re: The defense is a mess

quote:

---

You're arguing for the sake of arguing.

---

No, I am pointing out what good coordinators are able to do to a read on the run defensive front scheme when they have solid Oline talent.

It's not something you can do both. You have too spend all your time doing one or the other. Or else you will be a jack of all trades and a master of none.

It's what I said on page one..

Odom wants to build a real defense. Not one built on a high risk pass rush. Essentially a gimmick.

Likely the days of turning non football players into pass rushers are over.

Real football players are needed to think and react at this level.

I'd prefer real football players.

Except for the mirror message throughout this thread.

Except that there was a discussion started on the justification for the scheme switch on another thread 5 hrs before this thread was started.

Carry on.

quote:

---

I was just pointing out the infighting between players and coaches.

---

no you are not. You are cherry picking the comments in the linked article and extrapolating to come to a completely unsupported conclusion because the defense hasn't played well and you want to throw a fit about it. Cross would do well to chose his words very carefully around fans such as you like saying 'learn to trust it' instead of 'buy into it'. Did you not read Harris's last quote of the article?
“Once we see this working in the game, which we have here and there, and once we get that ball rolling it’s going to start clicking for everybody,” he said.

fans gonna fan

quote:

---

So you are saying when AU set every kind of SEC rushing record there was to set in 2013 it was because Ray, Sam, Ealy, et el. sucked? What about Navy, or OK, or bama, Nubs.
Or is pointing out it happens nearly every time we play a team that can run cherry picking?

---

I believe Tre Mason was quoted later as saying part of Auburn's success was a simple exploitation again and again and again of Sam charging wide instead of maintaining his lane a little more.

That made it very ironic for Sam to be defending that defense's gap integrity.


I think it's a case where players can return to the gap and fill it against lesser O lineman, but not against higher quality lineman. You can't give equally or more talented O lineman any advantages. Charge first, read second will give them an advantage sometimes.

Again, the Auburn game is NOT an indictment of the previous defense because we didn't run the previous defense in that game.

Steckel, inexplicably, decided to change the entire defensive scheme with a week to prepare, and in fact went with a more read based scheme. Cost us the chance at a national title.

I'm not cherry picking anything. The Auburn game keeps getting brought up and it shouldn't be.

This will be my last post in this thread because people are so dug in to their position it's getting beyond stupid.

For a team that supposedly ALWAYS struggled defending the run. They put up some pretty good rush defense numbers. They've been in the upper half of the SEC every year but 1 (12 which was injury ravaged) and this supposedly superior run scheme is worse than any SEC defense we've had. So far, and we haven't even played a league game yet.

It's no real revelation that more talented teams could give us a trouble. I mean, no fricking shite. Pointing that out only insinuates that this scheme will be immune to poor games or that it's the secret to consistently shutting down more talented teams.

It is what it is. We aren't going back to what was successful so I can only hope that they get the ball rolling with this thing. We have a chance to be a pretty good team if we do.