Ron Mendoza's Defense

Will to Win · September 13, 2007

I have heard several sports media say that OU's staff made fun of Menodza's defensive scheme. In two games that I have seen, I can't tell what is causing us to give up so many yards on defense? We have decent veteran players on the defensive side of the ball so what is the cause because I can't tell?

the real grad88 · September 13, 2007

The one thing you can say about Dickey is that he knew how to run a defense AND he was successful in recruiting defensive players. Dickey built his whole game plan around defense. It's the only way the pound away / down-your-throat, run offense works. Maybe we should have kept Dickey's defensive coordinator? I have never seen a UNT defense get shredded like this, going all the way back to our IAA days and playing the big programs with much fewer scholarships. If the defensive woes do not stop, I say that RV needs to get heavy handed in this area to force a change.

Edited September 13, 2007 by the real grad88

VideoEagle · September 13, 2007

We are TWO games into a brand new system. Relax. Beath. Those same OU coaches probably don’t think much of the system used by Miami either.

Stan R · September 13, 2007

Have to say that I agree with 88. But lets wait for a couple more games to confirm that.

eppy4life · September 13, 2007

Guys, lets calm down a second. First, OU's offense is just that good. Second, The great Justin "I have about two good throws in me a game" Willis is all-american talent. I'm surprised how little they scored against us.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · September 13, 2007

We play in the Sun Belt Conference. OU and Arkansas were bound to pound us. SMU? They're very bad...very bad...and they moved the ball on us when they needed to both through the air and on the ground. After the OU game, I also said, "give it time/withhold judgement"...however, the SMU game was stunning.

I suspect our offense, like our defense, has yet to show what it will really be like. Both OU and SMU shut down the run game. OU shut down the pass until the it was playing walk-ons in the fourth quarter. SMU has the worst pass defense in the country.

I wouldn't expect another OU-type blowout, except for the game against Arkansas, and I also wouldn't expect another 600 yard passing game since we won't see the confused likes of SMU again.

Sadly, after two games it appears the there are only two things we know for certain - we're passing more and we have a good punter. Other than that, you kind of wonder now (and for some, again), why Dodge didn't hire more assistants with college coaching experience.

The Belt appears to be stronger than before, and that won't be good for us if our defense keeps stinking up the joint and our run game produces only 13.5 yards per game. Many more games like OU and SMU and maybe the question will be, "Can Dodge do anything except coach QBs at the top collegiate level?" Time will tell.

I think what shocks most of us is that we took for granted the returning starters on defense. Surely, a switch from the 3-4 to the 4-3 can't be that difficult. Again, this is a coaching issue. If FAU wipes us out at home, fears and doubts about the defensive coordinator will erode to simply no confidence.

Again, one month into the season, we'll be saying, "Wait and see."

Edited September 13, 2007 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

GoMeanGreen1999 · September 13, 2007

Well I have questioned whether or not Mendoza is in over his head or not, but then again, I said Dickey wouldn't last 4 years, and he was here 9 so what do I know.

Smitty · September 14, 2007

Just a thought about about UNT's defense: the style of offense UNT is using puts a lot of pressure on its own defense. The offense runs faster, scores quicker, and gets off the field quicker. Because they work with no huddle and throw so much there are more plays in the game, so the defense is on the field more. OU's coaches mentioned this fact.

I'll ignore the OU results, because they're going to light up a lot of teams. But UNT's defense did well early against SMU. It was 14-3 and a hair way from 21-3 before SMU began to move the ball. If not for the late fumble, UNT would have allowed only 10 points in the first half. So maybe fatigue played a role in the second half.

It may be that UNT's defense will need a higher level of athleticism and more depth to be effective with an offense that accelerates the game.

Like I say, just a thought. But if this theory is valid, then it might be a year or two before this staff amasses the necessary athleticism and depth to be a really good defense.

StealthEagle84 · September 14, 2007

Let's admit it, Dickey won just enough to keep his head above water. Its tough to fire a coach who has won the conference 4 straight seasons. And yes, the defense was better under Dickey but that was not necasarrily a direct reflection of Dickey. Gary DeLoach was a hell of a defensive coordinator and that's why he is he is still at UCLA. I had a hard time cutting and pasting his bio, but just go the assistant coaches bios and read up on him. Once he left, the Green Curtain began to fall. I feel our defense is underperforming with how many returning starters we have (9 or 10). SMU should not be able to hang 45 (although 7 came via the defense). Case in point, Coach Mendoza needs to show some major improvement throughout the year. If not, we need to bring in another DC with some good credentials. At any rate, just check Coach DeLoach's profile on this link. Pretty damn impressive and it would be nice to have him back.

http://uclabruins.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl...mediaguide.html

Travis · September 14, 2007

The one thing you can say about Dickey is that he knew how to run a defense AND he was successful in recruiting defensive players. Dickey built his whole game plan around defense. It's the only way the pound away / down-your-throat, run offense works. Maybe we should have kept Dickey's defensive coordinator? I have never seen a UNT defense get shredded like this, going all the way back to our IAA days and playing the big programs with much fewer scholarships. If the defensive woes do not stop, I say that RV needs to get heavy handed in this area to force a change.

I don't think Dickey knew defense.

Outside of the years of Brandon Kennedy, what other times were we good on D?

GoMeanGreen1999 · September 14, 2007

I don't think Dickey knew defense.
Outside of the years of Brandon Kennedy, what other times were we good on D?

I would say that the D was fairly good most of the seasons DD was here. He kept a good part of the Defensive coaches from the Simon staff in Bill Michaels and some others. I would credit DD for doing a good job of keeping or getting guys that could coach the defense.

PlummMeanGreen · September 14, 2007

Like a healthy financial UNT contributor from Dallas told me today: "We are talking about a defense that was part of a team that won 5 games the last 2 years so, why are some of our best fans/alums beginning to panic now?"

Just like TDodge is in his honeymoon stage, so is Mendoza, folks, so shouldn't we also give him ample time to adapt to NCAA D1-A as well? Most of us got more time in most our new jobs in the past to get the learning curve down, too, didn't we?

Yet lets raise the bar for what we all want in the future and not necessarily what we got in the SBC's (insert sublimenal veiled success?) ugly duckling formative years (although even some of that level of success kept this program from completely drowning and (at least) got our heads above water.

GMG!

Edited September 14, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen

island eagle · September 14, 2007

Like a healthy financial UNT contributor from Dallas told me today: "We are talking about a defense that was part of a team that won 5 games the last 2 years so, why are some of our best fans/alums beginning to panic now?"
Just like TDodge is in his honeymoon stage, so is Mendoza, folks, so shouldn't we also give him ample time to adapt to NCAA D1-A as well? Most of us got more time in most our new jobs in the past to get the learning curve down, too, didn't we?
Yet lets raise the bar for what we all want in the future and not necessarily what we got in the SBC's (insert sublimenal veiled success?) ugly duckling formative years (although even some of that level of success kept this program from completely drowning and (at least) got our heads above water.
GMG!

Because giving up 600 yards a game is not acceptable. You can excuse OU, but 534 yards to SMU? NO. I don't want the reverse of Dickey, decent offense, 124th in defense. I want a competent offense and defense. Face it, Mendoza had 9 starters from a fair to average defense. We ought to expect more of him.

StealthEagle84 · September 14, 2007

Look at the points we gave up last year compared to this year so far. OU is one thing but SMU is another. And this is with 10 returning starters. The only excuse I can think of is the since we throw the ball more, it lengthens the game, thus allowing the opposing team to run more plays. Only time will tell how good we will be the rest of the season.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/teamsched?te...9&year=2006

PlummMeanGreen · September 14, 2007

Because giving up 600 yards a game is not acceptable. You can excuse OU, but 534 yards to SMU? NO. I don't want the reverse of Dickey, decent offense, 124th in defense. I want a competent offense and defense. Face it, Mendoza had 9 starters from a fair to average defense. We ought to expect more of him.

But still.............2 games under our belt?

I think most of us all want Top 25 for this program, but that's likely not to happen this year or next, either. Wonder how long it took Boise State to become a fixture in the Top 25 after the Big West football part of the league disbanded and when they went their way and we, uh............ :rolleyes: went ours?

island eagle · September 14, 2007

Look at the points we gave up last year compared to this year so far. OU is one thing but SMU is another. And this is with 10 returning starters. The only excuse I can think of is the since we throw the ball more, it lengthens the game, thus allowing the opposing team to run more plays. Only time will tell how good we will be the rest of the season.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/teamsched?te...9&year=2006

I agree, but if the offense puts that kind of pressure on the defense, then defense better well be a top priority or you'll just have a bunch of high scoring losers. Not saying that is the case, but it will be if the defense doesn't jell and the last time I looked, that was Mendoza's job.

GoMeanGreen1999 · September 14, 2007

I agree, but if the offense puts that kind of pressure on the defense, then defense better well be a top priority or you'll just have a bunch of high scoring losers. Not saying that is the case, but it will be if the defense doesn't jell and the last time I looked, that was Mendoza's job.

Someone help me out, seriously, what is the main difference between last year and this year in terms of what they are running. Having so many people back from that defense is good, yet they are far from good. Yes, I realize we only won 5 games over the last two seasons, but a lot of that had to do with our lack of offense.

PlummMeanGreen · September 14, 2007

And as far as OU coaches (supposedly) laughing at "OUR" defense? Anyone think they might have had a few Boomer giggles after they slobber-knocked the Miami 'Canes last Saturday? :blink:

Folks, could it be that this OU team will (once again) win its 2'nd consecutive Big 12 football championship and be a serious contender for an NCAA Football National Championship this bowl season?

Give our new coaches some time to sort all this "Mean Green D" business out, but please give them more than 2 games to do it. :rolleyes: We all want instant success because of the times and the era we live, but it may take a season or 2 (or 3) to get all this righted in Denton. After 4 bowl years, it didn't take long for it all to fall apart, either, now did it? I believe TDodge's non-stop work ethic (known to most of us by now) is of a nature that he wants to build something that won't fall apart over-night once he gets his foundation laid solidly.

Also, have we all forgotten how low our last 3-4 (stealth) recruiting classes under DD were ranked by DC's Texas Football?

Edited September 14, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen

GMoney · September 14, 2007

I would say that the D was fairly good most of the seasons DD was here. He kept a good part of the Defensive coaches from the Simon staff in Bill Michaels and some others. I would credit DD for doing a good job of keeping or getting guys that could coach the defense.

Make no mistake about it, our defense starting going down hill the second DeLoach left our campus. It was not good in BK's last year. When AA and McGee left it began to slide and just got worse from there ending with BK last year which was a total disappointment.

FirefightnRick · September 14, 2007

In '02, With De Loach and Booger, Mean Green defense ranked 9th.

In '03, Without De Loach, but still having Booger, Mean Green defense ranked 21st.

In '04, Without De Loach and without Booger, Mean Green defense ranked 87th.

In, '05, Mean Green defense ranked 101st.

In, '06, With Bliel coming in as DC, Mean Green defense ranked 64th.

Rick

Talon90 · September 14, 2007

Wake up people......

If you have watched the first two games then it should be clear that this might be one of the worst defenses we have EVER had. We are SLOW!!! Probably the slowest I have ever seen and our secondary is awful. We just don't have that much talent on that side of the ball and I hope the next couple of recruiting classes focus on defense as it appears the offense is already being addressed.

If it wasn't for Holman covering the whole field against SMU it would have been even worse!

If you think it is going to get better once Sun Belt play begins, you are in for a shock. ASU, MTSU and Troy have a lot of SPEED and all three games could get out of hand (See MTSU game last year). Florida Atlantic is no slouch either...whom we have never beaten.

The only thing that is different from last year is our offense. The only way we have a chance to win this year is to win in a shootout.

This is going to be a LONG year....or two and then things should get better.

My dream is to have the offense starting with the 2010 season and the defense from 2001-2003 in the same year. THEN we will have arrived!!!!!

GMG!

BEAT BYE!!!!

Coach · September 14, 2007

I agree, OU made us look slow, but that should be expected to some extent. But when SMU made us look like we running in sand, that worried me. But it's probably Cover 1, our new third down draw.

September 14, 2007

Yes the defense will need to get more aggressive, but NT is starting from scratch this year. Difficult to expect to compete right away with any D1 team and coaches that have been together. Further I would expect them to start out slow and trying to keep things in front of them. SMU realized it and adjusted. OU knew it before the game. They have some great lessons from these games to work on these two weeks, and I would expect them to be taking more chances in the next game. I know NT beat SMU last year, but in general they were winning against a higher level of competition than we have in the SB. It is not so surprising to me they were able to find a way to move the ball. Have a little more patience. Also, I totally agree that you can't overlook the fact that the offensive style generally puts a ton more pressure on the defense.

That said, if the defense is not noticeably more aggressive in the next game then I will be disappointed. If they get burned for a couple long ones that is not even going to bother me too much, even if it costs the game. I'd rather see them really getting in the backfield, because notwithstanding what some of you said, we have not seen much of that at all the last couple of years. The only way you get better at something is to keep doing it, and if they don't learn how to bring the heat, NT isn't likely to win many games.

FirefightnRick · September 14, 2007

I'm having a hard time understanding the "Our offensive system puts more pressure on the defense" statements?

In our system, if the O scores quickly, say in 3-5 plays, then the defense has to go right back out there? Is that where this is coming from? If that happens,

then if the defense theoretically does what it's suppose to do and gets the ball right back in a "3 and out"(which our Defense did do there late in the 4th quarter against smu, twice), then the offense goes right back out. Then over the course of the game if this keeps up I count the offense on the field for more plays, not the defense? Whereas, in our old system in the past, the O goes out and "3 and outs" all day long and happily punts it back to the opposing team, that to me seems to put real pressure on the defense because their on the field all day long? So I'm not buying it, but that's nothing new for me?

Rick

Edited September 14, 2007 by FirefightnRick