Taking Seattle to Pound Town - BYU vs. Washington

[HBCoug]

Good thing we don't have any more teams left on the schedule who like to play press man coverage against our inferior WRs or who do a good job pressuring the QB with their front 4 or creative blitz packages.

[Pelado]

they don't have to, but they did. and whether you have to or not, why wouldn't you? that's why going forward - maybe Boise doesn't have to - but they certainly should. no reason to play with fire. Wisconsin thought they didn't have to and got burned.

I'd have to go back and watch again to verify your assertion that they stacked the box. Not sure I'm willing to put myself through that.

i watched for it because not stacking the box is how wisconsin lost to byu. i can't say they did it 100% of the time, but much of the time they did.

So I went back and looked at Washington's defense on each of BYU's offensive snaps and tallied how many Husky defenders were in the box on each. I used a somewhat broad definition of the box, counting any defender within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage and within half a body of any BYU player with a hand on the turf (including multiple tight ends, etc.). The attached picture shows the tally. The total probably won't match the total plays since I also included plays that were whistled dead (false starts, etc.).

Washington's base defense, which they employed on the vast majority of plays, was 4 down lineman and two linebackers.

Their next-most common defense was 5 down lineman, at least one of which was lined up wide, with one linebacker. Seemed to most commonly use this alignment on third and long. This caused a lot of problems in the protection with the speed edge rusher often beating his man.

One of the 5-man fronts was on the broken play that Tanner threw to Shumway in the endzone. Since others had pointed it out, I paid special attention to Katoa on that play. Katoa did come open as his defender left him to contain Tanner's rush. But Tanner had already decided to throw to the endzone and didn't see Katoa come open on the checkdown that would have kept the drive alive.

Another of the 5-man fronts resulted in Katoa's fumble just before the half. Makes sense that Washington would be in more of a prevent defense at that point.

Most of the 7 man fronts and the only 8 man front were in the last possession near the goal line.

Washington beat the passing game by having 5-6 defenders available to cover the 2-4 receivers running routes.

They crushed the rushing game by beating their blockers and having the corners crash down on the ball carriers in the backfield. They did not stack the box.

[Donuthole]

Taking Seattle to Pound Town - BYU vs. Washington

So I went back and looked at Washington's defense on each of BYU's offensive snaps and tallied how many Husky defenders were in the box on each. I used a somewhat broad definition of the box, counting any defender within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage and within half a body of any BYU player with a hand on the turf (including multiple tight ends, etc.). The attached picture shows the tally. The total probably won't match the total plays since I also included plays that were whistled dead (false starts, etc.).

Washington's base defense, which they employed on the vast majority of plays, was 4 down lineman and two linebackers.

Their next-most common defense was 5 down lineman, at least one of which was lined up wide, with one linebacker. Seemed to most commonly use this alignment on third and long. This caused a lot of problems in the protection with the speed edge rusher often beating his man.

One of the 5-man fronts was on the broken play that Tanner threw to Shumway in the endzone. Since others had pointed it out, I paid special attention to Katoa on that play. Katoa did come open as his defender left him to contain Tanner's rush. But Tanner had already decided to throw to the endzone and didn't see Katoa come open on the checkdown that would have kept the drive alive.

Another of the 5-man fronts resulted in Katoa's fumble just before the half. Makes sense that Washington would be in more of a prevent defense at that point.

Most of the 7 man fronts and the only 8 man front were in the last possession near the goal line.

Washington beat the passing game by having 5-6 defenders available to cover the 2-4 receivers running routes.

They crushed the rushing game by beating their blockers and having the corners crash down on the ball carriers in the backfield. They did not stack the box.

Wasnt there a pre-game analysis column from someone who did an in-depth breakdown of the Wash D and concluded that the reason their D is so good is because thy are able to stop the run without stacking the box?

EDIT: yep. Here it is.

Pretty good breakdown of Washington's run defense here:

http://insidethepylon.com/pylon-u/te...-numbers-game/

How big of a problem is this going to be for the jet sweep/fly sweep that's been our bread and butter when receivers drop passes?

[Pelado]

Wasnt there a pre-game analysis column from someone who did an in-depth breakdown of the Wash D and concluded that the reason their D is so good is because thy are able to stop the run without stacking the box?

EDIT: yep. Here it is.

That's why I was wondering if they really had stacked the box.

[smokymountainrain]

Whether they did or didn't- why wouldn't you against byu? I mean even if you generally have success without doing it against othet teams?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Whether they did or didn't- why wouldn't you against byu? I mean even if you generally have success without doing it against othet teams?

That’s a funny question.

[smokymountainrain]

That’s a funny question.

because the answer seems obvious? i guess it's just interesting to me because Wisconsin didn't do it and it cost them the game. UW did it at times but not for a fairly significant portion of the game, according to pelado. just wondering, if you're a DC, why you wouldn't stack the box and risk BYU beating you with the run game. byu doesn't run the ball they lose - it's pretty simple. it will be interesting watch going forward what the teams on BYU's schedule choose to do - starting with USU.

[Jeff Lebowski]

because the answer seems obvious? i guess it's just interesting to me because Wisconsin didn't do it and it cost them the game. UW did it at times but not for a fairly significant portion of the game, according to pelado. just wondering, if you're a DC, why you wouldn't stack the box and risk BYU beating you with the run game. byu doesn't run the ball they lose - it's pretty simple. it will be interesting watch going forward what the teams on BYU's schedule choose to do - starting with USU.

You were asking why they didn't abandon a method that has worked great for them. Right after the decision to stick to it worked out perfectly.

[smokymountainrain]

You were asking why they didn't abandon a method that has worked great for them. Right after the decision to stick to it worked out perfectly.

hence my explanation - the question had more to do with my interest on how the teams on the schedule going forward choose to play things.

[Pelado]

because the answer seems obvious? i guess it's just interesting to me because Wisconsin didn't do it and it cost them the game. UW did it at times but not for a fairly significant portion of the game, according to pelado. just wondering, if you're a DC, why you wouldn't stack the box and risk BYU beating you with the run game. byu doesn't run the ball they lose - it's pretty simple. it will be interesting watch going forward what the teams on BYU's schedule choose to do - starting with USU.

They did not stack the box at all.

In football, this is the saying used when the defense puts a lot of players in ‘the box’ which is the imaginary rectangle in front of the offensive line that is the width of the offensive line and about 3-5 yards deep.

Out of the 11 defensive players on the field, having more than 7 ‘in the box’ would mean the box was stacked.

http://flipthefield.com/stack-the-box-football/

I counted wider than just the offensive line - including any offensive player with their hand on the turf (and BYU ran a lot of multiple tight end sets). If I had limited it to between the tackles, then they never had more than 6 in the box. Which is the exact opposite of stacking the box. On most common alignments (3-4 and 4-3), there are 7 in the box. Washington ran a base 4-2, with only 6 in the box.

"Stacking the box" means at least 8 defenders in the box. The only instance of "8" I counted was on the goal line and included at least 2 defenders over non-lineman who were all lined up with the offensive line. It would have been difficult for Washington to have much different alignment on that play since the endzone is only 10 yards deep.

They were practically begging Grimes to run the ball. He did, and they stopped it anyway.

[smokymountainrain]

They did not stack the box at all.





http://flipthefield.com/stack-the-box-football/

I counted wider than just the offensive line - including any offensive player with their hand on the turf (and BYU ran a lot of multiple tight end sets). If I had limited it to between the tackles, then they never had more than 6 in the box. Which is the exact opposite of stacking the box. On most common alignments (3-4 and 4-3), there are 7 in the box. Washington ran a base 4-2, with only 6 in the box.

"Stacking the box" means at least 8 defenders in the box. The only instance of "8" I counted was on the goal line and included at least 2 defenders over non-lineman who were all lined up with the offensive line. It would have been difficult for Washington to have much different alignment on that play since the endzone is only 10 yards deep.

They were practically begging Grimes to run the ball. He did, and they stopped it anyway.

lol. i can see that it's very important to you that you win this point. so i concede. congrats!

[Pelado]

lol. i can see that it's very important to you that you win this point. so i concede. congrats!

I didn't subject myself to a second viewing of that game for nothing.

[Donuthole]

lol. i can see that it's very important to you that you win this point. so i concede. congrats!

Lol.

"Washington beat BYU because they stacked the box a lot."
"Well, Washington beat BYU because they stacked the box enough to win."
"Well, Washington is stupid for not stacking the box. If they would've stacked the box, they would have really beaten BYU soundly."
"It's not really important to me whether or not Washington stacked the box, but I can see that it must be to you."

That was some fine backpedaling, my friend.

[smokymountainrain]

Lol.

"Washington beat BYU because they stacked the box a lot."
"Well, Washington beat BYU because they stacked the box enough to win."
"Well, Washington is stupid for not stacking the box. If they would've stacked the box, they would have really beaten BYU soundly."
"It's not really important to me whether or not Washington stacked the box, but I can see that it must be to you."

That was some fine backpedaling, my friend.

Fine summary!

[smokymountainrain]

I didn't subject myself to a second viewing of that game for nothing.