re: Why You Can't "Stack the Box" vs. Auburn (with graphics/pics)

Anyways moving along.

Just as I figured, all the garbage being spewed about our DL playing "contain" was just that... garbage.

As you've pointed out multiple times, you guys left the end unblocked nearly every single play. Multiple times you were able to gain big chunks playing off their misreads or misplays.

The DL didn't play contain at all. What Chavis did with them was slant them. Nearly every single play you'll see the DTs slant down. This really has nothing to do with contain or whatever it is people are trying to think we did.

Also, we blitzed out of our "Mustang" package on 3rd and 8. We blitzed the the outside corner with a 3 man line. The two inside backers (Baker and Sheppard) bailed into deeper zone coverage (as well they should to cover the guys left open by the blitz). Auburn ran a guy underneath inside which Brooks rightly released inside to cover the flat. Newton made a nice read and dumped it underneath the deeper zone and you guys picked up the first down. Not shitty scheme or even shitty execution. Sometimes you just get beat.

quote:

---

OBU, it's the internet,

---

You are obsessed with saying the internet arent you?

It is very simple. OBU said he was going to show us something 'good' which was what we all 'craved'. And Tada, it was a still shot of us playing with the deep safety. What a find! Because damn... that is clearly what we meant when we said man up and bring everyone else in towards the line of scrimmage... we meant we crave a deep safety!

quote:

---

If a safety 10 yards beyond the LOS is your concept of deep then heaven help you.

---

when every play is an obvious run... yes being farther then 10 yards back is deep.

Damn if you aren't a typical internet tough guy.

You got nothing...zero...nothing but pure internet bullshite taunts. You've been talked to decent, talking about football, and this is the result. Nothing but grade school bullshite.

quote:

---

We've played with Taylor at the depth all season and he does an outstanding job of playing downhill and cleaning up plays.

---

A) I agree all season he has been outstanding from depth. I never said otherwise.

B) I never said I had a problem with how we started the game.

C) I took challenge with a lack of an adjustment bringing the safeties in when it was clear by the several hundred yards against they they were moving the ball. Not questioning last week.

Seriously question for you OBUDan,

if we played Auburn again next week, would you use the same scheme and approach on D? Miles said no in his presser and was not specific. What would you do different or do you think we did the best we could?

You done with your bullshite grade school taunts, or do you want to talk football. I was talking football. You took it down another road.

quote:

---

if we played Auburn again next week, would you use the same scheme and approach on D? Miles said no in his presser and was not specific. What would you do different or do you think we did the best we could?

---

Watching what did in the first half, I'm not convinced we did anything that wrong.

We blitzed once and Auburn blocked it up and Cam burned us.

They tried a deep pass on us... PP7 had good position, but if BT15 isn't back there, there's a good chance it gets completed.

We slanted our line to try and mixup their blocking assignments. It worked some.

I'm only a quarter through rewatching, but I haven't seen an instance yet when I've thought "why the hell did we do that" in terms of defensive playcalling.

Auburn just had nice counters for everything we tried and they were blocking us up very well.

What would you do differently?


ETA: What really killed us in my mind defensively were the two big plays. Sure, the ideal is no yards and no points, but that's unrealistic. We made them earn their yards and earn their first downs (which is what our defense is based off of).

On their two huge TD runs we had guys in place to make tackles (on Newton's run we had about 5) and they missed. I don't care what scheme you run, if you do that, you're going to get beat.

quote:

---

The thing is, bringing the safeties in is what they want you to do.

---

I personally think they were fine rushing for 450 yards in massive chunks.

quote:

---

That's why the run it so much. They want you to get suckered into walking all your guys up and the next thing you know, they hit you over the top for 6.

---

You are effectively saying giving up 450 on the ground is a better result then risking a deep ball. I just dont get that. It is not like they ran for a buck fourty.

quote:

---

We may have died a slow agonizing death on Saturday,

---

6 plays covering about 300 yards is not a slow death to me. A 50 yard run is no less painful then a 50 yard pass.

quote:

---

Walking the safeties up wasn't going to stop their run game. You can continue to believe that all you'd like, but it wouldn't have changed anything because they consistently had free blockers for our free men.

---

Which is why I supported Chavis' talk before hand that we HAD to have more guys at the line of scrimmage then they had blockers. By definition, that means walking the safeties up and playing man on the outside.