Bullough & The Defense
Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N
Was able to finally get out to the Rose Bowl for the Cal game. I was hoping to see improvement from the Defense after reading about the "Players Only Meeting" but what I saw was the same concerns we've raised here on BN.
Here are some stats courtesy of: CFBStats.com
Total Defense Rank: 33
Scoring Defense Rank: 45 (21.6 pts per game)
Passing Defense: 20 (168.3 yds per game)
Rushing Defense: 79 (151.71 yds per game)
Here are the stats for the 1st Quarter:
Passing Defense: 91 (390 yds, 60.5% completion rate)
Rushing Defense: 95 (291 yds, 4.48 avg per carry)
Analysis after the jump.
These are our Pass & Run defense statistics from the season thus far:
San Diego State
Pass: 18-45, 238 yds
Run: 18 carries, 39 yds, 2.2 avg
Tennessee
Pass: 13-26, 93 yds
Run: 44 carries, 115 yds, 2.6 avg
Kansas State
Pass: 21-35, 199 yds
Run: 37 carries, 69 yds, 1.9 avg
Stanford
Pass: 14-20, 198 yds
Run: 44 carries, 174 yds, 4.0 avg
Oregon
Pass: 9-17, 82 yds
Run: 43 carries, 221 yds, 5.1 avg
Cal
Pass: 14-23, 205 yds
Run: 41 carries, 289 yds, 7.0 avg
First off, I personally think its a bunch of crock using the Bullough is/was told to not deviate from the DW defense. This is Bullough's defense and he is 100% responsible for the porous results thus far. I've read the arguments that we're young. Yes, we are young relatively speaking but this team does not lack game experience. Guys like Datone, Akeem, Rahim and Tony got plenty of time on the field last season and have been in the program for at least 2 fall camps. Even if Bullough was told to keep the DW playbook, we all read quotes from guys like Reggie who indicated that Bullough has added his personal touch to the defense.
Second, I have BIG issues with the Game Planning by Bullough. Time after time, we've seen our defense come out in the first quarter and look lost. The first quarter statistics for our defense are pretty telling in my eyes. Why the defense is not ready to fire on all cylinders from the kickoff continues to baffle me. In game adjustments seem to take way too long to happen.
Don't let those passing statistics fool you. We have yet to face a single big time QB this season. We've faced Lindley (new offense), Crompton (Overrated & new offense), Coffman (new offense), Luck (RS FR), Costa (Fill in for Masoli & coming off 2 ACL injuries) and Riley (erratic). We took advantage of the first 3 but failed to do so when we entered conference play. In conference play, teams didn't need to pass a lot since they were moving the ball on the ground. Why take the risk when we can't stop the run?
I'm more critical of the game planning/scheme since conference play has started. I believe that conference games are generally tougher than non-conference games because each team has accurate scouting reports of the other therefore teams don't lack information nor film of their opponents strengths/weaknesses/tendencies. Everybody and their mama knew that we were going to get a heavy dose of Gerhardt. Yet, we still got run over by Stanford in the 1st half. One would think that Bullough would stack the box and make Luck beat us. I saw too much base defense from us instead of changing coverages and blitzing Luck to cause confusion and create pressure. We then faced Oregon starting Costa who is making his 1st career start. Once again, we should have sold out to stop the run considering Costa was making his 1st start. Same goes for Cal who is quarterbacked by an erratic Riley.
We can point out that we were starting a True FR at CB. I can see the logic in protecting him for the Stanford game but if Price was the better option over Viney (still confused as to why he has yet to play considering Pressley & Carroll have gotten into games), then the protecting Price excuse does not work with me. The decision was made to go with Price over Viney so Bullough must be responsible for this decision.
Third, assuming that Bullough's game plans were sound, he is still failing miserably. Players are responsible for executing the game plan. However, it's clear to me that the players lack discipline (penalties & over pursuit) and cannot tackle if their life depended on it. We've seen penalties by the defense at critical times during the games keeping the opponent's drives alive. We've seen players not stay home on the backside leading to Best's TD run. We've seen our failure to tackle manifest itself when James flipped the field from the 1 yd line juking his way to midfield.
Our players are failing miserably in these aspects but the responsibility lies with Bullough. Every single player on our defense has had multiple starts and has been in this system for at least a year except for Price. This is an experienced defense with Mid-Season AA at all 3 levels of the defense. The lack of depth argument doesn't fly either. There aren't many teams that have the talent and experience we have on our defense. So are people going to make the same excuse next season when we lose both Boz's, Ward, Jerzy, Reggie, ATV and potentially BP? I guess people can use the "Youth" excuse next season.
I have been very critical of Price as well as others. I believe that Price is going to be a very good player in due time but he is clearly over-matched right now. My frustration lies with the fact that we've got Viney on the bench who has proven to be a good tackler for his size and played a very good game at Tennessee yet we fail to play him. Also, the Best run is not on Price. Akeem failed to stay home and Dye from his spot came inside where everybody else was instead of staying home on the outside. Dye would have had an opportunity to tackle Best and would have had help from ATV instead of ATV being on his own. Price came from the other side of the defense and tried to stop Best but there were 2 blockers. Price showed heart/hustle and never gave up on the play. For that, I commend Price.
I've been frustrated by the offense but I cannot deny the improvement no matter how small they may be. The defense on the other hand has been pathetic when considering all factors. As of now, count me in as someone that believes Bullough is in over his head and needs to get his pink slip. I hope he proves me wrong but I have no confidence in him and his coaching abilities.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
37 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So much truth in one post
Your post really sums up why I’m more critical of the defense than the offense: They’re supposed to be the experienced unit on this team. It’s mind boggling that such experienced and developed talent is still having these kinds of issues, and it does not bode well for next year when this unit gets a lot younger. Bullough needs to put these guys in a position to succeed and having us sit behind our side of the LOS can’t possibly be the answer.
The Trends are certainly negative and well established
I don’t know where this notion that this is DW’s defense comes from though. This doesn’t seem to be anything like that pressuring defense we had when the defense was at least average. If it’s not your schemes Bullough, then why don’t you get some players in there that will perform in them? The mark of bad coaching is obvious as oc’s are just teeing off on us from the get-go. Is it the players? I don’t care, fix it. While we are fixing stuff; how come our receivers seem to have regressed this year? When the players don’t improve, especially young players, that seems to be a coaching issue.
Walker's defense
Looked awful against Utah in 2007. It also was sliced up and shredded by the Bears the same year. It also got lit up by Washington State and Florida State the same season.
Walker had that one great game (13-9) and made substantial improvements over the previous DC (not saying much because it was Larry “You Are Killing Me” Kerr). But as we discussed numerous times here on BN, it is arguable whether Walker established himself as an elite DC.
For every good performances he had 2-3 stinkers every season in Wesrtwood.
Great. Thanks for mentioning Kerr
I just had the reflexive reaction of smashing my head into my keyboard. And yes, the legend of Walker was born on 13-9.
DW
At least had the decency to have his stinkers on the road. How many times did we lose to Cal, Stanford and Oregon at home?
Actually DW had his share of "stinkers" at home
Gave up 37 points to Washington State (at the Rose Bowl) in 2006
Gave up 36 points to Fresno State (at the Rose Bowl) in 2008 (BTW offense scored 31 points in that game for our team)
Gave up 31 points to Arizona (at the Rose Bowl) in 2008
Gave up 34 points to Oregon State (at the Rose Bowl) in 2008
I understand the the collapse against Arizona and Oregon State somewhat because our offense was not providing any kind of help. However, the performances against Washington State and Fresno State were basically what we have seen from Bullough’s unit in last three weeks (uninspiring to say the least).
New lows
I’m just trying to establish that we are hitting new lows on our home field. I don’t think we lost to Cal at home since 93’ . I’m not sure if that’s right but I know we won the last four. The first order of business is defend your home field. It’s an ominous sign when you get rolled at home. Occasionally with DW I could see some obvious game planning (not always successful). The only wrinkles I notice now is playing soft on the corner to protect our rookie (not always successful). Very uninspiring.
I don't have time to go back and look but
in the press conference and announcements of Bullough’s appointment either CRN or Bullough mentioned that they were going to keep most of DW’s schemes in place.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Oct 19, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
You're right
This is my complaint. We just sit back in a simple 4-3, with LBs 7 yards off LoS and at least one corner 10 yards back. If it appears that the offense knows exactly what it’s going to get, that’s because we look the same on nearly every play (with the exception of bringing in a nickel back on 3rd down). Soft coverage, soft mentality. At least in the first half. It’s as if Bullough goes into each game saying “I’ll spend the first half seeing if we can stop the run with normal 4-3 and then change at halftime if needed.” Memo to Chuck, if you do this, the game will be over at halftime.
The scheme has not varied from game to game. Does he look at film? If I was DC vs. Stanford, I would have stacked the box and blitzed the crap out of a RS freshman QB. Against Cal, after Riley had looked so bad in the two previous games, I would have done everything I could not to allow him to get comfortable. Instead, we go out without a killer instinct and get killed. The Pac-10 has a lot of inexperienced QBs. Take them out of their comfort zone early, and you’ll have a different game.
Be the Aggressor
That is what I would have like to have seen. Stack the box and blitz the hell out of Furd, Oregon and Cal. Make them decide whether they want to continue to pound it against an 8 man front or make them keep the back in for extra protection. I’ll gladly take my chances with ATV 1 on 1 and provide support over the top with Rahim for Price. None of our opponents WR’s corps are stellar nor do they have 2 guys that a defense should fear. Lets see if they can protect the QB and see if the QB has any poise or has the discipline to check down to their outlet.
They’ll hit plays but at least you’ll have them guessing on when we’re coming. I don’t even remember if we’ve even run a CB blitz. Let them adjust to us instead of sitting back and reacting.
undisciplined
i dont know if this has been brought up, but what really bothers me is how slow our defense is getting set. i understand they need to wait for the offense to line up, but get down and get ready with a purpose. when they line up they just look slow and lazy. this one act sets the character of the series, the defense, and the team.
I'm curious
why he can’t make adjustments before half time.
We should also ask why this is his first DC opportunity after having a dad considered a genius on the defensive side of the ball. If he showed a lot of talent, don’t you think he would have been give a shot before now with all his family connections? I hate to be rude, but you have head coaches in the NFL who are in their 30s, this guy is 42 and finally getting chance as just a coordinator in NCAA despite being connected and having a ton of minor NFL jobs. It makes me question…
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Oct 19, 2009 8:49 PM PDT reply actions
I played on a Flag FB team a few years back...
[ bear with the anecdote, please…]
I ran the defense (from the Mike) and managed to hold teams to 1-2 touchdowns per game. We had our bad games, but basically that was the average point total our offense had to overcome to win.
The problem? Our “offense” managed to score more than 1-2 touchdowns only 30% of the time so WE LOST A LOT. But that wasn’t the worst part: The worst part was having the offensive guys come down and “coach” us after we’d give up our 2nd or 3rd score of the game so as to help us “improve” our gameplay.
Complete waste of time if you never put up points, right? Right.
==
WRT to this post, it seems like a lot of drama for a list of defensive stats that include every stat but the one that really counts: TOTAL POINTS.
Dego State = 14
Vols = 15
KState = 9
Stanford = 24
Oregon = 24
Cal = 45
In all games but the last, this defense allowed fewer than 1-TD per quarter. That said, UCLA manages at least 7-points per quarter and you get 5-1, not 3-3 and we’re having a completely different conversation altogether.
Do with the numbers what you will, but the “Problem” with this UCLA team is Touchdowns — or rather the marked lack of them.
GO BRUIN BLUE.
GO BRUIN BLUE
Not really
Looking at strictly points doesn’t tell the whole story. Stanford and Oregon throttled things down once they built a lead. They were also not going to have a RS FR nor a 1st time starter make a mistake helping us get back in the game. And I’m pretty sure if we played Tennessee or K State now, they would score a lot more points than when we played them in the beginning of the season.
Yes, the offense could have performed better but for a defense that was supposed to be the strength of this team to get worked like we’ve been in conference play has to be more than concerning.
Really?
I’d say anytime kickers lead all scorers in your football program 5-years running, you probably have a TOUCHDOWN problem.
I enjoyed your worthy, fact-based post. I really did. Especially after our defense went out and laid that gigantic egg. But once you drag the numbers out into the sun, you’ll see that UCLA didn’t go 4-8 last season because the defense stunk… and we’re NOT 3-3 this season because Chuck Bullough’s name ain’t Craig Bray, Nick Holt or Charlie Strong.
UCLA is 3-3 because UCLA leads the PAC-10 in NET_PUNTING.
UCLA is 3-3 because UCLA ranks #104 nationally in TOTAL_OFFENSE.
Conversely, UCLA is ranked #33 nationally in TOTAL_DEFENSE — just behind #14 Virginia Tech and just ahead of #5 Cincinnati, #9 LSU and #21 Wisconsin (SOURCE: BCS)
So after it’s all all said and done, UCLA’s offense is still worse than 90% of Division I teams, while UCLA’s defense remains better than 2/3rds of it. In fact, one could very effectively argue that UCLA’s 1.8 touchdown per game (21.6 pt. avg) average would probably spell 0-6 this season, considering our opponents averaged 2.6 TDs.
This is the PAC-10, man. You need touchdowns.
GO BRUIN BLUE
?
I’m sure you’ve been reading the blog and if so, I’m sure you’ve seen the angst & dismay amongst us about the offense. I realize we have a TD problem and although I love Kai, I’d rather see him kick xtra points all season long. And yes, the offense and defense have a symbiotic relationship.
Having said this, the post is titled “Bullough & The Defense”. I’m pointing out how porous our defense has been, that we’re not the “elite” defense that many Kool Aid drinkers thought and that Bullough is the wrong man for the job.
Maybe you should collect your thoughts on our offense and do a Fanpost.
Dude!
Man it hurts to see that in print. This is the school that produced one of the greatest offenses of all time in the McNown Era. It’s just not good enough. The post and your response are both spot on. We need TD’s, TD’s, TD’s. And we need to stop somebody on 3rd down.
Logan
I have always respected your takes. And I think I am with you in terms of frustrations you are experiencing with our offense.
Here is my question for you. Do you think the schemes Bullough has been deploying last three games are good enough to handle potent Pac-10 offenses? Do you think he was making necessary adjustments against Stanford or fielded a well prepared squad against Cal?
Don’t take this as putting you on the spot. I am very interested in hearing your thoughts on this. Both you and Blue Reign are wonderful posters who bring a lot to this community. I know I learn from you guys. So, I’d like to hear your thoughts on this.
Well No..
..and NO.
Look, no-excuses. When our coaches see an 18-wheeler like Toby Gerhart (for example) barreling down the pike at us and we’ve got the benefit of [a] smart, 3 & 4-star defenders, [b] loads of game tape and a jog wheel and, above all. |c| two weeks to brace for impact — and we still end up with double tire treads running feet to beak, you won’t hear me say anthing other than the obvious: The Defense Failed at Palo Alto.
Personally, I’d like to have seen a clear, unambiguous hand of accountability raised right afterward, but I didn’t. And that specific non-acknowledgment of [what amounts to] poor coaching was my first real clue this season that Coach Bullough was – and may still be – in a bit over his head.
Re: Oregon, they were beatable. Period. They were down a tailback and too wise to go out and try to throw on us with a first-time starter and no clear receiver matchups to exploit. In all respects, we were equals that day. Accordingly, there were plenty of places, points and chances where the win slipped into then right back out of our nervous hands as- for the first time since the CRN era began – I watched UCLA go out and effectively kick its own ass.
That first half 4th & Goal will remain a true low-light of the season for me and many others because it bluntly expressed the totality our offensive dilemma in two, brief statements. Until that back-to-back QB Sneak shutdown is erased from our memory banks by some other moment (of greatness we hope), that goal line series will epitomize the lack of identity, confidence and imagination we prayed we had exercised when we dismissed the Great Pretender 16-months ago. When your coaching staff packs play-calling’s equivalent of the Dream Team, you do better than this. Period.
As to Cal, I tried to avoid writing another book today, but I think we all know last Saturday was the epitome of a defensive collapse – both on the coaching front (where the issue has definitely been cresting) but mostly on the Player front. Reggie Carter said it best: [the defense] hurt our team". The defense cost us the game, no doubt. We gave up MILK to what everyone now knows is a soft, dry and erratic Cal Offense.
But! Notice how Chow & CRN reacted once they knew they had NO CHOICE but to FLOOR IT? Imagine if Neu dropped his seeming reliance on our defense to “manage” our opponents and instead went out and played our kids like a bunch of cornered rats?!?
Chalking it all up, I truly believe UCLA’s defense is – and has been – the only thing standing between Us and a few 2 – 3-win seasons. PAC-10 offenses demand that you not only contain the pass but control the run to the tune of no more than 17-24 points allowed. You can hang in there — holding up the middle of the PAC at #4, 5 or 6, but at some point, you must learn to have fun, let it fly and PLAY TO WIN.
I know this’ll kill ya, but I’d give almost anything to get Bob Toledo a one-day field pass and let him loose just once!! Guy definitely ran too loose a ship, but come game day, boyyy did homeboy know how to set it off….
GO BRUIN BLUE
You'd take Toledo over Norm Chow?
I’m pretty sure Coach Chow can set it off if he’s allowed to do so. It all starts with CRN, though I’m sure he has Coach Chow’s counsel. The plays are there, the playmaking is not.
I agree with your takes on the games though. I got sick of watching Rhino boy run through holes up in Palo Alto. Oregon was a perfect storm (a la BYU last year), and Cal was just embarrassing. Then again, I expected us to lose those games before the season started.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
No sir
I said once! Just once! Like dancing with an old flame. You love the girl you married, but ahhhhhh!! Just… one… song!
Coming off Donahue, Toledo was such a huge departure. I miss that wide-open, no-fear mindset.
Is that wrong?
GO BRUIN BLUE
I think you miss number 18
Not Toledo. lol
I pretty much agree with everything you wrote upthread logan. I used to love the Toledo offense but I realized it was all number 18.
As for Chow … keep in mind his offense at SC didn’t take off until late in his first year and then exploded in his second year. However, there is a huge difference between that situation and what we have in Westwood. He inherited a Carson Palmer who was coming into his junior season. Last year he had Kevin Craft and this year he has a red shirt freshman in Kevin Prince. Huge difference.
I am pretty happy with Chow so far even though I am still annoyed with the goal line call from Oregon game.
I think you know me
way better than I think.
I do miss Cade, N. and Skip…and Brendon….and Kenyon…and Atkins…and Grieb.
Actually saw ole Cade same day as JJ’s HoF induction. Didn’t ask him to dance, though… probably should’ve so I could get over it, already.
Ahhhhhh…. you hit the fly in the eye, Nestor. Behind all my ramblings, that’s my agenda. We were fearless then. Fearless.
We took the field and KNEW we were the sh*t.
I miss that.
GO BRUIN BLUE
Fearless
That’s it. That’s what I want CRN to be. I wanted him here thinking that he can bring that mindset into our program. I think he can but you can tell I was pretty bummed out by what I saw last Sat. I am hoping it’s an aberration and a sign of the “growing process” with a young QB/OL. We will find out the final answers in next year and half I think (or have more info. to make form more definitive impressions).
Great thread guys.
Fear of failure
is already failure.
We need a little arrogance and cockiness…you know, traits a certain QB had in the 80’s when he took the Bruins to the Rose Bowl…traits that aforementioned QB kept when he became a head coach…time to bring back some of the fire Coach Neu!
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I'm surprised at those defensive numbers
I would not have thought we were that high after giving up 376 yards of offense in the first half to the Ducks, but I don’t dispute what you saw in the numbers. Do you know what we were before the Oregon game? We had to havev moved down after giving up 45 points.
So are we not asking enough of Coach Chow and Coach Neuheisel? We all know that the body of work of each of those guys is better than what we’ve seen lately. Maybe the coaches aren’t asking enough of the players. Let the magic Chow playbook get opened to a few more plays. Let the quarterback, whether it’s Prince or someone else, sink or swim. Just open it up. I’m very confident that our coaching staff is aware of the need for TD’s, and I assume they’re doing something. I know the players want to produce TD’s. So what’s holding us back? (My inability to answer that question explains why I’m sitting at a computer in Tampa rather than helping working on the Bruin coaching staff.)
Last but not least – Special Teams. I was (and remain) a major fan of Ganz. That’s Frank Ganz SENIOR, who was a dynomite special teams coach for the Chiefs when I lived in KC. Don Shula’s children, among many others, demonstrated that coaching acument does not necessarily get passed from father to son. Has anyone notified our CEO that he has an underperforming division (with the exception of the kickers)?
be the hammer ... not the nail
it starts with tackling and hard hits encourages more hard hits … it becomes infectious. i don’t think the greatest defensive scheme in the world will work if you consistently miss tackles and do not PUNISH the ball carrier … lights out!
not sure if we have issues with the scheme and/or the athletes but we don’t play aggresive enough and tackle with a passion to be sucessful in the pac-10. not intended to blame players but sp is not ready to play defense in the pac-10 … what happened to viney? in what down n distance, formation, … is bosworth a good matchup against jahvid best in the open field???
play to win(hammer) … not to lose(nail)!
The Post is excellent
I still haven’t figured out why we don’t use 8 man fronts and force the offense to beat us passing or vice versa. Something.
I still haven’t figured out why we wait forever to make adjustments, like even at Stanford where they came out wiith an ubalanced, power line to one side over and over and over again.
I hope to see changes at the Arizona game. At the very least I’d like to see some sure tackling.
By the way, the buck doesn’t stop with Bullough does it?
I’m not calling for any changes. That’s wrong IMO. It’s much too early in the season, and unless you’re there when the coacing is going on, you don’t really know whose fault it is yet. Or do you?
Let’s hope we don’t have this same conversation next week.
GO BRUINS!
Wrapping up
Serious question. Does wrapping up while tackling hamper one’s ability to hit hard? It doesn’t seem, to me, like wrapping up and hitting hard are mutually exclusive. I have no problem with players hitting hard, and actually want to see it, as long as they secure the tackle.
It seems to be a trend that players are trying to show their toughness by knocking ball carriers down without their arms. I’ve seen our players miss tackles numerous times doing this. I hate to single anyone out, but Ayers seems to do it often (I really like Ayers, btw, and think he has a great future). This really stuck in my mind while I was watching the ASU-Wash game and saw Burfict give up a 23 yard TD run after hitting the RB hard behind the LOS.
Yes it does
You can’t wrap up if you’re running at someone full speed trying to lay on a big hit, the goal there is to knock them down. And that’s the problem with a lot of football players, even in the pros. Everyone is trying to “make a statement”, to be Ray Lewis. It gets pathetic and results in numerous whiffs. Our team would do well to spend some time with the rugby club and learn how to tackle. Shoulder into the thighs, arms around the knees. But even more importantly: positioning.
But this has been a problem at UCLA for 20 years. Why, I don’t know…
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I definitely see what you’re saying. It’s a shame, too, since you can still lay a good hit while wrapping up and driving them into the ground.
Not easy to judge as a spectator, but it seems like QBs (easiest position to judge because they usually only leave the game when they get hurt) get hurt most often when they’re driven into the ground. Not that the aim of football is to injure others, but you do want to rattle them and make them think twice about your hit the next time around.
by truebluebruin on Oct 21, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Exactly
We’ve been seeing our guys going for the “highlight reel” hits, without wrapping up, since well back into the Toledo era. Anyone remember Ricky Manning? I could be wrong, but it seems to me that this is more prevalent with our undersized db’s—I don’t recall it being an issue with guys in the Eric Turner mold.
You know the guy who used to hate "highlight reel" hits?
John Madden.
I remember watching the old CBS broadcasts with Madden/Summaral of Niners games when Madden would point to number 42 (Lott) as one of the few players who always served up textbook examples of tackling. As vicious a hitter Lott was, he was so fundamentally sound. Always wrapped up while popping the poor offensive players.
I think the last Bruin defense that had a great season was the one fielded by Long during 97-98 season. They were good tacklers and they were spear headed by a senior LB named Brian Wilmer (who was awesome).
I think the other Bruin defense I recall having great year was the one that went to the Rose Bowl in 93. That defense was fairly dominating (Donnie Edwards, Gallatin, Psycho Cass, Marvin Goodwin … I think Jamir Miller was in that unit too) and really helped us win the conference. When I look at the guys we have now … I just don’t see them matching up to talent level of those teams from the 90s.
Those defenses were indeed excellent
I do remember both of them and all those names as well.
What I can’t figure out is why this only happened once or twice a decade, and I wonder if it has to do with having at least one upperclassman at each of the three levels of the defense. Or is the problem that we haven’t had continuity at the DC position, someone who would stay long enough to focus on fundamentals. The problem with bringing former NFL coaches is that they don’t really teach those things anymore, and I think it is crucial on the defensive side. Tackling in high school is not the same as tackling in college…whereas catching a ball for example is the same.
I just don’t get why it’s been 20 years that I have watched way too many UCLA defensive players look completely ridiculous when trying to make a tackle…
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.

by 























