Game & Performance Analysis
Game: v. Rexburg Gray
Date: Sept. 29th, 2010
Defensive Team Review
Overall, our defense played well. Over the last few weeks, we have begun stressing the individual responsibilities and duties of each position, requiring players perform those duties to the best of their abilities. We continue to move players and try out new players in various positions to make sure we are filling those roles with the individuals who can perform those duties best. It is important for the players to realize that as coaches we have to make our decisions about who plays what position and how much they play based on game performance, but more importantly, practice performance. If a player spends some or most of his time day dreaming, goofing off, or giving marginal effort in practice, it drastically effects the number of plays he participates in during the game. Also important, as per our team policy, if a player misses a practice, he will be unable to start the game for that week. If they miss two practices, it is unlikely they play much if any during the game. We had two defensive starters this week miss one practice and they did not start or see any snaps during the first defensive series of the game. Also adhering to our team philosophy of making sure all players get to play, all players took snaps at their respective positions on defense.
We continue to improve in our defensive play in several areas. Individual responsibilities are being performed more consistently. The level of physical play (aggression) continues to increase. Our pass coverage responsibilities continue to improve.
With the type of defensive formation we run (5-4) we have 9 players in the "box" and ask our pass coverage personnel to play man-on-man coverage. This is a good defense for the type of offensive plays we see at the youth level. Strong against the run play. The weakness of this defense is if a ball carrier get's through the 9 defensive players in the box, it's off to the races. The game statistics demonstrate this pretty clearly.
Individual Performance Report
| Player |
Tackles |
Assists |
Sack
|
Forced Fumble
|
Fumble Recovery
|
Jackson - OLB
|
6 |
-
|
-
|
- |
- |
Kooper - OLB
|
5 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Hunter - NG
|
2 |
- |
- |
1 |
1 |
Carter - C
|
2 |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
Mikey Mo - DE
|
1 |
2 |
- |
1 |
1 |
Ben - DE
|
1 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Nick - DT
|
1 |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
Justin - C
|
1 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Weston - ILB
|
|
3 |
- |
- |
- |
Noah - OLB
|
- |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
Peyton - ILB
|
- |
- |
- |
1 |
1
|
Defensive Unit Report
Total # of Defensive Plays: 28
Total Yards Given Up: 143 yards
Run: 114 yards
Pass: 29 yards
Run vs. Pass Plays:
Run: 24 (85.7% of plays)
Pass: 4 (14.3% of plays)
# of Plays for:
|
# of plays
|
% of Plays Ran
|
Result
|
Loss of yards
|
7 |
28% |
-24 yards
|
0-5 Yards
|
10
|
40% |
14 yards
|
| 6-10 Yards |
3 |
12% |
18 yards
|
| 11-15 Yards |
2 |
8% |
23 yards
|
| 16 -20 Yards |
0 |
0% |
0 yards
|
21 or more Yards
|
3 |
12%
|
112 yards
|
Notes
3 plays accounted for 78% of the total yards against us. All three of these were due to breakdowns in position responsibilities and poor tackling technique.
The number of plays for a loss of yards (7) and gains under 5 yards (10) was excellent.
~ Coach Pete