1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Clancy Pendergast's 52 Defense

Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by Buffnik, Jan 5, 2015.

  1. Buffnik

    Buffnik Real name isn't Nik Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    80,747
    Likes Received:
    16,461
    Whether he's a candidate or not, I assume some of you are like me and like to geek out a bit on the scheme stuff.

    I was curious what this 5-2 is that Pendergast developed and found a great blog from a USC guy who goes into ridiculous detail on the scheme.

    It sounds like M Kiffin's Tampa-2 is too complex for the college level while Pendergast's 5-2 is something that players can quickly pick up and play fast within a few practices... and that it matches up well against all the different offenses it needs to be tweaked for at the college level (especially in the Pac-12).

    Three-part series:

    The 5-2 Defensive Front

    Secondary Alignment

    Defensive Play Calling
     
  2. Darth Snow

    Darth Snow Hawaiian Buffalo Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Messages:
    56,968
    Likes Received:
    4,979
    5-2 = tweaked 3-4 under as dedicated base defense. That would make sense with our personnel of DTs and tweener DE/OLBs I guess. It gives up vertical depth to bump up horizontal depth to address the way spread offenses try and attack the full width of the field.
     
  3. chitownbuff

    chitownbuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,363
    Likes Received:
    541
    I'd like to think that our tweener recruiting would align perfectly with this scheme, but we're obviously still lacking in the height department. Those ends need to be able to deflect passes if they're rushing and don't reach the QB.
     
  4. Buffnik

    Buffnik Real name isn't Nik Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    80,747
    Likes Received:
    16,461
    The "tweak" that's pretty brilliant is figuring out how to play a 3-4 while not making your DL play 2-gap responsibilities.
     
  5. 89BUFF89

    89BUFF89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,523
    Likes Received:
    143
    interesting read....i like pendergast best because of his familiarity with the pac offenses...
     
  6. buffaholic

    buffaholic Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,200
    Likes Received:
    1,635
    My concern is we are loading up on D-linemen and seem to have little interest in Outside LB'ers.
    The 5-2 adds a LB (really the 3-4 under) and takes away a D-lineman.

    Olugbode and Gillam will be Juniors and played in all sets including nickel.
    Greer played the Sam and is gone.
    Not sure if Rippy will ever play. That leaves Severson, Gamboa, Talianko, and Rippy if he returns? Plus Watanabe (Mike I'm sure) and True Frosh?

    I find it hard to believe that we could fix our defense by switching, given our personnel.
     
  7. Darth Snow

    Darth Snow Hawaiian Buffalo Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Messages:
    56,968
    Likes Received:
    4,979
    Yup. Simple is good. And it forces teams to attack you deep or up the middle while giving you a lot of pass rush options. Although I bet a good vertical TE would cause extra problems.
     
  8. Bufffan68

    Bufffan68 Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2014
    Messages:
    4,233
    Likes Received:
    756
    This.
     
  9. Bufffan68

    Bufffan68 Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2014
    Messages:
    4,233
    Likes Received:
    756
    Interesting point. The D is 1-2 years behind the O in talent and depth and is certainly in the bottom tier of the PAC12. I don't know how much scheming will help improve outcomes...what will help is to get a coach in the players' heads so they cause TO (which is more about fundamentals than scheme IMO). This D probably won't be at least average until 2016.
     
  10. TDbuff

    TDbuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Messages:
    3,994
    Likes Received:
    566
    It gets a little more feasible if you include Gilbert and Shaver as LB's, maybe even Reed and McCartney as well in that alignment.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2015
  11. buffaholic

    buffaholic Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,200
    Likes Received:
    1,635
    We were using Gilbert and Shaver that way this year as the season wore on. So a little more feasible, but still not sure they have the athleticism for this, nor am I sure that Falo/Hockaday do either. We needed a couple of those Juco's to be LBs (well, we already thought that and that was before we added a LB to the formation).

    I think McCartney is outgrowing that concept.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2015
  12. Duff Man

    Duff Man Moderator Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    39,742
    Likes Received:
    4,747
    I have been concerned about height for a while, but Holic touched on something else-for giving up size, we sure haven't gained athleticism.
     
  13. buffaholic

    buffaholic Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    10,200
    Likes Received:
    1,635
    Short and slow is a rough combination. At least every football coach I ever had told me that... often.
     

Share This Page