1.) USC didn't destroy Utah's defense. USC/Fink destroyed FS Whittingham, who refused to back out of press man coverage after the fifth time Fink lobbed an arm punt to a triple covered receiver. I kept waiting for an interception, but it took until late in the game. You want to talk about moral victories/defeats for outgaining an opponent, Utah outgained USC 457 to 381 and won the turnover battle 2:1. USC's offense looked horrible all game, Fink wishes he has Browning's arm, and yet they kept getting lucky on lobs over and over again.
2.) USC beat Utah in spite of the statistical deficiencies for the same reason USC was so boom-or-bust against UW: They have freak skill position athletes who are bound to make a big play from time to time on their own and freak D-line/linebackers (Gaoteote)/edge (Jackson) players who can occasionally blow up a play on their own and create a momentum swing. What they lack is both scheme and discipline necessary to be consistent and glaring holes elsewhere in their lineup (QB, DB, OL is not great) that causes them to trade big positive plays for big negative plays. They're such a weird team. If I had to sum it up, it's, "What if Randy Moss, Doug Baldwin, Vita Vea, and Bobby Wagner played at Oregon State?"
3.) Aiding in the boom-or-bust nature of USC's offense in this game were the obvious personnel issues on the UW side. Anybody dooging over the defensive performance right now needs to understand that Fink has a historically bad arm at this level, and he's not very athletic to boot. His numbers against Utah were a mirage, and anybody watching that game knows it. The Husky defense have not faced a quarterback with so limiting arm talent, and they will not face another. And this advantage was compounded by their staff's dogged refusal to just keep running right at the UW 3 and 4 man fronts that were getting gashed. The linebackers are a problem, and I'm surprised at the extent. If before the season somebody was to show me the film of this game and tell me that either 13 or 30 was walk-on Ulofoshio, my response would be, "Bummer; I thought he was going to be better than that."
These are the starting linebackers, though, and it's a huge liability. Lake/Kwiatkowski are scheming their asses off to hide the fact that this is a linebacker-free defense (lot of A-gap blitzes that accomplish nothing but occupy a blocker and simplify gap responsibilities), but occasionally those guys are going to be relied upon to diagnose quickly, fill the proper gap before blocking leverage can be established, possibly shed said block, and make the tackle. This is where 60, 12, and 35 happen. They will continue to happen, as there is no "this year" fix to this problem. Utah will break off at least as many big runs, ditto Oregon.
4.) A lot of the problem against the run yesterday was the amount of manpower dedicated to conservatively stopping the passing game, as USC's scheme dictated. When it's 5-on-5 up front, all 5 have to at least stalemate, and the linebackers WILL have to shed a block or collapse a running lane. Utah, on the other hand, cockily stayed in their base defense and attacked the LOS. They gave up negative rushing yards until late in the 4th quarter, but it cost them dearly down the field. I'll take UW's compromise there--difference between win and loss. On the flip side, if you're asking a linebacker to have that big of a responsibility in the run game, things like that 4th down conversion are just going to happen, as the linebackers are going to be slower to drop into their zones (or not asked to at all). Those down on Molden for allowing that catch are crazy. You're asking a corner playing face-up on Amon-Ra St. Brown (inside and outside responsibility) to stop a slant for less than five yards? There are zero slot corners in the country who can do that. Winning that battle had to involve either hoping for a bad throw, bringing a safety up and risking a gamble over the top, or dropping a linebacker and conceding a first down run (almost certainly). It was a very conservative defensive call on 4th down, and it didn't pay off in the end, as I believe 'SC scored on that drive anyway.
The Molden okay was simply a good okay by USC. On that same drive on third and 6, Cam Williams missed a tackle at the los that would have probably sent the FG team out if he made the play.
1.) USC didn't destroy Utah's defense. USC/Fink destroyed FS Whittingham, who refused to back out of press man coverage after the fifth time Fink lobbed an arm punt to a triple covered receiver. I kept waiting for an interception, but it took until late in the game. You want to talk about moral victories/defeats for outgaining an opponent, Utah outgained USC 457 to 381 and won the turnover battle 2:1. USC's offense looked horrible all game, Fink wishes he has Browning's arm, and yet they kept getting lucky on lobs over and over again.
2.) USC beat Utah in spite of the statistical deficiencies for the same reason USC was so boom-or-bust against UW: They have freak skill position athletes who are bound to make a big play from time to time on their own and freak D-line/linebackers (Gaoteote)/edge (Jackson) players who can occasionally blow up a play on their own and create a momentum swing. What they lack is both scheme and discipline necessary to be consistent and glaring holes elsewhere in their lineup (QB, DB, OL is not great) that causes them to trade big positive plays for big negative plays. They're such a weird team. If I had to sum it up, it's, "What if Randy Moss, Doug Baldwin, Vita Vea, and Bobby Wagner played at Oregon State?"
3.) Aiding in the boom-or-bust nature of USC's offense in this game were the obvious personnel issues on the UW side. Anybody dooging over the defensive performance right now needs to understand that Fink has a historically bad arm at this level, and he's not very athletic to boot. His numbers against Utah were a mirage, and anybody watching that game knows it. The Husky defense have not faced a quarterback with so limiting arm talent, and they will not face another. And this advantage was compounded by their staff's dogged refusal to just keep running right at the UW 3 and 4 man fronts that were getting gashed. The linebackers are a problem, and I'm surprised at the extent. If before the season somebody was to show me the film of this game and tell me that either 13 or 30 was walk-on Ulofoshio, my response would be, "Bummer; I thought he was going to be better than that."
These are the starting linebackers, though, and it's a huge liability. Lake/Kwiatkowski are scheming their asses off to hide the fact that this is a linebacker-free defense (lot of A-gap blitzes that accomplish nothing but occupy a blocker and simplify gap responsibilities), but occasionally those guys are going to be relied upon to diagnose quickly, fill the proper gap before blocking leverage can be established, possibly shed said block, and make the tackle. This is where 60, 12, and 35 happen. They will continue to happen, as there is no "this year" fix to this problem. Utah will break off at least as many big runs, ditto Oregon.
4.) A lot of the problem against the run yesterday was the amount of manpower dedicated to conservatively stopping the passing game, as USC's scheme dictated. When it's 5-on-5 up front, all 5 have to at least stalemate, and the linebackers WILL have to shed a block or collapse a running lane. Utah, on the other hand, cockily stayed in their base defense and attacked the LOS. They gave up negative rushing yards until late in the 4th quarter, but it cost them dearly down the field. I'll take UW's compromise there--difference between win and loss. On the flip side, if you're asking a linebacker to have that big of a responsibility in the run game, things like that 4th down conversion are just going to happen, as the linebackers are going to be slower to drop into their zones (or not asked to at all). Those down on Molden for allowing that catch are crazy. You're asking a corner playing face-up on Amon-Ra St. Brown (inside and outside responsibility) to stop a slant for less than five yards? There are zero slot corners in the country who can do that. Winning that battle had to involve either hoping for a bad throw, bringing a safety up and risking a gamble over the top, or dropping a linebacker and conceding a first down run (almost certainly). It was a very conservative defensive call on 4th down, and it didn't pay off in the end, as I believe 'SC scored on that drive anyway.
I copied this and sent it to a friend and passed it off as my own analysis. TYFYS
doog......poor tackling or technique cost us points today. if molden is more disciplined he does not give that 4th down conversion.
sirmon needs to block/engage the TE instead he even wiffs on tackling him the wellligton cant make play on that rushing touch down
cam williams needs to be more disciplined that TD was on him
our edges are terrible at setting, lb are bad at filling gaps.
this usc team not winning more than 8 games lets be real.
we are going to be elite next year on defense and back to shit offense
I have no hopes for Sirmon. I’m already looking forward to Calvert, Danny Hammer, and Ah You.
Sirmon looks surprisingly bad... He is only a RS freshman so I guess you hope he continues to get coaching and workout and becomes a good contributing player his RS senior or Jr year... its not impossible with the staff.
1.) USC didn't destroy Utah's defense. USC/Fink destroyed FS Whittingham, who refused to back out of press man coverage after the fifth time Fink lobbed an arm punt to a triple covered receiver. I kept waiting for an interception, but it took until late in the game. You want to talk about moral victories/defeats for outgaining an opponent, Utah outgained USC 457 to 381 and won the turnover battle 2:1. USC's offense looked horrible all game, Fink wishes he has Browning's arm, and yet they kept getting lucky on lobs over and over again.
2.) USC beat Utah in spite of the statistical deficiencies for the same reason USC was so boom-or-bust against UW: They have freak skill position athletes who are bound to make a big play from time to time on their own and freak D-line/linebackers (Gaoteote)/edge (Jackson) players who can occasionally blow up a play on their own and create a momentum swing. What they lack is both scheme and discipline necessary to be consistent and glaring holes elsewhere in their lineup (QB, DB, OL is not great) that causes them to trade big positive plays for big negative plays. They're such a weird team. If I had to sum it up, it's, "What if Randy Moss, Doug Baldwin, Vita Vea, and Bobby Wagner played at Oregon State?"
3.) Aiding in the boom-or-bust nature of USC's offense in this game were the obvious personnel issues on the UW side. Anybody dooging over the defensive performance right now needs to understand that Fink has a historically bad arm at this level, and he's not very athletic to boot. His numbers against Utah were a mirage, and anybody watching that game knows it. The Husky defense have not faced a quarterback with so limiting arm talent, and they will not face another. And this advantage was compounded by their staff's dogged refusal to just keep running right at the UW 3 and 4 man fronts that were getting gashed. The linebackers are a problem, and I'm surprised at the extent. If before the season somebody was to show me the film of this game and tell me that either 13 or 30 was walk-on Ulofoshio, my response would be, "Bummer; I thought he was going to be better than that."
These are the starting linebackers, though, and it's a huge liability. Lake/Kwiatkowski are scheming their asses off to hide the fact that this is a linebacker-free defense (lot of A-gap blitzes that accomplish nothing but occupy a blocker and simplify gap responsibilities), but occasionally those guys are going to be relied upon to diagnose quickly, fill the proper gap before blocking leverage can be established, possibly shed said block, and make the tackle. This is where 60, 12, and 35 happen. They will continue to happen, as there is no "this year" fix to this problem. Utah will break off at least as many big runs, ditto Oregon.
4.) A lot of the problem against the run yesterday was the amount of manpower dedicated to conservatively stopping the passing game, as USC's scheme dictated. When it's 5-on-5 up front, all 5 have to at least stalemate, and the linebackers WILL have to shed a block or collapse a running lane. Utah, on the other hand, cockily stayed in their base defense and attacked the LOS. They gave up negative rushing yards until late in the 4th quarter, but it cost them dearly down the field. I'll take UW's compromise there--difference between win and loss. On the flip side, if you're asking a linebacker to have that big of a responsibility in the run game, things like that 4th down conversion are just going to happen, as the linebackers are going to be slower to drop into their zones (or not asked to at all). Those down on Molden for allowing that catch are crazy. You're asking a corner playing face-up on Amon-Ra St. Brown (inside and outside responsibility) to stop a slant for less than five yards? There are zero slot corners in the country who can do that. Winning that battle had to involve either hoping for a bad throw, bringing a safety up and risking a gamble over the top, or dropping a linebacker and conceding a first down run (almost certainly). It was a very conservative defensive call on 4th down, and it didn't pay off in the end, as I believe 'SC scored on that drive anyway.
I copied this and sent it to a friend and passed it off as my own analysis. TYFYS
My apologies if the phrase “USC destroyed Utah” triggered you.
Nothing in your breakdown is incorrect. It’s actually spot on, and I always appreciate your knowledge. I am not naive enough to believe USC has good coaching that makes smart decisions. I also know that Matt Fink has an arm punt on his right shoulder that even Browning laughs at. And I understand exactly what Utah was doing wrong last week. I am not arguing any of that.
But the second part of my phrase was “with deep bombs”, which was correct. My point, was that despite USC’s coaching deficiencies, they let their supreme athletes make plays against Utah. And Utah never adjusted.
Washington didn’t make that mistake.
Again, against UW:
3 passes over 10 yards: a 12, a 19, and a 44 yard busted coverage. The rest of the passing attack was held to just 94 yards on 16 completions.
3 runs over 10 yards: a 60, a 12, and a 35. The rest of the rushing attack was held to 110 yards on 30 carries.
USC had 3 long drives: 79 yards, 65 yards, 74 yards. A total of 218 yards.
The other 9 drives: 33, -4, -3, 30, 39, 6, 5, -3, 29.
2 touchdowns, 6 punts, 3 interceptions, 1 downs.
Against Utah and their stout defensive line and defensive backs:
11 passes over 10 yards: a 12, a 15, a 29, a 25, a 12, a 31, a 39, a 10, a 77, a 12, and a 42, The rest of the passing attack was held to 64 yards on 10 completions.
1 run of 10 yards. The rest of the rushing attack was held to 3 yards on 21 carries.
USC had 4 long drives: 81 yards, 74 yards, 90 yards, and 64 yards. A total of 218 yards.
The other 6 drives: 6, 38, 9, 1, -4, 24, and 8 yards to run out clock and end the game.
4 touchdowns, 4 punts, 2 turnovers.
My main point of the thread and poast was not to champion the UW defense as being elite or dominant or without major deficiencies. It was to highlight that despite all the fucktarded shit we have seen from them, the numbers are in line with what we’ve seen the last few years in points allowed. The takeaways have improved from the start of the season.
And most importantly, was to show that despite his vaunted secondary that he believes in above all else, Jimmy wasn’t stubborn or fucktarded to go 1 on 1 all game with the freaks USC has at offense. Even with a shit QB with a shit arm, that is a win for USC. Utah played press man on man and shut down the run.
Jimmy gave an Air RAID offense room to run and took away the elite WR chance to win the game on their own. Except for 3 big runs, the plan worked. USC averaged 3 yards per carry and their offense was contained.
Jimmy refused to give up the big jump balls that favor USC’s WR group. Take out a blown coverage on two True Freshman and USC has no passing attack and threw 3 picks.
I wasn't triggered at all. Just trying to clarify the defensive statistics to this point. The numbers look okay, but I haven't seen a Husky defense in, what, five years? that has had as big of a hole as the linebacking corps in 2019, and it makes zero sense. There's a senior who was playing great at the end of last season and a half dozen youngsters who were making plays in camp and looking good. I assumed a drop-off from an all-American, but I didn't expect this big of a step back. It really limits what the defensive staff is able to get done, hence compromises like giving up the fourth down and no longer being so impervious to explosive plays in the running game.
The numbers tell me not much has changed, but my eyes are telling me that a competent offensive staff with decent personnel to work with is going to have a field day against this unit.
My apologies if the phrase “USC destroyed Utah” triggered you.
Nothing in your breakdown is incorrect. It’s actually spot on, and I always appreciate your knowledge. I am not naive enough to believe USC has good coaching that makes smart decisions. I also know that Matt Fink has an arm punt on his right shoulder that even Browning laughs at. And I understand exactly what Utah was doing wrong last week. I am not arguing any of that.
But the second part of my phrase was “with deep bombs”, which was correct. My point, was that despite USC’s coaching deficiencies, they let their supreme athletes make plays against Utah. And Utah never adjusted.
Washington didn’t make that mistake.
Again, against UW:
3 passes over 10 yards: a 12, a 19, and a 44 yard busted coverage. The rest of the passing attack was held to just 94 yards on 16 completions.
3 runs over 10 yards: a 60, a 12, and a 35. The rest of the rushing attack was held to 110 yards on 30 carries.
USC had 3 long drives: 79 yards, 65 yards, 74 yards. A total of 218 yards.
The other 9 drives: 33, -4, -3, 30, 39, 6, 5, -3, 29.
2 touchdowns, 6 punts, 3 interceptions, 1 downs.
Against Utah and their stout defensive line and defensive backs:
11 passes over 10 yards: a 12, a 15, a 29, a 25, a 12, a 31, a 39, a 10, a 77, a 12, and a 42, The rest of the passing attack was held to 64 yards on 10 completions.
1 run of 10 yards. The rest of the rushing attack was held to 3 yards on 21 carries.
USC had 4 long drives: 81 yards, 74 yards, 90 yards, and 64 yards. A total of 218 yards.
The other 6 drives: 6, 38, 9, 1, -4, 24, and 8 yards to run out clock and end the game.
4 touchdowns, 4 punts, 2 turnovers.
My main point of the thread and poast was not to champion the UW defense as being elite or dominant or without major deficiencies. It was to highlight that despite all the fucktarded shit we have seen from them, the numbers are in line with what we’ve seen the last few years in points allowed. The takeaways have improved from the start of the season.
And most importantly, was to show that despite his vaunted secondary that he believes in above all else, Jimmy wasn’t stubborn or fucktarded to go 1 on 1 all game with the freaks USC has at offense. Even with a shit QB with a shit arm, that is a win for USC. Utah played press man on man and shut down the run.
Jimmy gave an Air RAID offense room to run and took away the elite WR chance to win the game on their own. Except for 3 big runs, the plan worked. USC averaged 3 yards per carry and their offense was contained.
Jimmy refused to give up the big jump balls that favor USC’s WR group. Take out a blown coverage on two True Freshman and USC has no passing attack and threw 3 picks.
I wasn't triggered at all. Just trying to clarify the defensive statistics to this point. The numbers look okay, but I haven't seen a Husky defense in, what, five years? that has had as big of a hole as the linebacking corps in 2019, and it makes zero sense. There's a senior who was playing great at the end of last season and a half dozen youngsters who were making plays in camp and looking good. I assumed a drop-off from an all-American, but I didn't expect this big of a step back. It really limits what the defensive staff is able to get done, hence compromises like giving up the fourth down and no longer being so impervious to explosive plays in the running game.
The numbers tell me not much has changed, but my eyes are telling me that a competent offensive staff with decent personnel to work with is going to have a field day against this unit.
Agreed. Which is why we are lucky to have Kwat and Lake because they scheme the shit out of it to cover up the deficiencies that would kill most teams and cause a down year.
I was reading USC articles and basically they all say Fink was confused all day because UW kept throwing different look after different look at him. Formations, bringing pressure, faking pressure. It messed him up.
One major counterpoint to the "17.2 ppg" argument, and I haven't researched it so it might just be the weakness of my memory, but weren't the ppg allowed inflated most of the last few years by like the 4th string defense giving up points in the last half of the fourth quarter of blowouts? And have we even gotten the fourth string D out there this year?
I agree the defense is much much better than the bored attitude about it. We've been absolutely spoiled the last four years.
I do think there's a tangible dropoff from previous years.
Plus a Dante Pettis type, John Ross type and two Reggie Williams as your receivers
A dangerous kick and punt returner in Pettis
Our secondary unit, matured with less mistakes and more physicality and sure tackling.
Plus our defensive line at the vita vea, tank Johnson plus talent level.
We wouldn't have to worry about Peterman fucking things up because he'd relax in the sidelines ... Jerk himself off and realize that talent is taking care of shit themselves.
And finally an alpha mentality ... Because all that fucking talent knows it.
So could be a lot better if they had the best players from the last 20 years? Chinsightful.
That's fucking right.
If you haven't noticed we're levelling up big-time. It's just disjointed at the moment which is irritating.
Caple poasted a story that backs up what I was saying in this thread. It's in the WAM in full but here are some pieces:
Through its first four games USC had targeted star receivers Michael Pittman and Tyler Vaughns about 45 times each, andAmon-Ra St. Brown about 20. So the Huskies frequently confronted Pittman and Vaughns with a defender in press coverage, plus another defensive back dropping over the top. The idea was to force Trojans quarterback Matt Fink to settle mostly for throws in front of the sticks, rather than a barrage of deep shots to some of the nation’s top receivers, and make it difficult for him to get much done on the outside.
The Huskies’ defensive backs watched Fink throw the ball up for grabs last week in USC’s win over Utah. UW knew it couldn’t allow the same Saturday.
Aside from Pittman’s touchdown, he caught only three passes for 20 yards on five targets. Vaughns caught four passes for 44 yards, with a long of 19, on six targets. Fink was 19-of-32 for 163 yards. Two of his three interceptions led to 15 UW points. His touchdown pass to Pittman late in the third quarter was his first completion that gained more than 9 yards, and Fink completed only three such passes the entire game.
“They had one long touchdown pass on something that shouldn’t have happened,” Molden said, “but other than that, I think we had a good scheme for them. We just took away the big plays.”
That wasn’t lost on Pittman, who last week caught 10 passes for 232 yards and a touchdown against Utah.
“They were stacking — they were bailing back and pressing up front,” Pittman said. "It’s generally not the best to throw a deep ball on."
“It didn’t throw us off, but I feel like we didn’t know they were going to come in and do that. I just wasn’t expecting them to come in and play it like that.”
“We had some different wrinkles that we had not put on tape, that we wanted them to kind of look up and go, ‘Whoa, what’s going on here?’ ” Lake said. “And just change the picture for the quarterback, change the picture for the wideouts, (and) don’t give them an easy look they’ve been game-planning for all week long. And it worked out.”
Comments
The numbers tell me not much has changed, but my eyes are telling me that a competent offensive staff with decent personnel to work with is going to have a field day against this unit.
I was reading USC articles and basically they all say Fink was confused all day because UW kept throwing different look after different look at him. Formations, bringing pressure, faking pressure. It messed him up.
I agree the defense is much much better than the bored attitude about it. We've been absolutely spoiled the last four years.
I do think there's a tangible dropoff from previous years.
If you haven't noticed we're levelling up big-time. It's just disjointed at the moment which is irritating.
Through its first four games USC had targeted star receivers Michael Pittman and Tyler Vaughns about 45 times each, andAmon-Ra St. Brown about 20. So the Huskies frequently confronted Pittman and Vaughns with a defender in press coverage, plus another defensive back dropping over the top. The idea was to force Trojans quarterback Matt Fink to settle mostly for throws in front of the sticks, rather than a barrage of deep shots to some of the nation’s top receivers, and make it difficult for him to get much done on the outside.
The Huskies’ defensive backs watched Fink throw the ball up for grabs last week in USC’s win over Utah. UW knew it couldn’t allow the same Saturday.
Aside from Pittman’s touchdown, he caught only three passes for 20 yards on five targets. Vaughns caught four passes for 44 yards, with a long of 19, on six targets. Fink was 19-of-32 for 163 yards. Two of his three interceptions led to 15 UW points. His touchdown pass to Pittman late in the third quarter was his first completion that gained more than 9 yards, and Fink completed only three such passes the entire game.
“They had one long touchdown pass on something that shouldn’t have happened,” Molden said, “but other than that, I think we had a good scheme for them. We just took away the big plays.”
That wasn’t lost on Pittman, who last week caught 10 passes for 232 yards and a touchdown against Utah.
“They were stacking — they were bailing back and pressing up front,” Pittman said. "It’s generally not the best to throw a deep ball on."
“It didn’t throw us off, but I feel like we didn’t know they were going to come in and do that. I just wasn’t expecting them to come in and play it like that.”
“We had some different wrinkles that we had not put on tape, that we wanted them to kind of look up and go, ‘Whoa, what’s going on here?’ ” Lake said. “And just change the picture for the quarterback, change the picture for the wideouts, (and) don’t give them an easy look they’ve been game-planning for all week long. And it worked out.”