Narduzzi's defensive scheme: there is no "scheme?"

[Sean Miller Fan]

OK, so while I admit I didnt watch much of Michigan State under Narduzzi other than a few minutes here or there flipping around, I didnt know much about his defensive scheme. I've watched pretty much every interview on Live Wire since he's been here (and there are dozens, if not hundreds) and here's how I would describe his defensive scheme based on what I've heard:

I guess I might compare Narduzzi's defense to GT's triple option in the sense that both are rather simplistic. We all know what GT is going to do on every play but everybody is so disciplined in the system, even though you know what's coming, you cant stop it. Narduzzi's D doesn't do anything fancy. Its very very simple (the word "simple" has been used maybe more than any other word to describe it). The idea is that if players can master what they need to do and play fast without the need to think what they should be doing, it allows them that extra advantage it takes to be in position to make a tackle, break up a pass, etc.

I've heard a lot about how House's D was very complicated, whereas this D is "dumbed down" (player quote, forget who). There's not a lot of sub-packages or variations. The offense knows where Narduzzi's D will be and have to react to that rather than the D reacting to the offense.

If I could describe Narduzzi's D in a few words, it would be: "play, dont think." House's might be: "lets dial up the most scientific coverage for this situation and hope our guys remember it and execute it perfectly."

The problem with House was his system was a bad fit. Not only did the guys never fully understand what they were doing, they weren't good enough to make up for the lack of knowledge. Now, most of the players are back so there is still is a talent shortage but the hope is that if they at least know what they're doing on every play, there will be less mistakes. Narduzzi seems to strive to minimize defensive mistakes and blown-coverages by running the same basic coverages and alignments every play and makes the offense adjust to them.

I dont know how it'll all play out. Players make a lot of difference but Narduzzi has been successful for a long time. I have high hopes for the defense but realize its still Year 1 and there will be growing pains.

 

[thebadby2]

OK, so while I admit I didnt watch much of Michigan State under Narduzzi other than a few minutes here or there flipping around, I didnt know much about his defensive scheme. I've watched pretty much every interview on Live Wire since he's been here (and there are dozens, if not hundreds) and here's how I would describe his defensive scheme based on what I've heard:

I guess I might compare Narduzzi's defense to GT's triple option in the sense that both are rather simplistic. We all know what GT is going to do on every play but everybody is so disciplined in the system, even though you know what's coming, you cant stop it. Narduzzi's D doesn't do anything fancy. Its very very simple (the word "simple" has been used maybe more than any other word to describe it). The idea is that if players can master what they need to do and play fast without the need to think what they should be doing, it allows them that extra advantage it takes to be in position to make a tackle, break up a pass, etc.

I've heard a lot about how House's D was very complicated, whereas this D is "dumbed down" (player quote, forget who). There's not a lot of sub-packages or variations. The offense knows where Narduzzi's D will be and have to react to that rather than the D reacting to the offense.

If I could describe Narduzzi's D in a few words, it would be: "play, dont think." House's might be: "lets dial up the most scientific coverage for this situation and hope our guys remember it and execute it perfectly."

The problem with House was his system was a bad fit. Not only did the guys never fully understand what they were doing, they weren't good enough to make up for the lack of knowledge. Now, most of the players are back so there is still is a talent shortage but the hope is that if they at least know what they're doing on every play, there will be less mistakes. Narduzzi seems to strive to minimize defensive mistakes and blown-coverages by running the same basic coverages and alignments every play and makes the offense adjust to them.

I dont know how it'll all play out. Players make a lot of difference but Narduzzi has been successful for a long time. I have high hopes for the defense but realize its still Year 1 and there will be growing pains.

OK, so while I admit I didnt watch much of Michigan State under Narduzzi other than a few minutes here or there flipping around, I didnt know much about his defensive scheme. I've watched pretty much every interview on Live Wire since he's been here (and there are dozens, if not hundreds) and here's how I would describe his defensive scheme based on what I've heard:

I guess I might compare Narduzzi's defense to GT's triple option in the sense that both are rather simplistic. We all know what GT is going to do on every play but everybody is so disciplined in the system, even though you know what's coming, you cant stop it. Narduzzi's D doesn't do anything fancy. Its very very simple (the word "simple" has been used maybe more than any other word to describe it). The idea is that if players can master what they need to do and play fast without the need to think what they should be doing, it allows them that extra advantage it takes to be in position to make a tackle, break up a pass, etc.

I've heard a lot about how House's D was very complicated, whereas this D is "dumbed down" (player quote, forget who). There's not a lot of sub-packages or variations. The offense knows where Narduzzi's D will be and have to react to that rather than the D reacting to the offense.

If I could describe Narduzzi's D in a few words, it would be: "play, dont think." House's might be: "lets dial up the most scientific coverage for this situation and hope our guys remember it and execute it perfectly."

The problem with House was his system was a bad fit. Not only did the guys never fully understand what they were doing, they weren't good enough to make up for the lack of knowledge. Now, most of the players are back so there is still is a talent shortage but the hope is that if they at least know what they're doing on every play, there will be less mistakes. Narduzzi seems to strive to minimize defensive mistakes and blown-coverages by running the same basic coverages and alignments every play and makes the offense adjust to them.

I dont know how it'll all play out. Players make a lot of difference but Narduzzi has been successful for a long time. I have high hopes for the defense but realize its still Year 1 and there will be growing pains.

I follow MSU closely, in fact living in MI I see them play more than I do Pitt. Not quite that simple, he most definitely has a scheme and some relatively unique principles that its based on-but he does like to operate out of his base D most of the time, it's easier for the players to adjust and play loose. He believes his base 4-3 Cover 4 D works against any type of offensive format, whether it be a spread or I formation double TEs. Stopping the run is the primary emphasis. Physical press corners to disrupt the routes and timing of the passing game. It's a proven winner.

 

[Pghfan]

Sounds like if you are a cornerback, and you like to have a lot of the pressure on you, to make or break a defense, this is the place to be. Some MSU fans came on this board after we hired him and warned us of giving up a lot of big plays due to having the CBs getting used to the new roles.. Of course on the flip side, strong CBs means a great defense..

At the very least, we should have our defensive players in the right place. Watching that bowl game, those de backs had no idea where the hell they were going. Guys scoring tds with no de backs within 5 yards. It's very telling when a WR catches a td pass and our CB is pointing to the safety and the safety has his arms out like "wtf?" That tells you no one knows what the hell they are doing. An all too often sign we saw over the last few years.. Getting torched because the WR was better or faster is one thing, getting torched because the CB is in zone and the Safety is playing man, is unacceptable.

 

[thebadby2]

Sounds like if you are a cornerback, and you like to have a lot of the pressure on you, to make or break a defense, this is the place to be. Some MSU fans came on this board after we hired him and warned us of giving up a lot of big plays due to having the CBs getting used to the new roles.. Of course on the flip side, strong CBs means a great defense..

At the very least, we should have our defensive players in the right place. Watching that bowl game, those de backs had no idea where the hell they were going. Guys scoring tds with no de backs within 5 yards. It's very telling when a WR catches a td pass and our CB is pointing to the safety and the safety has his arms out like "wtf?" That tells you no one knows what the hell they are doing. An all too often sign we saw over the last few years.. Getting torched because the WR was better or faster is one thing, getting torched because the CB is in zone and the Safety is playing man, is unacceptable.

You're right about the confusion in the secondary and LB corps. House switched up his zone coverages a lot during games depending on offensive formations etc. I think he had them all thoroughly confused. The worst example was the FSU game. I would have liked to see what the defensive practices were like leading up to that game. The DBs had no idea what they were doing and there was not a contested pass play the whole game. never seen anything like it.

 

[Pghfan]

You're right about the confusion in the secondary and LB corps. House switched up his zone coverages a lot during games depending on offensive formations etc. I think he had them all thoroughly confused. The worst example was the FSU game. I would have liked to see what the defensive practices were like leading up to that game. The DBs had no idea what they were doing and there was not a contested pass play the whole game. never seen anything like it.

Winston had two incomplete passes and one of them was a catch, ruled out of bounds. He's good but not that good.

 

[thebadby2]

Winston had two incomplete passes and one of them was a catch, ruled out of bounds. He's good but not that good.

The way our secondary played in that game was an embarrassment of the worst sort--and it was all on House. He was so afraid of giving up a big one, he gave up literally every intermediate route. 12-25 yards a pop, totally uncontested. Would we have done better if we had manned up? Who knows, but it literally could not have been worse. Jameis had it tougher during 7 on 7 drills with no pads in practice.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I follow MSU closely, in fact living in MI I see them play more than I do Pitt. Not quite that simple, he most definitely has a scheme and some relatively unique principles that its based on-but he does like to operate out of his base D most of the time, it's easier for the players to adjust and play loose. He believes his base 4-3 Cover 4 D works against any type of offensive format, whether it be a spread or I formation double TEs. Stopping the run is the primary emphasis. Physical press corners to disrupt the routes and timing of the passing game. It's a proven winner.

Yea, he even said something his base D is designed to stop the spread. Its an interesting philosophy. Most everyone runs subpackages, pulls a LB off for a DB, etc. Narduzzi is going to have the base formation 95% of the time and be reliant on the players to be where they are supposed to be. I would guess his philosophy is that defense is more mental than physical, if the players know where to be, they're more likely to make a play other than blowing an assignment on one of 15 subpackages.

 

[Jeffburgh]

Actually, in terms of general philosophy, his defense is like Paul Chryst's offense.

PC didn't have a lot of packages or formations. He had a simple base offense that had clear options to deal with whatever defense it was facing, made sure the players knew what to do in the various scenarios and got their duties down.

Nards defense is basically the same concept - a base defense with basic responses to what any offense is going to do, get the players to know the scenarios then get them to get their options down and execute.

I don't think House's defense was all that complicated. He was hampered by a lack of talent, and just had too little experience. HE TRIED to have a number of packages and put players into the packages that fit their skill sets, which is more of a pro style mentality. He and that staff in general just didn't have the experience/talent to make it work.

 

[deepelemblues]

i could have sworn narduzzi did have a system, i remember videos about it and articles and all that.

something about quarters. or nickels. or dimes. something. honestly, it all sounded like he was just explaining the drinking games he used to run at MSU and is now currently overseeing at Sutherland Dorm after "lights out"

 

[MajorMajors]

OK, so while I admit I didnt watch much of Michigan State under Narduzzi other than a few minutes here or there flipping around, I didnt know much about his defensive scheme. I've watched pretty much every interview on Live Wire since he's been here (and there are dozens, if not hundreds) and here's how I would describe his defensive scheme based on what I've heard:

I guess I might compare Narduzzi's defense to GT's triple option in the sense that both are rather simplistic. We all know what GT is going to do on every play but everybody is so disciplined in the system, even though you know what's coming, you cant stop it. Narduzzi's D doesn't do anything fancy. Its very very simple (the word "simple" has been used maybe more than any other word to describe it). The idea is that if players can master what they need to do and play fast without the need to think what they should be doing, it allows them that extra advantage it takes to be in position to make a tackle, break up a pass, etc.

I've heard a lot about how House's D was very complicated, whereas this D is "dumbed down" (player quote, forget who). There's not a lot of sub-packages or variations. The offense knows where Narduzzi's D will be and have to react to that rather than the D reacting to the offense.

If I could describe Narduzzi's D in a few words, it would be: "play, dont think." House's might be: "lets dial up the most scientific coverage for this situation and hope our guys remember it and execute it perfectly."

The problem with House was his system was a bad fit. Not only did the guys never fully understand what they were doing, they weren't good enough to make up for the lack of knowledge. Now, most of the players are back so there is still is a talent shortage but the hope is that if they at least know what they're doing on every play, there will be less mistakes. Narduzzi seems to strive to minimize defensive mistakes and blown-coverages by running the same basic coverages and alignments every play and makes the offense adjust to them.

I dont know how it'll all play out. Players make a lot of difference but Narduzzi has been successful for a long time. I have high hopes for the defense but realize its still Year 1 and there will be growing pains.

Seems to me the "scheme" is to bring the front seven on most plays. This should fill the gaps if it's a run and put pressure on the QB if it's a pass. Course the problem is that if the QB finds time to heave it, the corners are one-on-one.

I think the idea is to create "controlled chaos" at the line of scrimmage by having the DBs disrupt the routes and having the LBs either stop the run or pressure the QB...

Should be interesting. Does seem like we're going to see some big plays against us, and hopefully more big plays for us.

Go Pitt.

 

[vietvet1]

Yea, he even said something his base D is designed to stop the spread. Its an interesting philosophy. Most everyone runs subpackages, pulls a LB off for a DB, etc. Narduzzi is going to have the base formation 95% of the time and be reliant on the players to be where they are supposed to be. I would guess his philosophy is that defense is more mental than physical, if the players know where to be, they're more likely to make a play other than blowing an assignment on one of 15 subpackages.

The way to stop the spread is to stop the run. This was said by Tommy Tubberville when Texas Tech humiliated Geno and the boys after Cook said "Geno for Heisman!" He said that after the game about how he prepared for cc's vaunted spread.

 

[USN_Panther]

The way to stop the spread is to stop the run. This was said by Tommy Tubberfield when Texas Tech humiliated Geno and the boys after Cook said "Geno for Heisman!" He said that after the game about how he prepared for cc's vaunted spread.

And you have to hit the QB when he does carry the football. A few good licks on the QB and they stop looking to run so much.

 

[9nationalchampionships]

It’s a show about nothing

 

[rockypanther]

Narduzzi being interviewed about the specifics of his D during a film study.

 

[Dan from Howell]

At MSU, Narduzzi ran a quarters base defense. It requires good positioning, good tackling (you USUALLY don't see a lot of missed tackles at MSU), a good pass rush from the d-line, and corners who can plan on an island with receivers.

It's natural weaknesses tended to be as follows - 1. Seam routes - one on one with safeties with the slot. Elite QB's can get us there. Most can't, but Mariota, JT Barrett, and Bryce Petty all burned us badly there. 2. Wheel Routes - this was something that hurt us early on. I haven't seen that as much during the 2nd half of Dantonio era, but 07-08-09 was frustrating with that play. 3. Deke and Dunk. You'll see a lot of short completions, especially the first few year. Passing yards will be given up. It will be quite frustrating. It's not a pure prevent, but there's "soft zone" at times.

It's biggest strength is stopping the run. It's not common to see a 100 yard rusher against a Dantonio/Narduzzi defense. However, it takes time to build a "true" Dantonio/Narduzzi Defense. We went 9-4 in 2008, but that was more due to the offense, as John L Smith did have a good offense most of his coaching career at MSU. He just couldn't stop anybody. The run d started to become what you'd expect from an MSU team in 2010. MSU made a bowl game in it's first two seasons due to offense. In 09, that offense graduated and it was a 6-7 team. 2010 was the first 11 win season.

Narduzzi will blitz a lot, but a lot of it is zone blitzing and he wants to have a front four able to bring pressure.

I expect some improvements, but I don't expect Pitt's D to be MSU-East's D - Yet. Eventually, I expect Pitt's D to lead the ACC if there's good talent evaluation by the recruiters.

 

[htp123]

Dan - great observations which make a lot more sense after watching that interview. Seems to me that this defense requires "studs" across the board with a lot of individual responsibility, particularly the corners. I think we're all going to have to be patient with this defense (I say that out loud, but I won't be on game day!!). The truth is Paulie did not leave a lot of athleticism for Narduzzi and company to work with and, especially in the first half of the season, we are likely to see some big plays against us as our guys fail in one on one match ups because they aren't big enough or fast enough. On the other hand, we may see actually see more sacks and turnovers. We've all forgotten what those look like these last few years.