I haven’t done a mailbag the last couple weeks, but now that a bye week is here, it’s time for another edition of The Mailbag.
This week I received several really good questions, so thank you to those who have chimed in. Let’s get started.
Greg writes: Do you foresee the Wildcats moving away from the 3-3-5 press-man coverage as we face less passing centric teams in UCLA and Colorado, or does Yates stick with what works even though the opposing team’s offense is different schematically? Regardless of 4 down lineman or 3, I feel like we have to trust what appear to be very talented CBs in man coverage and be much more physical jamming opposing WRs off the line of scrimmage. That was one very obvious difference to me in this game: we pressured their skill position players constantly.
There are two good questions here that can be addressed separately.
First, will the Wildcats continue to implement the 3-3-5 defensive alignment against less pass-happy teams? There are plenty of reasons to stick with this plan, including the ability to get linebackers Colin Schooler, Tony Fields II and Anthony Pandy on the field at the same time. All three have a unique set of skills. Schooler is the relentless, instinctual player. Fields is playing faster this year and tracking down more plays. Pandy is a blend of the two with the best pass-rushing skills in the group.
While getting these three players on the field together sounds great initially, you have to factor in depth. This trio played basically every snap together against Texas Tech. That was manageable considering the defense did well getting off the field early in the game and the Arizona offense controlled the clock much of the second half. Plus, there was a bye week coming up.
However, I do worry about the volume of snaps these guys would face by being on the field together in a 3-3-5, especially considering the team plays six consecutive weeks coming up. The most experienced depth behind the trio is Day Day Coleman, who transitioned to linebacker in the spring. Freshman Derrion Clark saw some action against NAU before being disqualified for his targeting foul. But that’s really it in terms of experienced depth at the linebacker spot, unless you shifted in Tristan Cooper who has been a Spur safety.
Looking to the secondary, the biggest benefit of the 3-3-5 was putting Jace Whittaker in as a nickel player. Call it a third corner or a third safety – he was mostly positioned over a slot player. This took pressure off the other safeties and linebackers since Whittaker is such a strong cover guy. At the same time, it pushed Whittaker closer to the middle of the defense where he could help communicate adjustments. He truly is an extension of the coaching staff on the field, and being closer to the other 10 players helps get the team lined up and make adjustments quickly.
In terms of coverage, what Arizona did well against Texas Tech was mix up and disguise coverages. The Wildcats were man-heavy against Hawai’i and NAU, but played quite a bit of zone against the Red Raiders. I think the Red Raiders were initially confused by seeing the 3-3-5 at the start of the game and then were slow to adjust when Arizona mixed in a variety of zone coverages.
Not only did the Wildcats catch them off-guard with zone coverage, a lot of it was disguised with late movement at the snap of the ball. Scottie Young Jr. and Whittaker were very good at these late movements, as were the linebackers. Pandy, especially, is known as a pass-rusher, but his zone drop led to the interception of Alan Bowman in the first half. Bowman never saw Pandy dropping.
Whether the Wildcats are going to play predominantly man or zone or a combination, the key is what Greg points out: be physical.
Arizona was very physical in that game, especially the defensive backs. Lorenzo Burns had a really good game, as did freshman Christian Roland-Wallace. Bobby Wolfe is another freshman earning meaningful playing time, so depth is building at coverage spots. I would like to see Whittaker continue to be freed up to play closer to the ball to use his instincts and communication skills. He can help alleviate the stress in the passing game on the linebackers and safeties.
When it’s all said and done, I would expect Marcel Yates and his defensive staff to adjust their scheme week-to-week to have the Wildcats ready for their opponent’s plan of attack. Whether it’s a 3-3-5 or a 4-2-5, I don’t care. But there should be a clear game plan that has everyone on the same page and free to play fast, physical football. Stop thinking, just play football. That’s what was fun to see last Saturday night.
From Twitter, @azjangle writes: What goes into the decision on whether a player redshirts?
I would consider two primary factors to a redshirt: First, can the player help the team win right now? Second, is the player physically and mentally ready to play at this level?
If the answer is no to these questions, certainly it’s in his best interest to redshirt. Unlike past years, these questions no longer have to be made immediately in a three-week trial during fall camp. The new redshirt rule that went into effect last season allows a player to participate in up to four games without losing the option to redshirt. So that means coaches can watch players develop in practice and still evaluate them to use later in the season, if needed.
I think the rule is fantastic. For a freshman, the experience of being on the field and playing at collegiate speed cannot be replicated, even in practice. So being able to play in a few games, even if it is just special teams duty, is invaluable to the player taking the redshirt.
There is also a value to the rest of the team with this rule. If a starter is banged up with a nagging ankle or shoulder injury and there is little depth at his position, it was often a case where that player would suit up and push through the nagging ailment without being able to get back to 100 percent. Now a redshirt candidate, should he be ready to contribute, can be called upon at any point of the season and put into action without losing a year of eligibility. And it allows the injured player the opportunity to perhaps take a full week off to get back to 100 percent or perhaps reduce the reps and number of snaps in the game and so he is able to play at a higher level.
At the end of the season, the new redshirt rule benefits the development of a roster. Players that were ready to play at this level earned meaningful playing time, veteran players had depth behind them and the redshirt is light year’s ahead of where he otherwise would have been if he didn’t see the field and he is still a freshman come spring ball (note: player does not have to be a freshman to utilize this rule, a true sophomore could also preserve a redshirt season under the policy).
Circling back to the direct question: If the player is mentally and physically ready to participate as a freshman, he should see some playing time in a few ballgames. If he can help the team win right now, get him on the field early in the season, and if he has continued to develop, keep playing him. That’s what you saw last year Donovan Laie on the offensive line and what you’re seeing this year with Christian Roland-Wallace and Bobby Wolfe in the secondary.
From Twitter, @DaxTrujillo writes: Impact of offense pace of play on defensive efficiency and/or impact of defensive forced TOs on win expectancy.
These are deep-thinking questions that I probably can’t answer as well as those in the data and analytics world. But, I’ll give my perspective anyway.
In terms of the impact of offensive pace of play on defensive efficiency, let’s first get the idea out of our heads that time of possession is the best indicator of this. Time of possession has nothing to do with how many points you score or how many points you allow. Sometimes – like the second half last week against Texas Tech – it can be an indicator of who controlled the game, but it would not consistently predict a winning team.
We can surely confirm this fact by looking at the College Football Playoff teams from the last three years. Only three of the 12 teams listed below finished inside the Top 25 nationally for time of possession. Interestingly, the national champion in each of the last three seasons has had the worst time of possession margin of any of the four playoff teams.
| 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
| 35. Georgia | 19. Georgia | 13. Ohio State |
| 52. Alabama | 23. Oklahoma | 42. Washington |
| 87. Notre Dame | 49. Clemson | 46. Alabama |
| 96. Clemson * | 71. Alabama * | 55. Clemson * |
However, offensive efficiency and pace of play can have an impact on a defense. If the offense is terribly inefficient going three-and-out, certainly it puts more pressure on the defense to prevent the opponent from scoring and it reduces the amount of rest and time your defense has to make adjustments on the sideline.
In my NAU game preview, one of the goals I listed for the offense was no three-and-outs and this is obviously a goal for any offense. But the first first down of a drive accomplishes several things. It gives you good momentum to continue moving the football, but it also extends the drive to keep the defense on the sideline while also beginning to shift field position.
One of the best data and analytics guys in the football media is Bill Connelly, who is now a writer at ESPN. Several years ago, before ESPN, Connelly published his “five factors” in college football, and you can read a little bit about that here. But in summary, the five factors Connelly identified were:
• If you win the explosiveness battle (using PPP), you win 86 percent of the time.
• If you win the efficency battle (using Success Rate), you win 83 percent of the time.
• If you win the drive-finishing battle (using points per trip inside the 40), you win 75 percent of the time.
• If you win the field position battle (using average starting field position), you win 72 percent of the time.
• If you win the turnover battle (using turnover margin), you win 73 percent of the time.
So you will notice a couple things from these five factors related to the questions from Dax. First off, offensive pace is not a consideration. Teams can win games going fast or slow. And certainly, time of possession is not a factor. Instead, explosiveness, efficiency and drive-finishing would be things a team should self-evaluate to see if an offense is complementing a defense and vice versa.
The final two factors are turnovers and field position. Turnovers are obvious to everyone, but sometimes I think we attribute field position to an old-school line of thinking in football. Field position can have a direct impact on the other factors and certainly has an impact on the way both offensive and defensive coordinators call games. Even for drives that don’t result in a score, getting at least one or two first downs can be a success.
So there is a lot to unpack and consider here, which is why the analytics world has exploded in recent years both in media and inside football programs.
Thanks to everyone for the questions this week – some really good stuff. Please feel free to send your questions or comments to me anytime on Twitter (@BlairWillisUA or @DryHeatSportsAZ) or via email (bwillis@dryheatsports.com).
Get the latest content from Dry Heat Sports by following on Facebook (@DryHeatSportsAZ), Twitter (@DryHeatSportsAZ) and subscribing below.
You can also follow Blair’s personal Twitter account @BlairWillisUA.
Good answers, thanks for your time.