On the Banks debate... it's less about his coaching ability and more about the scheme that's causing issues

#76
#76
VFL-82-JP said:
This is an interesting hypothesis, this idea that an aggressive offense must be joined by an aggressive defense to succeed.

First thought is, the term "aggressive" could use more definition. Because Tim Banks' scheme is very aggressive up front. So much so that we've become known for it. Frequent blitzes and schemes to get into the opposing team's backfield and cause havoc, sacks, TFLs, QB pressure causing errant throws, disrupting timing, etc.

Some would say our defense has been super aggressive.

But you're right that in the defensive secondary, Banks tends to play soft, giving up the short yardage completions in order to prevent any home runs.

Just not sure what to call that combination: "conservative" doesn't seem to fit. Maybe more like a hybrid.

So terminology is point one.

Point two is, we seemed to do very well in 2022 with our offense/defense combination: 11-2. The Kentucky game in particular, I remember, time of possession was skewed way toward the Wildcats, our defense was on the field a lot...and we beat them something like 44-6.

So an aggressive offense, offset by a hybrid defense (unique defense, really), can work beautifully. We leave them on the field a long time so that the opposing offense can make a mistake and have to punt or kick a FG. Then we go get 7 again, and the process repeats.

That seemed to work really well. When we had a prolific offense.

So maybe the problem in 2023 wasn't all on the defense, or on an offensive-defensive mismatch.

Maybe we also need a QB and WRs who can execute Josh Heupel's O at a high level. Maybe that's what was missing. Maybe it is all built on that.

So not really sure I agree with your hypothesis yet. Ready to keep an open mind, though, if there's more evidence for it.

Go Vols!
Click to expand...

I think another name for this scheme is “3rd and Martinez.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol2B
#78
#78
knox-townVOL said:
Which is why I think we, as a fanbase, can't reach an agreement here. Simply put, the offense and defense need to complement each other. I'll do my best here to make this make sense:

We have a very aggressive offense. This offense is either going to score quickly, or punt quickly, that's just the reality of it.

On defense however, we run a very conservative "soft zone" defense. This defense is designed to not give up the big 40-50 yard play, and for the most part, does a great job at that. We rarely give up the big play. What we do give up, however, is the 2nd/3rd and medium-to-long at a really high rate. That's the downfall of this scheme, it leaves guys running wide open at mid to long range.

So what you end up with is an offense that gets off the field quickly, one way or another, and a defense that stays on the field for a long time in the interest of not giving up the huge downfield shot. This is not a good combination. A good combination would be an aggressive, press-man defense to go with our offense. Would we get burned more often? Absolutely, but we would also get off the field quicker one way or another.

We lose the game when the offense gets off the field quickly several times in a row, which it's built to do, and the defense stays on the field for the better part of a quarter.

So in summary:

Aggressive O + Aggressive D = ✅
Aggressive O + Conservative D = ❌
(That's us)
Conservative O + Conservative D = ✅
Conservative O + Aggressive D = ❌
(This was what Mason did at Vandy, Jimbo did at A&M, etc)

Supposedly Heupel isn't a big fan of this defensive scheme and that's caused some friction (per a couple of reputable insiders on 247), and this would be why.

TL;DR - Banks isn't bad, but we have to change the scheme.
Click to expand...
Solid post imo. I never like our scheme or the inability to switch the gameplan. I felt like Banks saying he didn't trust his 1:1 matchups was a dead giveaway that the defense needed some help. Martinez needs to go. If our secondary isn't better by now, it's his fault, nobody else. Bring in somebody that can coach up those LB/DB and can also help scheme and adjust in game. Change one guy and watch for a huge improvement imo.
 
#80
#80
TNVOLFN said:
It’s not complicated, great defense isn’t called or developed, great defense is played by great players. Saban, Smart, Donahue had great defenses because they had great players, bottom line.
Click to expand...
Why does Iowa play great defense year in and year out? Where are these 4-5* studs that they pulled over the normal suitors?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNVOLFN
#81
#81
AthensVol2007 said:
Why does Iowa play great defense year in and year out? Where are these 4-5* studs that they pulled over the normal suitors?
Click to expand...
Fair question. I believe there are a few factors that contribute to their success on defense.

The first, since 2020, they've had 10 players drafted on defense (Tennessee had 5 in the same time frame). Probably a combination of culture and development, but, most importantly, talent identification.
Second, their offense changes the complexion of their games. Their ball control offense limits possessions and opponent offenses aren't as aggressive because they don't have to be aggressive.
Third, I think the Big Ten West is mediocre, at best. I don't think you could drop Iowa in the SEC East or West and see them win more than 7 games, but that's my opinion.

I believe Iowa is an exception to the rule.
 
#84
#84
TNVOLFN said:
Fair question. I believe there are a few factors that contribute to their success on defense.

The first, since 2020, they've had 10 players drafted on defense (Tennessee had 5 in the same time frame). Probably a combination of culture and development, but, most importantly, talent identification.
Second, their offense changes the complexion of their games. Their ball control offense limits possessions and opponent offenses aren't as aggressive because they don't have to be aggressive.
Third, I think the Big Ten West is mediocre, at best. I don't think you could drop Iowa in the SEC East or West and see them win more than 7 games, but that's my opinion.

I believe Iowa is an exception to the rule.
Click to expand...
I agree they wouldn’t have the same results as they do in the B1G West but I think their defense would travel to the extent of making SEC offenses grind it out vs them. No way they give up 12 PPG but i think games like they played against Michigan would be repeatable; holding the best teams in the mid-upper 20’s. I think they get worn down though because their pathetic offense has a lot of 3 & outs vs SEC defenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNVOLFN
#90
#90
knox-townVOL said:
I don't see this logic at all.
Click to expand...
Listen to Heupel yourself…. He wants an attacking defense which means you are vulnerable when zones are voided or you don’t have good CB play… fast hitting defense with a fast hitting offense… quickly overwhelm you so you void your game plan which makes you less systematic and comfortable in your approach.

We need a new CB coach and someone that can recruit…

When your up you play bend don’t break… assuming (because of the above statement, they will make a mistake because they are playing out of character) we need a new CB coach period.
 
#91
#91
The offense has to be more well rounded. We cannot be score fast or bust. We have to learn how to put first down drives together not just big plays or bust. Sure we want the big plays we made plenty of big plays in 22 but we also put together drives at times. This is the SEC, you have to be able to get the tough yards as well. We have to be a more complete offense. We can’t just rely on big plays. Even in some of Bama’s big play offenses they could still move the chains and take time off clock and keep teams on the field. One truck ponies do not win titles. GBO
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top