Patrick Toney Defensive Personnel Stats

[Sec14Gator]

Saw this, and taking wild assumption the stats are correct from this Twitter guy, this basic personnel of 6 man front with 5 DBs is fairly similar to Grantham in personnel.



What is not is the pressure level Grantham brought (high volume of more than 4), there is nothing about the coverage scheme behind the front 6, and it doesn’t address Toney’s player type preferences for those 6 non-DB spots, such as whether he is playing 280 lb sophomore DE’s (Carter at the time) at DT over starting NFL DTs such as Slayton.

@ltraz - have you done any comparisons to other coaches or initial assessments. Curious your take I have not watched any of his defense yet despite hearing great things about him being a future star.

 

[gatorfan81]

There is a big difference between running a same defensive scheme and coaching a defensive scheme. We know Grantham ran a complex blitz oriented package so complex that our players game after game did not even know how to switch out, so we know he did not coach them. Now the question. Is Toney?

 

[Sec14Gator]

There is a big difference between running a same defensive scheme and coaching a defensive scheme.

I think it’s important to note this doesn’t represent the same scheme at all. Just the same base personnel/player group #’s on the field.

As noted, I have not watched enough Toney coaches ULL defense to compare the scheme similarities or differences. The lack of blitz packages shows some obvious scheme difference. I have also read Toney utilizes much less man coverage schemes.

 

[gatorfan81]

Same scheme or not the point I was making will Toney have the defense prepared? Because the last guy did not coach them up for ****.

 

[cover2]

The lack of blitz packages shows some obvious scheme difference.

Without having watched more than just a smattering of ULL’s D, my first idea would be that they are confident of the cover skills/techniques of the secondary and I would further guess that this probably has to do with coachability (the makeup of the athletes recruited), sense of group pride (do your job every time and don’t let your mates down), and acute familiarity with the scheme, calls, and adjustments. If this is so, it speaks a lot toward the demands and accountability required.

I always got the feeling that Grantham was proud of his scheme with a lot of looks and adjustments as well as a complimentary blitz package that used a lot of corner and secondary involvement. Unfortunately, I don’t think the success frequency was what was needed. It also seemed that this was maybe easier than demanding superior and consistent technique. Of course, having smallish DE/OLB types might have necessitated more blitz schemes than was prudent. As front six recruitment improves, so will what we can do in the back end. I’m long past ready to see us play with solid and consistent techniques, recognition, communication, and alignment skills. Two years ago we had an offense that could have won an NC, but the defense was subpar in that regard.

 

[CGgater]

Without having watched more than just a smattering of ULL’s D, my first idea would be that they are confident of the cover skills/techniques of the secondary and I would further guess that this probably has to do with coachability (the makeup of the athletes recruited), sense of group pride (do your job every time and don’t let your mates down), and acute familiarity with the scheme, calls, and adjustments. If this is so, it speaks a lot toward the demands and accountability required.

I always got the feeling that Grantham was proud of his scheme with a lot of looks and adjustments as well as a complimentary blitz package that used a lot of corner and secondary involvement. Unfortunately, I don’t think the success frequency was what was needed. It also seemed that this was maybe easier than demanding superior and consistent technique. Of course, having smallish DE/OLB types might have necessitated more blitz schemes than was prudent. As front six recruitment improves, so will what we can do in the back end. I’m long past ready to see us play with solid and consistent techniques, recognition, communication, and alignment skills. Two years ago we had an offense that could have won an NC, but the defense was subpar in that regard.

Subpar? That’s like saying a train wreck is just a minor mess.

 

[Gator By Marriage]

Subpar? That’s like saying a train wreck is just a minor mess.

I guess it would depend on the size of the train.

 

[Theologator]

Here’s a good article on Toney’s basic approach:

The power of safe pressures, and what Patrick Toney brings as Florida’s defensive coordinator

In any case, defenses want to minimize mismatches by having guys who can rush, defend the run or cover from the “star” or “buck” positions, disguise who is that 4th or 5th rusher and set the edge. A guy like Chauncey makes a huge difference.

Grantham’s scheme left holes he hoped to disguise long enough to get the QB, getting big plays at times but too often giving them up. It works better when he has guys like Zuniga and Greenard minimizing the exposure of the holes behind them.

It’s horrible when guys repeatedly take bad angles, miss assignments, can’t get lined up, won’t tackle and all the other elements that devolve from poor coaching. And when they can’t physically do what you’re asking because you’re an obnoxious jerk on the recruiting trail that turned off the guys who could.

Let’s hope and expect the coaching and positional discipline issues are improving right now. It looks like we will have bigger DEs to go with legit DT/NGs. Help is coming at S.

Toney’s scheme takes fewer risks, but we do have some real talent on the DL which can makes plays (Dexter).

The questions will include who can be that effective LB/S hybrid and the 4th rusher.

 

[Theologator]

[mention]ltraz [/mention] Am I correct in seeing that 3/4, 4/3, 3/3/5 fluidity as essentially a response to the single back, 3-4 wide sets and lateral passing game? Trying meet the mismatches?

 

[Sec14Gator]

[mention]ltraz [/mention] Am I correct in seeing that 3/4, 4/3, 3/3/5 fluidity as essentially a response to the single back, 3-4 wide sets and lateral passing game? Trying meet the mismatches?

I know this was directed at Traz, but 4/3 & 3/4 are pretty traditional bases, especially against 2 TE personnel. Where we see teams now really matching the 11 personnel (1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR base offense) is the 4/2 or 3/3 with a star/big nickel added to the field for 5 DBs.

Some of the tempo offense concept is meant to catch teams on the field if the offense prefers the personnel matchup and want to prevent the defense from substituting.