🏈 For your consideration. Are defenses today built to stop a physical offensive approach?

[TerryP]

Or, are they predominately built for the hurry-up style?

We're two weeks away from the beginning of spring camp and I think this is a question everyone needs to consider. Stop and think about it for a minute. What do you think?

Now, more importantly, what do you think the Alabama staff thinks about the same question?

The following is a tl;dr or a take a second kind of thing ...

Think back a bit to the beginning of the coaching carousel we've seen over the past two months. We've seen a change along the line of scrimmage with MC moving on, we're looking a different TE coach, a new offensive coordinator along with other changes. During this search we've done our best to point to how the decisions were being made. I can think of at least a half of a dozen references to "look at the type of offensive lineman" and "look at the running backs" when we've been discussing the direction of the offensive program and its scheme.

I've been told for a while now that it's Saban's belief that the defenses are built to stop the Auburn's, Clemson's, et. al of this world but they are not built to defend the physical front (whether that be from an 11 grouping, a 12 grouping, or what.)

Personally, I don't see this like a lot see Homer--great coach and play caller who was hand-cuffed. I do see Daboll similarly; not as a coach on a leash, but one that knows his 'boundaries.'

 

[TUSKtimes]

A lot of these defenses aren't built to stop much of anything. For those who invest and make a serious effort on the defensive side of the ball, it really comes down to personnel, scheme, and coaching. I don't think LSU has struggled with our style one way or the other. Since they've gone to the 3-4 base, they feel like a team that's digging in even harder against the run. Arkansas is shifting to the 3-4 trying to get better traction against the big boys.

So it's a complicated story and you have to live with your convictions. For Bama, it's still the QB and what he does best. In the end, one truth still stands tall in most college football games, Jimmy's and Joe's will beat Xs and Os.

 

[musso]

A lot of these defenses aren't built to stop much of anything.

:agree:

I think there are multiple forces at work limiting the supply of quality linemen. And by "quality" I mean real earth movers, with both the strength and attitude needed to consistently beat opposing fronts every week. Not to be forgotten is the character and academics needed to remain a wise investment for coaches. I see an increasingly small number of schools attracting the dwindling number of elite linemen, which means (alluding to @TUSKstuff 's point) that more and more programs are putting all their eggs in offensive scheme since there aren't many "difference makers" available in the trenches after the power schools sign them all up. The supply of small and quick players is obviously greater than the supply of big, strong, and quick players. So more and more HCs at 2nd and 3rd tier programs have said, "Screw it! Hey OC, get creative and let's just try to outscore our opponents! And I'll go recruit dual threat QBs who can overcome being over-matched by a superior defense whenever we play a power school." Meanwhile, colleges don't have to worry like the NFL does about the long-term liability of running their QBs every game. Every 2-3 years, colleges replace their best QBs anyway.

I think after the 2012 championship season, when we lost all those quality OL starters to the draft, we never recovered the same physical run blocking dominance we had enjoyed since Saban's arrival. It seemed like whether it was Coffee, Ingram, Richardson, or Lacy, they never were tackled in the backfield. Not so with Yeldon and Henry. We seemed to be habitually bad post-Lacy at converting in short yardage situations. This seemed to indicate to me that we had missed a bit in our OL recruiting and development.

So I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to consistently find Saban-level linemen willing to play physically grueling football for 60 minutes. As the DNA of high school linemen continues to change, the more difficult it will be to locate these special recruits, upon whom traditional football has always been built. I keep saying it over and over, but the game is at a fork in the road. And it seems to have decided it's going in a more finesse direction.

 

[50+yeartidefan]

Yea...so agree with all... i do believe the philosophy of "we will just outscore you" is prevelent....plus CF now is such a long grueling season...come on...13, 14, 15 game seasons..... and rhese guys are still big kids...
Finesse is so less physical.....
and in reference to NS big O line of 2012.... the exception rather than the rule...
Its proving out in the NFL...

 

[TerryP]

Finesse is so less physical.....
and in reference to NS big O line of 2012.... the exception rather than the rule...

There's a big element of X's and O's with '12 to '13. Stoutland to Philly and in comes Cristobal. It's no coincidence the shift to power comes with Cristobal moving out and the type of coach moving in taking those same positions.

 

[musso]

There's a big element of X's and O's with '12 to '13. Stoutland to Philly and in comes Cristobal. It's no coincidence the shift to power comes with Cristobal moving out and the type of coach moving in taking those same positions.

Interesting. I hadn't made the correlation with the OL coaching changes. Plus, I'm not privy to the particular coaching methods.

Can we assume then that Saban compromised a bit with Cristobal due to his recruiting prowess? Or was it in conjunction with Saban's intent to incorporate more Hurry Up?

 

[UAgrad93]

I for one, will be happy to see a return to the roadgrader style Olines. While being a former QB, I hate that we saw at times during Cristobal's tenure, multiple times where we had to resort to throwing the ball on 3rd and short because we couldn't line up and blow someone off the ball to get 2 yards!
Seeing Key take over the Oline fulltime and seeing what we have recruited in that area the last several years, makes us prime for another run as a ground and pound program with play action over the top capabilities.

 

[planomateo]

Not gonna hear/see me complain one bit if Alabama gets a bit more physical.

 

[musso]

After LSU finally opens up their offense for the next couple of seasons but keeps losing to us, watch LSU faithful demand that their offense is too finesse and needs to be physical like us! haha

 

[footballer]

I think that in todays football game, many high school teams and college teams, alot of players play out of position, especially in high school out of necessity. It used to be that the better athletes played on defense. I believe that many of todays best swell headed athletes want the glory heaped upon offensive players. Thus we see defenses that can't stop any thing the offense wants to run. Now this doesn't always ring true with the perennial powers of college ball, Us, ohio state, clemson, fl. state and a few others who can recruit many good high school players and teach them the FUNDAMENTALS and play them, for the most part, in their most natural position. I don't think, in general, there are many coaches who actually teach the fundamentals of each position, defense or offense. By the way, that also goes for basketball. Kids either are not taught fundamentals or they just aren't equipped mentally to retain their teaching through out high school and college. I have not read or heard anywhere anything about what I am about to write, and most of y'all on here will probably give me flak and call me crazy but I don't care because I just may be a little bit crazy. I believe that our QB Jalen Hurts would be better suited to play a different porition. Going by what I saw this past season with his lack of fundamentals in his passing game. He looks uncomfortable and unnatural on passing plays. Go ahead and quote his statistics, I get it. But he reminds of that DB who transferred into aubarn a few years ago and coach mouthzon converted him into a " qb ". I don't remember his name but he was a hell of an athlete, fast as hell but but was a shitty passer. But he put up some numbers passing. I remember a game against us on a rpo around his left side, our db came up to make the tackle and he threw an end over end pass for a td. My point being, players who play out of position can and do make plays but are better off in the long run to play the position they are better suited to play, whether defense or offense.

 

[TerryP]

Can we assume then that Saban compromised a bit with Cristobal due to his recruiting prowess

No.

One thing to add here. Before Saban hired Cristobal, who was he after that season? Brent Key.

 

[TUSKtimes]

:agree:

I think there are multiple forces at work limiting the supply of quality linemen. And by "quality" I mean real earth movers, with both the strength and attitude needed to consistently beat opposing fronts every week. Not to be forgotten is the character and academics needed to remain a wise investment for coaches. I see an increasingly small number of schools attracting the dwindling number of elite linemen, which means (alluding to @TUSKstuff 's point) that more and more programs are putting all their eggs on offensive scheme since there aren't many "difference makers" available in the trenches after the power schools sign them all up. The supply of small and quick players is obviously greater than the supply of big, strong, and quick players. So more and more HCs at 2nd and 3rd tier programs have said, "Screw it! Hey OC, get creative and let's just try to outscore our opponents! And I'll go recruit dual threat QBs who can overcome being over-matched by a superior defense whenever we play a power school." Meanwhile, colleges don't have to worry like the NFL does about the long-term liability of running their QBs every game. Every 2-3 years, colleges replace their best QBs anyway.

I think after the 2012 championship season, when we lost all those quality OL starters to the draft, we never recovered the same physical run blocking dominance we had enjoyed since Saban's arrival. It seemed like whether it was Coffee, Ingram, Richardson, or Lacy, they never were tackled in the backfield. Not so with Yeldon and Henry. We seemed to be habitually bad post-Lacy at converting in short yardage situations. This seemed to indicate to me that we had missed a bit in our OL recruiting and development.

So I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to consistently find Saban-level linemen willing to play physically grueling football for 60 minutes. As the DNA of high school linemen continue to change, the more difficult it will be to locate these special recruits, upon whom traditional football has always been built. I keep saying it over and over, but the game is at a fork in the road. And it seems to have decided it's going in a more finesse direction.

Rushing numbers don't suggest we can't run the football when we want, we just chose a different style. As much as it was frustrating to watch Henry not get to the LOS, I still get giddy thinking about all those DBs that couldn't catch the big man. And I give the offensive line credit for every one of them. It's only fair. It was the style we coached and chose for ourselves.

And yes, styles, they are a-changing, again.

 

[bama alum]

Not gonna hear/see me complain one bit if Alabama gets a bit more physical.

+1

 

[BamaFan334]

I agree with most that a lot of teams today are built to bend, but not break, hoping their offense can simply put up 30-40 points and outscore the opposition. As opposed to a defense that will just hit you in the mouth and get nasty.

Alabama is in a unique situation to where we have the athletes and strength coach that can be universal in their approach. Our boys can overpower you and they can run with you. We've all seen the transformation of the defensive linemen and linebackers and their more slim physic to bat more balls and chase down teams that spread you out, yet Cochran has these guys fine tuned to overpower anyone. Our defense ran out of steam against Clemson, but that was due to bad play calling on the offensive side of the ball in my eyes. But we have been able to run and gun with the best of them and knock others dicks in the dirt if they wanted to get physical. I do not think many defenses outside of ours, Ohio State's, LSU's, and maybe Florida's can have that hybrid style that can simply do both and be competitive.

 

[musso]

Rushing numbers don't suggest we can't run the football when we want, we just chose a different style. As much as it was frustrating to watch Henry not get to the LOS, I still get giddy thinking about all those DBs that couldn't catch the big man. And I give the offensive line credit for every one of them. It's only fair. It was the style we coached and chose for ourselves.

Well rushing totals don't tell everything. Explosive plays help to mask negative plays, which as I have alluded, began rising after the 2012 OL. Off the top of my head, I can recall the 2013 Auburn game when we had a 7 point lead late in the game, just inside Auburn's red zone, on 4th & 1, Saban elects to go for it (which to this day remains one of his few bad decisions-yes we had a questionable kicker but we were in the red zone and could extend our lead to 2 possessions), and we get stuffed.

Also, Yeldon as a freshman in '12 came in behind Lacy and ran through holes I could have run through. But the next two seasons he struggled. And to be clear, I'm mainly referring to running between the tackles and short yardage situations. To your point about rushing numbers, Henry was a peculiar rusher because I don't ever recall a Bama RB who struggled so much running inside but thrived so much running outside. I bet he has the biggest rushing disparity of any other Bama RB between his inside yards per carry and outside yards per carry.

We all know Saban would prefer long, methodical offensive drives over quick drives. His defensive philosophy has been predicated on offensive ball control. It's a symbiosis. So I just think he has tried since the '12 OL to make lemonade with the lemons he had at OL, at OL coach, and at OC, and now that he has a maturing and talented OL, a new OC, and replenished stable of RBs, and an unusually large number of big TEs (as opposed to the H-back type), I think we will see a renewed commitment to inside running and 2 TE formations.

 

[UAgrad93]

Just to tack on to @musso post, The '15 Oline that won a Natty was one of the worst teams in the nation in giving up negative plays. The A&M game in College Station that season was a prime example. A&M got to Coker 3 times but there were 12 other negative runs!! Henry still rushed for 225+ that day, but his big runs wiped out or masked those negative plays.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Well rushing totals don't tell everything. Explosive plays help to mask negative plays, which as I have alluded, began rising after the 2012 OL. Off the top of my head, I can recall the 2013 Auburn game when we had a 7 point lead late in the game, just inside Auburn's red zone, on 4th & 1, Saban elects to go for it (which to this day remains one of his few bad decisions-yes we had a questionable kicker but we were in the red zone and could extend our lead to 2 possessions), and we get stuffed.

Also, Yeldon as a freshman in '12 came in behind Lacy and ran through holes I could have run through. But the next two seasons he struggled. And to be clear, I'm mainly referring to running between the tackles and short yardage situations. To your point about rushing numbers, Henry was a peculiar rusher because I don't ever recall a Bama RB who struggled so much running inside but thrived so much running outside. I bet he has the biggest rushing disparity of any other Bama RB between his inside yards per carry and outside yards per carry.

We all know Saban would prefer long, methodical offensive drives over quick drives. His defensive philosophy has been predicated on offensive ball control. It's a symbiosis. So I just think he tried to make lemonade with the lemons he had at OL, at OL coach, and at OC, and now that he has a maturing and talented OL, a new OC, and replenished stable of RBs, and an unusually large number of big TEs (as opposed to the H-back type), I think we will see a renewed commitment to inside running and 2 TE formations.

Explosive plays are pretty much what the spread is. That's the trade-off. You can score quick and often, but you send your defense out for more reps. When it's working, it's a thing of beauty (see USC, Arkansas, Tennessee) and when it's not, it can look scary, like LSU. No one believes we aren't going to invest in more power stuff with Daboll, but as Saban said yesterday, our new OC is learning "our" spread concepts. With a talent like Jalen, you would be out of your mind to not take advantage of the mismatches that creates and the college offensive rules that allow it.

I would keep in mind that we were looking at the Lane Kiffin spread concepts for the last three years. We would get away from what was working at the drop of a hat. Against LSU we tried to establish the outside edge all night when it was the tiger's inside tackles that were weakest and easiest to expose. The Ole Miss game was even crazier in the first half. We would stop rushing for first downs against many teams for no other reason than Kiffin thought it was time to work on our passing game. There are really a lot of reasons we didn't get the best out of our rushing attack the last several years. A lot of it was the balance we chose, not the other team's defense.