Bear Down Wildcats

I with held judgment for the first couple of years. Maybe, our guys need more experience. Maybe, we need some better guys in. In the end, It just doesn't work. Our safeties are seniors that can't provide pass coverage. Outside of Bondo and Tevis on stopping the run, I don't see the skill set. I don't think Arizona has to have the next desert storm to be good, but at least a defense set and play calling that puts our players in the best positions to win.

I'm out, is anyone left in?

I've always been a fan of the 4-3. Fuck the 3-3-5.

I'm with you. Time to end the 3-3-5 experiment. Last year's ASU game and now tonight had opponents running completely alone for easy TD's. Both games were over by halftime. Big play after big play after ....

Go Cats!!

I don't know what say about the Game or Scheme itself or play calling. We cant just Jump into conclusion on the fact that 3-3-5 is not a fierce Defensive Scheme against quality team with good offense. I mean I don't know what the hell is going on with Defense lately tonight.

I wish you the best in your quest in getting rid of this defensive scheme but...it isn't going anywhere. Sucks but might as well just accept it.

The 3-3-5 makes average QBs look like Joe Montana.

scumdevils86 wrote:I wish you the best in your quest in getting rid of this defensive scheme but...it isn't going anywhere. Sucks but might as well just accept it.

You know damn well RR will not tell Casteel to abandon 3-3-5 scheme or work on another scheme. That saying three year of nothing on defense was a waste on time, recruiting and development.

Hey seniors safeties, learn pass coverage.

OSUCat wrote:I with held judgment for the first couple of years. Maybe, our guys need more experience. Maybe, we need some better guys in. In the end, It just doesn't work. Our safeties are seniors that can't provide pass coverage. Outside of Bondo and Tevis on stopping the run, I don't see the skill set. I don't think Arizona has to have the next desert storm to be good, but at least a defense set and play calling that puts our players in the best positions to win.

I'm out, is anyone left in?

Completely agree and I have been vociferously advocating junking the 3-3-5 since day one. In all honesty, however, the failure of this defense is as much about poor recruiting as it is about the scheme itself. I just posted this in another thread, but in year 3 Casteel/RRod have been unable to recruit a single PAC12 level DL or CB who will see the field this year...................and the downward recruiting tracjectory and the 2 star recruits don't give me much hope for the future. I think its time (in the offseason) to go find a bright young DL coach in the SEC and offer him the DC position. As I write this I also know that will never happen. RRod isn't going to dump Casteel unless Byrne intercedes after a losing season and forces his hand. We are stuck with this scheme (and the coaches who can't recruit to it) for the time being.

RR will never ditch Casteel.

The problem is this:

The 335 takes very specific types of athletes to run it. When Casteel came in, the story was that he didn't have those kinds of athletes, so we would have to wait a bit until he got them.

Now we've waited a bit, they've recruited athletes to play that scheme, and it is still appears to largely suck.

So what do we do? Switch to something else? If we do that, didn't we already recruit 335 oriented defensive players? Does that mean a few more years to recruit 4-3 or 3-4 oriented players? Right now we are ridiculously think on the DL with these guys - seems like we would be that much worse trying to run a 4-3, right?

It almost feels like we are kind of stuck.

I will not dump on the 3-3-5 until I see it fail with top line talent. Talent is the problem right now. We have a patchwork DL, so-so-LB's outside of Scooby, and 1 starting CB who continues to regress and another who is still raw, and safeties who have moments of greatness but are inconsistent.

You could argue that the scheme isn't appealing to DL recruits because the DL absorbs blocks and doesn't get the glory, but over half of NFL teams are running a 3-4 and that same argument applies - it's not like we're unique in asking a DL to be an unsung hero.

Would we feel better if we were running a 3-4 and a big OLB was getting burned trying to cover slot receivers?

azthrillhouse wrote:I will not dump on the 3-3-5 until I see it fail with top line talent. Talent is the problem right now. We have a patchwork DL, so-so-LB's outside of Scooby, and 1 starting CB who continues to regress and another who is still raw, and safeties who have moments of greatness but are inconsistent.

You could argue that the scheme isn't appealing to DL recruits because the DL absorbs blocks and doesn't get the glory, but over half of NFL teams are running a 3-4 and that same argument applies - it's not like we're unique in asking a DL to be an unsung hero.

Would we feel better if we were running a 3-4 and a big OLB was getting burned trying to cover slot receivers?

Pretty much all of this.

Scheme isn't the issue. Inexperience, talent and depth is. Some of that is recruiting. Some of that is just bad luck with injuries and attrition. Some of that I suspect will get better as players come back off injury and experience is gained. Some of that will not improve however, as further injuries happen and some players are just what they are.

The biggest problems I saw last night weren't related to scheme, but to personnel trying to execute fundamental concepts that any scheme depends upon. For one, the tackling was atrocious, and I don't care what scheme you play, if you can't tackle it's going to suck. For another, UA missed too many coverage assignments, mostly the secondary, but that again is on the players to execute, not on the scheme. UA's secondary got beat over the top twice for TDs; if the whole goal of this defense is to keep everything in front of you, then the secondary failed to execute that concept on those two plays.

Bottom line, maybe it's a good thing to confine all the whining about the scheme to one main thread, but as others have suggested the 3-3-5 won't be dumped this season, and I doubt it ever gets dumped as long as RR is here. Which makes this thread rather futile.

What doesn't help the defense is playing with a 3 man rush & the cornerbacks playing 10-15 yards off the line. (Not to mention the one trillion broken tackles yesterday.)

Quarterbacks have all day to throw the ball & they eventually do to burn the team. There has been way more than enough 3rd (& long) down conversions allowed this season.

NYCat wrote:What doesn't help the defense is playing with a 3 man rush & the cornerbacks playing 10-15 yards off the line. (Not to mention the one trillion broken tackles yesterday.)

Quarterbacks have all day to throw the ball & they eventually do to burn the team. There has been way more than enough 3rd (& long) down conversions allowed this season.

UA almost always sends more than 3. Just because they only line up with 3 down linemen (which 3-4 defenses also do), doesn't mean that's all they send. Part of the 3-3-5 is disguising where the LBs are coming from, and UA usually sends 4 or 5 on pass rushes, sometimes 6. I would agree that they have to do an even better job of generating pressure with those 4-6 guys though. As for the coverage, it's soft in general, and part of that is by design in order to keep everything in front of you while opponents have the ball between the 20s. I did see more press coverage last night than in games before, but that didn't work either, so for me, again, that's personnel over scheme.

I also don't think you're giving enough credit to Jared Goff, he was under pressure quite a bit last night, sacked 4 times, hurried several others, and yet he kept some plays alive as he has good pocket presence and is more slippery than he gets credit for being.

Reydituto wrote:UA almost always sends more than 3. Just because they only line up with 3 down linemen (which 3-4 defenses also do), doesn't mean that's all they send. Part of the 3-3-5 is disguising where the LBs are coming from, and UA usually sends 4 or 5 on pass rushes, sometimes 6. I would agree that they have to do an even better job of generating pressure with those 4-6 guys though. As for the coverage, it's soft in general, and part of that is by design in order to keep everything in front of you while opponents have the ball between the 20s. I did see more press coverage last night than in games before, but that didn't work either, so for me, again, that's personnel over scheme.

I also don't think you're giving enough credit to Jared Goff, he was under pressure quite a bit last night, sacked 4 times, hurried several others, and yet he kept some plays alive as he has good pocket presence and is more slippery than he gets credit for being.

The Cats were actually getting decent pressure for a lot of the night. That wasn't the problem. The problem was slip-ups in the secondary. That second touchdown was scored because the receiver was 15 yards behind the coverage. I don't care if you're running a 3-3-5, a 4-3, or a 15-15-15, when that happens you're screwed. Goff was making some fantastic throws as well. He made one just before he got brought down in the second quarter that showed some insane arm strength and accuracy.

I don't get the consternation over playing cornerbacks 10 yards off the LOS. Most teams do this. When you're playing a team with speedy receivers, the risk you run playing press coverage on speed burners is that a WR beats you at the LOS and then forget it, he's gone. The ten yards didn't really factor a lot of the night; Dykes didn't call his usual quick-outs very much at all and the sweeps they were running were very effective. That said, they did start playing a lot more press coverage on the trips receivers, which jammed them at the line of scrimmage and disrupted Goff's timing, and also allowed more guys to stop the run. If you play exclusively press against a team like Cal, though, they're going to torch you even worse than they did.

The corners are the biggest issue. McKnight... we know what his ceiling is and so do opponents. McCall is a redshirt freshman. Last year Richardson helped big time by taking away a chunk of the field, and you saw opponents picking on McKnight. That said, this position is still a work in progress. The '12 class was put together on a wing and a prayer with RR going after anyone left he could get since he was so late. What we're seeing is redshirts from 2013 and freshmen from the 2014 class. Richardson, Flowers and Fischer (the two LBs knew how to cover routes) aren't here to help. Denson needs time to develop. McCall didn't have a fantastic game last night but showed a few flashes of starting to figure things out. The second quarter TD he tripped on was one where he got torched and yet got into a position to make a play. He broke up a similar play later. He recognized a route in the third quarter, came out of nowhere, and damn near had a pick. McKnight is what he is, but he has experience. He had a third down pass breakup against Nevada that pretty much sealed the game, so he can make plays now and then.

azthrillhouse wrote:Would we feel better if we were running a 3-4 and a big OLB was getting burned trying to cover slot receivers?

Exactly. The 3-3-5 just makes a convenient punching bag. Ask Michigan fans if they're happy with their 4-3 defense now.

I say keep the 3-3-5.

Without it our offense would not be putting up the crazy numbers they have been putting up.

Reydituto wrote:
I also don't think you're giving enough credit to Jared Goff, he was under pressure quite a bit last night, sacked 4 times, hurried several others, and yet he kept some plays alive as he has good pocket presence and is more slippery than he gets credit for being.

There was one play where the DB had decent coverage on the receiver, and Scooby was in front of the receiver, and he just threaded the needle. I don't know if Arizona has ever had a QB who could make that throw. (Foles or Tunnicliffe maybe?)

Merkin wrote:The 3-3-5 makes average QBs look like Joe Montana.

This.

There are way too many good qb's in the Pac 12. This defense turns every one of them into All Americans. There is no pressure.

And if a team wants to lineup and smash it down our throats they can pretty much do that too. I'm not sure what the point of this d is other than to keep every team we play in the game.

Our offense is so good. If we had anything resembling a defense we'd be stacking Pac 12 championships.

Cats are 96th in total defense, and 5th in total offense.

Passing yards allowed 109th of of 125 teams.

Red zone defense 96th.

http://stats.ncaa.org/team/index/11980?org_id=29.0

So how long is Casteel given to bring in the recruits? I would say this season and two more, but the 3-3-5 has to adjust way too much in-game.

The problem with the CBs playing so far off the line is it allows opposing receivers to run their routes without LOS harassment--and it doesn't prime our receivers in practice for any Red Zone contact they'll inevitably get in games.

You can't win a national championship by being a second-half team in football like Arizona could in hoops. Even in the Rose Bowl, a Wisconsin or Nebraska would blow last night's first-half effort out of the water and ball-control the rest of the game.

Still calling nine wins this season, but without a defense that establishes on teams, this system is questionable in BCS bowls and Territorial Cups.

catgrad97 wrote:So how long is Casteel given to bring in the recruits? I would say this season and two more, but the 3-3-5 has to adjust way too much in-game.

At least 4 more years, or until we can put a unit on the field who doesn't contain a walkon.

Salty wrote:RR will never ditch Casteel.

I understand this. RR is straight loyal, and his guys are very loyal back.

I am not a defense knowledge type of guy. I thought that even though 3-4 and 3-3-5 both have three down lineman, those three lineman have different responsibilities from each other.

Merkin wrote:Cats are 96th in total defense, and 5th in total offense.

Passing yards allowed 109th of of 125 teams.

Red zone defense 96th.

http://stats.ncaa.org/team/index/11980?org_id=29.0

Telling statistics...........and remember, thats against very poor competition. If we are 96th in defense after playing UNLV/UTSA/Nevada what will we be after playing Oregon/USC/UCLA???

This season is starting to feel a lot like the first season under Rich Rod. Back then, it wasn't enough bodies at D and now, I think it's just youth in positions where if you make a mistake, you notice it. McCall is a RS Freshman. Our LB corpse are all Sophomores basically. McKnight is, well I don't know what happened with him.

I thought our dline actually played pretty well. We got some pressure and some sacks and Scooby ran free(because of y he guys upfront) and made 18 tackles. I think our outside linebackers are killing us.

I liked Bondo there. He is a playmaker. Turituri is ok as a pass rushing end but he struggles doing anything else as a linebacker.

To me this failure is on the back 8 guys

Cal made Tevis look like a walk on last night. Grandon was almost as bad.

Bondo needs to stay at one of the LB spots. Tui is still learning but i think he's going to be special out there

TuiTouchdown wrote:This season is starting to feel a lot like the first season under Rich Rod. Back then, it wasn't enough bodies at D and now, I think it's just youth in positions where if you make a mistake, you notice it. McCall is a RS Freshman. Our LB corpse are all Sophomores basically. McKnight is, well I don't know what happened with him.

McKnight blew his ACL out and hasn't been the same since.......I don't hold anything against him.

I had forgotten about the torn ACL for McKnight. Sucks.

And for the record, I think the 3-3-5 will be just fine. Yes, we are still going through growing pains and some frustrations, but I think there's going to be a point really quickly where we get the players we need who understand the scheme the way we need them to. Some games, like Oregon last year, it looks like our D can stop anyone. And then we have games like last night.

dmjcat wrote:

Merkin wrote:Cats are 96th in total defense, and 5th in total offense.

Passing yards allowed 109th of of 125 teams.

Red zone defense 96th.

http://stats.ncaa.org/team/index/11980?org_id=29.0

Telling statistics...........and remember, thats against very poor competition. If we are 96th in defense after playing UNLV/UTSA/Nevada what will we be after playing Oregon/USC/UCLA???

97th?

95th?

I'll be curious to see what the defensive stats across the Pac-12 are as the year rolls along. Once the year is done it'll be interesting to see how Arizona's defense stacks up numbers wise against the rest of the Pac-12, which will be more telling than how P12 teams stack up nationally. The conference has a lot of explosive offenses and it's likely that everyone is going to get hit by big plays.

One other thing that will make Arizona's stats look worse is the offense. Teams are going to get a lot of possessions because the Cats score fast (or go 3 and out fast.) UNLV put up 371 yards and they were never a threat in that game. What they need to do is fix the coverage issues in the secondary and tackle better. The most important stat for the defense is how many stops they get, and if they don't allow big plays on third down - where they've got a chance to get stops but have been getting burned a fair bit - then Arizona will be mauling teams.

I like that we have a thread to contain all the 3-3-5 rants in one place, but it's no different than having an Official "Drop the Man-to-Man Defense" or "Add a Zone Defense" thread in the basketball forum. Never going to happen. The best to hope for is they tweak it to give different looks in certain situations to try to shore up the weaknesses while keeping the strengths.

I'm still more in the "it's not the X's and O's, it's the Jimmies and the Joes" camp. How that gets fixed is a different thread.

I am beginning to wonder what 2015 might look like. On the surface it is hard to see us improving statistically. Both ends are gone and we dont have anyone who has really made an impact waiting in the wings. Tevis, Grandon and Bondo will be gone and no one hasbeen able to beat them out in the RR years. McNight will be gone and I would think Cam would want to move into Austin Hills spot.

I think we are in for some extended struggles on defense

azcat49 wrote:I am beginning to wonder what 2015 might look like. On the surface it is hard to see us improving statistically. Both ends are gone and we dont have anyone who has really made an impact waiting in the wings. Tevis, Grandon and Bondo will be gone and no one hasbeen able to beat them out in the RR years. McNight will be gone and I would think Cam would want to move into Austin Hills spot.

I think we are in for some extended struggles on defense

It will be alot of "if" on the defense. Does Marcus Griffen, WIlliams, Cobb, and Ware improve and become starters or atleast play alot? What will happen to the safety positions outside of Parks? Can Allah really become a starter after not being able to beat Grandon (you rarely ever hear his name, or see his stats). Tellas Jones is also a former walk on right? Any True freshman ready to go from day one?

I don't think Denson moves back to WR though, and I don't think he should. Denson and McCall can lock those position up for the next three years. Why give a potential starting position to not start on offense (Jones, Neal, Grant, Phillips, TJ could all come back and he would have to learn the offense).

We will just need some young guys to make that push.

Not really a 3-3-5 specific question but is anyone else as stunned as I am that Jordan Allen has basically been invisible this year.

I thought the guy would be a stud even for one year, but I guess the scheme must be holding him back.

Is it the scheme, is he hurt or hes not as good as advertised. Anyone have any inside info to share on him?

All I have heard is that their is a reason he lost time at LSU and is not playing much here yet

azcat49 wrote:All I have heard is that their is a reason he lost time at LSU and is not playing much here yet

Thanks 49, losing time at LSU should have been a window into the future. Well I had high hopes at one time.

Worth mentioning - It's not like they haven't been recruiting. Tabor and Hale committed after a lot of work by the staff, and then backed out. That's two CBs right there. We've lost guys due to career ending injuries.

DL, Worthy returns, you got Fish & Sani stronger & better after a year of play & conditioning, so to me that's a solid starting unit. Allen, Bruno and Banda a year better, Zellars still sparkplugging, and Griffin coming off his RS. Three HS recruits coming in, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a JUCO DE signed as well. Maybe Dwight Melvin gets his act together and returns to the team eligible and ready. Wouldn't be surprised to see Cobb or Turituri moved there. Depth will have to be developed, but the bodies are there, at least 12 and maybe more, it's the talent and ability that remains a concern.

LBs will be solid and experienced next year - Scooby, Matthews, Miller, Turituri (will prob play some DE too), The Artist Formerly Known as Bush-Loo, Ippolito, plus Ware and maybe Cobb (if he's not a DE) coming off their RS. Maybe Antonio Smothers figures things out, but not counting on him until I see him actually get on the field this season. UA should sign 1-2 more really good LB recruits as well. I think LB will be better next year TBH.

DBs, like DL, won't lack the bodies, just a matter of identifying contributors. McCall and Willy from Philly have two spots pretty much locked down, and I like what I see of Tellas Jones (who is on scholarship, always has been). Allah, Sanders, Price and Lopez will get their opportunities at the other safety positions. CB is interesting: Glover returns (see Smothers thought); Unlike others I see Denson moving back to WR, as some of you seem to forget UA has Holiday, Carr and Mashack on the roster still; and I see UA bringing in 7 recruits at DB, including two JUCO guys who should contribute (Cruikshank and Magliore) right away. UA has 11 guys returning as of now, not counting Denson, and is bringing in 7 more, so they'll be 3-deep across the board.

In short, LBs better, DL OK if they develop depth, and DB has some holes to fill but no lack of bodies to fill them. I expect this defense to be roughly the same if not slightly better next season, and potentially more talented considering the redshirts and incoming recruits, with a big leap forward 2 years from now. Everybody considers only the downside of losing guys like Bondurant, Tevis, McKnight, Gilbert, Pettinato, but the reality is part of the reason this D isn't as good as it needs to be is because UA is having to rely on guys like them, who in future years will be replaced by better athletes.

Gladiator Cat wrote:

azcat49 wrote:All I have heard is that their is a reason he lost time at LSU and is not playing much here yet

Thanks 49, losing time at LSU should have been a window into the future. Well I had high hopes at one time.

I have a feeling this thread will heat up by the end of Thursday evening

Reydituto wrote:The Artist Formerly Known as Bush-Loo

OK, so that's one less guy to factor in.

At this point I can see UA taking 4-6 more guys in the 2015 class, mostly on the defensive side, and maybe 1-2 of those being JUCOs in hopes of getting immediate depth.

azcat49 wrote:I have a feeling this thread will heat up by the end of Thursday evening

Sure. Although Oregon could score 100 points Thursday and the 3-3-5 still isn't going to be scrapped this season, sooooo ...

No one here thinks that the 3-3-5 will be dumped this year. Heck, I do not think it will ever change with RR here and Casteel not retiring. I'm still goin to complain when it sucks. Unless you are suggesting that since the coach will never change the defense formation so we shouldn't complain, than I raise you a

I'm in the "how do we know yet" mode about whether the 3-3-5 will be good enough or "successful" in the Pac12. I still believe with quality recruits the 3-3-5 can work well in the Pac12 and spread. Even Mike Stoops has implemented 3-3-5 schemes at OU. Especially targeting "tweener" LBs and adding quickness (blitzes) on the field. Maybe doesn't say much...

I am surprised how the Arizona defense performed (or not) against Cal. Just from a progression standpoint. Looking at the depth chart/result, many contributors still are pre-Casteel / Rich Rod recruits. Recuiting issue? Don't know. "Only" in year three. Less than that from full recruiting classes.

If you look back at Casteel and the 3-3-5 at WV, common fan frustration theme was the "bend but don't break" defense. But I read that with other defenses as well. 3-3-5 at WV from 2001-2011 really "successful" from a total and scoring defense ranking(s).

I know one can't fully compare defensive performance across different leagues, but someplace to start. At least for me starting some point to build expectations of what to expect from 3-3-5 compared to what Arizona defenses have accomplished since 2001. Some of this for me is the "good enough" because of Rich Rod offensive fire power.

Casteel's 3-3-5 2001-2011 ranked better than Arizona in both Total & Scoring Defense in all years except:
2006 Total and Scoring defense
2008 Total Defense (WV scoring Def higher ranked)
2009 Total Defense ((WV scoring Def higher ranked)
***Note: WV had better/lower Yards Per PLAY avg in all above years. Just played more plays (spread Off)

I know it's hard to compare, BUT Looking at Arizona's (2013) 5.26 yards per play defense and 24.2 points per game last year, those stats are better than most Arizona defenses 2001-2011. I would guess most AZ fans don't think Casteel and Rich Rod have the depth, recruits or build they anticipate on defense yet.

I just don't know yet. Stats tell me it's possible the 3-3-5 can still improve, be improved on and maybe produce comparable, sometimes better results than what we're used to. Pace of play has really changed college game.

RazorsEdgeAZ wrote:I'm in the "how do we know yet" mode about whether the 3-3-5 will be good enough or "successful" in the Pac12. I still believe with quality recruits the 3-3-5 can work well in the Pac12 and spread. Even Mike Stoops has implemented 3-3-5 schemes at OU. Especially targeting "tweener" LBs and adding quickness (blitzes) on the field. Maybe doesn't say much...

I am surprised how the Arizona defense performed (or not) against Cal. Just from a progression standpoint. Looking at the depth chart/result, many contributors still are pre-Casteel / Rich Rod recruits. Recuiting issue? Don't know. "Only" in year three. Less than that from full recruiting classes.

If you look back at Casteel and the 3-3-5 at WV, common fan frustration theme was the "bend but don't break" defense. But I read that with other defenses as well. 3-3-5 at WV from 2001-2011 really "successful" from a total and scoring defense ranking(s).

I know one can't fully compare defensive performance across different leagues, but someplace to start. At least for me starting some point to build expectations of what to expect from 3-3-5 compared to what Arizona defenses have accomplished since 2001. Some of this for me is the "good enough" because of Rich Rod offensive fire power.

Casteel's 3-3-5 2001-2011 ranked better than Arizona in both Total & Scoring Defense in all years except:
2006 Total and Scoring defense
2008 Total Defense (WV scoring Def higher ranked)
2009 Total Defense ((WV scoring Def higher ranked)
***Note: WV had better/lower Yards Per PLAY avg in all above years. Just played more plays (spread Off)

I know it's hard to compare, BUT Looking at Arizona's (2013) 5.26 yards per play defense and 24.2 points per game last year, those stats are better than most Arizona defenses 2001-2011. I would guess most AZ fans don't think Casteel and Rich Rod have the depth, recruits or build they anticipate on defense yet.

I just don't know yet. Stats tell me it's possible the 3-3-5 can still improve, be improved on and maybe produce comparable, sometimes better results than what we're used to. Pace of play has really changed college game.

Nice Post!

azcat49 wrote:I have a feeling this thread will heat up by the end of Thursday evening

...bump.

Its strange how almost bipolar this defense can be.

Maybe they play best against the spread?

Chicat wrote:Maybe they play best against the spread?

This sure is what it looks like to me.