So all that talk about the "D" being the strength of the team certainly did not materialize in this game.
With 11 minutes left and up by 10 points, at home, the "D" failed to do their job. I was crunch time and the "O" did their job to storm back and get a 2 score lead only to have the "D" let TX State back in.
The "D" isn't as good as we were all lead to believe.

The team has a lot of work to do.


GO BOBCATS

And, the last series it was a cover 4- prevent defense. Yep, it prevented us from having a chance to win. Our corners give up way too much cushion and a couple looked like they don't belong. I hate seeing them out there on an island. Little underneath coverage and afraid to get beat deep is not a defense for success with the personnel we have (or don't).

The cover four never works and you have to hold players accountable. Blair Brown needs to wrap up and play smart and Moore needs to cover ground and make solid tackles. We finally got some turnovers from our db's. We need to get our hands on the ball and we need to get 5-9 sacks per game, we have high motor guys and instinctive players like Poling make it happen.

Our lack of experience and depth at this position is something that we will need to overcome before we hit conference play.

There's also a bit of a discipline problem on the D. We were flagged for at least three late hits/unsportsmanlike and I saw two or three others that could've or should've been called.

No one has said that Texas State has a great team. However, even before the game, the emphasis was on the fact that they have a very good quarterback. It is against that type of QB that the cover-4 seems to fail miserably.

I should add that the other problem with the cover-4 is that it requires outstanding cornerbacks. The one position that has scared me all year is cornerback. I haven't been concerned about any other position.

A victory against Kansas will not be an upset.

Wasn't a problem giving up a lot of long plays. It continued to give up 8-12 yard pass plays over and over and over again. They torched us because we kept giving them a huge cushion. At no time did coaches make adjustments. Only two pass plays more than 30 yards. None over 40.

I can see that they did give up some long runs, though. That's a related problem. I'm generally comfortable with giving up a large number of short passes, which was the traditional strategy of the Cover-2. The idea is that it's hard to sustain an 80 yard drive with 16 five yard completions. A sack, a drop, an interception, a penalty... lots of things can go wrong.

One thing mentioned on TV is our speed on the D line made us susceptible to screens and shovel passes. We'd over-pursue and leave the underneath open. Could be. I'd rather have that, tho, than not have a decent pass rush. Making adjustments to compensate for over-pursuit is relatively easy to fix. Not having a decent pass rush is much harder to deal with.

Not sure about the math on that. Stats show that they hit 41 of 56 passing attempts. About 77%. For 440 yards, so about 10 yards per completion.

Hmm. Three downs to get a first...and your throwing completions of about 10 yards each on 2 of them (if you pass 3 times). You might be content to let them keep hitting short ones in that firestorm. So might the OHIO coaching staff.

But not someone who reacts to circumstances.



Again, I didn't watch for this the whole game. But on their first drive of the second half we played their receives tight at the line. The drive went nowhere. I don't think that we went to that tactic again. I wouldn't have gone to it exclusively. But I'd've used it more.

Yes. They averaged 7.9 per attempt and 10.7 per completion. Ohio managed 8.4 per attempt and 14.1 per completion.

First of all, the defense that I like is the cover 2. That was the defense used from 2005-2013. The defense I'm not comfortable with is the defense used from 2014-2016. Converting to it was a bold gamble, but it has resulted in some disastrous games.

Next, if they don't have the cornerbacks up pressing in the cover-4, they aren't playing the defense the way Mark Dantonio played it. The whole idea of his defense is to attack. The line attacks, the corners press. If the line is penetrating, the QB has to throw early, at which point the corners are up close. If the pass rush isn't there, however, pressing will lead to giving up long passes. If the QB has plenty of time to throw, and the corners press, eventually a receiver will get open.

If the line is pressing, but the corners aren't, then you're going to force the QB to throw early, but that isn't a problem for him since he has somewhere to throw it. I don't see the point of that. Conversely, in the cover-2, you don't press the QB, and you don't press the receivers. Your defense defends and reacts, and leaves no screens, or the like, plus they drop guys into passing lanes sometimes, or blitz other times. You let the QB throw short, but never long, and try to confuse him into an ill-advised pass.

I'll have a better idea after I watch the Kansas game, but it sounds like they didn't trust any of the young corners enough to bring them up and have them press, and ended up in a defense that didn't work well at all.