M
mkel43
Guest
Well first of all you said the 4-2-5 was built to get numbers in the front to stop the run and the 3-3-5 get numbers in the back to stop the pass...4-2-5 3-3-5 I'm not a mathematician but that's the same number on the back end of both. Both defenses are nickel based defenses which means their entire philosophy is developed around pass defense. Now to your point about "both of those defenses are trying to get numbers either in the box or in the backend"... THAT'S EVERY DEFENSE THAT HAS EVER BEEN DRAWN UP! That's like saying an offense is trying to throw the ball some and run the ball some depending on what the defense gives them. LOL The reason that NO other schools really effectively base out of the 4-2-5 is bc it's extremely difficult to stop the run with it especially against bigger style offenses. (like Wisconsin, Stanford etc.) The reason GP is able to base his entire system out of it is bc #1 He truly completely understands when to call what coverage and effectively coaches his CB's, S's and LB's how to play for each different coverage call he makes. #2 He uses his blitz packages by far more effectively than any other coach who has tried to run it or even called defenses in their nickel packages.
Now to whatever BS your trying to spew about throwing the ball, "All this to say that this data supports that throwing the ball early in games, on early downs and throwing high % routes will lead to far more points then the RTDB philosophy GP is forcing down Cumbie's throat." Not one coach in the world who has consistently been successful would ever go into a game plan saying "I don't care what they give me, we're going to throw it all over the place early". Every interview you hear about what a coach wanted out of their gameplan is "we need to start fast, establish the run, and play good defense." I'm sure you're a smart guy with all of your analytical data points and all but let's try to stay in our lanes here.
