- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
1
Posted on 8/17/08 at 8:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The Spread Option/Zone Read
have our Defensive coaches figured out a way for our D to play against this play without looking dumb?
I'm sure you will tell us all soon enough
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:06 pm to SG_Geaux
That offense is designed to make a defense think too much.
As a defense you have to play YOUR responsibility, no superman plays, because if you do, its a big play. It is similar to defending the triple option, if they get 4 big plays, thats 28 pts. they just want you to make the play for them.
As a defense you have to play YOUR responsibility, no superman plays, because if you do, its a big play. It is similar to defending the triple option, if they get 4 big plays, thats 28 pts. they just want you to make the play for them.
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:15 pm to SG_Geaux
Last year versus Florida we took the widest split between tackles I have seen.
We obviously wanted to force the action to the middle and keep containment at all costs.
This worked well for us, because they didn't have a reliable back between the tackles. They had some good runs up the gut, but after the fumble, UM abandoned that option.
They isolated Harvin whenever possible, and had good success moving the ball, even without a reliable RB.
Our ball control offense and two turnovers were our defense in that game, outside of the final drive, which they only had one minute left on the clock.
It will be interesting to see how we play it this year now that they have some backs, but I'm hoping we force the action better than we have in the past.
As far as App. St. goes, I watched there game with Michigan on the Big Ten Network last night, and forcing AE to throw the ball will probably be all that is required to beat them.
I have confidence in both of our DL rotations to apply just enough, but not too much pressure. We have a reputation of knocking QB's out of the game, and from the looks of AE and how much the offense revolves around him running the ball, it is doubtful he will keep up his aggressiveness for 4 quarters, if he stays in the game that long.
We obviously wanted to force the action to the middle and keep containment at all costs.
This worked well for us, because they didn't have a reliable back between the tackles. They had some good runs up the gut, but after the fumble, UM abandoned that option.
They isolated Harvin whenever possible, and had good success moving the ball, even without a reliable RB.
Our ball control offense and two turnovers were our defense in that game, outside of the final drive, which they only had one minute left on the clock.
It will be interesting to see how we play it this year now that they have some backs, but I'm hoping we force the action better than we have in the past.
As far as App. St. goes, I watched there game with Michigan on the Big Ten Network last night, and forcing AE to throw the ball will probably be all that is required to beat them.
I have confidence in both of our DL rotations to apply just enough, but not too much pressure. We have a reputation of knocking QB's out of the game, and from the looks of AE and how much the offense revolves around him running the ball, it is doubtful he will keep up his aggressiveness for 4 quarters, if he stays in the game that long.
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:15 pm to themunch
quote:
So going man is a good thing no?
yes
that's how the old school option was originally killed: hat on a hat
we're a very aggressive zone team. i think this is why we're particularly bad at defending it
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:17 pm to themunch
quote:
I would go man and let my dl get penetration and the lb's fill the gaps
well the thing is, your DTs are all but neutralized with the spread option, because there is almost no inside running
going 3-4 or 3-3-5 is the way to go, but your SS has to have disciprine! (along with CBs who can play man on islands)
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:18 pm to wahoocs
quote:
As far as App. St. goes, I watched there game with Michigan on the Big Ten Network last night, and forcing AE to throw the ball will probably be all that is required to beat them.
i agree
but we couldn't force ole miss to pass last year when they went spread option
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
but we couldn't force ole miss to pass last year when they went spread option
Might have been the worst performance by our D.
You also need to have your DE's play smart and keep contain.
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:20 pm to TheEdge
quote:
You also need to have your DE's play smart and keep contain.
yeah no rahim alem against spread option teams
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:23 pm to texastiger38
the problem with the spread/option is that it winds up looking to the defense like the offense has 12 guys - 4 receivers, 5 linemen, 1 passer, 2 running backs. Only the passer and one of the running backs are the same person. Defending a typical offense allows you to effectively have one extra guy. The Spread/option evens that out, and almost forces you to play man without a safety. Usually, if you play man without a safety, you have an extra guy who can blitz, but again, that is out the window against the spread/option.
So, it seems to me that the solution is to get the extra guy back. How to do that, I'm not sure, but my guess is that it'll wind up involving taking out some DLs and slow LBs and replacing them with quicker LBs and DBs. You concede the LOS up front, but you gain the advantage of confusion/complexity and flexibility. Regardless, I don't see a typical 4-3, even with nickel and dime packages, being the solution.
So, it seems to me that the solution is to get the extra guy back. How to do that, I'm not sure, but my guess is that it'll wind up involving taking out some DLs and slow LBs and replacing them with quicker LBs and DBs. You concede the LOS up front, but you gain the advantage of confusion/complexity and flexibility. Regardless, I don't see a typical 4-3, even with nickel and dime packages, being the solution.
This post was edited on 8/17/08 at 9:26 pm
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:28 pm to Colonel Hapablap
quote:
So, it seems to me that the solution is to get the extra guy back.
i agree, and since DTs aren't really valuable, i say they're the first to go
line up that single DT directly over the OG opposite the primary back. preferably this would be a 2-gap DT (al woods) who will just be fat and disrupt the zone-blocking (big DTS frick up zone blocking if used correctly)
then you add speed in the back 8 by adding another LB or another SS. you don't have to use a traditional 3-4 (With 2 Rush-ends at OLB, which essentially creates a 5-2 look in reality). you want to use 4 legit flow/seek LBs
and your original SS has to play up (preferably covering the QB). your FS should prolly just play cover 1 to aid your CBs, who should be in man. everybody but the FS in the back 8 plays man. hat on a hat. only concern yourself with your man
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:31 pm to Colonel Hapablap
If you take out one of the dlineman, wouldn't that help their zone blocking? just asking.
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
depending on the opposing personnel, you could even go so far as taking out BOTH DTs. Force one or 2 of their O-Linemen to look for something to do.
And with all of this, you can still bring heat to the QB whenever you want, you just have tons of options as to where it comes from.
And with all of this, you can still bring heat to the QB whenever you want, you just have tons of options as to where it comes from.
Posted on 8/17/08 at 9:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
that's pretty good there slo flo.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News