It's not just DB's that are the problem. We don't have a Cody or Chapman type at NG which is critical to the 3-4 defense. A lot of things feed off of good NG play with CNS's defense, stopping the run and pass rush, which helps the DB's and LB's.
The defensive problems aren't the HUNH it's the CB's
- Thread starter bigjue24
- Start date
What WVU, what OU did in the Sugar bowl, and what TAMU runs is NOTHING like what Oregon does. Besides both being HUNH teams, they really couldn't be much different. Two totally different approaches and philosophy.
Everybody always brings up what Stanford does against Oregon, but it is an apples and oranges comparison. When Stanford played teams with a prolific passing attack last year, they gave up 28 points and 489 yards (350 passing) to Washington (49 passing attempts), and Arizona St (56 passing attempts) also put up 28 points and gave up 367 yards passing. Washington and Arizona are very average teams. Conversely, Oregon ran the ball 62 times against Stanford, an passed for 33. They only threw the ball 33 times because they were behind. Saying what Stanford did to Oregon is an irrelevant argument when talking about the kind of offense OU, TAMU, and WVU runs.
Oregon is way closer what AU does than what TAMU, OU, WVU does, except AU is doing it with SEC/NFL caliber linemen. They both run a heavily run first predicated HUHN attack, except AU is WAY more physical. AU's 2010 defense, which was one of the in SEC that year, had no issues with Oregon. We held AU to less than 400 yards last year, but not being able to contain Marshall, and breakdowns in our coverage gave them 2 easy scores. TAMU, OU, and WVU all passed either more or close to the total amount of yards that we gave up to AU. Its a totally different issue than we had with AU.
In all of our struggles over the last 2 years, it still comes back to the DB play. That is the key to making our defense work, and until it improves, we are going to struggle. These QB's are throwing ball as almost as soon as it hits their hands, and it is designed to negate your pass rush. Your DB's have to win some of those battles to be successful.
Everybody always brings up what Stanford does against Oregon, but it is an apples and oranges comparison. When Stanford played teams with a prolific passing attack last year, they gave up 28 points and 489 yards (350 passing) to Washington (49 passing attempts), and Arizona St (56 passing attempts) also put up 28 points and gave up 367 yards passing. Washington and Arizona are very average teams. Conversely, Oregon ran the ball 62 times against Stanford, an passed for 33. They only threw the ball 33 times because they were behind. Saying what Stanford did to Oregon is an irrelevant argument when talking about the kind of offense OU, TAMU, and WVU runs.
Oregon is way closer what AU does than what TAMU, OU, WVU does, except AU is doing it with SEC/NFL caliber linemen. They both run a heavily run first predicated HUHN attack, except AU is WAY more physical. AU's 2010 defense, which was one of the in SEC that year, had no issues with Oregon. We held AU to less than 400 yards last year, but not being able to contain Marshall, and breakdowns in our coverage gave them 2 easy scores. TAMU, OU, and WVU all passed either more or close to the total amount of yards that we gave up to AU. Its a totally different issue than we had with AU.
In all of our struggles over the last 2 years, it still comes back to the DB play. That is the key to making our defense work, and until it improves, we are going to struggle. These QB's are throwing ball as almost as soon as it hits their hands, and it is designed to negate your pass rush. Your DB's have to win some of those battles to be successful.
Buzzard, it's as if you're living in my brain...SPOT ON! The Head Ball Coach's (Saban) reluctance to be flexible enough to deal with the changing landscape (that is offensive HUNH Spread college football) is a major issue. Hate to rain on the cheerleader's parade. However, I still would not trade him for anyone in the land. RTR!
I concur. The HUNH in conjunction with the Spread and read option play havoc on an entire defense. It puts all defensive personnel in conflict having to make a choice on each individual play. The addition of a mobile QB make the DE's have to play soft.
It's like Saban said a year or so ago and I've quoted several time (paraphrasing), "Is this really what's good for the sport? Is this really where you want to see it go?"
I've said it several times, but I don't enjoy watching these HUNH teams - the completely remove the 'thinking' part of the game that makes it so intriguing to me. If people want basketball-on-grass, keep it up - people like me will eventually stop watching.
The only teams that, in my opinion, are having consistent, measurable success against the elite tempo offenses are the teams that can absolutely wreak havoc in the backfield, by one method or another. I think that in most cases, this means calling a very aggressive and risky defensive game...ironically enough, you must counter hyper-aggressive offense with hyper-aggressive defense. The good tempo teams are so efficient that you can't just sit back there and react and hope to stop them consistently.
Yep, things have changed dramatically in the last 3 or 4 years, and its only going to get worse under the current clock rules. Mississippi State ran nearly 80 plays Sat night, and AU, TAMU, OM, and UT are all running fast paced offenses this year. Even we ran a lot more plays than we normally do Sat night (82).
The times they are a-changin'!
Finding good DBs nowadays is like trying to find a LT. Everyone moving to this type offense is making the recruiting competition for top flight DBs very elusive. Imo, you need to get as many of those 4-5 star DBs that you can but you also need to start looking at adding some 3 star DBS as well just get a rotation going to where those guys can give you some quality minutes on a few plays each game. It's apparent that our experienced depth is limited in the secondary. I think we are going to have to trot some of these younger guys out there and let them get some OJT. I believe I would have done that with Sylve just to send a message.
I don't either. Unfortunately, It may take an extreme , like a decade of increased post football brain injuries. They have already linked CTE with non concussive repeated brain trauma like the cumulative effects of normal hits on every play. stands to reason if you have more plays there will be more risk. 25% more plays is like an extra season every 4 years.
My reasons are more selfish. football was always meant to be more physical than finesse. HUNH is more finesse than physical. HUNH is just not football to me
I wonder about our opinions if Mike Price would of stayed out of trouble and stayed at Bama. His coaching tree is a Who's who of HUNH and includes Sumlin, Gundy , Petrino, Tiller,Holgorson and even James Franklin
)thus my question
Would somebody be kind enough to explain to me what "lock down corner" means?
Obviously, there is something that our corners are not doing that they should be doing, but I don't know the mechanics of football well enough to know what that something is.
Thanks!
Obviously, there is something that our corners are not doing that they should be doing, but I don't know the mechanics of football well enough to know what that something is.
Thanks!
The receiver he is covering is never open. He can do it himself without any need of a double team.
I don't think the coverage aspect of the corners is the problem with most HUNH teams, especially the run based ones like Auburn. They have to be able to fight off blocks and make tackles on the edge in space.
Without reading five pages, I'll just cut to the chase and say OP is correct.
Real problem that we have had -- and continue to have -- is that our cornerback recruiting basically went in the tank after we signed Dee Milliner. You basically go from the signing of Dee Milliner in 2009 to the signing of Eddie Jackson in 2013 (and, really, Brown and Humphrey this past year), and you get almost nothing at cornerback, just a couple of guys who never really lived up to their thought-to-be potential and a whole lot of "athlete" types that haven't turned into high-level cornerbacks.
That might have been fine 30 years ago, but not in this day and age. If you've got problems at cornerback in the modern game, you are going to be exposed very badly and your defense is giving up a lot of yards and points. And that's basically where we are at now. When you get career no-names who suddenly start showing up and easily throwing for 350+ against you, "scheme," regardless of how loosely you define that, is typically the least of your problems.
Real problem that we have had -- and continue to have -- is that our cornerback recruiting basically went in the tank after we signed Dee Milliner. You basically go from the signing of Dee Milliner in 2009 to the signing of Eddie Jackson in 2013 (and, really, Brown and Humphrey this past year), and you get almost nothing at cornerback, just a couple of guys who never really lived up to their thought-to-be potential and a whole lot of "athlete" types that haven't turned into high-level cornerbacks.
That might have been fine 30 years ago, but not in this day and age. If you've got problems at cornerback in the modern game, you are going to be exposed very badly and your defense is giving up a lot of yards and points. And that's basically where we are at now. When you get career no-names who suddenly start showing up and easily throwing for 350+ against you, "scheme," regardless of how loosely you define that, is typically the least of your problems.
Last edited:
Absolutely, and that's going to remain a problem, I'm afraid, as we play Ole Miss, A&M, and especially Auburn.
When your starting cornerbacks are averaging around 5'10 and 185 pounds, that's just a battle you are never going to win. Opposing coaches will -- and have, judging by what WVU did to us -- see that and view it as an opportunity ripe for exploitation. A 6'3, 215 pound receiver iso-blocking a 5'10 and 194 pound cornerback is going to win that battle far more often than he loses it.
Again, that just gets me back to my earlier point, underlying which is the fact that size is very important in a cornerback these days, and signing a lot of these small frame, bean-pole type "athletes" who run really well isn't a complete solution. You need length, you need athleticism, and you need someone who can fend off blocks and fight through the clutter on the perimeter in the run game and in the short passing game. Truth is, CB has become a position a lot like LT, in that it's getting to be essentially a must-have position for top-end talent. It has become nearly impossible to disguise talent deficiencies at cornerback these days.
Last edited:
Trickett's past numbers were misleading. He is probably the 2nd or 3rd best qb in the big12 and probably will be the best or a close 2nd qb we will see all year. A lot of the problems we had with him was that he was capable of making snap decisions and he had great pocket prescense. Granted our cbs didn't play particularly well and our d line didn't get in his face often enough, but you got to give the man his props and he might of only missed one or two passes if not for his butter fingered receivers.
This is the problem exactly. If CB play comes back to where it was several years ago it doesn't fix everything, but it certainly helps. Bama has never gotten great push from the DL rushing the passer. Upshaw and Dareus are the only exceptions in the Saban era, and the defense was just fine. The issue is at CB. Defensive line play can help cover that up by putting pressure on the QB, but it doesn't fix the problem, and hopefully Jackson, Brown, and Humphrey can fix it soon.
Latest threads
-
-
Question: Chris Youngblood did he commit over the weekend?
- Started by mlingerfelt31
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-