Lack of talent on D

You have to take good angles to make good tackles. We take a lot if bad angles and then try to chip people out of bounds with our shoulder pads. It's infuriating.
 
floridajacket said:
If it was that simple to tackle, then you wouldn't see missed tackles at other schools. But you see them all the time.

You can't just sit there and wait for the ball-carrier to come to you. Let's say you told me to tackle USC-era Reggie Bush. I could know all the tackling technique in the world, but my slow white ass will be pretty hopeless.

Often, defenses don't do a true open-field tackle but instead the first guy has to slow the runner down. Then there would be support to bring them down after a few yards.

For us, if our DL is getting pushed around like it is, then the Arab* is not going to be impeded by the DL. LB's need to come in run support and/or blitz, opening up passes to the flat which gashed us.

* Autocorrect for RB, but I'll leave it.
Click to expand...

Fortunately, this team hasn't played against a Reggie Bush-like back or else things would look worse than they have been. As a defender, I would always err on the side of being aggressive. A defender has to force the action while staying under control, so to speak, when attacking the ball carrier (whether a RB or WR in the open field). A defender who waits is a defender that will be made to look foolish. Personally, I'd never fault a guy for being aggessive on the defensive side of the ball.
 
Freeman was overly aggressive with Duke Johnson and lost contain, allowing Johnson to reverse field for a big gain. But given the choice between being too aggressive and too timid, I'll take aggressive.
 
UGa should move the ball against us no doubt. But they are a traditional pro style O. We have done better against that style of O by swarming the ball than we have against any other style. Last year we did really well stunting until our DL wore out from all the running. IF our O can burn clock, we have a better shot against UGA than it appears on paper.

Of course, they may just bull rush us to death. But that would play better to our style in a low number of possessions game.
 
WracerX said:
UGa should move the ball against us no doubt. But they are a traditional pro style O. We have done better against that style of O by swarming the ball than we have against any other style. Last year we did really well stunting until our DL wore out from all the running. IF our O can burn clock, we have a better shot against UGA than it appears on paper.

Of course, they may just bull rush us to death. But that would play better to our style in a low number of possessions game.
Click to expand...

I hope you're right.
 
WracerX said:
UGa should move the ball against us no doubt. But they are a traditional pro style O. We have done better against that style of O by swarming the ball than we have against any other style. Last year we did really well stunting until our DL wore out from all the running. IF our O can burn clock, we have a better shot against UGA than it appears on paper.

Of course, they may just bull rush us to death. But that would play better to our style in a low number of possessions game.
Click to expand...

We'll get a steady dose of Gurley (like he's not going to be playing) and Chubb and if they're smart, it will be a lot of drag routes or ins for Conley before they try to throw over our heads with Conley or Scott-Wesley.
 
Like I said, if it was as easy as you guys are saying, that they learn it at "pop warner" level, then you would look around the country and see very few missed tackles. But that's not what you see, especially as you go later into a game.

Given that defenses won't make every single tackle, they have other ways of disrupting plays. You have the tunnel screen for example, and the other WR always seems to have a picture-perfect block on the CB assigned to the WR catching the ball. The other DB or LB comes over, sure, but the angle and tackle is a lot easier if the CB gets around the block somehow and impedes the runner.
 
The way I see it we are basically as good as Notre Dame amirite?
 
savbandjacket said:
You have to take good angles to make good tackles. We take a lot if bad angles and then try to chip people out of bounds with our shoulder pads. It's infuriating.
Click to expand...

This, this, and this. If you can chip someone, you can at least put your helmet on the correct side and wrap up or strip the ball, like you're taught.
 
floridajacket said:
Like I said, if it was as easy as you guys are saying, that they learn it at "pop warner" level, then you would look around the country and see very few missed tackles. But that's not what you see, especially as you go later into a game.

Given that defenses won't make every single tackle, they have other ways of disrupting plays. You have the tunnel screen for example, and the other WR always seems to have a picture-perfect block on the CB assigned to the WR catching the ball. The other DB or LB comes over, sure, but the angle and tackle is a lot easier if the CB gets around the block somehow and impedes the runner.
Click to expand...

It's not easy and it's not an inherent skill. It must be taught and drilled. Show me a good defense and I'll show you more tackles that resemble form tackles than arm tackles or chips. On the screen blocks, the CB needs to get under the WR's pads and shed the block. As far as the WR cracking back, this is why coach always told CB's and LB's to keep their heads on a swivel. Wrapping up also "impedes the runner" and allows for gang tackles as long as the defense swarms to the ball.

Also, fatigue is the enemy of good technique. A team that is not in shape will make sloppy tackles. I'm not questioning our team's conditioning, but just saying in general.
 
coit said:
The way I see it we are basically as good as Notre Dame amirite?
Click to expand...
You are not all wrong. UNC has a blazing offense, probably the best and fastest we will see. This was one of those shootouts that we saw coming.

If we play a clean game, we can beat good teams. Otherwise we won't, and such is the case when you don't have any defensive talent.
 
I'm upset that our defense is struggling, but it's not super surprising. These were all things we knew would be issues going into the season. We got the lucky breaks early on, but we've kind of shot ourselves in the foot the last two games.

However, to keep perspective, while we haven't blown anyone out, both losses were close and very much winnable. We're 5-2 because of some mistakes that ended up costing us the game, not because of a depletion of talent. We can certainly turn around the rest of our season.
 
Lack of defensive talent was easily noticeable coming in this year. We have a total lack of depth in the front seven AND IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS UNTIL YOUNGUNS CAN GROW!
 
midatlantech said:
Lack of defensive talent was easily noticeable coming in this year. We have a total lack of depth in the front seven AND IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS UNTIL YOUNGUNS CAN GROW!
Click to expand...

We will not be a young team next year. Take a look at how many starters and ineligibles return. The exception is A-back.

If we continue to play a guaranteed 3rd down conversion distance off of receivers though, we will still suck.
 
beej67 said:
I categorically disagree with this. Tackling form can be coached.

I don't think tackling is our only problem, but if we just tackled well, then our "bend don't break" wouldn't be a "bend until they score 7" quite so often.
Click to expand...

If true, then we have had some lousy coaching for a looong time, including a MNC DC and a Super Bowl DC.

Yes, tackling form can be taught at many levels, but the ability to deliver said teaching at a D-1 level is talent based. Roof, Burnett, Smith, Clay, Rutland, etc.etc.etc. did not come from superior high school coaching, but they damned well could tackle the day they arrived on the flats.

For those who believe it's not for the most part just athleticism, then let's pick 2 or 3 Fr/So.s who are not tackling well now, and then have Beestorm pushpin a thread where we track their progress over the next 2-3 years. You won't like the "progress".
 
GoldZ said:
Nope. If they practiced speed all week they wouldn't be any faster. Same with tackling. Ya got it or you don't. Burnett for example was a tackling machine when he got off da bus---we taught him nothing about how to tackle. Ever see Roof tackle as a freshman? Willie Clay? Reginald Rutland? Any member of the Swilling or Rhino families?
Click to expand...

Some programs practice speed and most teams run agility drills.

http://www.stack.com/video/1745049757/football-speed-training-with-the-ohio-state-buckeyes/
 
Ask CPJ, CTR, and for that matter Saban himself about "coaching" speed (football speed that is).
 
Each day is programmed to be as intense as the previous day, giving the athletes weekends off to recover fully. Coach Cochran says, “[Coach Saban] wants us to be the fastest team on the field and, obviously, to be strong. But the number one thing is speed. So we run four days a week—and we are talking about strain-your-gut running.”

From stadium stairs to 110s and agility drills to speed-specific work, the Crimson Tide football team run themselves into the ground, excreting every drop of energy in the offseason to gain every edge against opponents.
Click to expand...

http://www.stack.com/2010/06/01/inside-bama-footballs-weight-room/

Affirming Saban’s focus on speed, Cochran says, “Today’s athletes want to be bigger, but the important thing is speed. You have to spend time on it. Even in theweight room, you can spend time on speed. Jump rope for 30 seconds or do ladder drills between sets. There are a million things you can do for speed. If you weigh 185 pounds now, don’t worry about being 200 pounds and putting fat on your body. Muscle will gain you weight. If you are gaining weight properly, you will be able to move faster, be more explosive and be able to knock people around.”
Click to expand...
 
GoldZ said:
We will not be a young team next year. Take a look at how many starters and ineligibles return. The exception is A-back.

If we continue to play a guaranteed 3rd down conversion distance off of receivers though, we will still suck.
Click to expand...

On the defensive line we will still have the exact same depth problem and it's not going to fix itself for a few years. What we lost in the last year is not something to easily overcome. If we were an SEC school that could sign a few JC players that would be different. But we're not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top