The DL was much more aggressive. The linebackers were solid. The decline was with the defensive backfield. They got burned in key situations all year, even with increased pressure from the front 7.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by texastigerr

Texas

Member since Jan 2005

8332 posts

Posted on 12/30/15 at 12:19 pm to Lsupimp

Gave up way too many big plays especially on 3rd and long and 3rd and very short. More busted coverages than I have ever seen from an LSU defensive backfield. We need to be more sound in assignments, bigger and deeper on the DL and LB to stop the power runs you get from Bama etc. One thing that was an improvement to me was the aggression at the end of some games to keep teams from coming back. TAM comes to mind and a couple of others. Seemed a problem with Chavis. And evidenced by his inability to stop us on our final drive against TAM.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by deuce985

Member since Feb 2008

27660 posts

Posted on 12/30/15 at 12:41 pm to Lsupimp

quote:
The DL was much more aggressive. The linebackers were solid. The decline was with the defensive backfield. They got burned in key situations all year, even with increased pressure from the front 7.

The decline of the secondary is because Steele insisted on forcing zone schemes that clearly none of the young DBs were capable or comfortable with running. Later in the season we started to play more man and the defense got better because of it especially last 2 games.

What those stats don't show is how bad the QBs were LSU faced this year yet no team scored under 19 points on this defense. A lot of blown coverages and it was usually zone schemes but genius DC wouldn't adjust it to player strengths.

You guys are absolutely blind if you think Steele is a good DC.

This post was edited on 12/30/15 at 12:44 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Tiger Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board