We were 4-2-5 base last year and it was our main defensive set.

There were two or more games where the defense absolutely stunk up the joint. My memory is poor. I think it was the secondary that got torched.

We SHOWED a 4-2-5 but kicked out the DE into coverage/spy sometimes both DEs

I believe that both the defense and the offense will be improved next year and it will show up in the win-loss record

Secondary should be better and I believe we'll have better pressure on the quarterback. I believe the old line can go nowhere but up and we are all hoping for a healthy quarterback situation.

Rod92 said:

---

I believe that both the defense and the offense will be improved next year and it will show up in the win-loss record

Secondary should be better and I believe we'll have better pressure on the quarterback. I believe the old line can go nowhere but up and we are all hoping for a healthy quarterback situation.

---

I looked at stats for Kline's 2 years as OC. They averaged about 440 yards per game. Split down the middle between run and pass. I think it's telling about his philosophy as the OC.

And his roster. Deuce Vaughn in '22. A 2nd round TE and early 3rd round OL last season.

Also,
Duke (and K-State) in '23 were tied at 25th in fbs for sacks allowed (17) [3rd in ACC]
A&M was 86th (30).

FBS Total TFL allowed:
'23: Duke (62). KSt (59). A&M (65). Tu (71)
'22: Duke (51). KSt (73). A&M (66). Tu (58)
'21: Duke (81). KSt (76). A&M (69). Tu (63)

FBS Avg TFL allowed per game:
'23: Duke 31st (4.77). KSt 27th (4.54). A&M 40th (5)

Nah . I like Aggies football. Plus I'm not going to label the players as criminals. That seems like a stretch and just plain not nice

NewEra2023 said:

---

And his roster. Deuce Vaughn in '22. A 2nd round TE and early 3rd round OL last season.

Also,
Duke (and K-State) in '23 were tied at 25th in fbs for sacks allowed (17) [3rd in ACC]
A&M was 86th (30).

FBS Total TFL allowed:
'23: Duke (62). KSt (59). A&M (65). Tu (71)
'22: Duke (51). KSt (73). A&M (66). Tu (58)
'21: Duke (81). KSt (76). A&M (69). Tu (63)

FBS Avg TFL allowed per game:
'23: Duke 31st (4.77). KSt 27th (4.54). A&M 40th (5)

---

None of the stats for Duke and K-State matter. They don't play in the NFLs defensive line factory known as the SEC.

Did Jimbo alienate the older players when he started so many freshmen and sophomores? Was that a problem?

That's an awesome belief in the team's defense! With Elko leading the way and some strong transfers coming in, the defense sounds like it's shaping up to be a force to be reckoned with this season. Looking forward to seeing those defensive beasts in action and the team winning games with solid defense!

One thing I think we will see is much better tackling, especially from the DB's. Solid tackling was a staple of Elko's defenses the 4 years he was here before.

Aggie0956732 said:

---

That's an awesome belief in the team's defense! With Elko leading the way and some strong transfers coming in, the defense sounds like it's shaping up to be a force to be reckoned with this season. Looking forward to seeing those defensive beasts in action and the team winning games with solid defense!

---

The defense was so poor in a few games that it defied logic. For example, the defense usually has the advantage in third and long. However, that did not matter in some of the games because the secondary was torched again and again in third and long situations.

yonose said:

---

NewEra2023 said:

---

And his roster. Deuce Vaughn in '22. A 2nd round TE and early 3rd round OL last season.

Also,
Duke (and K-State) in '23 were tied at 25th in fbs for sacks allowed (17) [3rd in ACC]
A&M was 86th (30).

FBS Total TFL allowed:
'23: Duke (62). KSt (59). A&M (65). Tu (71)
'22: Duke (51). KSt (73). A&M (66). Tu (58)
'21: Duke (81). KSt (76). A&M (69). Tu (63)

FBS Avg TFL allowed per game:
'23: Duke 31st (4.77). KSt 27th (4.54). A&M 40th (5)

---

None of the stats for Duke and K-State matter. They don't play in the NFLs defensive line factory known as the SEC.

---

Then let's get the OL and OC with the worst numbers in the big12 and acc. Doesn't matter at all right? Not like the OL talent is somewhat proportional to the DL talent.

If it was sec or nothing we would've hired Matt Luke. Foh

Moffett is that combat veteran Drill Sergeant who will push the players to new levels and the motivation and morale will be high. Kind of like the 101st Airborne Division in WWII. Those soldiers pushed each other to be the best and weeded out the slackers. That is the main reason they fought so hard and well. There was esprit de corps.

Tanker123 said:

---

Did Jimbo alienate the older players when he started so many freshmen and sophomores? Was that a problem?

---

Umm…so don't out the best talent in the field? I'm confused as to which way the wind is blowing today???

greg.w.h said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

Did Jimbo alienate the older players when he started so many freshmen and sophomores? Was that a problem?

---

Umm…so don't out the best talent in the field? I'm confused as to which way the wind is blowing today???

---

Best talent. How did that go?

Defense was not the problem w Fisher's system.

greg.w.h said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

Did Jimbo alienate the older players when he started so many freshmen and sophomores? Was that a problem?

---

Umm…so don't out the best talent in the field? I'm confused as to which way the wind is blowing today???

---

You would think a woman wouldn't want to carry water for a man everyday.

Tanker123 said:

---

Moffett is that combat veteran Drill Sergeant who will push the players to new levels and the motivation and morale will be high. Kind of like the 101st Airborne Division in WWII. Those soldiers pushed each other to be the best and weeded out the slackers. That is the main reason they fought so hard and well. There was esprit de corps.

---

Junction Boys 2.0!

I guess we'll just forget Elko's last game as DC for the Ags? .Elko's D's were never the 2nd coming of the WC, good, sometimes capable defenses, he wasn't Buddy Ryan.

I have nothing to say but laugh

StinkyPinky said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

Moffett is that combat veteran Drill Sergeant who will push the players to new levels and the motivation and morale will be high. Kind of like the 101st Airborne Division in WWII. Those soldiers pushed each other to be the best and weeded out the slackers. That is the main reason they fought so hard and well. There was esprit de corps.

---

Junction Boys 2.0!

---

Very good connection.

I wonder what the statistical defense comparison looks like for Elko's tenure at A&M and Jimbo's last two years.

BudFox7 said:

---

Defense was not the problem w Fisher's system when Elko was the DC

---

FIFY

Tanker123 said:

---

I wonder what the statistical defense comparison looks like for Elko's tenure at A&M and Jimbo's last two years.

---

Elko's defense was the best defense we've had since the WC days, and it's not close.

Bill Superman said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

I wonder what the statistical defense comparison looks like for Elko's tenure at A&M and Jimbo's last two years.

---

Elko's defense was the best defense we've had since the WC days, and it's not close.

---

And you could argue that Elko had significantly less talent during his DC years at A&M vs Fisher's last 2 years

Tanker123 said:

---

I wonder what the statistical defense comparison looks like for Elko's tenure at A&M and Jimbo's last two years.

---

Quick research shows the following...

Under Elko's four years we allowed 21.5 ppg, 59.15% completion, 220 pass ypg, 1.6 pass TD per game, 113 rush ypg, 3.6 rush ypc, 0.8 rush TD per game, 334 total ypg, 18.1 first downs per game, forced 1.15 turnovers per game.

Under Durkin: 21.65 ppg, 57.9% completion, 181 pass ypg, 1.4 pass TD per game, 158.8 rush ypg, 4.1 rush ypc, 0.9 rush TD per game, 340.6 total ypg, 18.6 first downs per game, forced 1.15 turnovers per game.

Stats don't tell the whole story, and I'm not sure anyone would suggest Durkin's defenses were better than Elko's. I would expect Elko's defenses to tackle better, play the run better, and be more fundamental.

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

I wonder what the statistical defense comparison looks like for Elko's tenure at A&M and Jimbo's last two years.

---

Quick research shows the following...

Under Elko's four years we allowed 21.5 ppg, 59.15% completion, 220 pass ypg, 1.6 pass TD per game, 113 rush ypg, 3.6 rush ypc, 0.8 rush TD per game, 334 total ypg, 18.1 first downs per game, forced 1.15 turnovers per game.

Under Durkin: 21.65 ppg, 57.9% completion, 181 pass ypg, 1.4 pass TD per game, 158.8 rush ypg, 4.1 rush ypc, 0.9 rush TD per game, 340.6 total ypg, 18.6 first downs per game, forced 1.15 turnovers per game.

Stats don't tell the whole story, and I'm not sure anyone would suggest Durkin's defenses were better than Elko's. I would expect Elko's defenses to tackle better, play the run better, and be more fundamental.

---

Both coaches run a bend but dont break defense which can be maddening in the moment but really effective in preventing scoring.

Durkin's defenses tended to get gashed in the run and not utilizer the depth and talent along to DL to create pressure thus needing more pressure from LB and secondary on blitzes. Durkin's defense also had the worst DB technique I have ever seen with the flag football chase technique, how that was thought to be a good idea is beyond me.

I recall Elko at both A&M and Duke having a knack for going prevent or not blitzing at inopportune times giving up easy completions. That said, Elko is inheriting a DL like he has never seen ever and some serious talent at DB. My hope is he stays aggressive.

Both coaches were negatively impacted by the lack of discipline and the poor S&C and nutrition under Jimbo. I am really hoping that has changed and if so I expect Elko's defense and overall team to be a whole letter grade better.

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

I wonder what the statistical defense comparison looks like for Elko's tenure at A&M and Jimbo's last two years.

---

Quick research shows the following...

Under Elko's four years we allowed 21.5 ppg, 59.15% completion, 220 pass ypg, 1.6 pass TD per game, 113 rush ypg, 3.6 rush ypc, 0.8 rush TD per game, 334 total ypg, 18.1 first downs per game, forced 1.15 turnovers per game.

Under Durkin: 21.65 ppg, 57.9% completion, 181 pass ypg, 1.4 pass TD per game, 158.8 rush ypg, 4.1 rush ypc, 0.9 rush TD per game, 340.6 total ypg, 18.6 first downs per game, forced 1.15 turnovers per game.

Stats don't tell the whole story, and I'm not sure anyone would suggest Durkin's defenses were better than Elko's. I would expect Elko's defenses to tackle better, play the run better, and be more fundamental.

---

What that says to me is that Durkin put up similar stats with better overall talent.

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

I wonder what the statistical defense comparison looks like for Elko's tenure at A&M and Jimbo's last two years.

---

Quick research shows the following...

Under Elko's four years we allowed 21.5 ppg, 59.15% completion, 220 pass ypg, 1.6 pass TD per game, 113 rush ypg, 3.6 rush ypc, 0.8 rush TD per game, 334 total ypg, 18.1 first downs per game, forced 1.15 turnovers per game.

Under Durkin: 21.65 ppg, 57.9% completion, 181 pass ypg, 1.4 pass TD per game, 158.8 rush ypg, 4.1 rush ypc, 0.9 rush TD per game, 340.6 total ypg, 18.6 first downs per game, forced 1.15 turnovers per game.

Stats don't tell the whole story, and I'm not sure anyone would suggest Durkin's defenses were better than Elko's. I would expect Elko's defenses to tackle better, play the run better, and be more fundamental.

---

Nice work!