Ron Mendoza's Defense

[greenminer]

He forgot the coach em up part. Plus, he called the third down draw.

If there was ever a gun, that's the one Dickey stuck to!

too bad it fired blanks

edit: Coach, have you ever actually been in a position where you thought of calling a draw on 3rd and long? and then hesitated because of DD flashbacks/horrors?

...I'm very serious, but you don't have to answer that.

edit 2: Cerebus, I noticed the "DELETE" option at the bottom of a post. 'bout time. Thanks for your work (and the other admins, too!)

Edited September 14, 2007 by greenminer

[Coach]

I'm mostly on the defensive side, but our go to third down play is our counter off the wing-T buck sweep series. It's money too. I love small school ball.

[Quoner]

I'm mostly on the defensive side, but our go to third down play is our counter off the wing-T buck sweep series. It's money too. I love small school ball.

Hope Bill Bellicheck isn't reading this...

[Coach]

Hope Bill Bellicheck isn't reading this...

He's too busy banging his married secretary.

[Stan R]

And, again, it begs the question...if we expected so much from the offensive side of the ball and are happy with their performance so far, why would we be cutting the defensive coaches slack now when we expected them to have the stronger of the two units coming out of the gate?

The dimmest of people say, "Well, football is football...there's not much difference between a high school and college coach." People, there's a world of difference. And, we're discovering that on the defensive side of the ball.

Why is it that we always have to wait? Hiring a high school coach to lead the thing was risky. But, to then watch as he hired several other high school coaches...it has never made any sense to me.

Adapt.

Come on, give us a break.

Win. Cover and tackle. And win.

Great post. We shouldn't be cutting Mendoza that much slack. I'll formally cement my verdict next game.

[Monkeypox]

The defense no doubt did not play well. But, IMO we lost the SMU game due to turnovers.

11 penalties. 4 turnovers.

have to fix that.

and the defensive struggles will be a consistent problem if the offense can't get better in the run game. you have to be able to pound an opponent late when you're up. if your offense can't do anything but pass the ball, look for every game to be a shootout.

[Quoner]

11 penalties. 4 turnovers.

have to fix that.

and the defensive struggles will be a consistent problem if the offense can't get better in the run game. you have to be able to pound an opponent late when you're up. if your offense can't do anything but pass the ball, look for every game to be a shootout.

It'd be nice to rush for at least a yard per carry

[FireFightnJoey]

I've waited to post since our games, because it has taken a bit for the Kool-Aid to flush so I didn't post irrationally. OU was a disaster. But SMU was a marked improvement. SMU got the upper hand on us starting around mid 2nd quarter and through the 3rd. Then the D stiffened and gave our offense a chance to get back in the game. Which they did with a couple great drives. Then the O coughed up the ball and the D didn't hold. Important to note that the D only had 1 chance to do anything with those last 2 interceptions. One of them was returned. Those last couple of series was all on the offense. How demoralizing on D is it to force the turnover, just to let the offense give it right back within a couple plays!

Time of Possession

UNT OPP

2003 30:29 29:31

2004 29:16 30:44

2005 27:49 31:59

2006 30:16 29:30

2007 (2 games) 28:29 31:31

Seems that we haven't changed so much in time of posession. Anyone know what the avg points per game did the D give up last year? Doesn't seem we've changed all that much.

Well here we are after our second game with Dodge and and we are b*tching. Why? Several expected us not to win a game this year.

At the SMU game we saw glimmers of excellence on the offense, the passing system, our quaterback, our recievers, the Field goals and extra points have been perfect. And Punting well pretty dang good. On D we saw the Defense stop SMU when they had to, but it was the offense that let them down, that and two really bad calls, the knee down and the mystery face mask.

Dodge and his staff are teaching our group of student athletes new systems, so give him time. At the SMU game I realized Dodge is training the fans also, we as fans tasted Victory and we wanted it, yes many of us damn right expected it as the game rolled on. That had to be one of the most exciting games I had watched UNT play ever, short of the win over Cincy. Hell I though I was going to have a heart attack, we all know that game could have gone either way. Remember that is supposed to be SMU's best team in 20 years their PONY UP team. Dodge has us cranked up and our expectations are rising fast. What is the old saying, "Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water."

In the interview with the MG Insider, Dodge talks about the D Free Dodge Interview. He says that there were something like 17 or 18 missed tackles in the SMU game that should have been made, not ones that we were beat on play, but just mistakes in tackling. Dodge said that made up for around 187 yards of SMU offense. They are going to fix it.

12 missed tackles that resulted in around 187 yards of SMU offense. Make those tackles and now we have a different ball game. The players are just as responsible. let's see how they are coached over the next couple weeks in the FAU game.

Also, I noticed on the replays of the game. This has been mentioned several times and I agree. Almost everyone of those replays the receiver had to adjust for the ball and at times nearly had to stop. Not just the long ball. There was one over the middle ... wide open receiver ... had to stop, catch and immediately dive for the TD. Could have just walked in. Meager did some good stuff, but he still has to work on efficiency. I saw a lot of wobbly throws. Kuddos to Danny for breaking the record and leading the team to several excellent drives. But, there is room for improvement. To his credit, it did appear he was hurried quite a bit. The line held better though and maybe with this game, they all gained some confidence/trust and gelled a little.

[ntsumck]

We currently do not have the speed or the athlete's to play his type of defense. He needs to mix it up and change his system to the current players. If he does not do this, we will have to score 40 - 50 points a game this year to have a chance to win. He is not known for being very creative. At SLC he played strictly man to man, he could do this because he had the athletes. At this level he must adjust with each and every game. To play man to man, you must have a excellent pass rush. Coach Mendoza does not even try to hide his coverages from what I have seen the first to games. Also, have you noticed how late he gets his call into the defense? He should know between 1 or 2 calls on each play because of down and distance, every team has tendencies.

I like his enthusiasm and I will give him more than 2 games, but I need to see some adjustments during the games or at least hide his coverages.

[greenminer]

What does it mean when box scores (ESPN and MGS) credit a team for a rush of -23 yards?

take that away, and we're at 20 rushes for 35 yards. Nothing to holler about, just saying.

[Mean Green 93-98]

What does it mean when box scores (ESPN and MGS) credit a team for a rush of -23 yards?

take that away, and we're at 20 rushes for 35 yards. Nothing to holler about, just saying.

Sacks count against rushing yards in college football, so total rushing yards is not completely attributable to the running game.

[Quoner]

What does it mean when box scores (ESPN and MGS) credit a team for a rush of -23 yards?

take that away, and we're at 20 rushes for 35 yards. Nothing to holler about, just saying.

That's pretty sweet in the Arena League

[greenminer]

Sacks count against rushing yards in college football, so total rushing yards is not completely attributable to the running game.

Yes, but aren't sacks usually counted against the quarterback's rushing stats? That's what I recall, so what is a "team" rush?

[DeepGreen]

That's the problem...with nine returning starters, we didn't figure this to be an "on-the-job" training year for Mendoza. He looked to be the one who had the athletes with experience on his side of the ball.

And, again, it begs the question...if we expected so much from the offensive side of the ball and are happy with their performance so far, why would we be cutting the defensive coaches slack now when we expected them to have the stronger of the two units coming out of the gate?

The dimmest of people say, "Well, football is football...there's not much difference between a high school and college coach." People, there's a world of difference. And, we're discovering that on the defensive side of the ball.

FAU was thought to be middle of the pack material in the Sun Belt this year. If they're tearing us up in two weeks like SMU did last week...it's just going to be tough to watch. I don't see why we have to accept losing for the sake of a high school coach "adapting." Maybe that's why UNT has never been a great program. Lack of foresight (dropping to I-AA), apathy (low support from the school and fanbase), combined with a "build it long term" instead of "win now" attitude.

Rice went to a bowl game last year on the power of one coach coming in with a good coaching staff. He leaves, and they're beaten by I-AA Nicholls State, then drummed by...Baylor, the perennial Big 12 doormat?

Bob Stoops took OU to a bowl game in season one after that program hadn't sniffed a winning season in five years. Urban Meyer immediately turned in winners at mid-majors Bowling Green and Utah before going to Florida. Jeff Tedford took the Cal program, the Pac 10 doormat, who hadn't had a winning season in eight years and immediately began winning.

Why is it that we always have to wait? Hiring a high school coach to lead the thing was risky. But, to then watch as he hired several other high school coaches...it has never made any sense to me.

Adapt.

Come on, give us a break.

Win. Cover and tackle. And win.

That's the problem...with nine returning starters, we didn't figure this to be an "on-the-job" training year for Mendoza. He looked to be the one who had the athletes with experience on his side of the ball. - BINGO!

I don't see why we have to accept losing for the sake of a high school coach "adapting." BINGO!

[Mean Green 93-98]

Yes, but aren't sacks usually counted against the quarterback's rushing stats? That's what I recall, so what is a "team" rush?

Got me there. SMU had one too.

[Quoner]

Got me there. SMU had one too.

It's just adding up the rushing yard of every back - including the QB. Am I missing something in the question?

N/M: They decided to give the giant fumble fiasco at the two to everyone, not just Meager. That was nice of them.

Edited September 14, 2007 by Quoner

[Mean Green 93-98]

It's just adding up the rushing yard of every back - including the QB. Am I missing something in the question?

Don't think so. The 1 "team" rush attributed to UNT is -23 yards, but the next stat shows they had a total of 12 rushing yards. The 1 "team" rush attributed to SMU is -1 yard, but they had a total of 181 rushing yards.

[UNTLifer]

My only issue with the "give Mendoza time" side of the coin is that Bleil arrived last year, installed a new system and had us playing pretty good by week two.

[PlummMeanGreen]

That's the problem...with nine returning starters, we didn't figure this to be an "on-the-job" training year for Mendoza. He looked to be the one who had the athletes with experience on his side of the ball.

And, again, it begs the question...if we expected so much from the offensive side of the ball and are happy with their performance so far, why would we be cutting the defensive coaches slack now when we expected them to have the stronger of the two units coming out of the gate?

The dimmest of people say, "Well, football is football...there's not much difference between a high school and college coach." People, there's a world of difference. And, we're discovering that on the defensive side of the ball.

FAU was thought to be middle of the pack material in the Sun Belt this year. If they're tearing us up in two weeks like SMU did last week...it's just going to be tough to watch. I don't see why we have to accept losing for the sake of a high school coach "adapting." Maybe that's why UNT has never been a great program. Lack of foresight (dropping to I-AA), apathy (low support from the school and fanbase), combined with a "build it long term" instead of "win now" attitude.

Rice went to a bowl game last year on the power of one coach coming in with a good coaching staff. He leaves, and they're beaten by I-AA Nicholls State, then drummed by...Baylor, the perennial Big 12 doormat?

Bob Stoops took OU to a bowl game in season one after that program hadn't sniffed a winning season in five years. Urban Meyer immediately turned in winners at mid-majors Bowling Green and Utah before going to Florida. Jeff Tedford took the Cal program, the Pac 10 doormat, who hadn't had a winning season in eight years and immediately began winning.

Why is it that we always have to wait? Hiring a high school coach to lead the thing was risky. But, to then watch as he hired several other high school coaches...it has never made any sense to me.

Adapt.

Come on, give us a break.

Win. Cover and tackle. And win.

Even a former offensive coordinator from SMU who got the UNT job with one interview (and no apparent competition for the HFC's job) was given 5 years to come up with his first above .500 W/L season in Denton. And (again) Dickey had all this college football coaching experience from a few pretty nice higher profile type programs.

Dickey inherited Simon's players and won 5 years later and now TDodge has inherited DD's players, but my bet is TDodge gets over the .500 hump much sooner than DD's 5 years. Any takers on that bet?

Edited September 14, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen

[Quoner]

Don't think so. The 1 "team" rush attributed to UNT is -23 yards, but the next stat shows they had a total of 12 rushing yards. The 1 "team" rush attributed to SMU is -1 yard, but they had a total of 181 rushing yards.

I misread the question. See my edit. This yardage is for the fumble play when we had first and goal - SMU must have had a fumble at some point too.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

I've waited to post since our games, because it has taken a bit for the Kool-Aid to flush so I didn't post irrationally. OU was a disaster. But SMU was a marked improvement. SMU got the upper hand on us starting around mid 2nd quarter and through the 3rd. Then the D stiffened and gave our offense a chance to get back in the game. Which they did with a couple great drives. Then the O coughed up the ball and the D didn't hold. Important to note that the D only had 1 chance to do anything with those last 2 interceptions. One of them was returned. Those last couple of series was all on the offense. How demoralizing on D is it to force the turnover, just to let the offense give it right back within a couple plays!

Seems that we haven't changed so much in time of posession. Anyone know what the avg points per game did the D give up last year? Doesn't seem we've changed all that much.

12 missed tackles that resulted in around 187 yards of SMU offense. Make those tackles and now we have a different ball game. The players are just as responsible. let's see how they are coached over the next couple weeks in the FAU game.

Also, I noticed on the replays of the game. This has been mentioned several times and I agree. Almost everyone of those replays the receiver had to adjust for the ball and at times nearly had to stop. Not just the long ball. There was one over the middle ... wide open receiver ... had to stop, catch and immediately dive for the TD. Could have just walked in. Meager did some good stuff, but he still has to work on efficiency. I saw a lot of wobbly throws. Kuddos to Danny for breaking the record and leading the team to several excellent drives. But, there is room for improvement. To his credit, it did appear he was hurried quite a bit. The line held better though and maybe with this game, they all gained some confidence/trust and gelled a little.

I don't really see SMU as a marked improvement. SMU is a far cry from where OU is in their offense and defense. We moved the ball a lot better but I credit that due to the level of competition. I didn't much difference in the defense.

[ParksAndRecRick]

Can Coach Mendosa's Defense work in Collge? YES and it will!

Go Green!

[untbowler]

Can Coach Mendosa's Defense work in Collge? YES and it will!

Go Green!

ok so next part of question. WHEN??

[ParksAndRecRick]

Cmon UNTBowler! Two Games. Maybe it will be next Saturday. Maybe later in the season. Maybe next season. It will happen. I think the O.U. coaching staff had a plan to try to end all the talk of "Dodge Ball". Their "high school defense" stuff, told our players to fall down in the second half, asked refs if we could play with running clock in second half....was bush league! But, I understand. Who had a multiple page feature in USA Today. Who was featured in Sports Illustrated. Don't for a minute....think they are not unhappy about that kind of coverage from UNT.

Never, would I say Coach Stoops ran up the score....and YES it could hae been worse. But, those other comments from him and his coaches had one intention in mind.... "let's end this Dodge talk".

Coach Fran lost to O.U. 77 to 0 in his first attempt while in Aggie Land. The next two years also brought losses, but by 11 and 10 points I believe.

Sure, questions can be asked. Lord, I will never be one to argue that! I just believe Coach Dodge has a plan, knows how to assemble a Staff, know what it takes to win in the College game...and we will see that on both sides of the ball.

Thanks for reading and we will see ya next week! Can't wait!!!

ParksAndRecRick

[GoMeanGreen1999]

Cmon UNTBowler! Two Games. Maybe it will be next Saturday. Maybe later in the season. Maybe next season. It will happen. I think the O.U. coaching staff had a plan to try to end all the talk of "Dodge Ball". Their "high school defense" stuff, told our players to fall down in the second half, asked refs if we could play with running clock in second half....was bush league! But, I understand. Who had a multiple page feature in USA Today. Who was featured in Sports Illustrated. Don't for a minute....think they are not unhappy about that kind of coverage from UNT.

Never, would I say Coach Stoops ran up the score....and YES it could hae been worse. But, those other comments from him and his coaches had one intention in mind.... "let's end this Dodge talk".

Coach Fran lost to O.U. 77 to 0 in his first attempt while in Aggie Land. The next two years also brought losses, but by 11 and 10 points I believe.

Sure, questions can be asked. Lord, I will never be one to argue that! I just believe Coach Dodge has a plan, knows how to assemble a Staff, know what it takes to win in the College game...and we will see that on both sides of the ball.

Thanks for reading and we will see ya next week! Can't wait!!!

ParksAndRecRick

I don't doubt one minute that Dodge doesn't know what he is doing, but if there are not some serious changes on the defense soon, the pressure will be on Dodge to make changes in coaching. Yes, it has only been 2 games, but 2 games of no changes is a little concerning. Hopefully we will see something different next week.