The 3-3-5 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

SoCalCoug · 12-25-2005, 02:15 AM

I can't post over on CB for another day, but Sale's over there saying we'll never be successful with the 3-3-5, because we can't get the personnel.

http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=1662609

Am I missing the point or his he? Our personnel problem has always been cornerbacks, not safeties. In fact, I seem to recall that we generally have pretty good safeties. The scheme uses 3 safeties, not 3 cornerbacks. When you consider that one of the safeties is more like a hybrid LB/safety, I don't see the problem.

I like the aggressiveness of the scheme. And it seems pretty short-sighted to base the potential effectiveness of the scheme on this year. I also think it's a myth for people to think that Bronco's had three years now to recruit the players for his scheme. He hasn't - Crowton was in charge of who was recruited and offered, and he had limited scholarships the past few years, and he focused on offense.

We've done the 3-4, and we've done the 4-3. We still had crappy defenses then. I'm willing to be patient for a few years. After all, we're only a couple of years removed from a top-15 defense - with the 3-3-5.

Surfah · 12-25-2005, 03:22 AM

Yes and no. I agree that the scheme isn't so bad, I mean several defenses employ the 3-3-5 at times. It isn't as gimmicky as many people call it either IMO. It's intent is to disguise our blitzes and coverage. It can be aggressive but that only depends on how many guys we're sending each time. I think it was ridiculous at times how many people Bronco was sending. The Cal game was a perfect example of it. We'd have 8 guys in the box and all of them would get caught up in the inside and Lynch would bust a huge gain.

I think that for the 3-3-5 to work you need good team speed. You only need two good corners, but you need safeties who can cover, and more importantly close quickly. The scheme is also dependent on a good DL who can penetrate and rush the QB. We missed Manaia greatly. We didn't put any pressure on the Cal QB at all. In fact our front was manhandled by Cal's OL which was inexcusable. The 3-3-5 struggles when you send 5-6-7-8 guys on every play and none of them can get to the QB. That turns an already poor secondary into a joke. I think most of the criticism of the 3-3-5 is that it doesn't feature our LBs who have usually been pretty solid. Instead they are used as rush ends.

I don't know. The scheme hasn't bothered me as much as the lack of fundamentals. The tackling is atrocious. And the fact that it always has been is no excuse. I am tired of reading that, like it makes it okay for our D to look like a bunch of pussys. It's not that these guys are going after the big hit either. I just don't get it. There are bad angles, guys who can't shed blocks, no containment, huge cushions, we don't ever knock a TE or WR off his route at the line, etc.

Maybe I am wrong, but those are my thoughts. I think that Bronco needs to hire a DC. But how do you hire someone to run the 3-3-5?

MikeWaters · 12-25-2005, 04:10 AM

we have terribly slow players at every position on D.

D-linemen can never run down a qb. Linebackers with very average speed.

folks, the D may be worse next year. and that's scary.

All-American · 12-25-2005, 06:05 AM

That's the bottom line. Any defense is bad if the defenders are bad. And our defenders, especially the corners, were scary bad.

And not looking to be much better.

Unfortunately.

NorCal Cat · 12-28-2005, 07:36 PM

in the LV Bowl.

SoCalCoug · 12-28-2005, 09:39 PM

Quote:

The safeties played worse than the corners in the LV Bowl.

That's why I said we "generally" have good safeties. :wink: I think we had the absolute worst defensive backfield this year that we have ever had.

12-25-2005, 02:15 AM	#1
SoCalCoug Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Orange County, California Posts: 3,059	The 3-3-5 I can't post over on CB for another day, but Sale's over there saying we'll never be successful with the 3-3-5, because we can't get the personnel. http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=1662609 Am I missing the point or his he? Our personnel problem has always been cornerbacks, not safeties. In fact, I seem to recall that we generally have pretty good safeties. The scheme uses 3 safeties, not 3 cornerbacks. When you consider that one of the safeties is more like a hybrid LB/safety, I don't see the problem. I like the aggressiveness of the scheme. And it seems pretty short-sighted to base the potential effectiveness of the scheme on this year. I also think it's a myth for people to think that Bronco's had three years now to recruit the players for his scheme. He hasn't - Crowton was in charge of who was recruited and offered, and he had limited scholarships the past few years, and he focused on offense. We've done the 3-4, and we've done the 4-3. We still had crappy defenses then. I'm willing to be patient for a few years. After all, we're only a couple of years removed from a top-15 defense - with the 3-3-5. __________________ Get your stinking paws off me, you damned, dirty Yewt! "Now perhaps as I spanked myself screaming out "Kozlowski, say it like you mean it bitch!" might have been out of line, but such was the mood." - Goatnapper "If you want to fatten a pig up to make the pig MORE delicious, you can feed it almost anything. Seriously. The pig is like the car on Back to the Future. You put in garbage, and out comes something magical!" - Cali Coug

12-25-2005, 03:22 AM	#2
Surfah Master Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: F'burg, VA Posts: 3,211	Yes and no. I agree that the scheme isn't so bad, I mean several defenses employ the 3-3-5 at times. It isn't as gimmicky as many people call it either IMO. It's intent is to disguise our blitzes and coverage. It can be aggressive but that only depends on how many guys we're sending each time. I think it was ridiculous at times how many people Bronco was sending. The Cal game was a perfect example of it. We'd have 8 guys in the box and all of them would get caught up in the inside and Lynch would bust a huge gain. I think that for the 3-3-5 to work you need good team speed. You only need two good corners, but you need safeties who can cover, and more importantly close quickly. The scheme is also dependent on a good DL who can penetrate and rush the QB. We missed Manaia greatly. We didn't put any pressure on the Cal QB at all. In fact our front was manhandled by Cal's OL which was inexcusable. The 3-3-5 struggles when you send 5-6-7-8 guys on every play and none of them can get to the QB. That turns an already poor secondary into a joke. I think most of the criticism of the 3-3-5 is that it doesn't feature our LBs who have usually been pretty solid. Instead they are used as rush ends. I don't know. The scheme hasn't bothered me as much as the lack of fundamentals. The tackling is atrocious. And the fact that it always has been is no excuse. I am tired of reading that, like it makes it okay for our D to look like a bunch of pussys. It's not that these guys are going after the big hit either. I just don't get it. There are bad angles, guys who can't shed blocks, no containment, huge cushions, we don't ever knock a TE or WR off his route at the line, etc. Maybe I am wrong, but those are my thoughts. I think that Bronco needs to hire a DC. But how do you hire someone to run the 3-3-5? __________________ Ernie Johnson: "Auburn is a pretty good school. To graduate from there I suppose you really need to work hard and put forth maximum effort." Charles Barkley: "20 pts and 10 rebounds will get you through also!"

12-28-2005, 07:36 PM	#5
NorCal Cat Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Where do you think? Posts: 1,201	The safeties played worse than the corners in the LV Bowl.

12-25-2005, 04:10 AM	#3
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	we have terribly slow players at every position on D. D-linemen can never run down a qb. Linebackers with very average speed. folks, the D may be worse next year. and that's scary.

12-25-2005, 06:05 AM	#4
All-American Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,420	That's the bottom line. Any defense is bad if the defenders are bad. And our defenders, especially the corners, were scary bad. And not looking to be much better. Unfortunately.