Having an adaptable defense

[brewskis]

The priority for Stitt is going to be stopping the run. He doesn't want to see the opposing team eat up the clock with long drives. The DL transfers and the last recruiting class supports that as well. He would rather see a QB throw for 300+ yards than have someone run 30 times for 150 yards on us. Ty's philosophy of emphasizing the pass rush just doesn't jive.

Cal Poly first column, all opponents last season, second column

Cal Poly averaged offense of 479 yards last season, mostly running. Ty's Defense kept them to 386 yards, far below Cal Poly's average.

Cal Poly's Offense offered opponents an average of 458 yards. Stitt's Offense got just 469 yards; about Cal Poly's Defense average. We offered only an "average" Offense. At that average, however, Cal Poly did not have a good season, 4-11 in conference play. Playing "average" and offering an "average" Defense should have beat them. Playing "average" and with an outstanding "Defense" should have beat Cal Poly decisively. Ty understood stopping "run" strategies. He proved it there. That was not the problem in that game.

I agree, our offense turned the ball over and couldn't punch it in in the red zone. No argument there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you also agree that the defense made good adjustments at halftime, gave up only 2 FG's in the second half, held CP to about 100 yards less than its average, and played well enough for UM to win the game (had the offense provided even reasonable help), and that your general premise on the defense and TG is not supported by the facts (at least in this game).

I was at the game, a little buzzed, and in the first five rows.....so I wouldn't say I had a great birds-eye view of any schematic adjustments that Bozeman states defensive coordinator made between the first and second half. I did think that Montana's defense played well all game, and we simply couldn't punch it into the end zone. That's why we lost against Cal Poly last year.

Whatever the change was, maybe it was having Stitt and Semore in the house, but it was nice to see us actually contain Cal Poly this year. It'll be interesting to see how Bozeman does against them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AZGrizFan]

The priority for Stitt is going to be stopping the run. He doesn't want to see the opposing team eat up the clock with long drives. The DL transfers and the last recruiting class supports that as well. He would rather see a QB throw for 300+ yards than have someone run 30 times for 150 yards on us. Ty's philosophy of emphasizing the pass rush just doesn't jive.

Cal Poly first column, all opponents last season, second column

Cal Poly averaged offense of 479 yards last season, mostly running. Ty's Defense kept them to 386 yards, far below Cal Poly's average.

Cal Poly's Offense offered opponents an average of 458 yards. Stitt's Offense got just 469 yards; about Cal Poly's Defense average. We offered only an "average" Offense. At that average, however, Cal Poly did not have a good season, 4-11 in conference play. Playing "average" and offering an "average" Defense should have beat them. Playing "average" and with an outstanding "Defense" should have beat Cal Poly decisively. Ty understood stopping "run" strategies. He proved it there. That was not the problem in that game.

I agree, our offense turned the ball over and couldn't punch it in in the red zone. No argument there.

Do you also agree that the defense made good adjustments at halftime, gave up only 2 FG's in the second half, held CP to about 100 yards less than its average, and played well enough for UM to win the game (had the offense provided even reasonable help), and that your general premise on the defense and TG is not supported by the facts (at least in this game).

Agreed. Defense was NOT the problem in the Cal Poly game.

 

[Umista]

I for one am glad as heck we about to start a NEW SEASON. Yes we can all agree we lost games last year we should have won. BUT, we are about to start a brand new season and I can't wait. Our defense will do well this year and that is simply my opinion, wait and see.

For some reason this has been the longest period of "no football" and far to much "bitter biting" on E-griz and most of us will be happy as pigs in pooh about 35 days from now. Hang on girls and boys.

 

[Grisly Fan]

Cal Poly first column, all opponents last season, second column

Cal Poly averaged offense of 479 yards last season, mostly running. Ty's Defense kept them to 386 yards, far below Cal Poly's average.

Cal Poly's Offense offered opponents an average of 458 yards. Stitt's Offense got just 469 yards; about Cal Poly's Defense average. We offered only an "average" Offense. At that average, however, Cal Poly did not have a good season, 4-11 in conference play. Playing "average" and offering an "average" Defense should have beat them. Playing "average" and with an outstanding "Defense" should have beat Cal Poly decisively. Ty understood stopping "run" strategies. He proved it there. That was not the problem in that game.

I agree, our offense turned the ball over and couldn't punch it in in the red zone. No argument there.

Do you also agree that the defense made good adjustments at halftime, gave up only 2 FG's in the second half, held CP to about 100 yards less than its average, and played well enough for UM to win the game (had the offense provided even reasonable help), and that your general premise on the defense and TG is not supported by the facts (at least in this game).

Agreed. Defense was NOT the problem in the Cal Poly game.

Well, the defense was the problem on that last drive. If the D had stopped them or held them until time ran out then the Griz win. Of course it could be argued that the O had the ball late and if they had gotten another first down then also game over. So flip a coin, either side of the ball could have won the game. It was more of a matter of the team not stepping up when needed (plus one hell of a good FG from a RS freshman kicker).

 

[UMGriz75]

Looking at scoring by half for season:
Opponents scored 181 in the first half, and 136 in the second half. That indicates that the defense did in fact adapt.
Check out the offensive stats by half. UM scored 234 in the first half, and 141 in the second half.

Well, that was last year's problem in a nutshell. We had a Defense that could adapt. We had an Offense that often-times refused to do so. And when it did, it went from a winning strategy to a losing one.

ISU -- the break for us that made the season because of an opposing team error that almost never happens, and our defensive player reaction that was extraordinary -- bothers me to this day. Offense scored 21 points on Simis mostly rushing. QB, 105 yards rushing in that game. (Simis aver. rushing/game: 45 yds, Gustafson, 4 yds). Allowed to run as a matter of strategy, he ran, and the team scored points. And Stitt couldn't stand it. He said so after the game about the "half time adjustment:" "You have to pass sometime." Give the man credit: successful or not, he wants to play it his way. And then decided that "we needed to protect our lead." And ISU caught up. It was exact opposite of "adapting," it was "give the other team what they prepared for."

Defense kept Idaho to "0" 3Q, but by then Kramer saw that Stitt's "strategy" was leaving Simis open to getting the ball stripped away, and focused on that. The Offense wrecked what the Defense had been able to do.

And ISU was sharing the cellar with Cal Poly at that point. Those should have been blow-outs.

Stitt knows it and everybody else knows it, but for the ISU fluke, that was the season for the Griz. And for that to happen that late in the season was not confidence inspiring.

We had an "adaptable" Defense. We lacked an "adaptable" Offense. With a new coach, we will have to see what the Defense has to offer. With the same coach, we will have to see if the Offense can adapt. It ought to be an interesting season.

 

[brewskis]

Looking at scoring by half for season:
Opponents scored 181 in the first half, and 136 in the second half. That indicates that the defense did in fact adapt.
Check out the offensive stats by half. UM scored 234 in the first half, and 141 in the second half.

Well, that was last year's problem in a nutshell. We had a Defense that could adapt. We had an Offense that often-times refused to do so. And when it did, it went from a winning strategy to a losing one.

ISU -- the break for us that made the season because of an opposing team error that almost never happens, and our defensive player reaction that was extraordinary -- bothers me to this day. Offense scored 21 points on Simis mostly rushing. QB, 105 yards rushing in that game. (Simis aver. rushing/game: 45 yds, Gustafson, 4 yds). Allowed to run as a matter of strategy, he ran, and the team scored points. And Stitt couldn't stand it. He said so after the game about the "half time adjustment:" "You have to pass sometime." Give the man credit: successful or not, he wants to play it his way. And then decided that "we needed to protect our lead." And ISU caught up. It was exact opposite of "adapting," it was "give the other team what they prepared for."

Defense kept Idaho to "0" 3Q, but by then Kramer saw that Stitt's "strategy" was leaving Simis open to getting the ball stripped away, and focused on that. The Offense wrecked what the Defense had been able to do.

And ISU was sharing the cellar with Cal Poly at that point. Those should have been blow-outs.

Stitt knows it and everybody else knows it, but for the ISU fluke, that was the season for the Griz. And for that to happen that late in the season was not confidence inspiring.

We had an "adaptable" Defense. We lacked an "adaptable" Offense. With a new coach, we will have to see what the Defense has to offer. With the same coach, we will have to see if the Offense can adapt. It ought to be an interesting season.

I agree about the points you made about the defense 100%. The defense really did appear to step up their game and adapt after the Portland State game. Finney got going on the ground against us a bit, but he's a good RB and did that to a lot of teams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SoldierGriz]

Looking at scoring by half for season:
Opponents scored 181 in the first half, and 136 in the second half. That indicates that the defense did in fact adapt.
Check out the offensive stats by half. UM scored 234 in the first half, and 141 in the second half.

Well, that was last year's problem in a nutshell. We had a Defense that could adapt. We had an Offense that often-times refused to do so. And when it did, it went from a winning strategy to a losing one.

ISU -- the break for us that made the season because of an opposing team error that almost never happens, and our defensive player reaction that was extraordinary -- bothers me to this day. Offense scored 21 points on Simis mostly rushing. QB, 105 yards rushing in that game. (Simis aver. rushing/game: 45 yds, Gustafson, 4 yds). Allowed to run as a matter of strategy, he ran, and the team scored points. And Stitt couldn't stand it. He said so after the game about the "half time adjustment:" "You have to pass sometime." Give the man credit: successful or not, he wants to play it his way. And then decided that "we needed to protect our lead." And ISU caught up. It was exact opposite of "adapting," it was "give the other team what they prepared for."

Defense kept Idaho to "0" 3Q, but by then Kramer saw that Stitt's "strategy" was leaving Simis open to getting the ball stripped away, and focused on that. The Offense wrecked what the Defense had been able to do.

And ISU was sharing the cellar with Cal Poly at that point. Those should have been blow-outs.

Stitt knows it and everybody else knows it, but for the ISU fluke, that was the season for the Griz. And for that to happen that late in the season was not confidence inspiring.

We had an "adaptable" Defense. We lacked an "adaptable" Offense. With a new coach, we will have to see what the Defense has to offer. With the same coach, we will have to see if the Offense can adapt. It ought to be an interesting season.

Ummmm....no offense in the BSC had to "adapt" more during the course of the season than the Griz. We cycled through 3 different QBs. I understand your argument compares production by halves in a game, and I get it. But, there is a much bigger - and more important in my opinion - perspective as you view the season as a whole. Many programs that had to work through their QB depth chart like the Griz had to would have done far worse. The Griz persevered, played well enough when it mattered, and won a playoff game. Not bad.

 

[Mavman]

UM75 do you think the offense will be much improved with another year under Stitt and if Brady can stay healthy all year?? Or do you find his offense to be one that will not work in the fcs? Is it a qb issue? A playcalling issue?

Defensively do you think they were better because of less turnover in philosiphy and staff?
How much credit do you give semore in the way the defense played after the PSU debacle?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Fat Bruno]

The problem with stats in that comparative half scenario is that it isn’t that simple. If you are doing well in the first half, you don’t want to make major adjustments. However, the other team is motivated to make adjustments since they’re behind. So, you have to wait to see what those adjustments are before you make your adjustments to their adjustments. This takes a while to figure out and takes more time to respond to. Those stats indicate that Stitt had good offensive game plans going in but took a while longer to adjust to their second half adjustments … that is inevitable in these situations. There are very bright and experienced coaches, I suppose, who can divine what adjustments the other team will make at half time and be ready for them to a certain extent, but that’s a crap shoot. One criticism of TG is that he did not have an early game plan and would allow too much scoring early. The stats seem to show that he did fairly well adjusting during the games. But, Stitt’s offensive stats for the first half are that much more remarkable in that he wasn’t getting a lot of help from the early defense.

 

[UMGriz75]

UM75 do you think the offense will be much improved with another year under Stitt and if Brady can stay healthy all year?? Or do you find his offense to be one that will not work in the fcs? Is it a qb issue? A playcalling issue?

Defensively do you think they were better because of less turnover in philosiphy and staff?
How much credit do you give semore in the way the defense played after the PSU debacle?

Thanks in advance!

The numbers I looked at showed that the average scored by opposing teams played "under" Semore increased by nearly a full touchdown compared to teams "under" Ty. Our opponents scored more points than when Ty was DC. Then everyone says "yes but ... MSU, EWU." On the other hand, under Ty, MSU scored scored seven whole points. Under Semore, 35.

At the end of the day, what "actually happened" and "yes but..." simply create argument scenarios that cannot reach any consensus. I did look at Ty's three year average, and that it was consistently improving, and what happened prior to the PSU game was consistent with his overall record because they included the entirety of the conference for two years, including against the high scoring offenses.It was also consistent with a trend of improvement over that three year period. Semore's many fewer games, with worse defensive results, perhaps are just too few to reach any definitive conclusion. But, they cannot be used to argue that he did "better" because he didn't.

Can we compare NDSU (I) vs NDSU (II), and the argument becomes "no, because ....". Pretty soon, explanations that have to always explain why what happened was "somehow different," get a bit tired. "Football" is a sport designed to combine athleticism, strategy, and teamwork in order to continually improve performance, the key metric being "to win." Last year's Griz Offense was more like a "Random Sequence Generator."

But, the fact is, at the end of the day, our "Defense" in key games came into second halves generally able to adjust and did so when Ty was fully in charge. For the season as a whole, Montana's Defense consistently showed an ability to reduce scoring opportunities for opponents compared to first halves.

Our Offense showed no such adjustment capability. That's concerning. Even more so because it wasn't a matter of changing quarterbacks, it was the reduction of such capability, often dramatically so, for successive games of the same quarterbacks. That was, to me, a remarkable pattern.

Call it a learning season, and, by sheer luck, a successful one. The test this year is to see what was learned. The sky could be the limit.

 

[Mavman]

UM75 do you think the offense will be much improved with another year under Stitt and if Brady can stay healthy all year?? Or do you find his offense to be one that will not work in the fcs? Is it a qb issue? A playcalling issue?

Defensively do you think they were better because of less turnover in philosiphy and staff?
How much credit do you give semore in the way the defense played after the PSU debacle?

Thanks in advance!

The numbers I looked at showed that the average scored by opposing teams played "under" Semore increased by nearly a full touchdown compared to teams "under" Ty. Our opponents scored more points than when Ty was DC. Then everyone says "yes but ... MSU, EWU."

At the end of the day, what "actually happened" and "yes but..." simply create argument scenarios that cannot reach any consensus. I did look at Ty's three year average, and that it was consistently improving, and what happened prior to the PSU game was consistent with his overall record because they included the entirety of the conference for two years, including against the high scoring offenses.It was also consistent with a trend of improvement over that three year period. Semore's many fewer games, with worse defensive results, perhaps are just too few to reach any definitive conclusion. But, they cannot be used to argue that he did "better" because he didn't.

Can we compare NDSU (I) vs NDSU (II), and the argument becomes "no, because ....". Pretty soon, explanations that have to always explain why what happened was "somehow different," get a bit tired. "Football" is a sport designed to combine athleticism, strategy, and teamwork in order to continually improve performance, the key metric being "to win." Last year's Griz Offense was more like a "Random Sequence Generator."

But, the fact is, at the end of the day, our "Defense" in key games came into second halves generally able to adjust and did so when Ty was fully in charge. For the season as a whole, Montana's Defense consistently showed an ability to reduce scoring opportunities for opponents compared to first halves.

Our Offense showed no such adjustment capability. That's concerning. Even more so because it wasn't a matter of changing quarterbacks, it was the reduction of such capability, often dramatically so, for successive games of the same quarterbacks. That was, to me, a remarkable pattern.

Call it a learning season, and, by sheer luck, a successful one. The test this year is to see what was learned. The sky could be the limit.

What do you think will be the record this year??

 

[UMGriz75]

What do you think will be the record this year??

If past is prologue, I'd have to say I have no idea. Compared to my expectations, I really have no idea what this coach will do. The key tactical features attributed to this coach did not generate predictable results. I can only assume that has to get better. If everything tightens up, it could be very good year.

 

[Mavman]

I say 7-4 not because the Griz don't have the talent , they have just been the shits on the road for a very long time now.

 

[77matcat]

What impact will the fact that the Bigsky has now personally witnessed your ofense??? Could that be the reason second half scoring was down last year??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Grisly Fan]

What impact will the fact that the Bigsky has now personally witnessed your ofense??? Could that be the reason second half scoring was down last year??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe that the offense had to be simplified quite a bit and that simplified version was relatively easy to defend once you learned it. If I am right then that shouldn't happen this year (as long as we have QB healthy that has at least a year in the system). Time will tell...

 

[77matcat]

Guess that's a possibility.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[EverettGriz]

What impact will the fact that the Bigsky has now personally witnessed your ofense??? Could that be the reason second half scoring was down last year??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Griz scoring was way down in the second half of the ewoo and msu games too. I think we all know the reason for that, though....

 

[77matcat]

Same I believe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brewskis]

Same I believe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe it was the fact we were up by 25+ in the second half and actually had the playoffs to consider.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[77matcat]

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk