🏈 Saban's response to the up-tempo

[musso]

Looking back on our season, I notice a very conspicuous defensive statistic: excluding the A&M and Auburn games, Bama surrendered a total of 6 touchdowns in 10 games. If someone wanted to examine closer they might find even more impressive tidbits. For instance, off the top of my head, I can remember VaTech's lone touchdown was a long run (80 yds?), and I wonder how many more of the remaining 5 touchdowns were a similar result of simply big plays and/or busted alignment, coverages, etc. Regardless, allowing only 6 TDs in 10 games is astounding.

But ... the up-tempo (whether via pass or run) is clearly Saban's Achilles' heel. My question is this:

Does Saban keep doing what he's been doing and roll the dice each season when we face a "Mr. Everything QB" (e.g. Tebow, Manziel, etc.) or a well-oiled offensive system like Malzauhn's? Or does Saban and Smart tweak our scheme some more? If so, what tweaks could be made?

Final thought: with the play-off commencing next season, the argument could be made that Bama (and other high-ranking programs) needn't focus so much on remaining undefeated, but what if we end up facing two up-tempo offenses in the play-off? For example, had the playoff began this season, would we have been able to stop up-tempo offenses in consecutive games without a month to prepare as is the current norm? Could we have beaten any two of the following teams - Auburn, Oregon, Mizzou, Baylor, OhSt - this season in consecutive weeks?

 

[JoshB]

First off we would have destroyed Ohio State with a month or two days to prepare... and the top 4 this year would have been FSU, AU, Bama, and MSU.

Anyway, yes we have to do something about the up tempo. Does that mean blowing up the current system? No and Im pretty sure its something Kirby and Saban are not blind to and have been working at trying to figure it out. With guys like Manziel we HAVE to get faster players on the field in terms of rushers and DBs with more experience will help matters hugely (see Tebow vs. 09 secondary). The problem there is you kinda need the complete opposite across the line against Auburn and that damn modified triple option, big ass bodies that can control the gaps. The linebackers and secondary just flat out have to be disciplined. If the outside backer/safety slides too far inside biting on the dive the QB is going to pull the ball and take it outside every single time. If the D-Line isnt controlling the gaps then the dive and trap plays are gonna gash you up the gut all day. Lastly if the corners get caught peeking in the backfield too much or just flat out bailing on their receiver to chase a scrambling QB they're gonna get burned.

 

[TheChief]

If Bama can't stop it, you can bet they'll see much more of it. I don't think you can accept a loss to the up-tempo team and expect to get into the mix nor can you expect to make it through the four team playoff. Bama must do something different. Just a thought, but it seems to me the up-tempo/read option is much like the wishbone only spread out much more. If teams can stop the wish bone, teams should be able to stop the spread option. There are defenses having success against it - look at the victories over Oregon.

All that said - Alabama was in a position to beat Auburn. Kick the field goal and go up by ten and it' ballgame. So, I would counter Manziel was the only glaring loss to that type of offense.

 

[psychojoe]

Against any type of option attack they key is to stay disciplined. As was mentioned, when lbs and dbs get caught up in the razzle dazzle,big plays for the offense result. With the boogs, giving them a sub par play on first down slows their pace considerably.

 

[JoshB]

So, I would counter Manziel was the only glaring loss to that type of offense.

Even then we went 1-1 and the one loss we still had it 4th and goal with a shot to win that one too...

 

[foshman]

Looking back on our season, I notice a very conspicuous defensive statistic: excluding the A&M and Auburn games, Bama surrendered a total of 6 touchdowns in 10 games. If someone wanted to examine closer they might find even more impressive tidbits. For instance, off the top of my head, I can remember VaTech's lone touchdown was a long run (80 yds?), and I wonder how many more of the remaining 5 touchdowns were a similar result of simply big plays and/or busted alignment, coverages, etc. Regardless, allowing only 6 TDs in 10 games is astounding.

But ... the up-tempo (whether via pass or run) is clearly Saban's Achilles' heel. My question is this:

Does Saban keep doing what he's been doing and roll the dice each season when we face a "Mr. Everything QB" (e.g. Tebow, Manziel, etc.) or a well-oiled offensive system like Malzauhn's? Or does Saban and Smart tweak our scheme some more? If so, what tweaks could be made?

Final thought: with the play-off commencing next season, the argument could be made that Bama (and other high-ranking programs) needn't focus so much on remaining undefeated, but what if we end up facing two up-tempo offenses in the play-off? For example, had the playoff began this season, would we have been able to stop up-tempo offenses in consecutive games without a month to prepare as is the current norm? Could we have beaten any two of the following teams - Auburn, Oregon, Mizzou, Baylor, OhSt - this season in consecutive weeks?

I would imagine Saban won't just accept that he has issues with something. I would imagine they will tweak their defensive system accordingly. I don't think his strength is in game planning, although he is still quite good at it, so I am anxious to see what they do for next year.

 

[BamaFisher]

I did notice (and Gary Danielson beat it to death) that Missouri had more success slowing down the speed and disrupting offenses when they switched from a 3-4 scheme to a 4-3 lineup. Could that be a wrinkle Saban and Smart work with?

 

[JoshB]

I did notice (and Gary Danielson beat it to death) that Missouri had more success slowing down the speed and disrupting offenses when they switched from a 3-4 scheme to a 4-3 lineup. Could that be a wrinkle Saban and Smart work with?

Ummmm did you not see what happened in the SEC Championship?

 

['65 Cobra]

Saban has been addressing this in recruiting for two seasons now. Last year's recruiting class - which will get much more playing time next year - and this year's class coming in. He has been focusing on bringing in more speed and agility on D for that specific reason. Beginning next season, he will have much more usable defensive speed on the roster to play with.

Outside of that, the solution is the same, stay disciplined and play your gaps - but now with more lateral speed. I think we will be much better with it next year.

 

[musso]

With guys like Manziel we HAVE to get faster players on the field in terms of rushers and DBs with more experience will help matters hugely (see Tebow vs. 09 secondary). The problem there is you kinda need the complete opposite across the line against Auburn and that damn modified triple option, big ass bodies that can control the gaps.

Something that I don't think came through clearly in my original post is that perhaps it is reasonable to choose one tactic and roll the dice with the other. We finished 1-1 against Manziel, and the loss ended up not hurting us, albeit after a crazy series of upsets which allowed us to get back into the national championship. Even if you factor in one Bama loss each regular season, I still think the up-tempo offenses handicap their team's defense from ever being as strong as that from a team with a traditional offense. In other words, say we lose to an up-tempo team every regular season ... the odds of that same up-tempo team finishing with a better record than us is slim.

My concern mostly pertains to a play-off, if we have to play two up-tempo offenses in consecutive weeks. Like most Bama fans, I love our chances against any team with Saban & Co having a month to prepare for a single opponent, however I don't see us beating any two of the aforementioned up-tempo teams in consecutive weeks. Yes, I know who the top four ranked teams were this season, but my question is hypothetical.

The question is, as Birdman noted, do we sacrifice size for speed or vice versa? Which is a better long-term trade-off given the popularity of the up-tempo spread?

 

[BamaFisher]

Ummmm did you not see what happened in the SEC Championship?

Hahaha - they did get shellacked, but they got run over a heckuva lot faster with just the 3 man line. I don't know that there is an easy solution - if you scheme one way they gash you another.

 

[UAgrad93]

The key is going to be getting a HUGE space eater in the middle. This will demand double teams and will free up our LBs. Even though we say we are a 3-4, we use our Jack LB as that 4th down man ALOT to give us a 4-3. As stated before, discipline to play your assignment until the whistle blows is the key. Something that I have thought about is whether our LBs and safeties are taught to read certain backs. When I coached, we were a 4-3 team and we would "cross read/key" the backs. For example, Mike read the FB, Will reads the back across the formation from him and the Sam would do the same. We used this for wishbone, wing T, etc. Just an idea.

 

[Houndstoothpuller]

I'm no defensive tactician by any means, but essentially the same solution as was molded to stop the old wishbone triple option must be implemented. It's not the power or the speed of the barn's scheme that makes it successful, as our defense is built (usually) to compensate for those type of offensive players, but it's the misdirection and eye-tricks that beat defensive speed and power.

To stop tricky misdirection option spread offense, the defense MUST be able to dictate at least some of what the offense has success doing. If I recall correctly, in the past it took placing three defensive players in the middle of the line to absolutely shut down gaps in the middle on run plays, i.e. on every offensive play. Just as our current defensive scheme is to push all runs to the outside, it's the same scheme but must be bolstered in the middle to absolutely take away the one part of the option that is so devastating...the run up the gut.
Essentially, three nose guards and they stay at home when facing option. It puts more pressure on the defensive backs and the offense will have successes outside and in passing (if good qb play) but there can be no option run up the gut, ever. Once a team starts gashing you in the A gaps, it's over. See 2009, 2011, and 2012.

Just my humble and sparingly informed opinion.
We'll see how Smart and CNS handle elusive option qb's and I know it's not so simple as closing the middle as the whole defensive set must compensate, but status quo vs. tricky quicky option offenses isn't going to cut it. It's too fast. Overpursuing kills. Triple option was killed before. Now, it's kinda like a triple option spread, but it can be limited by taking away the middle and making them go around.

I also hope there are some limits enforced on offensive speed of play...football shouldn't become basketball. Ugh

 

[It Takes Eleven]

This conversation sounds eerily familiar to Florida 2008. The only thing it's missing is Terry.

Since 2008, we have played good teams, and due to offensive efficiency mistakes, lost games - NOT as much due to an inability to stop them. The biggest exception was South Carolina 2010 - couldn't stop the rushing game at crunch time, QB had a career game. In our losses since 2008 (statistical analysis is tough with just six instances), we usually outgained our opponents, but had turnovers or bad kicking days. If I remember, we averaged more yards per rush than aubrun this year and outgained them by about a hundred yards. I see us properly scheming against good teams, but coming up short when the offense can't produce.

RTR,

Tim

 

[bcracker]

Wasn't there an earlier post referencing Saban toying with an uptempo offense? Mayhaps the coach is considering business as usual with his defense but structuring the offense to kick Gus and his ilk in the fork?

 

[foshman]

If Bama can't stop it, you can bet they'll see much more of it. I don't think you can accept a loss to the up-tempo team and expect to get into the mix nor can you expect to make it through the four team playoff. Bama must do something different. Just a thought, but it seems to me the up-tempo/read option is much like the wishbone only spread out much more. If teams can stop the wish bone, teams should be able to stop the spread option. There are defenses having success against it - look at the victories over Oregon.

Teams that beat Oregon do so by physically controlling the LOS. That's the preferred way to play in the SEC. In the PAC 12 only Stanford really has made it a priority. Given the conference wide emphasis on controlling the LOS I would think it would be harder to do against Auburn. Also Gus's offense is more simplistic than Oregon's in that the plays are more limited but the formations and pre-snap motions they are run from change dramatically. I'm not sure that Gus needs to take as much time to select a play on 2nd and 8 as Oregon does. I think he'd just run a similar play a second time and try to let the offense work. That seems to be what his offense is predicated on.

All that said - Alabama was in a position to beat Auburn. Kick the field goal and go up by ten and it' ballgame. So, I would counter Manziel was the only glaring loss to that type of offense.

Assuming they would have made the kick. That is far from a given. At least on that day.

 

[JoshB]

Assuming they would have made the kick. That is far from a given. At least on that day.

Uhhh are you forgetting the three other missed field goals... oh and the one that was taken away because of the phantom false start... revisionist history always goes to the victor...

 

[TerryP]

This conversation sounds eerily familiar to Florida 2008. The only thing it's missing is Terry.

Since 2008, we have played good teams, and due to offensive efficiency mistakes, lost games - NOT as much due to an inability to stop them. The biggest exception was South Carolina 2010 - couldn't stop the rushing game at crunch time, QB had a career game. In our losses since 2008 (statistical analysis is tough with just six instances), we usually outgained our opponents, but had turnovers or bad kicking days. If I remember, we averaged more yards per rush than aubrun this year and outgained them by about a hundred yards. I see us properly scheming against good teams, but coming up short when the offense can't produce.

RTR,

Tim

And with eight losses over that same span...this record will continue to spin in the same direction.

 

[bamaraider]

Guys have a problem with staying disciplined around the edge. Adrian Hubbard had some tough times against Auburn, then had some great times. What we need is a guy like Nick Gentry in the middle who can get off the snap quickly and disrupt the play. Have him in the middle, Hubbard at the edge, and Mosley and DePriest at MLB, this whole mystique would be put the rest.

Auburn has a good combo though of speed and physicality. I think their FB Prosch (sp. check) did a great job against us in opening more lanes for Mason. I won't fault for Hubbard for missing a few tackles against a QB that runs a freaking 4.3. I really don't think its that we don't match-up well with the HUNH, just the defense seems to lose their edge at times and it creates big plays for the opposing team. Maybe that is a result of the HUNH, but rewatcing the games, players just miss their assignments.

 

[bamaraider]

Wasn't there an earlier post referencing Saban toying with an uptempo offense? Mayhaps the coach is considering business as usual with his defense but structuring the offense to kick Gus and his ilk in the fork?

I don't know, but there is a possibility. Probably would not end up being the whole zone read thing, more along the lines of what the Patriots run, or used to run.