THREAD - A TON of GREAT content out there right now on exploiting BSD protection and recovery. @HarrConnor and @SlappinGlass are 2 of many that have done this to perfection. As a defensive coach, it’s always a fight to try to get even with or ahead of offenses scheme wise. (1/8)

Attacking the tag, 45 cuts, etc. are great actions. But on the defensive end, my guiding thought on BSD is “the better you are on the ball, the better you are off the ball.” While not a tactical solution to the challenges offenses throw at us in BSD, it is a fact. (2/8)

Take USF vs. UVA last week. Many people have been wowed by USF’s Princeton Offense, and there’s merit to that. But 15 of USF’s 23 FGs came out of BSD. No need to panic if you’re a subscriber to UVA’s D. They only gave up 61. But, USF did challenge them in BSD: (3/8)

One area in BSD that challenged UVA’s BSD the most was guarding the Ghost/Slip/Slop. USF did an awesome job mixing it up, and the confusion + ensuing indecision it created on the ball gave USF’s guards the advantage need to attack. As a result, UVA struggled to contain it. (4/8)

At times, UVA also struggled to maintain pressure on the BH by staying attached to him in the hard hedge. This allowed the BH to comfortably punish UVA’s protection plan. (5/8)

Pressuring or bothering the BH in BSD can be done in ways other than hard hedging every BS. Defenses can mix up on-ball coverages to slow the BH down to mix up his reads. USF anticipated the hard hedge each time and punished the D with the Ghost/Slip or dragging the hedge. (6/8)

While UVA’s protection plan wasn’t perfect (helping from 1 away vs. shake and forgetting to jump/tag the roll from the backside), defenders on the ball didn’t stand in the way of BHs making passes and reads. (7/8)

Last, let’s be real. USF’s guards were dynamite and made some plays. Their two lead guards went for 19 and 14 and a combined 6 assists. My point: “the better you are on the ball, the better you are off the ball.” Good O beats Good D, and it was fun to watch.