Question for the board

[ScarletRook]

I have read that the problem with the defense is Tresey and that the real problem is the talent which Tresey has only had one year to address.  So which is it?

I hear the same about Montgomery and his play calling - it's the coach, no it's the players.  Which is it?

YSU doesn't do a good job of keeping fresh legs on the field and they seem to have a real problem getting substitutions on and off the field so is it the coaches or the players?

I can't believe with the stable of running backs we have that the talent isn't there.  We seem to have more depth on the D-line than previous years, but very few substitutions during a game. 

Help me out on this one please.

[Train]

I personally don't see any problems with this team...they are 8-2 heading into the ND State game....How many of us would take that at the start of the year..?..

The long and short of it is this...... it is very difficult to win on the road in this conference...this team had a few turnovers...a blocked punt....and was still a dropped INT away from pulling out the WIN at UNI...

I am tired of hearing opinions of people who don't understand how hard it is to win a football game....regardless of who you are playing...

[penguinpower]

Personally I think it is a little bit of both and it isn't that simple. The players in the secondary are fast and athletic but I think the weakness in this area is coaching and scheme. When do we line up man to man against anyone?  I don't recall seeing man coverage except for maybe when we played morehead state etc.  We cannot play soft coverage every down. We need to hit their receivers off the line and disrupt timing. Heck this may give the DL a little more time to disrupt.  I think we are thin and young on the DL and we don't get much pressure as a result. The LB's are really coming along and they have gotten better and are a force when they make their reads properly. However, they still allow backs out of the backfield uncovered at times and they don't always cover the short slant routs well. The LB's are fantastic run stoppers. The entire defense is pretty good at shutting down the run, which tells me they are fast, physical and they can tackle well. But pass coverage is an entirely different story. For me they are not as good at pass coverage and much of it is technique and scheme. Why does Childs let people get behind him so often?  Drives me nuts. It drives Tresy nuts too. Tresey gave him an earful in the USD game. Our Db's play 8 to 10 yards off the receivers. I don't get it?  When was the last time you saw the LB's or the safety stunt?  I watch the corners give away the corner blitz that we run 20+ times per game, but bever see much movement by the LB's or the S. I think we need to stunt them at times.

I don't know if the answer is that simple. I think the coaching could be better. We can't change the current players. Our Lb's are impact players and #8 is an excellent run stopper and Peterman shows flashes of greatness, but then gives up some big plays.

I think that the QB's in todays game are better than 20 years ago. To me todays's QB's don't have the IQ of the qb's from 20 years ago due to the spread offenses of today, but they are consistently far more accurate because of the training commitment at an early age. Where I'm going with this is that it is difficult to defend a nearly perfect pass and there are probably many more "near perfect passes" that get thrown and they are more difficult to defend. The best way to deal with this is to have a DL that can get pressure with 3 down linemen and the 4th one is a wrecking ball. Pressure on the QB changes the game. We can't do it yet so we need exceptional play out of the secondary and LB's and the coaches need to work extra hard in this area to limit exposure by working on technique, schemes, and blitzing.  That is my opinion. 

[paladin]

For years, I rated the recruiting classes with the rest of the MVFC. YSU was good but usually only rated 3rd or 4th most years . Then under Wolf, I had YSU with the # 1 class two  years in a row. So looking at becoming a top MVFC team was a no brainer. However, even I have to admit that the MVFC has reached some parity and that there are a number of good teams in the league. That said, YSU has concentrated on the O side of the ball. We need better D players. But having said that too, it is extremely tough to play D against the Spread Os used in todays game, defending both the run & the pass. Lots of pressure to do both since your LB must play both very well and playing against a dual threat QB makes it often impossible. Yet, here we are and after losing to what has now become one of the best teams in the Big 10, YSU FINALLY loses a FCS game, on the road at a top program and on the last  play by a FG. What am I missing ?

YSU is in the playoffs right now. And still has the chance at a league title or co-title in last two games. The program took over when the last coach destroyed the program and has improved it record-wise every year which wasn't the case previously. I'm disappointed they lost a FCS game, but this is a playoff season and I'll make a judgement after the season is over. Looks like we have more good players being recruited and that needs to be looked at too. The DC is just now into his 2nd season with the players he had. If they work to improve the talent coming in on D and maintain a high quality on O, I don't see a problem. All I see are a return to playoffs and a team competing for a league title. Never fear, when I see poor talent or a dumb coach, bet your az$  I'm on here preaching the gospel.

[ysufan0505]

I personally don't see any problems with this team...they are 8-2 heading into the ND State game....How many of us would take that at the start of the year..?..

The long and short of it is this...... it is very difficult to win on the road in this conference...this team had a few turnovers...a blocked punt....and was still a dropped INT away from pulling out the WIN at UNI...

I am tired of hearing opinions of people who don't understand how hard it is to win a football game....regardless of who you are playing...

Amen to your point, Train. You hit it on the head!

[IAA Fan]

I think decisions have to be made as to the type of talent to recruit as well. Most teams in the MVFC can, and do, run the spread. However, the top teams (in our conference) are still running a heavy amount of traditional Gateway football offense. Coaching is 50% teaching and 50% control. This variety of offenses places a heavy burden on our defensive coaches to be able to teach both types. Scout teams become the most important players on your team. For example:


NDSU's offense is more traditional than spread ...with back-to-back national titles to show the reasons why. YSU does not do this. So we cannot control the clock. Now, I am sorry to be so repetitive but ...

-What offense does YSU's defense face the most? Simple ...YSU's defense faces YSU's offense for a lot more than a couple of hours each season. So if YSU's offense cannot run a quality traditional set, the YSU defense will never truly be able to defend other teams that use it ...thus we are blown out by NDSU last year.
-We had the opposite problem under Tresssel. Tressel ran a traditional "vanilla" offense from the time he began "trying out" for the OSU job. About 1996. Now what happened when we faced on option team in the 1999 title game? The same thing as last year's NDSU game ...we were blown out by an offense that we had never faced. The only thing that is changing now is that we are spreading out and adding a read component to that option game.

The moral of the story is that coaches have to teach ALL aspects of the game; and players need to be recruited that can play both styles. Defensive recruits need to be taught that in the MVFC, you need to tackle ...not just push receivers out of bounds.  Corners need to be taught that QBs are going to throw the ball no matter how tight you cover the receiver. So they need to look for the ball and tackle quickly after the catch.

Train I like your enthusiasm, but we all fear that the team is 8-2 & will finish 8-4 ...with the loses all coming to the best competition. Making us feel like we are a middle-tier MVFC team.

[Spiderlegs]

The defense appears to be a "bend but not break" style. On pass plays, defenders often stay behind their defender to prevent big gains, but the problem is unless there is something to interrupt the play--either through the pass rush or a DB jumping in front of a pass--this type of defense gives lots of yards and doesn't work in 3rd down situations.  Beyond the general, there are some specific points where the defense falls apart:

(1) The linebackers and nickelbacks are not placed where they can be effective.  They aren't reinforcing the line to stop runs, and they don't move to their positions on pass plays fast enough.  Compare how YSU LBs are positioned to nearly any opponent, and you will see the difference. This is coaching, and it's why opponents get so many 5-10 passes up the middle, especially on third down. This could be fixed very easily, but looks like it is not deemed a priority.
 
(2) The defense line is weak when it comes to pass rush. Hard to tell if this is the players or if it is the scheme. It would be pretty easy to assign a fifth person (LB or nickelback) to the rush in pass situations since they don't appear to be doing much anyways. Occasionally YSU does do this, and it is effective.

[rayI09]

according to Joe Scalzo the biggest difference between NDSU and YSU is the defensive line. YSU just doesn't have great players at this position.