Guys, Matt Canada

[TD_6082]

Canada has done a great job so far, given what he has to work with.

That said, we haven't faced a very good defense the whole year.

Statistically, GA TECH is 32nd in overall defense, while PSU is 52nd. After that, the numbers are terrible. UNC is 78. Okie St at 106, UVA-107 and Marshall at 118. Our schedule is backloaded with teams that actually do have a respectable defense.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

We weren't moving the ball up and down the field in the second half of either of our losses, that's for damn sure.

The defense is way behind the offense from a personnel perspective. That's the Chryst legacy as much as that strong OL and stable of backs is. We know this in every game we play. We know that no lead is safe in the second half where we can't pressure the QB and cover down the field. So we know that we need to score on most possessions. And it wasn't sudden stellar defense that stopped us. It was going in the tank and playing not to lose offensively. No doubt in my mind we could have kept scoring on those weak defenses at OkSU and UNC had we kept calling the offense aggressively. I don't think that was Canada, I think that was the head man. I think he he felt he could get enough pressure on the QB that we could get stops when we needed to, and that would mask the weak coverage. He was wrong-and what's disturbing is, he made the same mistake twice.

Most of that is true – not all of it but most. However, it still doesn't change a single thing.

It is not unreasonable to ask your defense to hold teams under 40 points per game - it just isn't.

Expecting your offense to score 40+ points per game every single week just have a chance to win because we are accepting the defense's utter ineptitude absolutely is unreasonable.

We keep talking about how undertalented the defense is – and there are definitely issues there. However, for many seems to mean that neither Conklin or Narduzzi can be held responsible for anything bad that happens on that side of the football.

Nope, it's all Chryst's fault...or House's fault...or Wanny's fault...or Obama's fault...or JoePa's fault.

Bullshitt. That's not how it works. It's at least partly their fault.

I have news for you guys, the offense has some significant talent issues too. The difference is our OC has largely schemed around those deficiencies so they are FAR less glaring.

As I said earlier, we were a little too conservative for my taste down the stretch in those games. I'm not arguing that point.

I'm arguing the absurd notion that being slightly too conservative in the last 5–10 minutes of a narrow loss is somehow equally responsible – or as has been asserted by many, more responsible – for a loss as the fact that our defense continues to chunks of yardage every time they step out on the field.

No. They. Are. Not. Not even close.

I'm not into coach scapegoating – I think it's almost always bad analysis. Also, I do not hold Josh Conklin solely or even primarily responsible for our issues on defense. I am by nature a very patient guy. I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt before I close the book on them.

However, if we are going to insist on pointing fingers at a coordinator, it had better start on that side of the football. Any other approach is just plain fundamentally wrong.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

The two best players on the entire football team are arguably Jordan Whitehead and Juan Price. Those are talented football players and there is definitely at least some talent on that defense.

There are holes too and I am certainly not oblivious to them. However, the notion that were running around with two good players and a bunch of bad players is grossly overstating things.

There are other guys in Pitt's defensive two-deep who would hold similar positions at most other ACC schools. Unfortunately, that is not true at DE (aside from Price) or in our secondary (aside from Whitehead).

However, that's what the coach's job is – to scheme around his talent deficiencies. We are not doing that on the defensive side of the football. At least we haven't done it frequently enough this season.

(Ironically, the best job I've seen them do it was in the second half of the Virginia game.)

This is a very difficult defensive scheme to run. You have to have good athletes to play it – particularly in the secondary. It is hyper aggressive and it leaves your defensive backs exposed in coverage a lot.

That's why we are going to see more Conner at defensive end. Pitt must figure out a way to get more pressure on the quarterback – to compensate for their lack of coverage on the backend.

We obviously don't have enough good athletes at enough positions right now. Also, that is definitely a bigger problem on defense than it is offense. However, there is no rule that says you can't alter your scheme to give someone some help.

If Terrish Webb can't cover my grandmother in the slot, then quit putting him in positions where he has single coverage deep down the seam.

How hard is that?

And if we have a scheme that doesn't permit that, then we need a new scheme. If you won't do that, then put someone in the game who can run well.

If you won't give the guy help, or you won't put in a better (but less prepared) athlete, and you can't find a way to get pressure on the quarterback, then I don't know what to tell you?

I guess my only advice in that case would be to learn the words to the fight songs of our upcoming opponents because we are going to be hearing those songs a lot in the coming weeks.

What I'm not interested in hearing about is Pitt's offensive play selection after a 52-49 loss.

 

[thebadby2]

Most of that is true – not all of it but most. However, it still doesn't change a single thing.

It is not unreasonable to ask your defense to hold teams under 40 points per game - it just isn't.

Expecting your offense to score 40+ points per game every single week just have a chance to win because we are accepting the defense's utter ineptitude absolutely is unreasonable.

We keep talking about how undertalented the defense is – and there are definitely issues there. However, for many seems to mean that neither Conklin or Narduzzi can be held responsible for anything bad that happens on that side of the football.

Nope, it's all Chryst's fault...or House's fault...or Wanny's fault...or Obama's fault...or JoePa's fault.

Bullshitt. That's not how it works. It's at least partly their fault.

I have news for you guys, the offense has some significant talent issues too. The difference is our OC has largely schemed around those deficiencies so they are FAR less glaring.

As I said earlier, we were a little too conservative for my taste down the stretch in those games. I'm not arguing that point.

I'm arguing the absurd notion that being slightly too conservative in the last 5–10 minutes of a narrow loss is somehow equally responsible – or as has been asserted by many, more responsible – for a loss as the fact that our defense continues to chunks of yardage every time they step out on the field.

No. They. Are. Not. Not even close.

I'm not into coach scapegoating – I think it's almost always bad analysis. Also, I do not hold Josh Conklin solely or even primarily responsible for our issues on defense. I am by nature a very patient guy. I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt before I close the book on them.

However, if we are going to insist on pointing fingers at a coordinator, it had better start on that side of the football. Any other approach is just plain fundamentally wrong.

I don't think we're disagreeing on much here. My only real beef was the conservative play calling when we know that with our D and a team that can throw it even a little bit, no lead is safe. I really believe that had we continued to call the offense aggressively, we possess the ball more, score more, and beat UNC relatively easily. For the most part I think Canada is doing a good job. We are scoring points and moving the ball in a way we haven't seen here anytime in recent memory. Of course, we haven;t exactly faced a murderer's row of defensive opponents either, and we have been getting critical non-offensive touchdowns as well.

To the extent we went conservative with the lead in a few games, that call is made by the head man telling the OC what he wants to see, and that is obviously Duzzi's philosophy more than it is Canada's style of playcalling.

As for the D, this is Narduzzi's D, so the blame should go on him, not Conklin. However, pre-Pitt, Narduzzi was one of the 2-3 most highly regarded defensive coordinators in college football, which is why we hired him. His MSU defenses were top 5-10 consistently, The only time they ever looked anything like what we've seen this year is when MSU played Baylor in the Cotton Bowl a couple of years ago, and even then, Narduzzi dialed up the pressure on the QB in the second half and slowed BU's passing attack down considerably, enough to win.

To me, that indicates that we just don't have the personnel to compete defensively. Whether it;s Narduzzi's scheme, Matt House's, or anyone else's, these players can't get it done. I truly don't think that Narduzzi and Pitt would gain much by adapting to a different style of defense than the one he has coached, taught and won with for the past 15 years. If we load up on the pass, the opponent will run the ball down our throats. I hate to bring up the ridiculous "stars" debate, but this is what a defense looks like when it's composed of a bunch of kids whose best offer came from Pitt. Specifically that description fits our starting LBs and DBs outside of Whitehead, and many of the 2 deep guys as well.