Date: 19/08/25 - 05:10 AM   48060 Topics and 694399 Posts

Author Topic: we go from read and react with elliot to...  (Read 1451 times)

August 16, 2006, 01:13:06 AM
Read 1451 times

ksuno1stunner

  • Guest
read and react with morris

August 16, 2006, 01:34:22 AM
Reply #1

Kat Kid

  • Administrator
  • Junior Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ********

  • 8821
  • Personal Text
    warm up the EMAW
ksufanscopycat my friends.

August 16, 2006, 01:43:12 PM
Reply #2

ksu_FAN

  • Second String Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 11401
Most college defenses are "read and react" in some form or another.  The question is how much leeway will be given for agressiveness.  In reality if your guys on the d-line aren't techniquely sound in reacting to what the offensive linemen are doing, you are going to get killed.  The days of simply running up the field to the football through gaps are over.  However, that doesn't mean you can't be aggressive.  You have to be aggressive in the way you attack and we haven't been the last couple of years for whatever reason. 

August 16, 2006, 02:22:53 PM
Reply #3

sonofdaxjones

  • All American

  • Offline
  • ******

  • 15644
I got concerned when they kept referencing "gap control" on the new defense.  I guess from my perspective, if gap control means engaging and "Controlling" that gap, then I assume that's good.  If it means getting through a gap and up field, then I see offenses scheming KSU right out of the play and LB's getting shoved all over the field.

Is that anywhere close to a possible scenario???

August 16, 2006, 02:31:43 PM
Reply #4

WILDCAT NATION

  • Cub

  • Offline

  • 1999
When I played in a gap control 4-3, we were taught to "read and react" and it was much different than the passive crap we saw out of Bobby's Defense.

DL puts their hands on the lineman trying to block them and engages them...briefly...Just shooting the gap ala middle school football will get you murdered.


August 16, 2006, 02:47:39 PM
Reply #5

Poopley

  • Cub

  • Offline

  • 1103
  • Personal Text
    rokkar stokkar
I bet Raheem could learn a lot from you peeps.


August 16, 2006, 02:56:12 PM
Reply #6

kougar24

  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • **

  • 6966
  • Personal Text
    shame on you, non-believers
I prefer a defense that dictates through its schemes what the offense does, or is unable to do. Bennett's D's did that.

August 16, 2006, 03:07:58 PM
Reply #7

michigancat

  • All American

  • Offline
  • ******

  • 23713
  • Personal Text
    You can't be racist and like basketball.
I prefer a defense that dictates through its schemes what the offense does, or is unable to do. Bennett's D's did that.

I loved Bennett's style.  Even the 2001 defense pretty much kicked ass...even if we were getting beat, we at least got to see us kick the crap out of opposing QB's.

August 16, 2006, 03:32:27 PM
Reply #8

opcat

  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • **

  • 5189
No use arguing here.

We don't know crap. :eek:

August 16, 2006, 04:33:15 PM
Reply #9

ksuno1stunner

  • Guest
I bet Raheem could learn a lot from you peeps.



i just think it's ironic that everyone was whining about elliot's defense for being too passive.  and now everyone is in love with raheem even though his defense is read and react.

that is all.

August 16, 2006, 04:54:57 PM
Reply #10

Poopley

  • Cub

  • Offline

  • 1103
  • Personal Text
    rokkar stokkar
yeah, cuz pretty much everyone on this board has sent Raheem love letters.

August 16, 2006, 04:58:51 PM
Reply #11

MrWhite

  • Guest
having defensive linemen, linebackers and defensive backs that aren't very good was a factor for elliot as well.  he wasn't much as a coach, but he didn't have talent to make up for his faults, like bennet did.

August 16, 2006, 06:40:09 PM
Reply #12

Purrrple

  • Cub

  • Offline

  • 499
The cover-2 is basically a cover zone defense with the lb's pass covering the outside near the line of scrimmage, the cb's covering close to midrange on the outside, the safeties covering deep and the mike covering the middle. It's a "read and react" type of defense in that the defenders must "read" where the WR's are going. If he comes into your zone , you are responsible to cover him. What I like about it is that makes blitzes easy to disguise and audible to the players. You can bring one from anywhere at any time. It also frees up your outside LB's to wreak havoc on the outside. Look for Diles and Archer to kick A$$.  I hope we see more of it in 2006. :beerchug:

August 17, 2006, 11:47:37 AM
Reply #13

kougar24

  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • **

  • 6966
  • Personal Text
    shame on you, non-believers
I prefer a defense that dictates through its schemes what the offense does, or is unable to do. Bennett's D's did that.

I loved Bennett's style.  Even the 2001 defense pretty much kicked ass...even if we were getting beat, we at least got to see us kick the @#%$ out of opposing QB's.

Yep. And I loved watching Bennett on the sideline ripping a guy's facemask around if he f*cked something up.

August 17, 2006, 12:25:55 PM
Reply #14

WILDCAT NATION

  • Cub

  • Offline

  • 1999
having defensive linemen, linebackers and defensive backs that aren't very good was a factor for elliot as well.  he wasn't much as a coach, but he didn't have talent to make up for his faults, like bennet did.


No, no, no...I've heard countless times how good these guys are...so which is it?


August 17, 2006, 12:38:37 PM
Reply #15

MrWhite

  • Guest
i was speaking about andrew bulman, matt butler and louis lavendar.

the big tip that i wasn't talking about his year's team is when i said "elliot."

i think i'm beginning to understand you better.  it's not (entirely) that you're a complete dumb ass.  it's that the doctor that delivered you pulled you from the wrong orifice.

August 17, 2006, 03:46:21 PM
Reply #16

Poopley

  • Cub

  • Offline

  • 1103
  • Personal Text
    rokkar stokkar