Question Regarding Defense vs. MSU

deltatider

1st Team
Nov 29, 2005
934
529
117
43
One thing that has frustrated me the last few years is that for the most part, we don't really seem to confuse the opposing offense very often when we decide to bring pressure. Frankly I was envious of what A&M was able to do with their blitz packages against our front. To my untrained eye it looked like our guys up front were confused multiple times when A&M brought pressure. For the most part that doesn't seem to be the case when we decide to bring some pressure. Which leads me to my question...

Late in the 1st quarter our defense started to really get after the MSU quarterback. And it pretty much continued throughout the game from that point on. It looked to me like MSU was confused at times, and just overwhelmed others; but either way we were pretty effective at causing issues with our pressure. For some of you that are more versed at the X's &O's side of the game....Were we more creative in our blitz packages? Was it because we knew they weren't a threat to run so we were able to pin our ears back more than normal....Or was it a talent gap situation? In other words, did you see anything to make you think we might be able to have a similar level of success going forward?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rush

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,193
3,327
187
One thing that has frustrated me the last few years is that for the most part, we don't really seem to confuse the opposing offense very often when we decide to bring pressure. Frankly I was envious of what A&M was able to do with their blitz packages against our front. To my untrained eye it looked like our guys up front were confused multiple times when A&M brought pressure. For the most part that doesn't seem to be the case when we decide to bring some pressure. Which leads me to my question...

Late in the 1st quarter our defense started to really get after the MSU quarterback. And it pretty much continued throughout the game from that point on. It looked to me like MSU was confused at times, and just overwhelmed others; but either way we were pretty effective at causing issues with our pressure. For some of you that are more versed at the X's &O's side of the game....Were we more creative in our blitz packages? Was it because we knew they weren't a threat to run so we were able to pin our ears back more than normal....Or was it a talent gap situation? In other words, did you see anything to make you think we might be able to have a similar level of success going forward?
I don’t think all of the sacks or pressures came when we were rushing more than four, sometimes three. Saban mentioned this in his PC. If you can get pressure without blitzing you have a much better chance of being successful.
 

bamafaninbham

All-SEC
Jul 19, 2004
1,600
1,204
182
Homewood
I think it was mostly due to the fact there is little to worry about from the run game against MSU. But there was definitely more to the rush than normal. Saw more twists than we have run all year. Not that all of them were effective. Several times we would take and inside DT and at the snap stunt him from the left interior all the way around the right side which always took too long. But other than that I thought we did a good job of mixing up where we were bringing pressure. At least it was different than bringing both ILBs up the A gap time and time again to little effect like against the aggies.
 

gtgilbert

All-American
Aug 12, 2011
3,166
4,036
187
One thing that has frustrated me the last few years is that for the most part, we don't really seem to confuse the opposing offense very often when we decide to bring pressure. Frankly I was envious of what A&M was able to do with their blitz packages against our front. To my untrained eye it looked like our guys up front were confused multiple times when A&M brought pressure. For the most part that doesn't seem to be the case when we decide to bring some pressure. Which leads me to my question...

Late in the 1st quarter our defense started to really get after the MSU quarterback. And it pretty much continued throughout the game from that point on. It looked to me like MSU was confused at times, and just overwhelmed others; but either way we were pretty effective at causing issues with our pressure. For some of you that are more versed at the X's &O's side of the game....Were we more creative in our blitz packages? Was it because we knew they weren't a threat to run so we were able to pin our ears back more than normal....Or was it a talent gap situation? In other words, did you see anything to make you think we might be able to have a similar level of success going forward?
Biggest factors in the increase in sacks stats:

  1. Will Anderson
  2. Will Anderson
  3. for some inexplicable reason, they rarely doubled Will Anderson
  4. We had them against the ropes and were able to rush full force - pin the ears back and go
  5. We did use a couple different looks. Some didn't work (like looping the DT all the way around that another poster mentioned), but some did cause the OL to have to think about stuff like that and a couple worked better than they have in the past - the DB blitzes were more effective with one sack and a couple of hurries officially, but pretty sure a few more contributed to other times we effected the QB
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
Biggest factors in the increase in sacks stats:

  1. Will Anderson
  2. Will Anderson
  3. for some inexplicable reason, they rarely doubled Will Anderson
  4. We had them against the ropes and were able to rush full force - pin the ears back and go
  5. We did use a couple different looks. Some didn't work (like looping the DT all the way around that another poster mentioned), but some did cause the OL to have to think about stuff like that and a couple worked better than they have in the past - the DB blitzes were more effective with one sack and a couple of hurries officially, but pretty sure a few more contributed to other times we effected the QB
I'm not sure you emphasized Will Anderson's role enough.

No blue font needed.
 

deltatider

1st Team
Nov 29, 2005
934
529
117
43
Biggest factors in the increase in sacks stats:

  1. Will Anderson
  2. Will Anderson
  3. for some inexplicable reason, they rarely doubled Will Anderson
  4. We had them against the ropes and were able to rush full force - pin the ears back and go
  5. We did use a couple different looks. Some didn't work (like looping the DT all the way around that another poster mentioned), but some did cause the OL to have to think about stuff like that and a couple worked better than they have in the past - the DB blitzes were more effective with one sack and a couple of hurries officially, but pretty sure a few more contributed to other times we effected the QB
Ha….Absolutely right about Will Anderson. He was a complete terror Saturday night. If we could get one of our D-Linemen to step up and compliment Will, our defense would be a lot tougher to deal with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B1GTide and Rush

JustNeedMe81

Hall of Fame
Sep 30, 2011
14,905
6,189
187
42
Huntsville, Al
This is hard. Will Anderson definitely was the x-factor in the game. Without him, MSU would've killed us and game would've been lot closer. Seems like we ran similar bilitzes from previous game. I really hate the twist blitzes... We take so long to get to QBs...
 

BamaDMD

Hall of Fame
Sep 10, 2007
5,446
834
137
Rainsville Al
Ha….Absolutely right about Will Anderson. He was a complete terror Saturday night. If we could get one of our D-Linemen to step up and compliment Will, our defense would be a lot tougher to deal with.
Just look at our defense in the Miami game when we had Chris Allen. When we had him and Will, we looked like Georgia's front 7 now.

By the way, Is Allen out for the entire season or is there a chance we see him by post season?
 
Last edited:

bamagradinATL

All-American
Sep 12, 2006
3,415
1,580
187
47
McKinney, TX
I usually refrain from comparing him to some of our greats, but man that guy’s motor is always running. When he isn’t flat out beating his man he’s being held. We had a great who had a motor like that, I won’t name him. Most of you know who I’m talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TideEngineer08

AUDub

Hall of Fame
Dec 4, 2013
16,258
5,930
187
Give me ambiguity or give me something else.
This is hard. Will Anderson definitely was the x-factor in the game. Without him, MSU would've killed us and game would've been lot closer. Seems like we ran similar bilitzes from previous game. I really hate the twist blitzes... We take so long to get to QBs...
Against schemes like Leach's that rely heavily on vertical set blocking, stemming and stunting are the name of the game. Vertical set limits direct approaches to the QB by nature, so you have to introduce some confusion.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,284
30,895
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I do not think that another team will ever single Will Anderson again after that game. aTm totally neutralized him with doubles and triples. And, when Anderson is neutralized, the entire pass rush is neutralized.
Which makes no sense. We need Drew Sanders back.

But if you are double and triple teaming one player, it's just like doubling a WR. Someone has to be open. Someone has to have an open lane to the QB. Why can't we exploit that?
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.