"Struggled to even slow down the best passing efforts."?

by beattherush , Chicago, Friday, January 24, 2025, 07:50 (14 days ago) @ HumanRobot

Which brings up a good question.

It's true that we struggled mightily against OSU this week. I am not sure whether that's
a) we monkeyed around with the base scheme too much and we played slow as a result - more zone, different LB fits
b) we played a good scheme with the wrong players due to injury
c) the scheme is Kellyesque in that it can defend middling teams very well but is flawed against elite teams

I'm sort of inclined to think a) and b), but I can't discount c). So which is it?

Then another question: how much of this defense is Golden's, and how much Freeman's?

My impression is that it's a bit of a mix. Freeman made it clear when Golden was hired that he was not looking for a wholesale rebuild of the defense and expected us to not confuse our players with major changes to structure/nomenclature. I don't think Freeman is the kind of coach to give in on that without a lot of pushback. So I expect Golden added to the playbook but didn't rip it up.

This, by the way, is similar to how Saban ran Alabama. Rees was not authorized to come in and revamp the offense, but he was able to adapt and install along the way.

Which brings us to the final question: who to hire, and why?

If it's really ND's defense / Freeman's defense at ND, then promoting Mickens makes a lot of sense vs. bringing in a top tier guy who is going to have a strong opinion about how the defense is built and might be a clash. But if the defense is not structurally sound - and performance against top passing teams is a bit of a flag - then we might need that strong opinion.

A's hire A's, B's hire C's. And strong leaders make personnel decisions assuming no one is irreplaceable. So maybe we go get a top defensive guy and let the chips fall where they may.