Started By
Message
re: A&M is better on defense than on offense
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:20 pm to Uncle Luke
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:20 pm to Uncle Luke
quote:
Both their offense and defense contributed heavily to their beating
Did you watch the game? Our D gave up 17. Our O gave up 24 (3 pick sixes and an INT that set them up in FG range). Yeah Henry went off in the first quarter, but they ended up with 396 yds on 71 plays. Not exactly lighting it up.
Our offense was the reason for this loss. The defense was fine.
This post was edited on 10/19/15 at 2:20 pm
1
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:25 pm to tigbit
quote:
Just because College Station is obviously having internet connectivity issues does not mean you need to start posting for them.
Not sure what you mean. There have been plenty of us posting today. It is the middle of the workday, though.
As for the OP, I have more confidence in our D to get a stop right now than I do in our O getting a TD drive. Strange days indeed.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:25 pm to Tigerpaul1969
Not a huge impact. Their offense is definitely down.. but their run D is not much different... Extremely out of position and soft. As always.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:27 pm to tigbit
quote:
Just because College Station is obviously having internet connectivity issues does not mean you need to start posting for them.
Will someone please send a tech out to College Station to get this fixed!
I get it. But I keep seeing LSU fans still taking shots at Chavis, and I'm telling you, A&M's problems are much worse on offense than on defense. Their defense is good enough for them to be unbeaten right now. Period.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:29 pm to RoscoeHarper
quote:
The defense was fine.
Not fine enough to win. Bama D only gave up 9 points, while our special teams gave up 14. Using your line of thought, of course.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:32 pm to beauchristopher
The 1st half is still part of the football game, counts just as much as the 2nd half. If Texas A&M football gives up 236 on the ground to one running back and feels like that defensive performance is fine, so be it. In Baton Rouge or Tuscaloosa, many of us would call that embarrassing. One man's trash is another man's treasure. I bet Chavez loves it over there! The only reason the Arkansas game was close was because they ran the ball and played keep away from A&M. Until a team can run the ball when it needs to and stop the run when it has to, they wont win the league.
This post was edited on 10/19/15 at 2:38 pm
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:36 pm to scrooster
quote:
A&M is going to bend us over and go in dry.
Prepare yourself rooster. It's going to be excessively unpleasant
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:41 pm to Tigerpaul1969
quote:
The problem this year is not A&M's defense, it's the offense. Their offensive line is not up to their usual snuff
Factor in Bama's massive front line and there is a plausible answer.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:44 pm to Uncle Luke
quote:
Until a team can run the ball when it needs to and stop the run when it has to, they wont win the league.
When did I say this was a championship defense? All I'm saying is that the A&M defense is far better this year than it was last year. They were terrible last year.
Yes, they gave up 236 to one running back. Some of our best defenses gave up big games to great running backs (remember Darren McFadden). The key is to make the adjustments, which they did. Weren't they still in the football game in the second half AFTER Henry went off in the first half? Yes, until Allen's third pick six.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:46 pm to Tigerpaul1969
Offense looks lost. No identity. Not really a air-raid, not an pass option team, not sure what they are doing.
Defense getting better with Chavis was never the question in year 1. The improvement from year 2 to 3 will be key measuring stick.
Offense is surprising. Looks different from year to year (or QB to QB?).
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:51 pm to Alltheway Tigers!
quote:
Offense looks lost. No identity. Not really a air-raid, not an pass option team, not sure what they are doing.
I don't think Sumlin foresaw that his offensive line would be as mediocre as it is. I think he really thought if he just spent more time on the running game and hired a well-known running game guru, that it would automatically give him a running game.
I'm not sure if he's good at recruiting running back either. They had all those 5 stars and none of them have panned out. They even switched one to corner (which I don't know if that says more about their defensive backfield depth or their ability to evaluate running back talent). Their best running back in the last few years has been Ben Malena. By far.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:52 pm to Tigerpaul1969
to be fair Bama had 3 defensive touchdowns. Thats like 2 A&M possessions in a row each time.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 2:56 pm to SammyTiger
Bama had 70 offensive plays and 20 offensive points. That's not a bad scoring defense against an elite team.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 3:01 pm to Tigerpaul1969
I think people on here like the most simple explanations for things. The conference is still about matchups. Alabama is a terrible matchup for A&M as are LSU and Arkansas. If A&M doesn't play well, they don't have a good chance to be successful against Alabama because of the matchup. A&M's performance was about not matching up well against the opponent, not some indication that the team just is a huge fraud.
LSU was a bad matchup for Florida. Florida has a great secondary but is thin in depth at the linebacker spot. They excel at stopping teams that want to pass. They have a bit more trouble against teams committed to running the ball. Ole Miss gives Alabama matchup problems.
LSU's defense in recent years has been a bad matchup against Alabama. Though they have performed well in those games, LSU is more built to stop teams that would like to pass the ball. The conference is all about matchups. It isn't as simple as who is average or who sucks. It is about what styles clash against what a given team likes to do.
LSU was a bad matchup for Florida. Florida has a great secondary but is thin in depth at the linebacker spot. They excel at stopping teams that want to pass. They have a bit more trouble against teams committed to running the ball. Ole Miss gives Alabama matchup problems.
LSU's defense in recent years has been a bad matchup against Alabama. Though they have performed well in those games, LSU is more built to stop teams that would like to pass the ball. The conference is all about matchups. It isn't as simple as who is average or who sucks. It is about what styles clash against what a given team likes to do.
This post was edited on 10/19/15 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 10/19/15 at 3:08 pm to therick711
quote:
It isn't as simple as who is average or who sucks. It is about what styles clash against what a given team likes to do.
I agree. I just get tired of sour LSU fans coming up with this simplistic and not right assumption about A&M's defense. And trust me. I'm sour on Chavis...just not on his coaching ability. Dude has been pretty much nails everywhere he's been.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 3:33 pm to therick711
quote:
I think people on here like the most simple explanations for things. The conference is still about matchups. Alabama is a terrible matchup for A&M as are LSU and Arkansas. If A&M doesn't play well, they don't have a good chance to be successful against Alabama because of the matchup. A&M's performance was about not matching up well against the opponent, not some indication that the team just is a huge fraud.
LSU was a bad matchup for Florida. Florida has a great secondary but is thin in depth at the linebacker spot. They excel at stopping teams that want to pass. They have a bit more trouble against teams committed to running the ball. Ole Miss gives Alabama matchup problems.
LSU's defense in recent years has been a bad matchup against Alabama. Though they have performed well in those games, LSU is more built to stop teams that would like to pass the ball. The conference is all about matchups. It isn't as simple as who is average or who sucks. It is about what styles clash against what a given team likes to do.
this
Posted on 10/19/15 at 3:41 pm to Uncle Luke
quote:
The 1st half is still part of the football game, counts just as much as the 2nd half. If Texas A&M football gives up 236 on the ground to one running back and feels like that defensive performance is fine, so be it. In Baton Rouge or Tuscaloosa, many of us would call that embarrassing. One man's trash is another man's treasure. I bet Chavez loves it over there! The only reason the Arkansas game was close was because they ran the ball and played keep away from A&M. Until a team can run the ball when it needs to and stop the run when it has to, they wont win the league.
The total yards stats aren't what matter--it's how many points you give up, and whether or not you can force the other team to punt/kick FGs. The Arkansas and Bama games are two very good examples of why that's so.
Against A&M, Arkansas went 232 rush, 225 pass, 457 total, in 67 plays.
Bama went 258/138/396 in 70 plays.
To look at those, you'd say, what's the difference, but the difference was A&M forced 9 punts and 2 FG attempts by Bama, while Arkansas only punted 3 times (and had one offensive turnover that ended a drive). While the stats look similar on the surface, the performance against Bama was light years better than against Arkansas--it took three defensive touchdowns in order for Bama to come out on top comfortably (might have prevailed even if those INT's don't result in immediate points, but we'll never know). Point is, anyone who watched those two games and felt like the defensive performance in the second game was in any way comparable to the first would be called crazy.
If we force LSU to punt 9 times, and don't turn the ball over like crazy, I would like our chances. Remains to be seen whether we can do that or not, but Fournette could still get his yards in such a scenario and LSU could still lose the game.
This post was edited on 10/19/15 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 10/19/15 at 3:51 pm to CajunTiger_225
quote:
Yeah and that "average"team is going to give us all we can handle in Nov 28
I completely disagree
Posted on 10/19/15 at 3:54 pm to Tigerpaul1969
quote:
Coker had a grand total of 138 passing yards
With three pick sixes by the defense and 236 yards rushing by Henry, seems like they didn't really need to pass much.
quote:
Henry was held in check in the 2nd half (17 carries for 59 yards)
So you're saying Henry rushed for 177 yards on only 15 carries in the 1st half.
quote:
The problem this year is not A&M's defense, it's the offense.
Maybe it's both.
Derrick Henry had his way with Aggy. How many teams do you think beat Bama when they give up 200+ yards on the ground?
Bama also rushed for 298 on Aggy last year.
Arkansas rushed for 232 earlier this year against Aggy while A&M managed to run for a mere 65.
Perhaps Aggy is just getting outmuscled up front on both sides of the ball.
Posted on 10/19/15 at 3:59 pm to BrerTiger
quote:
How many teams do you think beat Bama when they give up 200+ yards on the ground?
Probably none. That's what makes it so impressive that they were still in the game in the second half (it was 28-23 with A&M driving when they gave up the third pick six), after two pick sixes and 200 yards rushing by Henry in the first half. The D did a great job of limiting the points given how they were gashed in the first half.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News