may have gone unnoticed in the first 2 seasons because, hey, we were winning, and it looked like we were getting better. And the trajectory of that seeming improvement had us all high on pie in the sky. But now, in year 3, it seems like opposing OCs have finally figured it out and it’s been exposed as a severe liability.

I’m all for coaching continuity and the benefits of that on team development and recruiting. But if MSU significantly digresses this year and ends up with a sub-0.500 record – which you could argue may negatively impact recruiting and team development – and the defensive scheme/playcalling is the main cuprit, I think Dantonio will have to take a long look at parting ways with Narduzzi.

Are there advantages to keeping 3 LBs on the field at all time that we’re overlooking?

Reportedly, the defensive coverage schemes are getting even simpler. Apparently, the get-really-good-at-what-you-do-regardless-of-the-opponent thing is definitely the plan.

MSU’s primary coverage scheme is called “cover four,” or “quarters.” It’s a zone coverage with each of the four defensive backs responsible for one-fourth of the deep part of the field.

The other primary coverage styles are man-to-man, “cover two” (safeties split the deep part of the field, corners play more shallow), “cover three” (three defensive backs split the deep part of the field, with one closer to the line) and “man free,” which involves man-to-man coverage with one safety playing center field.

Defenses also mix coverages, with some players in a zone and some man-to-man, to try to confuse offenses. Barnett said MSU’s secondary was struggling to communicate and react well within certain combinations.

“We scrapped a couple coverages. We’re not gonna do those again,” Barnett said. “We simplified things, and I can see it really helping out our guys, too. We’ve got guys playing fast now and playing with confidence.”