re: Addressing the "attacking style" Chavis defense claims - Gulf War Edition

quote:

---

However, if we win the games then I won't care how

---

This is a very valid point and one which no one questioned or addressed in the original point of this thread.

quote:

---

But I think he will be a pass rusher in Chavis' scheme more often than not based on some if his commets.

---

We will see. Chavis never had an upfield rushing defensive line during his time at LSU. The only times we had a very elite pass rush was from having Michael Brockers in the middle who could single handedly defeat double blockers against him. I think that Chavis is more likely to try to fit his players into his scheme rather than fit a scheme around his players. If I recall correctly, after the Music City Bowl, Chavis said that the pass rush was sufficient in the 2014 season and in the game when that was clearly not the case.

Obviously there is a large discrepancy between what the Aggies' vision of what his defensive scheme is compared to what his scheme has been in the past. The goal of this thread is to inform that Chavis' scheme centers around more traditional DE play instead of pass rushing. He also uses his defensive line as gap controllers to free up his LBs to make plays. This point was expressed in detail by CBS color commentator Gary Danielson during LSU's game vs Florida in 2012 when Kevin Minter was racking up tackles.

quote:

---

Two lies in a row

---

Are you really going to continuously ignore my pleas for you to stay on-topic and not concern yourself with my personal life? No, I don't drink. And no, it doesn't concern you in the first place. So please, keep the thread on-topic instead of mucking it up.

Half the SEC runs spread, and Oregon runs the ball a lot.

SEC leading rusher first year in the conference

quote:

---

That poster is uninformed.

Oregon runs the ball a lot. A&M has had an air raid offense with no semblance of a running game. Hopefully that changes this year.

---

It's pretty clear that not one of the three of you actually read my post.

I clearly specified spread teams that attack the edge with speed is what Chavis excels against. Spread teams that attack between the tackles, epecially with a QB, have a ton of success running the ball against his scheme.


From my original post:

quote:

---

Also, Chavis' scheme excels at stopping spread teams who try to attack the edge with speed. His D gets gashed by teams, like AU, who spread you out and attack between the tackles, especially with a QB who attacks there.

---

I was saying comparing Oregon's running attack to AU or MSU is ignorant.

quote:

---

A&M has had an air raid offense with no semblance of a running game.

---

'12-'14 A&M was 14, 46, and 78 in rushing yards and 4, 22, & 73 in rushing TDs. While it did drop off without the threat of a rushing QB, we will be much better running with a change in OL philosophy, but still you are wrong again.

Manziel doesn't count as a running game. He did his own thing and scrambled when plays broke down. A&M has not had a strong rushing attack using running backs. Does that make more sense?

quote:

---

He was the offense.

---

Um no. Ben Malena had 800 yards rushing that year as well.

I didn't

quote:

---

Ben Malena had 800 yards rushing that year as well

---

Didn't know that. What about 2013 and 2014?

quote:

---

Farmer1906

---

A lot weren't designed runs. Cam Newton or Dak Prescott could be included as pieces in a rushing attack but Manziel was different.


Anyway, once again this thread has gone off-topic.

quote:

---

So A&M runs a ton when they have a QB that can, but that doesn't count because it proves you wrong? OK

---

A ton of Manziel's rushing attempts came from QB scrambles on called passing plays. Do you really not understand the difference between that the the designed runs that AU, MSU, Bama, etc. use?

Why do you think Chavis was so successful in containing JFF? It's because his tendancy was to escape pressure by running to the sideline. That type of East-West running is exactly what Chavis wanted his opponents to do because LSU had the speed in the front 7 to contain it.