- 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
USC practically shut down our running game playing 2 high safeties all night
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:04 am
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:04 am
You’re supposed to run a team out of that coverage and force them to bring another safety into the box. We could not. Offensive line play is not what it was supposed to be. That’s the most disappointing take away from the other night. That does not bode well for our future games against legit SEC defensive lines.
28
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:07 am to StatMaster
this has been beaten to death here already.
ok so at times they stopped us with 7 in the box? oh well.
plenty times they had 8 or 9 in it.
ok so at times they stopped us with 7 in the box? oh well.
plenty times they had 8 or 9 in it.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:07 am to StatMaster
This is an original, unique take. Keep up the good work.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:09 am to StatMaster
is this not the same as last year?
Our RB's didn't do a ton running the ball, our running offense came from JD taking off when a pass play broke down or a QB option
Have we actually shown we can run the ball with a RB?
JD had 1100+ rushing yards, the next person, Logan Diggs, was at about 650~ yards and it slides further down between the next 5 running backs
Our RB's didn't do a ton running the ball, our running offense came from JD taking off when a pass play broke down or a QB option
Have we actually shown we can run the ball with a RB?
JD had 1100+ rushing yards, the next person, Logan Diggs, was at about 650~ yards and it slides further down between the next 5 running backs
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:09 am to Fat Bastard
Yep, it was more an issue that they knew what downs we wanted to run and cheated up accordingly. You’d see guys creeping up on 1st down then you’d see wide front looks on 2nd down. Problem was Nuss wasn’t allowed to check out of plays when the looks were obvious.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:11 am to StatMaster
At worst they had us out number 7 to 6, but that is normal vs most teams. Without a running QB you lose 1 on offense. 9 vs 6 is BS - they must be in zero for that to happen. Most people don’t know what the hell they are looking at. 9 vs 6 only happens in short yardage and goalline stuff. Teams are then in zero man.
This post was edited on 9/4/24 at 10:57 am
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:15 am to shadyone2
Playcalling predictability also hurt the running game.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:16 am to StatMaster
quote:
USC practically shut down our running game playing 2 high safeties all night
And CBK continued to run it despite there being 8 guys in the box.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:19 am to StatMaster
I liked A LOT that i saw from Sloan but the approach to the run game (and game management in the 4th quarter) left a good bit to be desired. I hope he can adapt and change some things to make it easier on the OL and RBs in short yardage. Incorporating the pistol would be a nice start.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:21 am to StatMaster
quote:
bode
“boat”
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:22 am to shadyone2
quote:
At worst they had us out number 7 to 6, but that is normal vs most teams. Without a running QB you lose 1 on offense. 9 vs 6 is BS - they must be in zero for that to happen. Most people don’t know what the hell they are looking at. 9 vs 6 only happens in short yardage and goalline stuff. Teams are then on zero man.
Running inside zone from the shotgun with a mesh means slow developing and backs not getting a running start. You have to have elite run blocking for that to work, especially when the defense doesn’t respect the QB run or and RPO pass options, because we never MADE them respect them.
The problem was sticking with that. We had more success going off tackle and outside, but we didn’t stick with doing it. They sold out putting numbers up front and we didn’t counteract that by hitting them out wide in the second half. That has to change going forward.
As for as inside running, they need to use the options on option plays so defenses pay for just crashing the interior. Also, non-option runs that aren’t slowed by the mesh and runs with a TE lead out of the Pistol would help the OL by not forcing them to hold blocks forever and getting the backs moving forward faster. That lack of momentum to the line really hurt our interior running vs USC.
This post was edited on 9/4/24 at 10:23 am
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:27 am to StatMaster
We don’t have a dominant RB. It’s just that simple. They are just average RB at best.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:28 am to StatMaster
We actually schemed outside runs pretty well, it was up the middle that didn't do so hot.
I think the run game is going to improve a lot as we figure out what works and what doesn't.
I think the run game is going to improve a lot as we figure out what works and what doesn't.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:30 am to S
quote:
I liked A LOT that i saw from Sloan but the approach to the run game (and game management in the 4th quarter) left a good bit to be desired.
Sloan failed miserably his first test as an OC. Whether it was he or Kelly, truly calling the plays, they failed miserably in the 2nd half. Too many fans got hooked into thinking it was a decent coached game with the first half, but when it really counted, the 2nd half, when we really needed a strong performance by our OC, offensive play calling, structure, and philosophy was just bad.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:36 am to StatMaster
Mix in a bubble screen which is basically a long hand off and get those guys running laterally on defense. A flare pass to a RB out of the backfield can accomplish this as well. There are lots of things we could have tried but didn’t which is concerning from an OC standpoint.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:41 am to Bring Da Wood
We ran for 113 yards and 4.5 yards/rush. USC ran for 72 yards and 3.3 yards/rush. We were rushing for almost 3 yards a carry even when they stacked the box.
The issue was running the ball on 1st and 2nd downs when USC had their DBs 15 yards off the LOS and their LBs close in, and then passing on 3rd downs when their LBs spread out and DBs came a little closer to make sure we had to catch the ball short of the sticks.
They didn't shutdown our running game. Our coaches did due to their playcalling.
The issue was running the ball on 1st and 2nd downs when USC had their DBs 15 yards off the LOS and their LBs close in, and then passing on 3rd downs when their LBs spread out and DBs came a little closer to make sure we had to catch the ball short of the sticks.
They didn't shutdown our running game. Our coaches did due to their playcalling.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:42 am to J2thaROC
No RB is dominant when the run blocking is non existent and your only run play in the whole fricking play book is a zone read right up the gut. There is absolutely no creativity to LSUs rushing attack at all. And it’s been that way for years now.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:47 am to StatMaster
We do not have the talent to make up for bad coaching.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:53 am to S
quote:
Incorporating the pistol would be a nice start.
I'm all for modern offense but I guess I'm old school when it comes to the run game. I'm not saying go back to the I and run toss dive all game but I'd love to see some off tackle from the Pistol. Maybe even two tight. Give the back a running start and give the O line time to move guys up front.
Posted on 9/4/24 at 10:55 am to StatMaster
This offensive line is suspect. Once again, a much ballyhooed unit is underwhelming. USC has some good d-linemen.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News