners that are perfect for the 3-4.

That's why they need to run 4-2-5

[IronHog]

I think you are wrong about the pretty bad part...

ATM and TCU are just teams


Watched part of ULL vs ATM.  ULL was giving ATM fits

[hehawg]

For whatever reason the strategy has been to keep everything in front of them and for the A&M game to keep Mond in the pocket.

In short, we have a bend, but don't break philosophy.

To be honest I along with others are tired of hearing that philosophy. Play sound defense...is that to much to ask?

[DeltaBoy]

It like Swiss Cheese.

[ballz2thewall]

doesn't matter if she's blond, brunette, red or raven.

if the body is crap, she's a 4 a.m. pickup and dump.

[Sed76]

If I remember correctly A&M only punted once in the second half. That's not good defense no matter how you spin it.

[code red]

Is it what you thought it would be?

Scheme be dammed.  It the jimmies and the jacks that make a defense. 

[Al Boarland]

Scheme be dammed.  It the jimmies and the jacks that make a defense.

It was stated the roster better fit the 3-4 many times in the offseason on HV.

[carolinahogger]

It's a distraction.  The defense is not up to SEC levels in talent and coaching.  Now that the novelty of the 3-4 is wearing off, and we are racking up the losses...       BEHOLD!!!   THE STEAMBOAT PACKAGE!!!