Has this been posted?
“Just so everyone knows, we don’t teach our guys to just dive at the ground and not see what you hit,” Sitake said. “We teach our guys to be aggressive, close the grass, keep your eyes on the ball-carrier and strike.”
And then:
Sitake is sometimes unsure if certain players are deliberately being defiant because they don’t believe in the scheme or if they simply “get freaked out” when the pressure ramps up with thousands of onlookers in the stands.
It sounds like they are getting stage freight. It’s lame Sitake thinks they might be purposely defiant. They should have given the actual quote on that one. Maybe now that the pressure is off and the season is lost, they can relax and show the improvement we’re all expecting.
Doubtful that they’ll show the improvement we’re hoping for if they’re either defiant or ‘freaked out’. That’s mostly because the defiance piece wont have changed due to the fact that the season is lost, and the pressure of on-lookers will still be there regardless as well.
To start seeing the significant improvement that we desire, they need to realize that the old regime is dead. Their old life is gone. The new life requires new expectations. The new tasks in front of them are their focus. Mental cues like ‘being aggressive’ can direct their energy, but they need to buy into the focal points of ‘closing the grass’ and ‘striking the carrier’ to sustain attention and motivation throughout the game.
Until they’ve bought in to the ‘process’, they’ll remain behind the 8-ball regardless of the pressure and expectations.
watching Andersen on The Drive tonight I can’t help but think things will get better, even before this season is over let alone into future seasons. His leadership skills are in such dramatic contrast to the absence of same under Riley. He just needs some decent QB play to turn this around
If these comments are real and true, then Sitake is morally bankrupt and a fake teacher. At 850 k, you had better know how to present your message and then have your students demonstrate. To blame them for being defiant is nothing less than high treason or should way say, hedonistic narcissism.
That’s a weird comment and melodramatic, but it is weird he thinks that. But without his quote, it’s possible the reporter misunderstood him, which is why I said it would be nice to get the quote.
But remember back to the first game. Most commented on how we actually saw open field tackling instead of the Banker Hug & Flop. What changed? Was it the competition or???
This. There’s been a noticeable drop off over the course of the season.
I actually remember on the first play of the season against Weber St. (where DeCoud was not fooled on the trick play) thinking to myself that this was a different, smarter defense and that Banker’s defense would have been burned on that type of play. Looks like I was wrong in hindsight, for now anyway.
It’s an o-live media interpretation. I wouldn’t go from there to “morally bankrupt” anyway.
You all underestimate the supernatural power of Keith Pankey. The precedent of flopping on the ground and pretending to tackle a runner was set long ago on the gilded plains of Reser Stadium, it’s going to take sometime to excise the Ghost of Pankey.
Careful, or his mom might yell at you.
I linked this interview with Sitake in an earlier thread. I believe this may be the source of the quotes because it is generally the topic being discussed in the interview. However, the tape has been edited with obvious cuts, and, as a result, you don’t actually hear him say the first quote (about how they teach tackling). That was likely heard and noted by someone off camera (?). He does use the word “defiant” to offer a possible explanation for breakdowns that occur in games, but it fits, sort of, within the context of what he is talking about. Perhaps “defiant” wasn’t the best word to use.
Maybe I should include the link, huh?
http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2015/10/watch_fundamentals_the_focus_f.html#incart_river
That interview was good. Sounds much better than the print, which is inaccurate interpretation imo.
It’s remarkable that these players are taking so long to figure out a simplified version of the defense. I’m sure they are coaching them right, so I have to think this is on the players, for whatever reason.
He uses defiant when talking about players doing poorly at one position and moving them to a position where they don’t have to think as much and they should be able to play better because they do it in practice, but then they still don’t. He says that they aren’t buying in and at that point it becomes a little bit defiant and “we can’t coach that”.
That’s better understood. Only I would call it pouting instead of defiance.
Yup, hopefully these guys will transfer out and get some players that will buy in. Hard to coach if they are uncoachable, you just can’t beat them with the hose anymore, damn unions.