🏈 The Good, The Bad and The Ugly vs. Wisky?

[It Takes Eleven]

Good - Our seat were in the shade all game. The length of the commercials would have made it miserable in the sun.

Bad - 2 TDs dropped in the endzone.

Even badder - the concession stand nearest us didn't have anything but packets of ketchup and mustard for the stadium dogs. May be the first time ever my hot dog at the stadium didn't have sauerkraut on it.

Ugly - For me, the acoustics in the stadium are terrible now. I couldn't even tell the band was playing. Of course, my age has become a factor. I didn't recognize a single song they played yesterday except for Dixieland Delight and Rammer Jammer.

Better - My granddaughter enjoyed the day and the tour of the campus.

We were in the east upper deck for years, always had a hard time hearing the band. We've been in the west upper deck for several years now, and we can hear (and see) the band, and the seatbacks are nice. The music selections have been "modernized" over the last several years, along with a screeching male cheerleader who I don't think will ever graduate.

 

[50+yeartidefan]

Good - A good win over a decent team from a strong conference. EDIT: plus, Hubbard's redemption.

Bad - Three minute, fifteen to twenty second back-to-back commercial breaks.

Ugly - Not just the run blocking, but the entire running scheme. In my amateur view, the backs are way too close to the line, so that they have little to no room to adjust to any penetration, or utilize any forward momentum or vision. Plus, when we motion in a TE or other receiver, it's obvious they are coming in to crack back....unless they stop and face the line. Then they are just adding pass protection. Perhaps they're setting something up down the line in bigger games, but other than the double-reverse-flea-flicker-screen (which took longer to develop than it took me to type this) everything else seemed obvious to me.

Those damn commercials. 3+ minutes. And the back to backs really suck

Sitting in that heat and waiting n waiting for play to resume...yicks

 

[Rolltide24]

Good - Ty DeboerilizedTM their defense. Bernard had another great game. Williams outside of that huge drop. That catch by Riley when he got smashed from behind. AK Dear again, I keep saying, get that man the ball.

Bad: Penalties again, broken record. I guess we need to just get accustomed to having a bunch of stupid untimely penalties.

Ugly: Wisconsin’s team, they sucked. The drops by our WRs. Pitiful. They’d showed a stat that Williams has 11 drops in his 15 games.

 

[Justneedme81]

 

[Justneedme81]

'Ain't Nothing Like Hitting the QB': Alabama Thrives in Sacks Department against Wisconsin

The Crimson Tide tallied a season-high four sacks by four different players in the win over Wisconsin.

www.si.com

 

[Justneedme81]

 

[PurlJam]

Good: Ty didn’t get booed.

Bad: stupid penalty = kick off from the 20 = piss poor coverage/lane assignments or lack thereof = 95 yard K.O. Return.

Ugly: Arch got booed.

 

[Secondand26]

Those damn commercials. 3+ minutes. And the back to backs really suck

Sitting in that heat and waiting n waiting for play to resume...yicks

Yeah, I love it when they do 3 minutes of commercials, a kickoff, & immediately do 3 more minutes of commercials!

 

[OldPlayer]

Good - creative play calling. Passing game

Bad - stupid penalties

Ugly - Alabama running game

 

[RTB X Bot]

 

[Kamikazi18627]

Running game wasn't there. That's the bad. - But, Wisconsin is nasty against the run this year. So, we took what the defense gave us.

Ugly- That kick return.

 

[Secondand26]

Legitimate question for everyone bitching about the lack of a running game against Wisconsin: When did we have the chance to really establish a running game?
Ty’s passing was so efficient & ate up CHUNKS of yards - most of the scoring drives were quick & few plays.
4th quarter was more backups.

 

[UAgrad93]

Legitimate question for everyone bitching about the lack of a running game against Wisconsin: When did we have the chance to really establish a running game?
Ty’s passing was so efficient & ate up CHUNKS of yards - most of the scoring drives were quick & few plays.
4th quarter was more backups.

I think it is the fact we averaged a shade over 3 yards a carry on 22 attempts and that included a 19 yard scramble by Ty and the 22-24 yard run Dear had late in the game.
We just haven’t gotten a consistent push from our OL as of yet. Now, to Wisky’s credit, they had a stout front 7 and were very good tacklers.

 

[Secondand26]

I think it is the fact we averaged a shade over 3 yards a carry on 22 attempts and that included a 19 yard scramble by Ty and the 22-24 yard run Dear had late in the game.
We just haven’t gotten a consistent push from our OL as of yet. Now, to Wisky’s credit, they had a stout front 7 and were very good tacklers.

I agree. But generally our running game is accumulative, the bigger runs coming late 3rd & into 4th. Didn’t really try to establish it. Of when pass game is working like that , why try to establish the run?
* I thought the Dear run got called back

 

[UAgrad93]

I agree. But generally our running game is accumulative, the bigger runs coming late 3rd & into 4th. Didn’t really try to establish it. Of when pass game is working like that , why try to establish the run?

True! I always liked the old saying of “dance with who gotcha there!” If we are clicking in the pass game, why stop and vice versa. I would like to see a “4-6 minute” drive that burns clock and just rips out the defenses soul!

 

[64Tide]

Keep in mind if they are stacked to stop run, throw the ball. I get that we need to be good enough to run even when the defense knows we are going to, not happening this year.

 

[OldPlayer]

Legitimate question for everyone bitching about the lack of a running game against Wisconsin: When did we have the chance to really establish a running game?
Ty’s passing was so efficient & ate up CHUNKS of yards - most of the scoring drives were quick & few plays.
4th quarter was more backups.

Whether we “needed” it or not, if we don’t establish a running game we won’t have a running game when we need it. If a team devises a way to stop the passing game, what do we do?

 

[Crimson&WhiteGecko]

Grubb & Simpson have both said in repeated interviews that they will adjust the plays based on what the defense is giving. Wisconsin committed to stop the run.... soooo..... We passed. AND with Simpsons completion percentage being what it is, why would they NOT throw it?

Do NOT give the defense what they want. EVER.

 

[PurlJam]

Whether we “needed” it or not, if we don’t establish a running game we won’t have a running game when we need it. If a team devises a way to stop the passing game, what do we do?

Gene Stallings, is that you?