BREAKING: USC Defensive Coordinator Alex Grinch Fired

[David Marsh]

On 11/7/2023 at 1:35 PM, Hill Billie said:

Lincoln Riley has a very narrow resume working with almost exclusively Air Raid coaches.  The Mike Leach well has run dry, and Lincoln is going to have to hire someone he really doesn't know.  Whoever that is must be an amazing recruiter, an amazing defensive coordinator, and someone who is willing to work for Lincoln.  Sounds like mission impossible.

 

That is a big ask... In large part because he will probably have to inspect how his offense functions. 

 

You look at Oregon and how both sides are in sync with each other and work to help the other one out. The defense is disruptive and works to get the ball back relatively quickly.

 

And just as importantly the offense is efficient but also eats up some clock to let the defense rest. 

 

The Oregon teams of the blue era with Kelly and Helfrich both required better conditioned athletes and actually more players on the defensive side of the roster to compensate for the defense being on the field longer. 

 

Bend but don't break was the solution at the time to deal with an offense that got off the field quickly... Usually with points but not always. 

 

But those defenses were also designed to be highly opportunistic and get turnovers knowing the opposing offense would be taking some risks by playing from behind.

 

It's easy to build one side of the ball ... A lot more difficult to build both sides up to be elite. Riley is focused on the offensive side and unless he starts thinking of a defense that compliments his offense he is going to be right back where he started. 

[Log Haulin]

It's said Riley doesn't care about defense. Are we sure that defenses want to play for Lincoln Riley? Maybe Rileys seeming indifference towards defense is actually the problem. Just a thought. Maybe a dumb one. But if all the praise and resources were heaped on the O from the HC, as a defensive player I might be resentful. Like I said, just a thought.

[kirklandduck]

On 11/7/2023 at 5:40 PM, Log Haulin said:

It's said Riley doesn't care about defense. Are we sure that defenses want to play for Lincoln Riley? Maybe Rileys seeming indifference towards defense is actually the problem. Just a thought. Maybe a dumb one. But if all the praise and resources were heaped on the O from the HC, as a defensive player I might be resentful. Like I said, just a thought.

Definitely not a dumb thought.  As noted by others on the forum, a head coach needs to make sure the offense and defense need to be designed to work in harmony.  Riley could give a rip about the later, which is why we're seeing the kind of defensive effort that is being put on the field by his team.

[Dr Hilarius]

One thing is for sure, if OBD win the coin toss, they need to get the ball first on offense and run a 75-yard series that ends in a TD and takes 5 mins off the clock before U$C ever breathes on the ball.

[The Kamikaze Kid]

On 11/8/2023 at 5:44 PM, Dr Hilarius said:

One thing is for sure, if OBD win the coin toss, they need to get the ball first on offense and run a 75-yard series that ends in a TD and takes 5 mins off the clock before U$C ever breathes on the ball.

The problem with that plan is giving the ball to Bucky against that Swiss cheese defense will become a score much quicker than five minutes!

[Mic]

On 11/7/2023 at 1:35 PM, Hill Billie said:

 Whoever that is must be an amazing recruiter, an amazing defensive coordinator, and someone who is willing to work for Lincoln.  Sounds like mission impossible.

 

Steven has just the candidate selected: Brady Hoke.  I think it's a marvelous choice. And I'm sure Riley probably doesn't know him!  

[Dr Hilarius]

On 11/8/2023 at 5:51 PM, The Kamikaze Kid said:

giving the ball to Bucky against that Swiss cheese defense will become a score much quicker than five minutes

So true—Stein really has his work cut out for him. 

[ElPatoUO]

On 11/8/2023 at 5:44 PM, Dr Hilarius said:

One thing is for sure, if OBD win the coin toss, they need to get the ball first on offense and run a 75-yard series that ends in a TD and takes 5 mins off the clock before U$C ever breathes on the ball.

Why do you want to shorten this game?  Unless you think the Ducks simply aren't as good, or aren't as deep (which seems to be the complete opposite of what most think), then you should want as many possessions as possible. The more possessions there are, the more likely the truly better team will win.  In a low possession game, a few (fluke?) plays have an even more dramatic impact on the outcome.

 

They key is points per possession, rather than worrying about trying to eat up clock at the start of the game.  Obviously, in certain situations (getting the last score before half, salting away a 4th quarter lead, etc.), then you can be mindful of the clock.

[Jon Joseph]

On 11/9/2023 at 4:18 AM, ElPatoUO said:

Why do you want to shorten this game?  Unless you think the Ducks simply aren't as good, or aren't as deep (which seems to be the complete opposite of what most think), then you should want as many possessions as possible. The more possessions there are, the more likely the truly better team will win.  In a low possession game, a few (fluke?) plays have an even more dramatic impact on the outcome.

 

They key is points per possession, rather than worrying about trying to eat up clock at the start of the game.  Obviously, in certain situations (getting the last score before half, salting away a 4th quarter lead, etc.), then you can be mindful of the clock.

Great take.

 

But if there is a chance to shorten the game vs. the defending Heisman Trophy winner who put up 42 points vs. UW when OREGON put up 33, IMO it makes sense to keep Caleb off the field and looking for his Mom post-game.

[Jon Sousa]

On 11/9/2023 at 1:18 AM, ElPatoUO said:

Why do you want to shorten this game?  Unless you think the Ducks simply aren't as good, or aren't as deep (which seems to be the complete opposite of what most think), then you should want as many possessions as possible. The more possessions there are, the more likely the truly better team will win.  In a low possession game, a few (fluke?) plays have an even more dramatic impact on the outcome.

 

They key is points per possession, rather than worrying about trying to eat up clock at the start of the game.  Obviously, in certain situations (getting the last score before half, salting away a 4th quarter lead, etc.), then you can be mindful of the clock.

I have been thinking this very same thing. We want more possessions, not fewer.

 

Why???

 

Everyone believes that both teams have a great offense and can score points. The difference is, which team has the better defense and can more probably get more stops???

 

Everyone knows that Oregon has the better defense. But having the better defense does not mean that they will get a 3-and-out on every drive. It just means that they have a better chance of getting a stop on any one particular drive.

 

For example, if you toss a coin 1000 times, the split between heads and tails will be close to the probability of getting tails 50% of the time. But... there is a chance that if you toss the coin only 3 times it will come up heads all three times. In fact, if you toss the coin 1000 times there will no doubt be several times that at least 3 heads in a row will be tossed.

 

Let's say that the Ducks and the Trojans have a 66% to 33% chance of getting a stop, respectively. If everyone plays slow to limit the other team's offensive possessions, and each team only gets 3 possessions per half, the score could easily be USC 14 - UO 7... because anyone can toss 3 heads in a row.

 

The fewer possessions, the tighter the game. The more possessions, the greater the probability that Oregon gets pulls away from USC, assuming a 66% - 33% probability of getting a stop.

 

Look no further than the Stanford game. Stanford happened to get a couple of stops in a row at the beginning of the game. Meanwhile, Oregon was only able to hold the Tree to 3 points each on their first couple of possessions... and the games was a LOT CLOSER than it should have been half way through the second quarter.

 

The more possessions this Saturday, the wider the margin of victory for the Ducks. Assuming both teams play at their normal pace, Expect Ducks to win 56 - 24.

 

If both teams play slow to limit the other team's possessions. The Ducks might win by only a touchdown... but they could even lose, because anyone can throw 3 tails in a row.

 

 

 

 

[Solar]

One thing I caught on USC article comments was that there is a strong perception that Grinch was playing his guys rather than the best guys.

 

If that was truly the case then we might see some improvement in their D just by having better players in the game for often. I'm a little skeptical about that being a significant issue, but we'll see.

[Mic]

On 11/10/2023 at 6:22 AM, Solar said:

One thing I caught on USC article comments was that there is a strong perception that Grinch was playing his guys rather than the best guys.

 

If that was truly the case then we might see some improvement in their D just by having better players in the game for often. I'm a little skeptical about that being a significant issue, but we'll see.

But that would mean the commentators differed on who they think are the "best" players vice the D.C. actually on the field coaching.  I don't know about this being the case.  But, like you say, I guess we'll see.  

 

I do not see this game as an easy one for the Ducks to win.  In fact I can see this being a game they could lose if they don't play their best game yet.

Edited November 10, 2023 by Mic