Our main problem has been lack of speed and experience on the D. The WR’s have been blowing by our secondary and getting behind them. It may be because they are backing up and don’t turn fast enough on some plays and may be out of position. Experience will come, but there isn’t much a kid can do about the WR being faster.
1 Like
Not at all. We have had soft as tissue defenses in the past. This one works hard.
1 Like
Art Briles"s defenses were a clinic on how to arm tackle
4 Likes
In the post Helton era we really only began formulating a serious defense under Stewart. He wasn’t perfect but his defense was trending in the right direction. I still consider him a good DC. We dipped hard with Bryant. I think we kind of peaked at Gibbs-Orlando. Then went back in Bryant territory with Dorito. I suspect Cauthen will end up being very good.
I say that because Tilman and Renu are going to invest time in this staff…or whatever staff Holgorsen wants.
1 Like
And how to allow receivers catch the pass and only then worry about where the ball was when trying to tackle the WR. The secondary got better under Stewart and then Gibbs actually had guys who made plays on the ball while it was in the air…weird stuff and foreign to Coog defenses since probably the Astrodome days.
2 Likes
I loved how Gibbs taught all 11 guys to attack (punch) the ball. It made for exciting turnarounds.
2 Likes
Spavital was the one getting the talent in the door, Gibbs coached them up after they got here. Levine had that side of the ball figured out. I loved what Herman did, but believe to this day that Levine should have been given time to figure out the offense post Bush.
If we had had the patience to allow Levine to stay, would he still be with us today? Would he have gotten similar results? Would we be in the roster predicament we are in now? Would we be talking about the last eight years with a long term coach for the future?
1 Like
You don’t get to do that twice. He bet his job promoting Bush for the second time. He knew exactly what he had.
No. Levine wasn’t the answer.
1 Like
It was his 3rd OC after failing to get along with the first two. He was even warned about Bush and asked if he would make another change. When he insisted on staying with Bush, Mack told me Levine would go as far as Travis Bush would take him.
He had his chances and they were more than fair.
Our defense since the 90 season have been wait for the catch then react. Stewart was also terrible as was the other guy I think from Purdue. The best thing Skladanny did was lure Tyus Bowser here from USF.
Gibbs while I don’t think was that great did change the mindset of our defense and we started creating plays so I appreciate what he brought but also felt it was time for a change in order to keep moving forward.
No D last season was as bad as any of them
1 Like
I don’t recall Levine having any differences with Meacham. Meacham just jumped ship to TCU when he had the chance.
I agree that the 2nd go around of Bush was a mistake, but do not ever recall hearing that Levine wasn’t willing to move on from Bush going into year 4.
In regards to Gibbs, I disagree with you on him being great.
Stewart wasn’t horrible and Gibbs was very good by UH standards post-2000.
4 Likes
Gibbs was limited and exposed over time, but glad what he was able to do here.
Cary not sure why you say you don’t remember all this when you don’t know. I am sharing with you some of the turmoil during the Levine era.
Yes there was issues with Levine and Meacham which forced him out.
Bush hire was debated before he was here and questioned by people who had worked with him and Levine was warned. This was his 3rd hire, don’t forget he fired the first one before our first game vs UTSA and we know how that one went.
When the AD questions a hire and then coach sticks with him, he better work or the coach will be unemployed.
What issues existed between Levine and Meacham?
Meacham wanted to run HIS offense