- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
I see some complaints about the defensive scheme.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:05 pm
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:05 pm
I think the scheme was fine. A couple easy catches by our secondary and Geno has 300 yards passing an they get lesss than 400 total. We'd have converted those turnovers to points like we always do and the game would have been over in the third. Also some poor tackling.
I know it's not what we're used to but it was a great plan to pin them back and make them chip their way down the field.
"When you throw the ball, three things can happen, and only one of them is good."
-- Bear Bryant
To me that sums up our scheme from last night. Let them frick themselves with turnovers. We just didn't capitalize.
Instead, we'll have to settle for this four touchdown win.
I know it's not what we're used to but it was a great plan to pin them back and make them chip their way down the field.
"When you throw the ball, three things can happen, and only one of them is good."
-- Bear Bryant
To me that sums up our scheme from last night. Let them frick themselves with turnovers. We just didn't capitalize.
Instead, we'll have to settle for this four touchdown win.
10
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:08 pm to mule74
Our defense had their worst game this year so far credit WVU some but LSU missed a lot of tackles and gave up some big big plays.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:08 pm to mule74
quote:
Also some poor tackling.
this x1000, worst tackling ive ever seen by our db's
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:11 pm to mule74
Hatcher...
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:13 pm to mule74
quote:
Instead, we'll have to settle for this four touchdown win.
No kidding!
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:14 pm to rockybalboa
It was a lot more than bad tackling. Their skilled WR's were schooling Claiborne (sorry, thats just a fact).
The good news is the other team threw for 400+ yards and we still won by 26 points.
The good news is the other team threw for 400+ yards and we still won by 26 points.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:15 pm to mule74
our db's dropped them some interceptions last night. hey, we need to improve as the year goes on and this gives us an area to do so.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:27 pm to LSU GrandDad
It wasn't a bad defensive performance. The D we were running wasn't designed to get the stop on downs. It was designed to flood the field with db's and take advantage of interceptions.
WV is a short throw passing team and blitzing a bunch gives them an opportunity for quick strikes. And it is hard to get sacks on that type of an offense.
I doubt that the coaches where happy with how little pressure our front 4 were able to get but in the end the scheme worked. drive drive drive turnover! DB's could have/should have had even more. This is saying something to because WVU had no interception before this game I think.
WV is a short throw passing team and blitzing a bunch gives them an opportunity for quick strikes. And it is hard to get sacks on that type of an offense.
I doubt that the coaches where happy with how little pressure our front 4 were able to get but in the end the scheme worked. drive drive drive turnover! DB's could have/should have had even more. This is saying something to because WVU had no interception before this game I think.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:30 pm to mule74
quote:
I see some complaints about the defensive scheme.
On this board you would see complaints about the Second Coming.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 6:34 pm to LSU GrandDad
That may be the best overall group of WR we see all year - 3 kids that could play anywhere.
After the first 3 games we got used to seeing QB pressure - obviously wasn't the plan. Without the DB blitz, it took away their favorite pass schemes - screen passes. Lot of man-to-man - give up the short stuff & not the big ones - run the clock. Up 13 at the half, that was smart football against this team.
It was a reflection of our offensive plan all year - patience & wear'im down. At my age, I admit I'm not the most patient guy around. It may drive me crazy, but you cannot argue with success - 4-0!
After the first 3 games we got used to seeing QB pressure - obviously wasn't the plan. Without the DB blitz, it took away their favorite pass schemes - screen passes. Lot of man-to-man - give up the short stuff & not the big ones - run the clock. Up 13 at the half, that was smart football against this team.
It was a reflection of our offensive plan all year - patience & wear'im down. At my age, I admit I'm not the most patient guy around. It may drive me crazy, but you cannot argue with success - 4-0!
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:19 pm to Tigerntx
Not enough blitzing for me! They exposed a weakness of our defense. To throw for 400 Yards against us is a damm disgrace. If they don't turn it over in that game they win. We have a lot of work to do
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:21 pm to mule74
Missed tackles but LSU has one or two bad games each year.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:22 pm to mule74
I was at another college game last night, so I didn't get to see the game until tonight's replay.
Based on some of the thread subject titles, I had thought that Chavis pulled a UNC, and that Hatcher had an atrocious game.
Now I'm starting to wonder where all that sentiment is coming from. I'm seeing some unfortunate softness on the way we play zone, and a general lack of creativeness in finding ways to pressure the QB, but not really too much to complain about.
Not Chavis's best game plan, but hardly anything terrible.
Based on some of the thread subject titles, I had thought that Chavis pulled a UNC, and that Hatcher had an atrocious game.
Now I'm starting to wonder where all that sentiment is coming from. I'm seeing some unfortunate softness on the way we play zone, and a general lack of creativeness in finding ways to pressure the QB, but not really too much to complain about.
Not Chavis's best game plan, but hardly anything terrible.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:22 pm to Tigerntx
LSU was up 20 at the half, not 13.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:22 pm to mule74
I thought the defensive intensity was lacking. Part of that could be scheme as these guys thrive on overwhelming tenacity. In the end, it all worked though.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:42 pm to ALTiger
Did hatcher get hurt? One play it seemed he totally gave up on.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:49 pm to dgnx6
It actually wasn't a bad scheme considering the offense.
Id like to see more blitzing too, but the way geno was getting to ball out in 2 seconds, the blitz would have not been successful IMO.
The defense dropped at LEAST 5 ints last night.
If they actually catch the ints that they should have caught, the game isn't just a 26 point win.
Chavis put the players in a position to succeed, but they didnt execute IMO.
Id like to see more blitzing too, but the way geno was getting to ball out in 2 seconds, the blitz would have not been successful IMO.
The defense dropped at LEAST 5 ints last night.
If they actually catch the ints that they should have caught, the game isn't just a 26 point win.
Chavis put the players in a position to succeed, but they didnt execute IMO.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:51 pm to RogerTheShrubber
I believe Chavis's gameplan was a direct result of our special teams ability to pin them deep.
The defense was willing to allow the small passes, because it is very hard to sustain a long drive(90+ yards) with small dink and dunk passes. It leaves very little room for error on the offense's part when you have zero running game. A strong short passing game can be stupefying when coupled with a decent running game. WVU couldn't establish the run, so LSU concentrated on taking away the deep ball.
These drives, while succesful statistically, would eventually fizzle and lead to no points. Whether by turnover, punt, or turnover on downs, the defense did their job.
The WVU offense was spectacular, yet only found the endzone 3 times.
Chavis noticed early on that the extra man (i.e. blitz) was not getting to Smith, though he was hurried a couple times.
We stopped blitzing right around the same time we started pinning them against their own goal line for every possession.
Though we got beat a couple times for big plays, for the most part our defensive scheme was content to allow them to move the chains, knowing that unless WVU executed perfectly, the drive would eventually stall.
And no, I don't believe we played a great defensive game. We missed some tackles, which has been one of the most impressive components of the defense this season. I just think this might be one reason we called off the blitz and played soft coverage underneath.
The defense was willing to allow the small passes, because it is very hard to sustain a long drive(90+ yards) with small dink and dunk passes. It leaves very little room for error on the offense's part when you have zero running game. A strong short passing game can be stupefying when coupled with a decent running game. WVU couldn't establish the run, so LSU concentrated on taking away the deep ball.
These drives, while succesful statistically, would eventually fizzle and lead to no points. Whether by turnover, punt, or turnover on downs, the defense did their job.
The WVU offense was spectacular, yet only found the endzone 3 times.
Chavis noticed early on that the extra man (i.e. blitz) was not getting to Smith, though he was hurried a couple times.
We stopped blitzing right around the same time we started pinning them against their own goal line for every possession.
Though we got beat a couple times for big plays, for the most part our defensive scheme was content to allow them to move the chains, knowing that unless WVU executed perfectly, the drive would eventually stall.
And no, I don't believe we played a great defensive game. We missed some tackles, which has been one of the most impressive components of the defense this season. I just think this might be one reason we called off the blitz and played soft coverage underneath.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:52 pm to mule74
I have zero problem with the scheme. The problems were poor tackling, poor coverages (also busted assignments), we couldn't get pressure with our front four d-lineman with only five o-lineman blocking them. Your defensive lineman ought to be able to get pressure with 5 on 4 if they are as good as their press clippings. I don't think this game was all bad. I think a game like this can be good for a team. It refocuses your team on fundamentals and areas exposed can be corrected. Don't tell me Chavis wanted those guys to miss tackles on purpose or he told them not to rush the QB too hard.
Posted on 9/25/11 at 10:54 pm to peopleschamp
5 blatantly dropped ints...
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News