Bear Down Wildcats

How many of you really want to believe this article that the cause of are injury and disappointment were from RR first recruiting class in 2012.

http://tucson.com/sports/football/colle ... 552a1.html" target="_blank

I've posted before that 75% of the defensive recruits from that first class are gone for whatever reason. Those are guys that would theoretically be playing now in their prime. That's a lot of bodies and easily accounts for some of the depth problems now in defense.

Next year should be a good one then, if we all remain healthy.

Not buying it. At least not in full.

Until a Rich Rod defense can prove it can be better than 70th in the country in a power 5 conference. There's 7 seasons that fit that now and it really hasn't happened. Well sorta did in 2008. First year at Michigan in total defense (67th) but not scoring (84th) . Then downhill from there.

At AZ in 2013 (Stoops recruits 62nd, 39th. And I still remember Scout, Rivals guys tweet trashing Shaq, Grandon and McKnight during games. Boy, if they only knew) but downhill from there and with a monster year from Scooby Wright in 2014.

Don't think that's unreasonable to look for. Something to back it up. Something to point to that hey, look at where the defense is heading to stat /tackling / skill / depth wise. Just because of a splintered recruiting class? Rich Rod has less time to recruit his 1st class at Michigan than he did at AZ. And guessing it was less splintered than here. His defenses got worse statistically there too.

BTW, the splintered 2012 class didn't seem to impact the same way on Offense. Plenty of injuries that side of the ball (OL, WR, RB etc). Plenty. Suspensions too. That offense stat wise way up there Nationally. Offense have depth issues, splintered 2012 class, next man up. BUT no where near depth issue what defense has. Includes transfers which both sides of the ball have had.

No one can ultimately say injuries, recruiting, splintered classes is the reason. Really you can't with something concrete to reference. Had the defense been good before the injuries, since the injuries occurred and defense gotten much worse, then maybe. But that's not the case. Bad.

Some of us (me) hanging on hope, not facts

I think there's good reason to blame some of the putrid defense on injuries for sure. Most teams in the country would struggle with depth at linebacker given the issues we've had. Resulting subpar LB play means we can't get pressure on the QB by rushing Turituri, Ippolito, or Scooby every play like we normally would. No pressure on the QB means the secondary needs to cover for longer than they normally would have to, with the predictable result.

But I agree with Razor's Edge in that we should be seeing some improvement. Remember, Stoops allegedly left the cupboard bare, so three years of full time RichRod & Co. recruiting should have filled up the cupboard. Quite frankly DL looked promising, LB looked outstanding, and DB was worrisome at the beginning of the year. At midway I'm okay with the DL; I'm disappointed in the LB situation because we're resorting to walk-ons and have 3 4* recruits on the bench or playing offense, and I'm the most worried about DB. For a scheme featuring 5 DB's, we'd better damn well have quality depth on the roster, and I'm not seeing it.

A lot of that is attributed to bad luck (Conwell and Dozier playing well, but had to retire) kids wanted out, and had to keep some Stoops leftovers. Not much of a class to begin with. 2013 is his first full class that he didn't throw together and we've seen a lot of really good players in that one.

RazorsEdgeAZ wrote: Well sorta did in 2008. First year at Michigan in total defense (67th) but not scoring (84th) . Then downhill from there.

With Lloyd Carr's recruits and no Jeff Casteel.

I really do like RichRod, but have totally lost faith in Casteel and the 3-3-5.

I still blame Macovich

Stoops' last class was bad as well. Only a handful of guys contributing (Gilbert, Baker, RIchards) for a bunch of guys who should still be around (if they redshirted).
Brad Allis did an article about how that class and RR's first should be the foundation of this team but really not much left.

UAEebs86 wrote:Stoops' last class was bad as well. Only a handful of guys contributing (Gilbert, Baker, RIchards) for a bunch of guys who should still be around (if they redshirted).
Brad Allis did an article about how that class and RR's first should be the foundation of this team but really not much left.

Was kadeem a contributor?

ASUHATER! wrote:

UAEebs86 wrote:Stoops' last class was bad as well. Only a handful of guys contributing (Gilbert, Baker, RIchards) for a bunch of guys who should still be around (if they redshirted).
Brad Allis did an article about how that class and RR's first should be the foundation of this team but really not much left.

Was kadeem a contributor?

Was Bondurant? Also the same class.

Merkin wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:

UAEebs86 wrote:Stoops' last class was bad as well. Only a handful of guys contributing (Gilbert, Baker, RIchards) for a bunch of guys who should still be around (if they redshirted).
Brad Allis did an article about how that class and RR's first should be the foundation of this team but really not much left.

Was kadeem a contributor?

Was Bondurant? Also the same class.

My comment and Brad Allis' article are about contributing THIS year. The fifth year seniors.

Alieberman wrote:I still blame Macovich

The Stoops fanboys were saying that he needed at least 5 years to get over the Mackovic years.

And Merk, to follow up on your comment on Bondurant. Stoops hardly used him. Didn't really play until Kish took over. Should have been redshirted and
would be a RS Senior on this team. A waste of a season.

Think we could use a playmaker like Bondo on D this year?

Merkin wrote:

RazorsEdgeAZ wrote: Well sorta did in 2008. First year at Michigan in total defense (67th) but not scoring (84th) . Then downhill from there.

With Lloyd Carr's recruits and no Jeff Casteel.

I really do like RichRod, but have totally lost faith in Casteel and the 3-3-5.

That unless RR has lost completely faith in 3-3-5. When new article were bashing 3-3-5 and RR shot it down by saying I heard this argument before while he was at WVU.

Merkin wrote:

RazorsEdgeAZ wrote: Well sorta did in 2008. First year at Michigan in total defense (67th) but not scoring (84th) . Then downhill from there.

With Lloyd Carr's recruits and no Jeff Casteel.

I really do like RichRod, but have totally lost faith in Casteel and the 3-3-5.

I'm starting to wonder it's not all on the 3-3-5 scheme but "some" with the recruit target philosophy. Way I look at it, RR can run any Damn schemes he wants. His position is performance based. I personally don't like idea (never think he would. Silly to think so) that Byrne would ever dictate an assistant coaching or scheme change. At that point, you've lost your head coach. Especially a RR caliber coach. Byrne and most AD's don't have any coaching experience to dictate. Just me.

3-3-5 scheme has worked before. Well. In FBS. In Big East though...

I'm wondering if it's the tweener approach because of size a part of it. Tweener Recruits generally speaking have speed. Part of what RR wants. Athleticism. Same thing. But undersized recruits (generally speaking, not all) that get lot's of mid-major offers. Or majority offers from mid-majors (size).

I'm searching for whys... Physics would lead one to think smaller players going up against bigger players after 100's of hits/plays would be more susceptible to injury. Would also say bigger / just as fast and athletic players would win their fair share of plays / match-ups. In a power conference where there's lots more of these bigger / faster / athletic athletes than a Big East top to bottom. Remember, RR excelled in BE as Miami and VT left BE for ACC and were replace by CUSA schools.

UAEebs86 wrote:And Merk, to follow up on your comment on Bondurant. Stoops hardly used him. Didn't really play until Kish took over. Should have been redshirted and
would be a RS Senior on this team. A waste of a season.

Think we could use a playmaker like Bondo on D this year?

Wasn't the first time Stoops misused a player. KDC only 91 carries as a FR.

Love RR but we will NEVER have a top 25 defense with this staff. We just have to be great on offense and get used to when we lose and get dominated or are unefficient on offense, it will get ugly.

May not matter if RR goes to VaTech

azcat49 wrote:Love RR but we will NEVER have a top 25 defense with this staff. We just have to be great on offense and get used to when we lose and get dominated or are unefficient on offense, it will get ugly.

May not matter if RR goes to VaTech

Is it the Scheme or the Defensive coaches? Because it doesn't matter if you get Dick Lebeau in here, Rich Rod will still be running the 3-3-5. Jeff Casteel had multiple top 10 defenses in the Big East once they got good players in there, no reason to think the same can't be done here.

The biggest immediate difference I noticed from Stoops to RR on defense was tackling. For the first three years under RR, our defensive guys seemed to miss much fewer tackles.

This year is an exception and missed tackles are now the norm.

RazorsEdgeAZ wrote:

Merkin wrote:

RazorsEdgeAZ wrote: Well sorta did in 2008. First year at Michigan in total defense (67th) but not scoring (84th) . Then downhill from there.

With Lloyd Carr's recruits and no Jeff Casteel.

I really do like RichRod, but have totally lost faith in Casteel and the 3-3-5.

I'm starting to wonder it's not all on the 3-3-5 scheme but "some" with the recruit target philosophy. Way I look at it, RR can run any Damn schemes he wants. His position is performance based. I personally don't like idea (never think he would. Silly to think so) that Byrne would ever dictate an assistant coaching or scheme change. At that point, you've lost your head coach. Especially a RR caliber coach. Byrne and most AD's don't have any coaching experience to dictate. Just me.

3-3-5 scheme has worked before. Well. In FBS. In Big East though...

I'm wondering if it's the tweener approach because of size a part of it. Tweener Recruits generally speaking have speed. Part of what RR wants. Athleticism. Same thing. But undersized recruits (generally speaking, not all) that get lot's of mid-major offers. Or majority offers from mid-majors (size).

I'm searching for whys... Physics would lead one to think smaller players going up against bigger players after 100's of hits/plays would be more susceptible to injury. Would also say bigger / just as fast and athletic players would win their fair share of plays / match-ups. In a power conference where there's lots more of these bigger / faster / athletic athletes than a Big East top to bottom. Remember, RR excelled in BE as Miami and VT left BE for ACC and were replace by CUSA schools.

Miami basically own BE from 2001 to 2003, VT wasn't really a strong team back then same can be said for BC. After Miami, VT left in 2004 and BC in 2005, I wouldn't say because of those three WVU excelled into winning just Four BE title. But BE did replace them with strong Louisville team that were CUSA Champs, Cincinnati team that was under a first year coach in Mark Dantonio then Brain Kelly two year later, South Florida team that was just starting it program not to long ago. Back then no one knew how to stop RR offense and 3-3-5 once it had a break out years.

Who else runs the 3-3-5? I imagine less than 5 of the 127 Div I teams do although many will often rush just 3 and go with 5 DBs in a Prevent Defense.

What about the Double Eagle Flex of Desert Swarm fame? Who runs that now? Rich Ellerson was fired at Army a few years ago when he kept losing with it.

Just like gimmick offenses and gimmick defenses, eventually the other DCs and OCs will figure out how to beat it.

Nothing fits the small time Arizona football mentally better than making excuses and bitching about a recruiting class four years earlier.

Making excuses and talking about shoulda and coulda is the Arizona football fight song. Always has been and I suspect it will be that way.

Imagine if you tried to run that small town BS with the basketball program you'd be lynched within seconds. The gap between the two programs is gigantic in its scope.

That class is one issue with the current defensive woes and the biggest problem it caused is depth. Couple depth issues with some untimely injuries and well...

GladiatorCat wrote:Making excuses and talking about shoulda and coulda is the Arizona football fight song. Always has been and I suspect it will be that way.

It is what it is. What's your alternative? Should we all just post nothing but "The coaches suck, the players suck, everything sucks and there's no hope because we've always sucked and we always will suck?" Because that's pretty much what's going on here these days anyway.

azpenguin wrote:That class is one issue with the current defensive woes and the biggest problem it caused is depth. Couple depth issues with some untimely injuries and well...

GladiatorCat wrote:Making excuses and talking about shoulda and coulda is the Arizona football fight song. Always has been and I suspect it will be that way.

It is what it is. What's your alternative? Should we all just post nothing but "The coaches suck, the players suck, everything sucks and there's no hope because we've always sucked and we always will suck?" Because that's pretty much what's going on here these days anyway.

No, I already told you the answer, its just what Arizona football does and is. Now if you need an alternative excuse for the decades of suckage, go find what ever rabbit-hole talking point that floats your boat. I know it can be found and will be.

I never tried to tell you what to talk about, but that didn't matter as long a snarky defection point was made to belittle.

Its apart of our UofA football DNA, and apparently it apart of yours as well from time to time.

I take a longer view of things and I'm very selective about my bitching. I look at it this way - this is bunch of 18-22 year olds playing a game. I'm wanting to see them do well but I also know that it's not that important a matter in the grand scheme of things. Enjoying football and talking about it is one of my favorite diversions, but it's just that - a diversion. I also know that we aren't Bama or Ohio State and we aren't going to get the best recruits, to have five stars backing up five stars. We hope they can get good guys in there and win some games and as long as I've been watching Arizona football, they've had to scratch and claw to win games. We're still waiting for that elusive Rose Bowl. We're not fans of a team that plays for high level bowls and championships on a routine basis. People seem to think that Arizoba should be on that level. Hell, I'd enjoy that. That's what being a fan of Arizona Basketball is like. Bitching about a history of making excuses kind of implies that either the school will forever suck at football or that they don't have any excuses for not competing for titles on a regular basis. It is what it is. I'm not going to go gloom and doom on the team because Arizona has never been consistently good enough for us to be spoiled enough to think the season is a waste with 3 losses. I'm going to go to the stadium, watch the games and hope for the best.

No one is stopping people from bitching about things. There's no shortage of that. Take whatever viewpoint you want, including one that disregards the possibility that the 2012 class as laid out has caused problems with the current defense. That's fine. I'll see things from the point of view that keeps me sane and takes into account what I've seen over the past 35 years.

By my count, drunk while watching the CU game, we have 60 underclassmen and 12 senior and redshirt seniors. We are a very young team for several reasons. Losing 10 straight games to D1 competition really put a damper on our recruiting and RR's first get while the getting was good class both hurt us now, we just don't have the senior and r-senior leadership.

To spin this positive or to look at this realistically - we have several young players getting experience due to injuries. I'm ready to see them get experience, get better and the team get healthier. Not many teams can weather 2.5 players per position (28 by Parker's count during the Wazzu game) starting across the defense. It really sucks, but that's the reality.

[quote="Merkin"]Who else runs the 3-3-5?

Well theirs Us( Arizona) WVU, San Diego State, Western Michigan,LouisianaJ



If good quality team with a good defense will find a away stop our gimmick offense or defense that most people will say.
http://www.cleveland.com/ohio-sports-bl ... gin_t.html" target="_blank

Army has been running The Triple Offense for a long time. It not gimmick if really know how to run it. And beside Army doesn't recruit high caliber player.

azpenguin wrote:I take a longer view of things and I'm very selective about my bitching. I look at it this way - this is bunch of 18-22 year olds playing a game. I'm wanting to see them do well but I also know that it's not that important a matter in the grand scheme of things. Enjoying football and talking about it is one of my favorite diversions, but it's just that - a diversion. I also know that we aren't Bama or Ohio State and we aren't going to get the best recruits, to have five stars backing up five stars. We hope they can get good guys in there and win some games and as long as I've been watching Arizona football, they've had to scratch and claw to win games. We're still waiting for that elusive Rose Bowl. We're not fans of a team that plays for high level bowls and championships on a routine basis. People seem to think that Arizoba should be on that level. Hell, I'd enjoy that. That's what being a fan of Arizona Basketball is like. Bitching about a history of making excuses kind of implies that either the school will forever suck at football or that they don't have any excuses for not competing for titles on a regular basis. It is what it is. I'm not going to go gloom and doom on the team because Arizona has never been consistently good enough for us to be spoiled enough to think the season is a waste with 3 losses. I'm going to go to the stadium, watch the games and hope for the best.

No one is stopping people from bitching about things. There's no shortage of that. Take whatever viewpoint you want, including one that disregards the possibility that the 2012 class as laid out has caused problems with the current defense. That's fine. I'll see things from the point of view that keeps me sane and takes into account what I've seen over the past 35 years.

THIS!! Like you, I follow UA football (and basketball, and softball) very closely, but I don't live or die by its success or failure. I follow it so closely that I get a lot of pleasure out of following each player, each position, and each team year to year. I enjoy the pre-season anticipation, and the ups and downs of the season itself. I enjoy watching how some kids progress and sometimes excel (I'm looking at you, Scoobie), and how some don't. I go home happier after a win, and am disappointed by a loss, and yes, I bitch about the losses and mistakes that contributed to them. Win or lose, I always look forward to the next game. It's fun to anticipate that mistakes will be corrected, and then watch when they are ... or aren't. UA football is really nice diversion for me, at whatever level it finds. The next game, next year, new recruit, a player a year older, will always be better next time in my mind. Lots of fun no matter the result. Gotta love the process.

After watching a scary replay on dvr of the Washington St game, which I just did, you notice it's both a combo of backups of backups playing (Cats' fractured first class led to 2015 issues), BUT, in football coaching and schemes are so so so important, and our entire WSU game defensive scheme by our coaching staff was absolutely, utterly, mindnumblingly stupid.

I rarely use the analogy you often hear like "even you or I coulda ran that in for a touchdown with that hole!" But seriously, some of what the wsu players were doing we could do, as long as you could put pads on over your head and strap on a helmet. Their receivers simply lined up, ran a 7 yard inside slant or curl route, sat down and waited for the ball to be thrown to them with nobody there to bother them in any way. Nobody was even 5-6 yards near them. Then they had time to turn around and sprint up field for another 5-10 yards before first being contacted by our defense. So anyone of us here would have been good up to that point before being crunched by a db, knocking us out of the game, but hey it was fun while it lasted!

You have to wonder how guys get paid millions of dollars simply to design a football game plan, only to think up a scheme of "hey let's leave the middle of the football field completely wide open the entire game!" Probably some of the worst defensive coaching I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot of it. Our guys are out of position, nobody is attacking. We're always reacting to the play instead of dictating the action. After awhile of that, ours guys started giving up (loafing as they call it.) I really don't blame them, it's like they're helpless out there at times.

Casteel isn't going anywhere, but he's gotta try something else because we've had like 4-5 games already where we've given up just massive amounts of yards and points. Like the time Stoops was fired, Hank played that flex eagle crap and it worked amazingly because the kids were flying around having fun for a change (at least for 1 game). Mix it up, run a 5-2, 3-4, blitz like crazy, play some unique nickel coverages, who cares, just SOMETHING to put pressure on the offense to do SOMETHING they don't want to do, not the vanilla crap we play.

Only after next year, if we stay relatively healthy, with all RichRod's guys in the program from day 1, will we know if Rich and his staff can coach defense. If we suck again next year on D, I think the handwriting is on the wall in about 3 years once Rich can cash out his oil stock and his kids are all graduated from school. At that point, he'll be so beaten down from giving up 55 points a game he can go be offensive coordinator at an SEC or blue chip football school and never think about how to field a defense for the rest of his life.

TheGreatCatsby wrote:After watching a scary replay on dvr of the Washington St game, which I just did, you notice it's both a combo of backups of backups playing (Cats' fractured first class led to 2015 issues), BUT, in football coaching and schemes are so so so important, and our entire WSU game defensive scheme by our coaching staff was absolutely, utterly, mindnumblingly stupid.

I rarely use the analogy you often hear like "even you or I coulda ran that in for a touchdown with that hole!" But seriously, some of what the wsu players were doing we could do, as long as you could put pads on over your head and strap on a helmet. Their receivers simply lined up, ran a 7 yard inside slant or curl route, sat down and waited for the ball to be thrown to them with nobody there to bother them in any way. Nobody was even 5-6 yards near them. Then they had time to turn around and sprint up field for another 5-10 yards before first being contacted by our defense. So anyone of us here would have been good up to that point before being crunched by a db, knocking us out of the game, but hey it was fun while it lasted!

You have to wonder how guys get paid millions of dollars simply to design a football game plan, only to think up a scheme of "hey let's leave the middle of the football field completely wide open the entire game!" Probably some of the worst defensive coaching I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot of it. Our guys are out of position, nobody is attacking. We're always reacting to the play instead of dictating the action. After awhile of that, ours guys started giving up (loafing as they call it.) I really don't blame them, it's like they're helpless out there at times.

Casteel isn't going anywhere, but he's gotta try something else because we've had like 4-5 games already where we've given up just massive amounts of yards and points. Like the time Stoops was fired, Hank played that flex eagle crap and it worked amazingly because the kids were flying around having fun for a change (at least for 1 game). Mix it up, run a 5-2, 3-4, blitz like crazy, play some unique nickel coverages, who cares, just SOMETHING to put pressure on the offense to do SOMETHING they don't want to do, not the vanilla crap we play.

Only after next year, if we stay relatively healthy, with all RichRod's guys in the program from day 1, will we know if Rich and his staff can coach defense. If we suck again next year on D, I think the handwriting is on the wall in about 3 years once Rich can cash out his oil stock and his kids are all graduated from school. At that point, he'll be so beaten down from giving up 55 points a game he can go be offensive coordinator at an SEC or blue chip football school and never think about how to field a defense for the rest of his life.

That why it going to be( Something has to give at this point). RR is good enough coach to make decision on what really best for his program and for his staff. But I highly doubt it he wont fired Casteel and entire Defensive staff unless he force by administration or Byrnes. Casteel is a good DC but you will have question his play calling and he making game preparation against quality opponent. Now if RR decide that 3-3-5 isnt stopping no one, He going to have to make a tough decision on whether or not Casteel isnt getting the job done or demote casteel and hired another DC to run defense.

azpenguin wrote:I take a longer view of things and I'm very selective about my bitching. I look at it this way - this is bunch of 18-22 year olds playing a game. I'm wanting to see them do well but I also know that it's not that important a matter in the grand scheme of things. Enjoying football and talking about it is one of my favorite diversions, but it's just that - a diversion. I also know that we aren't Bama or Ohio State and we aren't going to get the best recruits, to have five stars backing up five stars. We hope they can get good guys in there and win some games and as long as I've been watching Arizona football, they've had to scratch and claw to win games. We're still waiting for that elusive Rose Bowl. We're not fans of a team that plays for high level bowls and championships on a routine basis. People seem to think that Arizoba should be on that level. Hell, I'd enjoy that. That's what being a fan of Arizona Basketball is like. Bitching about a history of making excuses kind of implies that either the school will forever suck at football or that they don't have any excuses for not competing for titles on a regular basis. It is what it is. I'm not going to go gloom and doom on the team because Arizona has never been consistently good enough for us to be spoiled enough to think the season is a waste with 3 losses. I'm going to go to the stadium, watch the games and hope for the best.

No one is stopping people from bitching about things. There's no shortage of that. Take whatever viewpoint you want, including one that disregards the possibility that the 2012 class as laid out has caused problems with the current defense. That's fine. I'll see things from the point of view that keeps me sane and takes into account what I've seen over the past 35 years.

Re: the part in bold... Great perspective, and one I can get behind - with a caveat or two.

Very few things in life really are THAT important. Medicine, law in some cases, government, education, and a few I am missing. Virtually all commercial endeavors are trivial in the grand scheme of things - with professional sports no higher on the list than college ones,

If it is so inconsequential, then wh should we pay a coach $3MM per year? With money comes accountability as it should, and does in every other 'trivial' commercial endeavor.

Injuries are a valid excuse, but they are also a part of the game. Defections or improper evaluations? No leniency from me; in every other leadership position I know of, picking the right people and keeping them is a critical factor in evaluating job performance.

I really get tire of more relaxed expectations for people making 7 figures a year than a low level manager making $75K a year. Fortunately for athletic coaches, the constituency get emotional and embrace 'hope' a great deal more than they do in the rest of the real world.