Seeing a lot of bashing on Ena on here, and in full disclosure, I was really disappointed with the defensive drop off. I'm not sure what to think. Gary was a dominant DC at Utah. Is it a talent issue? Maybe Gary needs time to get his guys in here.

But talking with my brother-in-law (who is a byu fan) he makes the exact same comments about their DC as we read on here. He said he's not confident that BYU beats Hawaii in their bowl, and blames Tiaki the BYU DC.

Looking at Ena and Tiaki, they were both linebacker coaches at Utah and hired to be the defensive coordinator at USU and BYU respectively. Both guys are not popular at all.


I think we need to be patient with Ena. To hear my bro-in-law, he thinks Tiaki is much much worse!

I had this exact same discussion today with a byu co-worker. It makes sense. They come from the same Utah coaching tree. The Utah scheme has worked really well down there for many years. I don't think we'll see the same success with it. I hope there will be some re-evaluation of that scheme for next year.

aggies22 wrote: ↑

December 23rd, 2019, 5:26 pm

AgMac wrote: ↑

December 23rd, 2019, 4:56 pm

I had this exact same discussion today with a byu co-worker. It makes sense. They come from the same Utah coaching tree. The Utah scheme has worked really well down there for many years. I don't think we'll see the same success with it. I hope there will be some re-evaluation of that scheme for next year.

The defensive scheme doesn't work well at Utah State because we are just too far down the recruiting totem pole. In order for the 4-3 to be successful, you need four down linemen that are all pushing 280 pounds plus depending on the individual player's skill set. Not two defensive tackles who run 290 pounds and two converted linebackers that tip the scales at 255 and 240.

Since we are talking coaching trees, utah currently starts two DEs that are nearly 270 BUT the DTs are both 330 pounds. The backups are nearly identical in size. In his first go-round here at Utah State, Coach Andersen specifically explained that the reason he was making a move from the 4-3 that he used his first year or two and transitioning into a 3-4 defense was that they were unable to recruit enough quality depth to successfully run a 4-3 scheme.

It was clear that there was not enough size or depth along the defensive line in 2019 for the scheme to be successful. As the 2019 graduating class moves on, there were 7 graduating defensive linemen, six of which were on the two-deep depth chart. As the 2020 signing class begins to ink their letters of intent, there has been one DT (James Hansen), one undersized DE (Dahlin Mesake) and possibly one undersized RM (Mata Hola) added to the team. If the 4-3 is going to continue, as things currently stand, we are sorely shorthanded.

How can it be that GA understood this the first go round and made explicit changes to use our guys in the best way, but totally forgot/missed the issue/and made no adjustments (in spite of the whole season proving the issue) this time around. I think this is what has people the most upset, why not use what worked the last time around???!!!!!

The only reasonable explanation, first assume people are reasonable, is that Gary has been letting himself be convinced by his staff to implement one scheme or another.

aggies22 wrote: ↑

December 23rd, 2019, 5:26 pm

AgMac wrote: ↑

December 23rd, 2019, 4:56 pm

I had this exact same discussion today with a byu co-worker. It makes sense. They come from the same Utah coaching tree. The Utah scheme has worked really well down there for many years. I don't think we'll see the same success with it. I hope there will be some re-evaluation of that scheme for next year.

The defensive scheme doesn't work well at Utah State because we are just too far down the recruiting totem pole. In order for the 4-3 to be successful, you need four down linemen that are all pushing 280 pounds plus depending on the individual player's skill set. Not two defensive tackles who run 290 pounds and two converted linebackers that tip the scales at 255 and 240.

Since we are talking coaching trees, utah currently starts two DEs that are nearly 270 BUT the DTs are both 330 pounds. The backups are nearly identical in size. In his first go-round here at Utah State, Coach Andersen specifically explained that the reason he was making a move from the 4-3 that he used his first year or two and transitioning into a 3-4 defense was that they were unable to recruit enough quality depth to successfully run a 4-3 scheme.

It was clear that there was not enough size or depth along the defensive line in 2019 for the scheme to be successful. As the 2019 graduating class moves on, there were 7 graduating defensive linemen, six of which were on the two-deep depth chart. As the 2020 signing class begins to ink their letters of intent, there has been one DT (James Hansen), one undersized DE (Dahlin Mesake) and possibly one undersized RM (Mata Hola) added to the team. If the 4-3 is going to continue, as things currently stand, we are sorely shorthanded.

Well noted 22, and the future of AGGIE Football is in the hands of our coaching staff. When an experiment fails to blossom as in the 4-3 of the 2019 season, then other paths for success must be chosen.

NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑

December 24th, 2019, 8:34 am

aggies22 wrote: ↑

December 23rd, 2019, 5:26 pm

AgMac wrote: ↑

December 23rd, 2019, 4:56 pm

I had this exact same discussion today with a byu co-worker. It makes sense. They come from the same Utah coaching tree. The Utah scheme has worked really well down there for many years. I don't think we'll see the same success with it. I hope there will be some re-evaluation of that scheme for next year.

The defensive scheme doesn't work well at Utah State because we are just too far down the recruiting totem pole. In order for the 4-3 to be successful, you need four down linemen that are all pushing 280 pounds plus depending on the individual player's skill set. Not two defensive tackles who run 290 pounds and two converted linebackers that tip the scales at 255 and 240.

Since we are talking coaching trees, utah currently starts two DEs that are nearly 270 BUT the DTs are both 330 pounds. The backups are nearly identical in size. In his first go-round here at Utah State, Coach Andersen specifically explained that the reason he was making a move from the 4-3 that he used his first year or two and transitioning into a 3-4 defense was that they were unable to recruit enough quality depth to successfully run a 4-3 scheme.

It was clear that there was not enough size or depth along the defensive line in 2019 for the scheme to be successful. As the 2019 graduating class moves on, there were 7 graduating defensive linemen, six of which were on the two-deep depth chart. As the 2020 signing class begins to ink their letters of intent, there has been one DT (James Hansen), one undersized DE (Dahlin Mesake) and possibly one undersized RM (Mata Hola) added to the team. If the 4-3 is going to continue, as things currently stand, we are sorely shorthanded.

Well noted 22, and the future of AGGIE Football is in the hands of our coaching staff. When an experiment fails to blossom as in the 4-3 of the 2019 season, then other paths for success must be chosen.

Exactly. The most sought after players in college football are not elite QB recruits but 4 man front D ends. They have to big enough to squeeze the run but have the length and speed to cover sideline to sideline, and have the athleticism and instincts to take on a tackle and often a RB or double team in a 4 man pass rush. The few that can do this are snatched up by all the P5 programs because they are the type of athletes that stand out big time. Even Fackrell who the Aggies developed would have not have been nearly as elite and successful as he was in college playing in a 4 man front.

Wyoming has stubbornly worked at this and with their coaching recruiting type and their focus on it has been successful at it but at the expense of other recruiting needs.

Our only true D end was Heninger and he was a back up at the U. Three man front guys are block and hole pluggers and can be developed and are plentiful with our poly pipeline. USU can recruit athletic guys with length that play skill positions in High School and put the weight on to play LB. Traditionally they have done well in the Florida, Texas, Cali pipelines to get underrecruited DBs.

But the D ends are extremely tough to come by or develop. They got to be big, tall, strong fast and athletic in high school and that's why they are recruited by the big schools. Moving a great finesse 240 edge rusher was a disaster. Tei was Ok but not ideal and it deprived the Aggies of their second most experienced true LB that could play inside and out. Mind boggling move.

The other thing I would mention is that the traditional 4 2 5 requires great corners or a real 5 DB mentality rather than hybrid safety/LBs on the outside. Not only did USU lack the DBs they didn't have any real hybrid guys this year.