Caponi not the problem

[emmitt01]

3 hours ago, Green with Envy said:

You might be proving my point.   It’s not your job to teach them civics.  It’s your job to enforce their correct knowledge of civics.  If they do not have that knowledge, you punish them, in some regard.  
 

If our coaching staff punished everyone that couldn’t tackle, we’d be out of players.  They have no choice but to deal with what they have and spend time on schemes, positioning and reads.  If they can’t tackle, “we’ll do the best we can.”    The coaches and this team are getting by with what they have and finding a way to make it work best they can, which is why we relish a 7-win season and a bowl loss, year after year.  

The part you are conveniently leaving out is if they don’t know civil rights or the penal code, I call a press conference to give my resignation speech.

There is no option of “hey, they’re doing the best they can.”  It is, and always should be, “I am the head of this team, EVERYTHING that happens under my watch is my responsibility.”  

Edited October 13 by emmitt01

[Rudy]

19 hours ago, Green with Envy said:

You might be proving my point.   It’s not your job to teach them civics.  It’s your job to enforce their correct knowledge of civics.  If they do not have that knowledge, you punish them, in some regard.  
 

If our coaching staff punished everyone that couldn’t tackle, we’d be out of players.  They have no choice but to deal with what they have and spend time on schemes, positioning and reads.  If they can’t tackle, “we’ll do the best we can.”    The coaches and this team are getting by with what they have and finding a way to make it work best they can, which is why we relish a 7-win season and a bowl loss, year after year.  

He's not proving your point in any way.  If they don't know how to play the game, then you do not recruit them.  

[DentonLurker]

In all reality, it’s on both coaches and players. Coaches can run bad schemes, fail to recruit the right players, or fail to develop players… that’s on the coaches.

BUT players can also be in good position to make a play, be taught well, and fail to execute.

It’s on both.

[SilverEagle]

I remember a news program several years ago (it may have been a 60 minutes segment) about the mother of a former USC linebacker who was suing USC because her son finished his eligibility at USC (and unsuccessfully tried out for the NFL) and couldn't read.  She said that it was USC's job to teach her son to read, and as of the time of the news story, he could not.

I couldn't believe what I was seeing/hearing. First of all, the NCAA should have brought a lawsuit against USC for fraud. But that's about it. The person(s) that should be first in line to be held responsible for his lack of reading ability was the one bringing the lawsuit against USC in the first place. After that one could (somewhat) reasonably say that the next people in line would be the elementary school teachers, his middle school teachers and then his High School teachers......including his HS coach.

NOW, I have to assume that our coaching staff makes decisions about making offers to players based on the recommendation of their HS coaches (who should have taught them their particular skills, or directed their staff to do so) and viewing the players in action on "highlight" videos. If "videos" were their most common assessment tool, I have to wonder what the hell they were looking at before making an offer.

[Venson]

4 minutes ago, SilverEagle said:

I remember a news program several years ago (it may have been a 60 minutes segment) about the mother of a former USC linebacker who was suing USC because her son finished his eligibility at USC (and unsuccessfully tried out for the NFL) and couldn't read.  She said that it was USC's job to teach her son to read, and as of the time of the news story, he could not.

I couldn't believe what I was seeing/hearing. First of all, the NCAA should have brought a lawsuit against USC for fraud. But that's about it. The person(s) that should be first in line to be held responsible for his lack of reading ability was the one bringing the lawsuit against USC in the first place. After that one could (somewhat) reasonably say that the next people in line would be the elementary school teachers, his middle school teachers and then his High School teachers......including his HS coach.

NOW, I have to assume that our coaching staff makes decisions about making offers to players based on the recommendation of their HS coaches (who should have taught them their particular skills, or directed their staff to do so) and viewing the players in action on "highlight" videos. If "videos" were their most common assessment tool, I have to wonder what the hell they were looking at before making an offer.

Great information, but I am trying to understand the relevance to the topic. Are you saying it is not Caponi's job to teach them something they should have learned a long time ago? If so, what is that something they should have learned before arriving at UNT?

[SilverEagle]

1 hour ago, Venson said:

Great information, but I am trying to understand the relevance to the topic. Are you saying it is not Caponi's job to teach them something they should have learned a long time ago? If so, what is that something they should have learned before arriving at UNT?

 The USC player than couldn't read, should have had his deficits addressed LONG before he arrived there. And like his situation (which was academic) anyone seeking to play defense in college should have had the basics (like tackling) down LONG before even playing HS football. SO, how is it that our paid professionals missed something this basic?

[MeanGreenTexan]

On 10/12/2024 at 7:26 PM, StealthEagle84 said:

Too often our guys are in the right position to make a play and they simply don't. For me, our defensive woes are more on the players and not the coaches. We just don't have good players on the field on defense. Plain and simple. 

Sounds to me like these guys just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and put some extra time in after practice & watch some Youtube videos on how to tackle better.

[meaniegreenie]

2 hours ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Sounds to me like these guys just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and put some extra time in after practice & watch some Youtube videos on how to tackle better.

Like this??

 

[Monkeypox]

Yeah, I mean Caponi is not THE problem, but he is A problem.

A lot of issues for schools like ours is guys come in married to their scheme. You get these guys who succeeded at schools that either ran it forever or have the advantage of being able to get a higher level of recruit to it. And they don't KNOW anything else. 

We simply aren't at a talent level where you can afford to put anything other than your best 11 on the field. Coaches have to be versatile and scheme for the talent we have. Absolutely recruit for what you want to run, but you can't just get in here and do it right away. Versatility is key.

[Venson]

7 hours ago, SilverEagle said:

 The USC player than couldn't read, should have had his deficits addressed LONG before he arrived there. And like his situation (which was academic) anyone seeking to play defense in college should have had the basics (like tackling) down LONG before even playing HS football. SO, how is it that our paid professionals missed something this basic?

That's what I thought you were trying to say, but I wanted to be sure.

[NT80]

1 hour ago, Monkeypox said:

Yeah, I mean Caponi is not THE problem, but he is A problem.

A lot of issues for schools like ours is guys come in married to their scheme. You get these guys who succeeded at schools that either ran it forever or have the advantage of being able to get a higher level of recruit to it. And they don't KNOW anything else. 

We simply aren't at a talent level where you can afford to put anything other than your best 11 on the field. Coaches have to be versatile and scheme for the talent we have. Absolutely recruit for what you want to run, but you can't just get in here and do it right away. Versatility is key.

Which is exactly why Caponi is the problem.  He can’t/won’t adjust his scheme.  But Morris is forcing him to play the best 11 guys in hopes “that” is somewhat of an adjustment.  
 

We should have lost the FAU game totally because of the poor defense.  Only a miracle save by the offense prevented it.  Like many of our games this season.  I expect Caponi and his scheme gone at the end of the season, and Morris to bring in someone better as DC. 

[NT93]

4 minutes ago, NT80 said:

We should have lost the FAU game totally because of the poor defense.  Only a miracle save by the offense prevented it.  Like many of our games this season.

Huh?

[NT80]

27 minutes ago, NT93 said:

Huh?

Our offense has had to outscore our defense in every game this season.

• The Mean Green's 13-play scoring drive to open the game was the third-longest scoring drive of the season, and it was the first time UNT has scored first since the season opener at South Alabama.

Scoring offense is #13 in FBS = 40.8 points scored per game.

Scoring defense is #116 in FBS = 33 points allowed per game

 

https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/27

https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/28/p3

[NT80]

5 minutes ago, greenminer said:

If we're going to pick miracles, I pick the 2Q.  20 points by FAU.  Otherwise, pretty solid game by our defense.

Take away those two miracles, our final 14 and everything in the 2Q, and you get a solid 24-17 Mean Green win.

Our defense played better in the second half and I'd like to know what adjustments we are making at halftime.  Why can't we adjust in-game during the first half?

Still, overall our defense gave up 519 total yards and 37 points to a team only averaging 22 points this entire season (that includes a blowout over an FCS).   NT only gained 484 yards total.   

FAU's QB had more yards passing and better completion percentage than Chandler for the whole game.  

This all means our defense is overall still a liability.  A better quality opponent (like the 3 coming up) will not be as easy to make midway adjusts to overcome a large deficit (think TTech).

[NT93]

39 minutes ago, NT80 said:

Our offense has had to outscore our defense in every game this season.

That’s simply not true.  You may need to re-watch the Wyoming and Tulsa games.  Some will say it’s because those two teams have terrible offenses, but our defense was actually pretty good in those games.  
 

So that leaves USA and Tech.  I think it’s a bit of stretch, but I’ll give you that the offense had to outscore USA. Now Tech…that was a total team effort…though I feel like the 3 interceptions contributed to the game going downhill so fast.

So, not sure how you can say “Like many of our games this season.”

Edited October 15 by NT93

[NT80]

22 minutes ago, NT93 said:

That’s simply not true.  You may need to re-watch the Wyoming and Tulsa games.  Some will say it’s because those two teams have terrible offenses, but our defense was actually pretty good in those games.  
 

So that leaves USA and Tech.  I think it’s a bit of stretch, but I’ll give you that the offense had to outscore USA. Now Tech…that was a total team effort…though I feel like the 3 interceptions contributed to the game going downhill so fast.

So, not sure how you can say “Like many of our games this season.”

SFA, Wyoming, Tulsa, Tech all scored first.   Defense puts is in hole from the beginning.  Couldn't come back vs Tech and almost didn't vs FAU.   Only 8-point lead into 4th quarter vs FCS SFA.  Only 10-point lead into 4th vs 2-4 USA.  I don't know what else you need to see the defense has been a liability.  If it was even average (not #116) we might be getting ranking consideration.

[NT93]

22 minutes ago, NT80 said:

SFA, Wyoming, Tulsa, Tech all scored first.   Defense puts is in hole from the beginning.  Couldn't come back vs Tech and almost didn't vs FAU.   Only 8-point lead into 4th quarter vs FCS SFA.  Only 10-point lead into 4th vs 2-4 USA.  I don't know what else you need to see the defense has been a liability.  If it was even average (not #116) we might be getting ranking consideration.

I forgot all about SFA, but thanks for reminding me since the defense only gave up 13 points that game.  

Defense gave up 10 points to Wyoming.

Defense kept us in the Tulsa game until the offense woke up midway through the 2nd quarter.  14 of Tulsa’s 20 points (and arguably 17 of the 20) came in mop up duty.

So the defense has games where they’ve given up 13, 10, and 6 for all practical purposes and you’re saying the offense had to save those games?

As I said, I’ll give you USA and FAU.  Not giving you Tech because it was a meltdown all the way around.  I could make a good argument that the offense was worse than the defense in Lubbock.

 

[golfingomez]

1 hour ago, NT80 said:

Our defense played better in the second half and I'd like to know what adjustments we are making at halftime.  Why can't we adjust in-game during the first half?

Still, overall our defense gave up 519 total yards and 37 points to a team only averaging 22 points this entire season (that includes a blowout over an FCS).   NT only gained 484 yards total.   

FAU's QB had more yards passing and better completion percentage than Chandler for the whole game.  

This all means our defense is overall still a liability.  A better quality opponent (like the 3 coming up) will not be as easy to make midway adjusts to overcome a large deficit (think TTech).

what if we adjusted to what the offense was doing BEFORE the game? 

Then we wouldn't have to adjust at all

 

[El Paso Eagle]

There is one thing I wonder: in the two years he's been here, how much time and effort has Morris and the majority of the support style spent focusing on recruiting offensive players versus defensive players? It definitely seems like in the first year, minimal effort was put into putting defensive players into the system. Keep in mind support staff also makes a significant effort in finding players, and it's hard to understand why you can watch FCS games and see some very, very good defensive players that have transferred from power schools to multiple programs in the Lone Star and UAC.

 

[Cooke County Kid]

We beat an okay fau team in a deluge at their home.  We won and it was ugly.  This team has grown and hopefully will continue to.  That said, it is a time to continue winning, how would a six game win streak sound?  National television while we are doing it, even better.  We will be on national television anyway, so we better win, obviously the more the better.  Go Mean Green!!!

[817Fan]

Last in the nation in Red Zone Defense. -Not that good in between the 20's either. That's all on Caponi.

[NT80]

24 minutes ago, 817Fan said:

Last in the nation in Red Zone Defense. -Not that good in between the 20's either. That's all on Caponi.

Yes.  According to Memphis fan forum stats we have not stopped any Red Zone score this season!   

[Jonnyeagle]

21 minutes ago, NT80 said:

Yes.  According to Memphis fan forum stats we have not stopped any Red Zone score this season!   

You have a link to that?

[NT80]

6 minutes ago, Jonnyeagle said:

You have a link to that?

https://csnbbs.com/thread-999103.html

As loaded as NTSU is on offense, they are just as lacking on defense.

Giving up 432.3 yards and 33 points per game.

NTSU is -0.33 in turnover margin with 7 ints, but only 1 fumbles lost.

NTSU allows 279.8 yards passing and 152.5 yards rushing per game.

NTSU hasn't stopped anyone a single time in the red zone.

Edited October 15 by NT80

[greenminer]

2 hours ago, 817Fan said:

Last in the nation in Red Zone Defense. -Not that good in between the 20's either. That's all on Caponi.

We are tied with 7 other teams for allowing teams to score 100% of the time in the RZ.
 

t's interesting to dive,  though.  Of those 7 teams, we are far and away the best at holding teams to FGs.

This is not a Caponi defense: I am not okay in any way or form being last in the nation in a defensive category.