🏈 Bama defense

[TheChief]

If you mean "more of a threat" by throwing ore downfield and less of the damn tunnel screens for 3 yards a damn attempt!!!! I'm with you!!!

Could we have run the ball more early? Can you see a reason we threw the ball on early downs as much as we did in the first half?

Seems like we started churning out rush yards late in the game (and I know the Ole Miss defense had been on the field a long time).

 

[Tidestalker]

Could we have run the ball more early? Can you see a reason we threw the ball on early downs as much as we did in the first half?

Seems like we started churning out rush yards late in the game (and I know the Ole Miss defense had been on the field a long time).

Why do people act like running their ass over early in the game wouldn't have worn them down anyway? Might have even scored some points too... Crazy thought?

Staying on the field and grinding out drives wears teams down a lot more than 3 and out screen passing.

 

[planomateo]

Ole Miss interior defense creates a mess of things. No reason to help them out early in the game.

 

[Tidestalker]

Ole Miss interior defense creates a mess of things. No reason to help them out early in the game.

What were you watching? Our inside runs worked awesome the 4-5 times they were called in the first half. We made a mess of things by throwing the ball backwards with a true freshman QB, being stuck in 2nd and +10 most of the half.

 

[doemasters]

How about them holding Ole Miss on the 1 yard line to a field goal

 

[UAgrad93]

Could we have run the ball more early? Can you see a reason we threw the ball on early downs as much as we did in the first half?

Seems like we started churning out rush yards late in the game (and I know the Ole Miss defense had been on the field a long time).

I saw the logic behind it. Make their defense defend sideline to sideline and wear them down. It also meant slowing their rush as well. Kiffin didn't want to have Hurts trying to run the offense from behind the chains in a hostile environment. If we had executed and sustained our blocks, we should have scored on several other possessions.

 

[rueben]

You are correct. Cause and effect.

 

[TerryP]

Our inside runs worked awesome the 4-5 times they were called in the first half.

Kiffin made mention pre-game they felt the sweep motion was going to open up the inside lanes for Jalen ... saw that a handful of times.

It's my opinion these quick outs that seem to be grating on some nerves will only get better. A quicker release from Hurts and those little five yard gains will turn into bigger plays. While a lot didn't care for the call, more often than not they were left with manageable down and distance.

 

[Tidestalker]

Kiffin made mention pre-game they felt the sweep motion was going to open up the inside lanes for Jalen ... saw that a handful of times.

It's my opinion these quick outs that seem to be grating on some nerves will only get better. A quicker release from Hurts and those little five yard gains will turn into bigger plays. While a lot didn't care for the call, more often than not they were left with manageable down and distance.

You must consider manageable 2nd and less than 20...

I'd agree that those plays will only improve because it can't get any worse. Hell we are running into our own damn players... Snaps are out of rhythm, Hurts timing is off, blocking terrible. Those plays look either poorly coached or poorly executed. Take your pick.

 

[T&B]

I'll rewatch the game and have a report later but off the top of my head Bama opened the game with a 16 play drive where they consistently got a big push by the OL, and was running the ball five six yards at a time ?

After that drive I thought Bama would maul miss for four quarters, but to my horror immediately after that drive Bama abandon everything that resembled a power running game.

Lane got way too cute. I have no idea why.

 

[TerryP]

You must consider manageable 2nd and less than 20...

There may have been five 2nd down plays where it was 12 yards or more. Two of those came from sacks on first down. I recall Ridley losing a few yards then a holding penalty leaving a 2nd and 20. Out of how many second downs in that game? The first touchdown drive had four or five 2nd and manageables by itself.

Now, I'd have to look at the play by play to see how those drives ended. I know they didn't score on the drive with the holding call.

I'd agree that those plays will only improve because it can't get any worse. Hell we are running into our own damn players... Snaps are out of rhythm, Hurts timing is off, blocking terrible. Those plays look either poorly coached or poorly executed. Take your pick.

My picks is one that errs on the side of caution.

SEC Now has had a segment these last three weeks about over-reactions. I see a lot, A LOT of over-reactions.

Just as one example ... we KNEW what Clint Trickett brought to the table before that game and a lot of people still freaked out. We KNEW what Kelly brought to the table ... and people are still freaking out.

Anyone want to bitch about UA scheduling Kent State this week?

 

[Tidestalker]

There may have been five 2nd down plays where it was 12 yards or more. Two of those came from sacks on first down. I recall Ridley losing a few yards then a holding penalty leaving a 2nd and 20. Out of how many second downs in that game? The first touchdown drive had four or five 2nd and manageables by itself.

Now, I'd have to look at the play by play to see how those drives ended. I know they didn't score on the drive with the holding call.



My picks is one that errs on the side of caution

SEC Now has had a segment these last three weeks about over-reactions. I see a lot, A LOT of over-reactions.

Just as one example ... we KNEW what Clint Trickett brought to the table before that game and a lot of people still freaked out. We KNEW what Kelly brought to the table ... and people are still freaking out.

Anyone want to bitch about UA scheduling Kent State this week?

Who's overreacting? Pointing out that the play calling in the first half made little sense and was ineffective seems like common knowledge.

As noted in another thread, you had to expect Ole Miss to make some plays offensively. Really talented QB, good WR's, and a pretty good OL. I think we all expected our own talented DB's to make plays also, which didn't happen, but none of that changes the disappointing offensive production in the first half when we have players just as or more talented as their offensive players.

And TGOD we have Kent State this week... Should be a perfect way to get these youngsters some reps and build depth moving forward.

 

[JoshB]

Too thin in the secondary. The back end fell apart when Eddie Jackson left the game.

Humphrey got molested all game. Not as good as people think.

Marlon gave up ONE pass that was on him (and it was because of the shit soft defense we were playing), the only other passes were perfect coverage and a perfect pass. Please tell me how you would have defended those passes Mr. DB Guru sir?

Harrison had the worst game of any player in the secondary, the touchdown to Engram was all him biting on the run play (his responsibility was to watch out for the tight end or receiver on that run-pass option, but he completely ignored the pass option and keyed on the run possibility and got burned). Shyhiem Carter actually played solid and Minkah and Eddie getting hurt might have been a blessing in disguise because it gave Hootie and Carter valuable playing time.

Secondary is thin in experience, not talent.

 

[TerryP]

Who's overreacting? Pointing out that the play calling in the first half made little sense and was ineffective seems like common knowledge.

Saying the play calling made little sense to you? That's a statement I've not seen. Saying it was ineffective? I've seen that from more than one say that. It's simply not true.

There's no way anyone can honestly say having back to back drives, a total of almost 20 plays on that Ole Miss defense, wasn't effective. Hell, it goes back to the story Freeze told all week about the first 30 being equal ... until they get past those first thirty. Did those drives produce points? Three.

I've no issues with people pointing out how the offense shot themselves ... you know the cliche ... on more than one occasion. When I see right around 80 plays, close to 500 yards on offense, a solid 3rd down percentage ... they're moving the ball.

Damn. It's game three. Last week it was about how bad the offensive line was when they were trying to run the ball.

I'm looking at back to back home weekends before heading to Arkansas. All we want to see is improvement, right?

 

[footballer]

I understand the thinking behind the side to side screen plays to try and wear down the defense. But todays athletes are well conditioned and fast, defensive as well as offensive. But with way too many TV TIMEOUTS, the defensive players get a lot of extra time to catch their breath and rest a bit which made many of our sideways passes ineffective. I believe you can wear down DB's by running at least one or two deep routes on every passing play whether you throw it deep or not. And on running plays, instead of our receiver running up to the DB to block him or get in his way, hell, just run deep, some body has to chase you, If they don't, then it's time to play action.

 

[Tidestalker]

Saying the play calling made little sense to you? That's a statement I've not seen. Saying it was ineffective? I've seen that from more than one say that. It's simply not true.

There's no way anyone can honestly say having back to back drives, a total of almost 20 plays on that Ole Miss defense, wasn't effective.

I guess it was effective in certain ways... Getting the QB blindsided and giving up a free 7 after abandoning the run game was effective for Ole Miss. And I guess it brought their defense right back on the field to, which makes for a solid body blow.

 

[TerryP]

I guess it was effective in certain ways...

Are you nit-picking ... maybe, just a bit? Citing the example you've just thrown out there ... true frosh, right tackle, misses an assignment and it results in points. That makes a hell of a lot of sense. It wasn't a matter of if.

But, a series here and there and the offense is ineffective? I'm looking at these numbers and like the possibilities. (That translates to the top 25% of all teams through three games.)

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

With the pressure the D is putting on Kelly, just letting our DBs on an island all the time against that size at receiver is starting to feel like a fool's errand.

On an island? All the pressure?

You do realize we've hardly blitzed at all this year, and most of our pressure is with the front 4, right?

Our secondary got torched by a 1st round QB yesterday, plain and simple.

 

[Tidestalker]

Are you nit-picking ... maybe, just a bit? Citing the example you've just thrown out there ... true frosh, right tackle, misses an assignment and it results in points. That makes a hell of a lot of sense. It wasn't a matter of if.

But, a series here and there and the offense is ineffective? I'm looking at these numbers and like the possibilities. (That translates to the top 25% of all teams through three games.)

View attachment 6108

Absolutely. I could also point out that we have more talent than any other team on offense and sitting in third would be under achieving. And have we really played a good defense yet? I don't know.

Plenty of ways to control a game, in rhythm, with the talent on that side of the ball. The screen and jet sweep negative play diet should not be first on the list.

 

[TUSKtimes]

On an island? All the pressure?

You do realize we've hardly blitzed at all this year, and most of our pressure is with the front 4, right?

Our secondary got torched by a 1st round QB yesterday, plain and simple.

Only if you watch the game. With our front four getting the pressure they consistently do it doesn't make sense we are allowing their best and biggest receivers to run open in coverage with a single defender. We blew some safety help a few times, but it is one thing or another with our d-backs and we are frankly getting exposed when the balls in the air. We have not locked down the back side of our defense and that last TD on the on-side kick reminded me of the finish of the Clemson game. Simple pitch and catch and not much resistance. We are not finished with this air-raid and big receiver look. The Aggies are coming soon and it would be wonderful if we could scheme some different looks that give these receivers a different impression than just throw it up long, I'll go get it. Cause most of the time, as you can see, they do.