Gophers’ defensive woes: What role have schematics and personnel played?

Over the past few weeks, if you stepped away from a Gopher football game for a few minutes, chances are you probably missed a big play. The Minnesota defense has simply been unable to prevent explosive plays in Big Ten games.

Many of the statistics are rather staggering, especially considering the Gophers’ defense starts nine upper classmen on that side of the ball. In four Big Ten matchups, the Gophers have allowed 34 plays of 15-plus yards, including ten plays of more than 20 yards in Saturday’s 53-28 loss to Nebraska. The Huskers tallied scoring plays of 40, 59, 35 and 67 yards as they moved the ball at will against the Minnesota defense. Quarterback Adrian Martinez completed 93 percent of his passes as the Huskers settled into the soft spots of Minnesota’s coverage.

Of the 34 big plays, the method of attack has been rather balanced. Twenty of the plays have been through the air, while 14 have come on long running plays. The Gophers’ average length of opponent touchdowns scored in Big Ten play is 31.5 yards. This shows how much teams are exploiting the defensive scheme. Minnesota is allowing a whopping 504 yards and 43.3 points per game in conference matchups.

Over the past three games, the Gophers have surrendered 5.8 yards per play, which ranks 118th among 130 college programs over that span. The amount of chunk plays they allow helps teams control the tempo and put up points. The Gophers also aren’t receiving a consistent pass rush as they are averaging just over 1.5 sacks per game. This, combined with a lack of talent in the backend, has been the recipe for trouble. The combination of smaller issues related to scheme and personnel have squandered a strong amount of progress by the team’s offense.

In P.J. Fleck’s 11 conference losses as head coach, the Gophers have allowed an average of 35 points per game. The defense has clearly struggled to handle a competition elevation in Big Ten play. There are many questions surrounding why this is the case. First, does a hybrid rush end style defense work in the Big Ten? It’s something many people have questioned, especially considering the physical style of play in this conference. However, as the coaching staff transitions to a new scheme, they need to have the correct type of personnel to execute it. Perhaps they will place an emphasis on recruiting more prototype pass rushers with high athletic metrics, such as 2019 recruit Jason Bargy. It’s important to consider the critical balance between scheme and personnel.

How does that impact what the Gophers can do defensively, though?

It certainly plays a role as they try to scheme to help their safeties in the backend. All of the off-coverage (7-to-10-yard cushions) and zone looks are at least partially the result of personnel trouble in the secondary. The coaches are leaving so much cushion because they are trying to eliminate even more big plays from occurring. Opposing coordinators are scheming to hit the soft spots of coverage as the Gophers attempt to keep everything underneath. This is a direct reaction to problems at the cornerback and safety spots. Antonio Shenault was converted from cornerback to safety, but left last week’s loss to Nebraska with an injury. It meant Jordan Howden, a true freshman, was thrust into one of the most important roles in the defense. He has really struggled to handle physical backs in the second level as a tackler. Teams also love to stack up wide receivers and run bunch sets to deliver route concepts that require communication and potential pass offs. When this happens, an incorrect alignment or missed tackle can lead to an easy big play. Teams have also been bunching things up and tightening the splits of wide receivers to take advantage of Minnesota’s physical strength deficiencies in the secondary. They run to the edge out of those sets and force defensive backs to make plays in space. If the Gophers happen to be in man coverage at the time, it’s a necessity to make the tackle because the play can’t be funneled to the safeties. This is where physical, versatile players like Antoine Winfield Jr. are so valuable. Minnesota missed 18 tackles in last week’s game and have struggled with tackling fundamentals in all Big Ten matchups.

MORE: http://www.1500espn.com/gophers-2/2018/10/gophers-defensive-woes-role-schematics-personnel-played/

Unless the writer knows what plays were called and then compared it what happened on the field, they would have no idea if it was a schematic problem or a personell problem.

Many of the key players on defense are Claeys' players. They played much better 2 years ago.

gopherveteran said:

Many of the key players on defense are Claeys' players. They played much better 2 years ago.

Click to expand...

The only key player that played significantly better two years ago is Cashman. Winfield Jr. played well, but is obviously injured. Lot's of upperclassmen on that defense two years ago, especially in the secondary (Myrick, Travis, McGhee notably). Other key players on this year's defense including Shenault, Huff bros, Martin, Barber, and Coughlin played sparingly and in specific formations two years ago. Coughlin played well from my memory, but is most definitely playing better this year.

I'm not defending this year's putrid defense, or Robb Smith, but it's hard to compare the two separate years personnel-wise.

Some guy said:

Unless the writer knows what plays were called and then compared it what happened on the field, they would have no idea if it was a schematic problem or a personell problem.

Click to expand...

Disagree. Secondary locations at the college level can tell you what coverage is called a high percentage of the time. I'm guessing easily over 75% of the time QB/WR/OC will know what coverage has been called based on dbs' locations. (There are some small differences at times but they don't always mean a ton to the O. Ex. cover 6 (quarter/quarter/half is a cover 2 principal and virtually the same underneath but a bit weaker in the flat and stronger deep on one side. Thus, the O can stick to their cov 2 routes if it's a choice type of play.) Furthermore, OCs add motion sometimes which helps a QB discern if a coverage is a zone or man as they can look the same at times. When coaches say the have to simplify the D it generally means they are doing to0 much to hide the coverage, screwing it up, getting confused, and/or getting beat b/c of the former statements.

Now, on fronts and blitzes, that can be a different story. However, a trained eye can generally spot who is screwing up by watching a unit as a whole. However, if there are multiple screwups that's where it can become difficult determining what was called. To do this, plays have to be watched many times. This is how coaches put their game plans together. They know that on 2nd and 7+ the defense plays cover 3 20% of the time, blitzes 65% playing cover 1, and blitzes 5% playing cover 0. They learn tendencies and try to call plays for mismatches with those tendencies in mind on their "menus".

Schematically speaking, it's really, really obvious if a team is a contain team or a spill team. Spill teams are the opposite of contain teams. They don't try to contain or turn anything in; they try to make everything bounce and run laterally to the outside while chasing it down with 2nd and 3rd level players.

These are just my opinions, but I've only been playing and coachng the game since Joe Salem was the U's coach.


***Perhaps, you're talking about if the writer should know what a kid is capable of doing. Then you're correcct, and I've shown screen shots of things that are schematically unsound and some where players didn't execute.

I agree with you about coverages. But most of our problem isn’t coverages.

Some guy said:

Unless the writer knows what plays were called and then compared it what happened on the field, they would have no idea if it was a schematic problem or a personell problem.

Click to expand...

My reading of the column was that defensive schemes are limited by the personnel somewhat. He plainly stated one can’t be certain the defensive woes are 20%, 50%, 75% the coordinator’s fault until they get their guys in and developed. That’s not really controversial.

In the future, the Gophers need to keep developing their internal talent, while adding more quality pass rushers and defensive backs in 2019.

Until these players arrive, it’s hard to truly evaluate or diagnose the Gophers’ defense.

Pompous Elitist said:

In the future, the Gophers need to keep developing their internal talent, while adding more quality pass rushers and defensive backs in 2019.

Until these players arrive, it’s hard to truly evaluate or diagnose the Gophers’ defense.

Click to expand...

Well these guys are at a premium and we have not done well at recruiting them, especially good pass rushers. If we could really luck out and end up with a couple of them our defense would improve. Until they arrive we should get used to getting 40+ points hung on us. Those are hard games to win.