3-and-outs

[Raising Heel]

Some interesting stuff today from David Hale's Twitter account (@DavidHaleESPN):

UNC defense actually had a higher rate of 3-and-outs vs. P5 foes (21.3%) than 6 other ACC teams. FSU - 14.1%, GT - 15.1%.

 

[WoadBlue]

So our D last year either got a 3 and punt or gave up points.

 

[HeelFan58]

maybe more a result of so many possessions.

 

[JimmyinVA]

maybe more a result of so many possessions.

or maybe our defense doesn't deserve all the blame for a bad season.

 

[heelmanwilm]

I think they confused 3 and td with 3 and out

 

[Raising Heel]

So our D last year either got a 3 and punt or gave up points.

Pretty much. In a later exchange with me, Hale described it as "don't bend, but often break" defense.

If anything, it seems to indicate that we had the capacity for being better than we were. That thought seems to be reinforced by comments from Charlton Warren and recruiting rankings. Guys like Brian Walker, Desmond Lawrence, and MJ Stewart were all borderline 4-star recruits with excellent offer lists.

I know better than to get hyped in the offseason, but for better or worse (please, not worse) I want to see the impact of the new defensive coaches on the field. Simply keeping plays in front of us and tackling better would fix 75% of our problems IMO.

 

[heelmanwilm]

Pretty much. In a later exchange with me, Hale described it as "don't bend, but often break" defense.

If anything, it seems to indicate that we had the capacity for being better than we were. That thought seems to be reinforced by comments from Charlton Warren and recruiting rankings. Guys like Brian Walker, Desmond Lawrence, and MJ Stewart were all borderline 4-star recruits with excellent offer lists.

I know better than to get hyped in the offseason, but for better or worse (please, not worse) I want to see the impact of the new defensive coaches on the field. Simply keeping plays in front of us and tackling better would fix 75% of our problems IMO.

EXACTLY! When i started just watching the def trying to figure out wtf they were so bad i was blown awayby how confused they seemed and how slowly they reacted. That to me is coaching. But we'll see i guess.

 

[WoadBlue]

Pretty much. In a later exchange with me, Hale described it as "don't bend, but often break" defense.

If anything, it seems to indicate that we had the capacity for being better than we were. That thought seems to be reinforced by comments from Charlton Warren and recruiting rankings. Guys like Brian Walker, Desmond Lawrence, and MJ Stewart were all borderline 4-star recruits with excellent offer lists.

I know better than to get hyped in the offseason, but for better or worse (please, not worse) I want to see the impact of the new defensive coaches on the field. Simply keeping plays in front of us and tackling better would fix 75% of our problems IMO.

My case all along was that our D should not have been close to that bad. I expect the new staff to get the job done, but it probably won;t show fully until 2016.

 

[JP4UNC]

Curious to see where are offense ranked in 3 and outs last season. Can not imagine it was all that great.

 

[Raising Heel]

Curious to see where are offense ranked in 3 and outs last season. Can not imagine it was all that great.

I imagine half of them happened in the NC State game.

*** projectile vomits all over his computer screen ***

 

[UNC71-00]

I imagine half of them happened in the NC State game.

*** projectile vomits all over his computer screen ***

Thanks for that fun stroll down memory lane. Perhaps you wish to highlight the ECU game as well?

 

[Raising Heel]

Thanks for that fun stroll down memory lane. Perhaps you wish to highlight the ECU game as well?

Hey, our offense scored 41 points in that game.

 

[94tarheel]

I don't believe anyone bought into the new scheme. Furthermore, the Ram and Bandit positions were not manned with individuals who had the correct ability to hold that position down. Sure, the individuals could run stop or drop back into coverage, but there was no one who had a combination of both skill sets necessary for the position. Basically, the D coaches never really adapted their scheme to the personnel they had. With everything that was going on, the scheme should have been scraped and the D should have remained a 4-3 until the right players were recruited for the scheme they wanted to implement.

Additionally, the O didn't help either. If your tea's depth is lacking, why continue to play a hundred miles per hour on O. There were plenty of games where the D was just gassed in the 4th quarter because of lack of O production and the O playing at break neck speeds. There should have been some sort of adjustment.

 

[JimmyinVA]

...the O didn't help either. If your tea's depth is lacking, why continue to play a hundred miles per hour on O. There were plenty of games where the D was just gassed in the 4th quarter because of lack of O production and the O playing at break neck speeds. There should have been some sort of adjustment.

i agree. the way i see it if your defense lacks talent or depth you want to keep them off the field with time consuming drives. some posters have argued that time of possession is unimportant and as long as you score it doesn't matter how much clock you use. i guess that's true for teams that have plenty of depth or so much talent on defense they create their own 3 and outs. otherwise you've got tired legs on defense in crunch time and you're going to lose some high scoring games. some posters blame the offensive line for our lack of a running game, but on the rare occasion our running backs got the ball they did fine.

 

[Raising Heel]

some posters blame the offensive line for our lack of a running game, but on the rare occasion our running backs got the ball they did fine.

Every returning running back -- Logan, Morris, and Francis -- saw his yards per carry decline from the previous year. So did Marquise. It's not like every one of those guys forgot how to run the ball. The offensive line was the biggest reason for our anemic ground game.

 

[Tru Blu Tar Heel]

So our D last year either got a 3 and punt or gave up points.

Pretty much the way I read it. Either the opponent's offense immediately stalled or they crammed it down our throats.

 

[JimmyinVA]

Every returning running back -- Logan, Morris, and Francis -- saw his yards per carry decline from the previous year. So did Marquise. It's not like every one of those guys forgot how to run the ball. The offensive line was the biggest reason for our anemic ground game.

morris had the same yards per carry in 2014 vs. 2013 (4.6). logan's average did decline from 5.9 to 4.6, which is still not so terrible that he should only get 105 carries in 13 games. francis only had 12 carries before he was injured and should not be included in statistical analysis. the most dramatic change in our running game from 2013 to 2014 was the number of times marquise williams carried the ball: 178 (vs. 111 in 2013). williams had more carries than our two leading backs COMBINED! the biggest reason for our anemic ground game was coaching and play calling which emphasized big plays over grinding out yardage on the ground.

 

[WoadBlue]

morris had the same yards per carry in 2014 vs. 2013 (4.6). logan's average did decline from 5.9 to 4.6, which is still not so terrible that he should only get 105 carries in 13 games. francis only had 12 carries before he was injured and should not be included in statistical analysis. the most dramatic change in our running game from 2013 to 2014 was the number of times marquise williams carried the ball: 178 (vs. 111 in 2013). williams had more carries than our two leading backs COMBINED! the biggest reason for our anemic ground game was coaching and play calling which emphasized big plays over grinding out yardage on the ground.

Williams carried the ball far too many times. Part of that was as you say: play calling. Part was that he looked to run on any pass play in which his #1 target was not open.

Marquise Williams' natural instincts are to run the ball. Unless his main target is wide open, his instincts tell him to start looking to run.

 

[Raising Heel]

morris had the same yards per carry in 2014 vs. 2013 (4.6). logan's average did decline from 5.9 to 4.6.

Not sure what stats you're looking at but they're not official. Morris averaged 4.3 and Logan went from 5.7 to 4.9.

2013 Official Stats
2014 Official Stats

the most dramatic change in our running game from 2013 to 2014 was the number of times marquise williams carried the ball: 178 (vs. 111 in 2013).

That's because Renner was the starter for the first 7 games in 2013. (For the record, Williams ran the ball 193 times in 2014.)

In 2013, 34% of Marquise's touches were runs and 66% of his touches were passes. In 2014, 31% of Marquise's touches were runs at 69% of his touches were passes. Relatively speaking, he ran the ball less often in 2014 than he did in 2013.

the biggest reason for our anemic ground game was coaching and play calling which emphasized big plays over grinding out yardage on the ground.

UNC ran the ball on 52.0% of its plays in 2013. UNC ran the ball on 49.4% of its plays in 2014. That's a statistically insignificant difference.

The biggest reason for our anemic ground game was poor offensive line play, which is why the coaches often had to abandon the traditional running game.

 

[Raising Heel]

Williams carried the ball far too many times. Part of that was as you say: play calling. Part was that he looked to run on any pass play in which his #1 target was not open.

Marquise Williams' natural instincts are to run the ball. Unless his main target is wide open, his instincts tell him to start looking to run.

This is simply untrue. The overwhelming majority of Williams' carries were on called plays -- either the read-option or designed QB runs. You should come to my house, have a beer, and re-watch game tape with me sometime.