(10-14-2017, 09:12 AM)ChicagoTree link Wrote:I wonder with a result like this for Wash St how much other teams can apply from whatever ×ÉÉ's defensive coaches did against the Wash St offense (should have stated that in the form of a question)...
Love this topic...
It's almost cliche for pundits to say "did this provide a blue print" when an upset happens. But let's be clear, there is a big difference between say Syracuse upsetting Clemson by 3pts, and ×ÉÉ absolutely annihilating the Cougs by 34.
×ÉÉ in fact did provide a blue print, IMO. They don't play man-to-man, bring extra blitzers-oriented defense, like say Oregon does. And they play a 3-4 defense that relies on more LBs than DL. Given Leach doesn't run much, when a defense confuses the OL and QB with different zone blitz and coverage looks, it can be very difficult on the Air Raid offense.
IMO, with what ×ÉÉ exposed, Leach is going to have some trouble unless he can establish a real running threat, against other 3-4 teams they will face. Stanford also plays a 2 DL look. Stanford hasn't been using as much of a variety of blitzes as ×ÉÉ uses, but there is no reason to think Anderson won't be using the same tactics against the Cougs now.Â
×ÉÉ rarely rushes more than 4 guys, but brings LBs, Safeties, and Corners from all directions. Stanford is equipped to do exactly the same thing to the Cougs that ×ÉÉ did.Â