Jalen Milroe is now the starter going forward.

[RollTide_HTTR]

I'd play us man-to-man with deeper than normal drops for the DBs. EVERYONE else is playing in the box to occupy every blocker +1, then I've got a spy on Milroe so we'd really be +2 in the box. that'd create a situation where Bama would need to try to pass, so right at the snap I'd be bailing a guy into each flat, and a S to the middle. I would dare Bama to try to beat me with dink and dunk passes down the field. Double dog dare even...

Likely what most teams will do or at least some variation of it.

 

[colbysullivan]

Likely what most teams will do or at least some variation of it.

Or what LSU did to Hurts in 2016, if they have the athletes on the outside.

 

[bamaslammer]

I'd play us man-to-man with deeper than normal drops for the DBs. EVERYONE else is playing in the box to occupy every blocker +1, then I've got a spy on Milroe so we'd really be +2 in the box. that'd create a situation where Bama would need to try to pass, so right at the snap I'd be bailing a guy into each flat, and a S to the middle. I would dare Bama to try to beat me with dink and dunk passes down the field. Double dog dare even...

That's not what they are going to do. they will leave two deep, tell them to just PI if necessary to limit JM's long ball (which he is very good at). then focus the rest of the defense in the box. Bama's run game will tank, JM won't have success in the intermediary, he will score a few long TD's but it won't be enough

 

[Cruloc]

Or what LSU did to Hurts in 2016, if they have the athletes on the outside.

Shhhh, the Milroeians won't like such talk. Come to think of it, the blue font is unnecessary because its true.

 

[SkullDuckery]

I'd play us man-to-man with deeper than normal drops for the DBs. EVERYONE else is playing in the box to occupy every blocker +1, then I've got a spy on Milroe so we'd really be +2 in the box. that'd create a situation where Bama would need to try to pass, so right at the snap I'd be bailing a guy into each flat, and a S to the middle. I would dare Bama to try to beat me with dink and dunk passes down the field. Double dog dare even...

Sounds a lot like what Texas did 2nd quarter on.

 

[92tide]

every time i think we’ve reached peak eeyore …

 

[BamaMoon]

I'm no defensive expert, but wouldn't zone with two deep safeties seem the better plan for someone like Miloroe?

Two deep safeties will hurt his deep ball and he doesn't see underneath coverage which led to his two terrible INTs.

I'd put my best athlete on defense as a spy.

 

[JustNeedMe81]

I'm no defensive expert, but wouldn't zone with two deep safeties seem the better plan for someone like Miloroe?

Two deep safeties will hurt his deep ball and he doesn't see underneath coverage which led to his two terrible INTs.

I'd put my best athlete on defense as a spy.

That could work, but even with someone who spys Milroe, Milroe is hard to stop when running. He can easily blow past by Spy LB. If there's zone, You'll give him time to find his man. He'll get better with underneath coverage.

If Ole Miss is smart.. send 4, 5 man rush, scheme different way to get to Milroe, knowing the issues OL had. Generate pressure, and force MIlroe to make mistakes. Get points off TO.

 

[TexasBama]

every time i think we’ve reached peak eeyore …

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Remember when fans weren't sold on Mac Jones? But, he turned out to be one of the best QBs the team has ever had and gave the Tide one of their best seasons.

Maybe Milroe will do the same

the difference is Mac could throw accurately. I was one of the few posters that never doubted Mac. I do not see Milroe suddenly becoming an awesome accurate passer overnight.

 

[BamaMoon]

You'll give him time to find his man. He'll get better with underneath coverage.

With our OL?

But seriously, if he gets better with underneath coverage assumes he has to learn some from failure. At what expense will he get better? After several more INTs (remember against UT he could have been picked 4-5 times and was lucky it didn't happen) OR will his improvement come after a couple more losses???

I'm not sure what the answer is, but we've usually been able to manage our QBs thru growth and struggle to find a way to avoid losing while still getting better.

That'll be the goal with Milroe, but in those years with QBs like GMac or Coker we had impressive OL play and dynamic RBs and I don't see that out of Jace or Roydell at this time.

 

[BamaMoon]

I think playing man with single high safety coverage is what Jalen would like to see most and be best for his game. Again, I don't understand defensive concepts schematics well enough, but it would just we could scheme that better with deep shots than zone with 2 deep safeties cause by the time JM reads the deep ball is not there he's got to come back to a 2nd or 3rd read underneath and we've seen how he struggles with that.

 

[JustNeedMe81]

With our OL?

But seriously, if he gets better with underneath coverage assumes he has to learn some from failure. At what expense will he get better? After several more INTs (remember against UT he could have been picked 4-5 times and was lucky it didn't happen) OR will his improvement come after a couple more losses???

I'm not sure what the answer is, but we've usually been able to manage our QBs thru growth and struggle to find a way to avoid losing while still getting better.

That'll be the goal with Milroe, but in those years with QBs like GMac or Coker we had impressive OL play and dynamic RBs and I don't see that out of Jace or Roydell at this time.

Yes. the OL issues is correctable.

 

[editder]

One thing no one has (I think) discussed--that perhaps it was Rees who pushed for Buchner to get the start. If Bucher's practice performance had been anything like his USF performance, a player revolt might make a little more sense.

If Rees thinks Buchner is the guy, that alone is grounds to question his grip on reality.

 

[BamaMoon]

If Rees thinks Buchner is the guy, that alone is grounds to question his grip on reality.

So I just watched the On3 video in another thread.

Don't know who that guy is, but he raised an important question about going forward with JM. He said, "So with JM is it going to be 'Alabama's offense' OR an offense tailored to JM?"

If CTR was told by CNS (and this is what we've constantly heard from him) "run the Bama offense" then that's what we saw against UT. With JM, you get the explosive plays and the implosive plays.

CNS has always figured out a way to win with QBs that had weaknesses (GMac, Coker and Hurts come to mind) so it'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

But if CTR doubts JM's ability to run "the Bama offense" you can't blame his for wanting to see if TB could.

 

[Bamaingeorgia81]

If Rees thinks Buchner is the guy, that alone is grounds to question his grip on reality.

Buchner played horribly, but that was mostly(but not all) because his throws were so erratic and he kept missing targets and throwing the ball in the ground.

It's conceivable that had buchner just been more accurate(a big if) he would have done ok Saturday. Of course even then it doesn't mean much given the opponent.

Buchner and Simpson's game scores were fairly similarly terrible(qbr of 15 for one and 20 for the other), but I got the sense that in Buchner's case if he was more accurate it was a salvageable perfornance. I didn't get that sense in Simpson's case- even if simpson had hit every pass between the numbers, he was still not managing the pocket, still not reading the field, etc....that's why I never expected Simpson to be considered for the OleMiss start.

 

[Cruloc]

Buchner played horribly, but that was mostly(but not all) because his throws were so erratic and he kept missing targets and throwing the ball in the ground.

It's conceivable that had buchner just been more accurate(a big if) he would have done ok Saturday. Of course even then it doesn't mean much given the opponent.

Buchner and Simpson's game scores were fairly similarly terrible(qbr of 15 for one and 20 for the other), but I got the sense that in Buchner's case if he was more accurate it was a salvageable perfornance. I didn't get that sense in Simpson's case- even if simpson had hit every pass between the numbers, he was still not managing the pocket, still not reading the field, etc....that's why I never expected Simpson to be considered for the OleMiss start.

I've probably missed some posts, but that's the first one I've read that argued Buchner would have had a better performance if he had been more accurate. The same could be said of all QB's in every game ever played, couldn't it?

Of course, I keep thinking I've watched a different game, because between Buchner and Simpson....Simpson was the better QB vs USF. He was more accurate. He held onto the ball too long, like most kids that haven't seen a lot of action, but the team responded to him in the 4th. The WR's were ready to throw Buchner off the field.

 

[countrytider]

Buchner played horribly, but that was mostly(but not all) because his throws were so erratic and he kept missing targets and throwing the ball in the ground.

It's conceivable that had buchner just been more accurate(a big if) he would have done ok Saturday. Of course even then it doesn't mean much given the opponent.

Buchner and Simpson's game scores were fairly similarly terrible(qbr of 15 for one and 20 for the other), but I got the sense that in Buchner's case if he was more accurate it was a salvageable perfornance. I didn't get that sense in Simpson's case- even if simpson had hit every pass between the numbers, he was still not managing the pocket, still not reading the field, etc....that's why I never expected Simpson to be considered for the OleMiss start.

You’re honestly saying between Buchner and Simpson, you pick Buchner?

 

[UAH]

I was around when Coach Bryant had his first decline from 67-70 and there were billboards from Bama fans declaring that "the old gray Bear ain't what he used to be", wanting him gone. There were many who wanted him gone. Then of course from 81-82 it happened again. As usual, the female fans were the best "true fans", who almost always "support the team, the coach, the players". Their expression was, "thank you Coach for 25 great years". They helped put the focus in the right place, not on the dysfunction that characterized the end of his run.

This, of course, was before the current media environment. If fringe Bama fans do it again, if and when Coach Saban's run declines, the ugly exposure (including running with rumor and innuendo rather than waiting for substance) will be far worse and observed with greater delight by Alabama's legion of enemies. They will likely be rewarded with what they deserve - a program that will have a hard time finding a good coach to enter a toxic environment. (It's going to be tough enough as it is.)

The debt Alabama fans owe Coach Saban is incalculable and can never be repaid in full. Part of what can be paid is patience and understanding, giving the benefit of the doubt, etc. during any tough times.

If Rees thinks Buchner is the guy, that alone is grounds to question his grip on reality.

Yes. Wasn't Rees the subject in SEC Shorts this week. Requiring offensive tutoring! I come to wonder when he will get the training wheels off.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

I just have to withhold any assessment on Tommy Rees as a playcaller until whatever is going wrong with the OL gets moderately fixed. I've re-watched the Texas and USF games and good night alive, with all the busted protections on run and pass plays, I don't see how any playcaller could have gotten into any sort of a rhythm when one positive play is almost immediately negated by two negative plays caused by atrocious OL play.