Question: Question: OL/DL fatigue with 99 plays

bamacon

Hall of Fame
Apr 11, 2008
17,179
4,352
187
College Football's Mecca, Tuscaloosa
I heard someone mention on the radio that Bama fans saying the Defense was gassed due to the 99 plays was no excuse. Correct me if I'm wrong but I also thought I've heard from former players that the energy expended by the DL is much more than the OL. Does anyone know because it seemed like Bama was shutting down Clemson for 80% game and then hit a wall?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
20,932
15,935
282
Boone, NC
This is being discussed is several threads, but the short answer is yes the defense got tired. No way you hold up against DW and that offense for that long without wearing down after that many plays.

Bottom line, if the offense makes a couple more first downs and runs some more clock at some point in the game, we are celebrating #17 now.
 

CoastGhost

Suspended
Sep 5, 2009
5,650
80
67
North Carolina
It is not an excuse but it is a reason. I would think on pass plays, the defense would work harder than the offense and the opposite for run plays just based on action coming to you or you going to the action but I don't know. Nor do I know the human limit for running wind sprints and colliding into men about your size but I expect mine is far lower than 99! :)
 

bamanix

1st Team
Mar 24, 2010
528
0
0
the only way Clemson wins this game is that they will get over 80 plays in this game. they achieved this because our offense was so ragged. we still had a chance with bo, but, his injury was the end. we only had two first downs on 13 attempts. no wonder, the defense was tired. they rarely got off the field. we had no drives. we scored on big plays. I really don't understand why we went away from the run when bo went down. we were still ahead, and harris was a legitimate 1000 yard rusher this year. Jacobs showed will this year. instead we forced hurts, a poor passer, and rusher against a 7 and 8 man rush, failed often. we needed a stewart touchdown pass, a bo run, and Jalen a great run near the end. unfortunately, by jalens run the defense had been whipped. way too long on the field. of course, those to pick plays really set me off. the last one was block that got two defenders. no call. even so, we have a long way to go to get Jalen ready as a real dual qb. his passing is so bad. he never puts any air under the ball. everything is a dart. the offensive line continued its penalty play. only blocked to the left well. even so give Clemson credit they stated even before game they were going to force Jalen to beat them. they had the best game plan.
 

PA Tide Fan

All-American
Dec 11, 2014
4,442
3,058
187
Lancaster, PA
This is sort of where we played into Clemson's hands I think. I don't know if it was Sark's idea or Saban's but many times on offense we were getting the plays in faster and snapping the ball with a lot of time still on the play clock. Kiffin always used to get the plays in slower and we got the play off with only a few seconds remaining. Had we slowed down the tempo a bit and used our full allotted time then I don't think Clemson has the time to run 99 plays.
 

AlexanderFan

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
11,076
7,524
187
Birmingham
Quick throws which require little blocking, but maximum effort on the d line, and cut blocks, which are the same effectively allow bigger offensive lineman to stay fresher during a game. They don't chase the quarterback nor are they trying to run away from a defender with his hand full of jersey. So defenders will be far more tired than the offensive line will be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

day-day

Hall of Fame
Jan 2, 2005
9,937
1,659
187
Bartlett, TN (Memphis area)
Also, some offensive players can take breaks during plays if they no longer can affect the play while pretty much every defensive player will have to continue to pursue the play. Defensive players have to react more than most offensive players which takes more energy. Offenses tend to substitute receivers who run downfield while the defensive backs usually remain the same and have to constantly chase receivers even when they are basically decoys. These add up.
 

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
20,932
15,935
282
Boone, NC
This is sort of where we played into Clemson's hands I think. I don't know if it was Sark's idea or Saban's but many times on offense we were getting the plays in faster and snapping the ball with a lot of time still on the play clock. Kiffin always used to get the plays in slower and we got the play off with only a few seconds remaining. Had we slowed down the tempo a bit and used our full allotted time then I don't think Clemson has the time to run 99 plays.
Correct...not doubt.

A deeper question I have is this: Did Sark have as good of a feel for in-game play calling as Kiffin would have (assuming Kiffin at his best)?

I think the obvious answer IN THIS GAME is "NO." It seems we were getting plays in so fast that Sark wasn't even checking Clemson's defensive set. I don't remember too many times JH looking to the sideline for audibles either. This would have been when Kiffin was signaling in an audible based on the defense. We went so fast in this game that I don't think we made many changes and often we ran right into the teeth of their defense and they saw it coming.

We were probably whistling past the grave yard on the reality that the sudden change would show up in this game and I wonder if that was part of it?

BTW, not suggesting the Sark isn't right for the position or that he won't be as good next season, but lets face it, there was probably no way he could transition and be equal/better than an undistracted Kiffin in only having a week to get ready and then calling his first game in about 2 years.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
]Correct me if I'm wrong but I also thought I've heard from former players that the energy expended by the DL is much more than the OL.
Sure they do - the OL never substitutes unless there is an injury - it's standard practice for DL to rotate fresh players in.
 

Tideflyer

Hall of Fame
Dec 14, 2011
7,826
3,904
187
Savannah, GA
This is being discussed is several threads, but the short answer is yes the defense got tired. No way you hold up against DW and that offense for that long without wearing down after that many plays.

Bottom line, if the offense makes a couple more first downs and runs some more clock at some point in the game, we are celebrating #17 now.
In my own very humble opinion, I think that`s the most accurate and succinct summary of the game that I`ve seen.
 

CHATTBRIT

Hall of Fame
Dec 3, 2003
5,762
504
237
Falling Water, TN
Any defense, even our amazing front four, cannot be expected to make 89 plays with little rest. Seven 3 and outs did not allow enough recovery time. That being said, the NC is a team championship and a team wins or loses, not the individual. I think it would be totally disingenuous to make excuses (No EJ, no Bo in 4 Qtr). I'm still trying to process my first NC game loss since I started following the Tide in 1980 when I moved to Orangeville. One thing I know is that I can hold my head high and be proud of the 2016 Tide despite losing. Clemson deserved the win. Rats!
 

tusks_n_raider

Hall of Fame
May 13, 2009
12,130
12,212
187
Mobile, AL
Clemson ran 80+ plays on lots of teams this season. They ran 91 against NC State who held them to 17 points going into OT and 24 points total. Troy, Auburn, and Ga Tech all held them to 30 or less points. The offense scored enough to win. The Defense could not even force a FG attempt. They couldn't force enough 3 and outs themselves. They couldn't get an INT off a guy who averaged at least 1 a game for 2 straight years. They were just flat overrated and not good enough to win a NC. We could play Clemson 9 more times and Watson would torch them 9 more times.
 

JDCrimson

Hall of Fame
Feb 12, 2006
5,346
4,417
187
51
We seemed hell bent on playing man coverage. They would take Reuben out wide to cover a TE/WR with Williams on the line for rush. This left Evans as the only LB in the middle where they would run some decoy route through tying him up and then drag Renfro through for the easy catch. Basically a quick short throw to diffuse our pressure.

The only way to effectively defend what they were doing is with our own ball control offense.

What I don't understand is why on some of those midfield 3rd and 4th and shorts why we didn't bring in our heavy package or Mack Wilson to grind out a conversion or two. Because as we have all concluded a midfield conversion in the second half was as good as points.

I dont know how you would incorporate it but think we really should consider having someone in the box who is basically an armchair OC kind of like us who doesnt necessarily have a play sheet but is just watching the game for the trends and tendencies that develop throughout the game.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

theballguy

Hall of Fame
Nov 5, 2012
6,268
1,083
187
Roll Tide Roll, Colorado USA
The game is by nature bent to offense. Defense always reacts and must cover the entire field. There are times when you gamble though. The offense can scheme, redirect and essentially push a play to a very small portion of the field. So, defenses will usually be the first to wear down against an offense with a pulse.
 

CoachJeff

Suspended
Jan 21, 2014
3,596
3,654
187
Shelby County Alabama
It's easier to attack than to defend. You got more tired on defense than on offense.

Bama had 7 straight drives that lasted under 2:00 at one point. You will have a hard time winning that way.

However, if Bama makes a play on the last drive none of these questions get asked. Funny how that is.
 

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.