[Goose]

Sure, getting separation always works, but fast receivers who get separation through sheer speed against slower DBs might struggle against faster (or smarter, in the case of a guy like Richard Sherman) DBs.  Likewise, scheming open players can work against an inferior defensive scheme, but might fail against a more well-designed or more disciplined scheme.  Likewise, while size works against small fast receivers defensive backs, it will struggle against some schemes (sandwiching the receiver) or against larger, stronger defensive backs.

Totally with you there. Fortunately for us, USC didn't even attempt to change their scheme.

That being said, as they say in basketball, you can't teach height, and there are very few defensive backs who are going to be anywhere near the 6'6" receivers that we have.  It won't work 100% of the time, but we should have an advantage (possibly a substantial one)  against most teams.  The best coaches exploit the mismatches you have, instead of the ones you wished you had.



BC

I have to disagree with your first thesis. I do agree with your second, that you have to make the best use you can of all your players, exploit any particular abilities they have. However, while you can't teach height, you can certainly attack the "jump ball offense", as you point out in your initial paragraph. One way you do that is by disguising your defense as much as possible, so the QB and the receivers don't know what they are getting on any given play. You can cover one receiver over and under on one play, and another receiver on a different  one. You can have safety help on some plays but not others. You can drop linebackers into short zones sometimes and blitz sometimes. USC did essentially none of that. One reason you do these things is to confuse the QB and have him throw to the wrong guy. That is often effective against a young QB, which McKee is. You can teach experience, but it takes time.

I think that at least half of our future opponents are quite capable of doing a good job of mixing it up. I think they can and will cause us problems. It possibly will open up the running game, because doing all that pass defense takes bodies, but they can do it. So I don't at all agree we have a "substantial advantage" against most teams. We have a weapon in our size and height. We also have a weapon in our receivers ability to use their size and strength to protect the ball and make difficult catches. However, our other opponents don't have to play as stupidly as U$C did, and I strongly suspect they will not. That is why Shaw gets paid. I just don't want us to embrace the "size and strength" as a panacea, because it isn't.

It is obviously best to have many different skill sets on your team, but you have to use what you have in the best possible way. However, you for sure don't want to do what S$C did and just assume your superior physical abilities will prevail. Out passes to the middle of the field and the stop/slant patterns filled that bill on Saturday. We need to have equivalents against our future opponents, because just being taller and heavier won't be enough.

[Goose]

Sure, getting separation always works, but fast receivers who get separation through sheer speed against slower DBs might struggle against faster (or smarter, in the case of a guy like Richard Sherman) DBs.  Likewise, scheming open players can work against an inferior defensive scheme, but might fail against a more well-designed or more disciplined scheme.  Likewise, while size works against small fast receivers defensive backs, it will struggle against some schemes (sandwiching the receiver) or against larger, stronger defensive backs.

Totally with you there. Fortunately for us, USC didn't even attempt to change their scheme.

That being said, as they say in basketball, you can't teach height, and there are very few defensive backs who are going to be anywhere near the 6'6" receivers that we have.  It won't work 100% of the time, but we should have an advantage (possibly a substantial one)  against most teams.  The best coaches exploit the mismatches you have, instead of the ones you wished you had.



BC

I have to disagree with your first thesis. I do agree with your second, that you have to make the best use you can of all your players, exploit any particular abilities they have. However, while you can't teach height, you can certainly attack the "jump ball offense", as you point out in your initial paragraph. One way you do that is by disguising your defense as much as possible, so the QB and the receivers don't know what they are getting on any given play. You can cover one receiver over and under on one play, and another receiver on a different  one. You can have safety help on some plays but not others. You can drop linebackers into short zones sometimes and blitz sometimes. USC did essentially none of that. One reason you do these things is to confuse the QB and have him throw to the wrong guy. That is often effective against a young QB, which McKee is. You can teach experience, but it takes time.

I think that at least half of our future opponents are quite capable of doing a good job of mixing it up. I think they can and will cause us problems. It possibly will open up the running game, because doing all that pass defense takes bodies, but they can do it. So I don't at all agree we have a "substantial advantage" against most teams. We have a weapon in our size and height. We also have a weapon in our receivers ability to use their size and strength to protect the ball and make difficult catches. However, our other opponents don't have to play as stupidly as U$C did, and I strongly suspect they will not. That is why Shaw gets paid. I just don't want us to embrace the "size and strength" as a panacea, because it isn't.

It is obviously best to have many different skill sets on your team, but you have to use what you have in the best possible way. However, you for sure don't want to do what S$C did and just assume your superior physical abilities will prevail. Out passes to the middle of the field and the stop/slant patterns filled that bill on Saturday. We need to have equivalents against our future opponents, because just being taller and heavier won't be enough.