A co-op community for Arizona Fans
http://beardownwildcats.com/
I gotta know how much of that is us, and how much of that was them.NYCat wrote:
Yeah I don't think we put up the same type of numbers against UTSA if their effort today is any indication, but still...as you said, we really could put up a shit-ton of yardage and points if Anu can get his accuracy and touch a bit more on target. I mean, if the D is even half way decent....The Butcher wrote:Consider this: 6 of the 10 times Arizona has gone over 600+ yards RichRod has been the coach. We beat them 58 to 13 at their house last year and they STILL won 7 games and went to a bowl.
I love our offense. It's only going to get better. More oiled. How can it not with those receivers? Jones-Grigsby can catch, block and run, which is huge. Anu gets his wits about him and stops over throwing wide open WR's and we are going to put a shit-ton of yardage and points up.
It's all about the defense. We need pressure and we need to be able to get some stops, allowing our D on the field.
We simply have UNLV's number. After watching UTSA today, I'm a little worried about their defense, which looked really solid at Houston. And the fact they return something like 123 seniors/starters on that team. Apparently a record.
NYCat wrote:
ASUHATER! wrote:unlv is obviously not great. they can't compete with power 5 teams, but they aren't terrible...they probably aren't even one of the bottom 15-20 teams in the FBS. they won 7 games last year and had a winning conference record. they are picked to probably go to another bowl this year. they aren't great...but having the most yards by any pac 12 team in 89 yards in any game is impressive...i don't care who it's against.
I don't think UTSA is going to be a Threat against us. They did beat Houston that kind of a shocker thou. There Defense did play solid but there not going to slow us down at all.The Butcher wrote:Consider this: 6 of the 10 times Arizona has gone over 600+ yards RichRod has been the coach. We beat them 58 to 13 at their house last year and they STILL won 7 games and went to a bowl.
I love our offense. It's only going to get better. More oiled. How can it not with those receivers? Jones-Grigsby can catch, block and run, which is huge. Anu gets his wits about him and stops over throwing wide open WR's and we are going to put a shit-ton of yardage and points up.
It's all about the defense. We need pressure and we need to be able to get some stops, allowing our D on the field.
We simply have UNLV's number. After watching UTSA today, I'm a little worried about their defense, which looked really solid at Houston. And the fact they return something like 123 seniors/starters on that team. Apparently a record.
UNLV would beat WSU and give Cal a good game. Other than that I think every other team whips them.PieceOfMeat wrote:ASUHATER! wrote:unlv is obviously not great. they can't compete with power 5 teams, but they aren't terrible...they probably aren't even one of the bottom 15-20 teams in the FBS. they won 7 games last year and had a winning conference record. they are picked to probably go to another bowl this year. they aren't great...but having the most yards by any pac 12 team in 89 yards in any game is impressive...i don't care who it's against.
I guess I wonder how they'd fare against any other pac12 team. Not that it's always a perfect, or even good, way to measure things...it's just I wonder.
I believe UNLV could beat Colorado, Wash. St., ASU, and Cal.PieceOfMeat wrote:ASUHATER! wrote:unlv is obviously not great. they can't compete with power 5 teams, but they aren't terrible...they probably aren't even one of the bottom 15-20 teams in the FBS. they won 7 games last year and had a winning conference record. they are picked to probably go to another bowl this year. they aren't great...but having the most yards by any pac 12 team in 89 yards in any game is impressive...i don't care who it's against.
I guess I wonder how they'd fare against any other pac12 team. Not that it's always a perfect, or even good, way to measure things...it's just I wonder.
I don't think so. UNLV's defense is really bad but their offense is okay. I didn't think at any time UNLV should have been able to stop Arizona's offense. OTOH, UNLV moved up the field quite a bit against our defense and we didn't get any pressure on the qb without a blitz which does not bode well.Chicat wrote:UNLV would beat WSU and give Cal a good game. Other than that I think every other team whips them.PieceOfMeat wrote:ASUHATER! wrote:unlv is obviously not great. they can't compete with power 5 teams, but they aren't terrible...they probably aren't even one of the bottom 15-20 teams in the FBS. they won 7 games last year and had a winning conference record. they are picked to probably go to another bowl this year. they aren't great...but having the most yards by any pac 12 team in 89 yards in any game is impressive...i don't care who it's against.
I guess I wonder how they'd fare against any other pac12 team. Not that it's always a perfect, or even good, way to measure things...it's just I wonder.
Impressed with Colorado's two touchdown loss to CSU?Chicat wrote:UNLV would beat WSU and give Cal a good game. Other than that I think every other team whips them.PieceOfMeat wrote:ASUHATER! wrote:unlv is obviously not great. they can't compete with power 5 teams, but they aren't terrible...they probably aren't even one of the bottom 15-20 teams in the FBS. they won 7 games last year and had a winning conference record. they are picked to probably go to another bowl this year. they aren't great...but having the most yards by any pac 12 team in 89 yards in any game is impressive...i don't care who it's against.
I guess I wonder how they'd fare against any other pac12 team. Not that it's always a perfect, or even good, way to measure things...it's just I wonder.
gumby wrote:How bad is UNLV? So bad that after the Cats left the field, they scored three plays later.
Actually, I was fairly impressed with the 40-year-old quarterback and the wide receivers. A lot of completions with the DBs right there.
Unlv's defense is not that bad as they had a UW transfer in Shirley and the transfer from Ucla who were both legit Pac 12 players. Not to mention that they had size and physical DB's.Daryl Zero wrote: I don't think so. UNLV's defense is really bad but their offense is okay. I didn't think at any time UNLV should have been able to stop Arizona's offense. OTOH, UNLV moved up the field quite a bit against our defense and we didn't get any pressure on the qb without a blitz which does not bode well.
As someone who has criticized Casteel for only rushing 3 so many times, last night I focused on watching the rush, and I have not seen in the RR era so many blitzes. Love to see some Winger stats.dc4azcats wrote: As for Arizona and pressure on the QB, what were you expecting from a 3 man front? We got pressure on the QB when we wanted to get pressure on the QB and it was the reason why they only scored 13 points.
Agreed on the blitzes. It was a good thing to see.Merkin wrote:As someone who has criticized Casteel for only rushing 3 so many times, last night I focused on watching the rush, and I have not seen in the RR era so many blitzes. Love to see some Winger stats.dc4azcats wrote: As for Arizona and pressure on the QB, what were you expecting from a 3 man front? We got pressure on the QB when we wanted to get pressure on the QB and it was the reason why they only scored 13 points.
http://www.arizonawildcats.com/pdf9/277 ... M_ID=30700whatisee wrote:Agreed on the blitzes. It was a good thing to see.Merkin wrote:As someone who has criticized Casteel for only rushing 3 so many times, last night I focused on watching the rush, and I have not seen in the RR era so many blitzes. Love to see some Winger stats.dc4azcats wrote: As for Arizona and pressure on the QB, what were you expecting from a 3 man front? We got pressure on the QB when we wanted to get pressure on the QB and it was the reason why they only scored 13 points.
Anyone notice if Denson played? Allen was much more effective when we blitzed. Good seeing Fanene in the game...that was quick. anyone have the defensive stats? Tackles etc.
I just wanna see a DT who gives the opposing qb some trouble. We've had them before and even in the Stoops' era. You are correct that 3 on 5 or 6 is not going to be that productive. I did like the blitzes and hope that that is a symptom of what lies in the future. I guess it depends on how the secondary can handle the hot receivers. UNLV got burned a couple of times by simple slants that went a long way. When I wrote my entry, I hadn't seen the second half and I have to admit that the team looked better after halftime which is a good thing.dc4azcats wrote:Unlv's defense is not that bad as they had a UW transfer in Shirley and the transfer from Ucla who were both legit Pac 12 players. Not to mention that they had size and physical DB's.Daryl Zero wrote: I don't think so. UNLV's defense is really bad but their offense is okay. I didn't think at any time UNLV should have been able to stop Arizona's offense. OTOH, UNLV moved up the field quite a bit against our defense and we didn't get any pressure on the qb without a blitz which does not bode well.
Problem was they didn't get any pressure on Anu unless they blitzed and they, like every team we will play - don't have enough quality corners to stop our passing game. How many teams have 4 physical and fast cover guys? Answer is not many. Case in point is we move Hill to the slot and hit a 92 yard pass play. Most of the night we had Hill lined up wide. Hill is a beast of a match up in the slot because of his size and because a safety can't cover him.
As for Arizona and pressure on the QB, what were you expecting from a 3 man front? We got pressure on the QB when we wanted to get pressure on the QB and it was the reason why they only scored 13 points. On the series where they scored a TD we put no pressure at all on the QB and they go down and score a TD. I thought our pressure on the QB via the blitz which is what this D is designed to do was very effective tonight.
I also thought for the first time in a long time we actually had some safety help on some deep passes as we didn't see that at all LY. It makes a huge difference when the safety is back there for the deep ball.
In the 3-3-5 the DLineman are supposed to take on blockers to free up lanes for the linebackers to get through the gaps and into the backfield. So that's why you won't see that traditional upfield pressure from a defensive end.Daryl Zero wrote:I just wanna see a DT who gives the opposing qb some trouble. We've had them before and even in the Stoops' era. You are correct that 3 on 5 or 6 is not going to be that productive. I did like the blitzes and hope that that is a symptom of what lies in the future.
Or elite ones choosing Arizona. The job description isn't fun. I remain skeptical of the scheme, but I do love the offense.Chicat wrote:In the 3-3-5 the DLineman are supposed to take on blockers to free up lanes for the linebackers to get through the gaps and into the backfield. So that's why you won't see that traditional upfield pressure from a defensive end.Daryl Zero wrote:I just wanna see a DT who gives the opposing qb some trouble. We've had them before and even in the Stoops' era. You are correct that 3 on 5 or 6 is not going to be that productive. I did like the blitzes and hope that that is a symptom of what lies in the future.
But do you need an elite DLineman to be a space-filler?gumby wrote:Or elite ones choosing Arizona. The job description isn't fun. I remain skeptical of the scheme, but I do love the offense.Chicat wrote:In the 3-3-5 the DLineman are supposed to take on blockers to free up lanes for the linebackers to get through the gaps and into the backfield. So that's why you won't see that traditional upfield pressure from a defensive end.Daryl Zero wrote:I just wanna see a DT who gives the opposing qb some trouble. We've had them before and even in the Stoops' era. You are correct that 3 on 5 or 6 is not going to be that productive. I did like the blitzes and hope that that is a symptom of what lies in the future.
When we bring a LB down, we basically become a 4-man front. I don't think an elite DL would necessarily do poorly here.gumby wrote:Or elite ones choosing Arizona. The job description isn't fun. I remain skeptical of the scheme, but I do love the offense.Chicat wrote:In the 3-3-5 the DLineman are supposed to take on blockers to free up lanes for the linebackers to get through the gaps and into the backfield. So that's why you won't see that traditional upfield pressure from a defensive end.Daryl Zero wrote:I just wanna see a DT who gives the opposing qb some trouble. We've had them before and even in the Stoops' era. You are correct that 3 on 5 or 6 is not going to be that productive. I did like the blitzes and hope that that is a symptom of what lies in the future.
Popular argument, but it ignores the fact that a 3 man front is common in the NFL and good space fillers may not make sports center, but they do demand top dollar and are in high demand. Nothing is sexier than a big pay check.gumby wrote:Need better linemen, regardless of scheme. Probably not going to recruit them when the job is space filler. Like basketball, when your job as a Big is to set screens and box out so the others can score and rebound.
The funny thing is is that this defense was designed for programs who don't have the ability to recruit traditional 6'5 300 lb. DTs.ANGCatFan wrote:Popular argument, but it ignores the fact that a 3 man front is common in the NFL and good space fillers may not make sports center, but they do demand top dollar and are in high demand. Nothing is sexier than a big pay check.gumby wrote:Need better linemen, regardless of scheme. Probably not going to recruit them when the job is space filler. Like basketball, when your job as a Big is to set screens and box out so the others can score and rebound.
The bigger problem is that there are not many quality, big defensive lineman out of high school and the ones that exist tend to go to the SEC or big boy programs (pun intended). Winning solves a lot of issues including recruiting the players required for this defensive front.
Who is the last DT (not rush end) who went to the League from Arizona? Doesn't surprise me that they're at a premium given the task.ANGCatFan wrote:Popular argument, but it ignores the fact that a 3 man front is common in the NFL and good space fillers may not make sports center, but they do demand top dollar and are in high demand. Nothing is sexier than a big pay check.gumby wrote:Need better linemen, regardless of scheme. Probably not going to recruit them when the job is space filler. Like basketball, when your job as a Big is to set screens and box out so the others can score and rebound.
The bigger problem is that there are not many quality, big defensive lineman out of high school and the ones that exist tend to go to the SEC or big boy programs (pun intended). Winning solves a lot of issues including recruiting the players required for this defensive front.
Salave'a? Osborne?gumby wrote:Who is the last DT (not rush end) who went to the League from Arizona? Doesn't surprise me that they're at a premium given the task.
EMFMChicat wrote:Salave'a?gumby wrote:Who is the last DT (not rush end) who went to the League from Arizona? Doesn't surprise me that they're at a premium given the task.
Most recentgumby wrote:Who is the last DT (not rush end) who went to the League from Arizona? Doesn't surprise me that they're at a premium given the task.ANGCatFan wrote:Popular argument, but it ignores the fact that a 3 man front is common in the NFL and good space fillers may not make sports center, but they do demand top dollar and are in high demand. Nothing is sexier than a big pay check.gumby wrote:Need better linemen, regardless of scheme. Probably not going to recruit them when the job is space filler. Like basketball, when your job as a Big is to set screens and box out so the others can score and rebound.
The bigger problem is that there are not many quality, big defensive lineman out of high school and the ones that exist tend to go to the SEC or big boy programs (pun intended). Winning solves a lot of issues including recruiting the players required for this defensive front.
My brain is obviously still on vacation.TheBlackLodge wrote:EMFMChicat wrote:Salave'a?gumby wrote:Who is the last DT (not rush end) who went to the League from Arizona? Doesn't surprise me that they're at a premium given the task.