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

I believe it was the play before McCalebs big run, they ran a similar play. On that play Edwards contained and Newton ran the ball.
On the long TD, Edwards lost contain looking for Newton to run and gave the edge away.

Newton ate LSU up by making alot of proper reads on those zone read runs.
What's sad is JJ has the same opportunity, but I truly don't think he's "reading" as much as predetermining what to do. There were a few times that he kept the ball that had he given it to Shepard it would have been huge gains. There were others that he should have kept it.

Time to let this go brah. The game was almost a week ago.

quote:

---

That makes no since man. No defensive coach would do that. NO coach is going to leave his Safeties over the top in such a scenario. They would switch to man coverage. No coach is going to knowingly, purposely leave a WR uncovered.

Ok, I don't have TIVO and have only seen the game once but I remember a shite load of QB Power & QB Counter that raped our arse the whole game. Why don't you go back and watch the game again & tell me (HONESTLY no BS) how many times Auburn ran QB Power, QB Counter & QB lead. Then tell me how many times they ran the Zone Read. I'm assuming you know enough about football to know what plays I just described to you?

---

Several posters have locked on to one statement he made that they've taken out of context. I knew what he meant when he wrote them.

There there was debate over "the safety" vs "a safety"...

Anyway...the point, is do you or should you go Man 0, and play with no safety over the top in order to stop Cam/Auburn? Well that would be one way to go about things. Of course it obviously leaves your DBs on islands. You got Peterson. Can your #2 Corner, OLBs, or Nickles cover our WR's all day in press man? That's a lot to ask. Would y'all prefer we had beat you passing, or rather Chavis had decided to sell out to stop the run then be "satisfied the scheme was correct" if we still beat you throwing the ball? Doubt it...a loss brings out the "they didn't make adjustments"..."the coaches are stupid, I could do a better job coaching this team" posters. Not unique to LSU fans.

This is what Auburn is doing.



LINK (might want to pay particular attention to what the Clemson LB said, and what they said about this play vs 4 WR sets, and what he said about "base defense" vs other stuff...in fact that's really how you defend this...base solid defense...BUT it requires making the tackle because it puts defenders in 1 on 1 matchups all over the field.)

And this is a quote from a coach off a coaching message board I'm a member of: "Watching Auburn vs LSU and Auburn is doing a TREMENDOUS job of making LSU defend the entire field. Time after time LSU's defense seems to be in a position where if just one guy misses a tackle, a big play ensues."
Read more: LINK

It's not new or unique per se, but I don't know anyone that's doing it in the SEC right now. As I have said, I've watched replays of other Auburn games...nobody is constantly walking all safeties down in the box and playing Cover 0. Seems to be an issue totally ignored here, as when I've mentioned it, nobody's even said "oh yeah". Cam is the #3 QB in passing efficiency. We have several good WRs. We can have success throwing.

quote:

---

I believe it was the play before McCalebs big run, they ran a similar play. On that play Edwards contained and Newton ran the ball.
On the long TD, Edwards lost contain looking for Newton to run and gave the edge away.

Newton ate LSU up by making alot of proper reads on those zone read runs.
What's sad is JJ has the same opportunity, but I truly don't think he's "reading" as much as predetermining what to do. There were a few times that he kept the ball that had he given it to Shepard it would have been huge gains. There were others that he should have kept it.

---

Your DE didn't "lose contain" on the McCaleb run. He executed his job which was a "block down/step down, wrong arm technique" (which was an adjustment made by the coaches)...he plugged the hole where Newton had been running, which gave Cam a "give read", and your OLB got blocked by a WR, and your Safety crashed down hard, filled, and whiffed the tackle that would have stopped McCaleb for a short gain if he'd made it.

Didn't pay attention to what JJ does, but Auburn wasn't running that much zone read...we're running a form of veer, the read and blocking are different.

quote:

---

On Newton's big run they actually ran an inverted veer look. Obviously McCalleb's big run was a zone read play.

---

Disagree. Cam's and McCaleb's run were the same play from different sets. The DE gave two different reads...both were inverted veer.

quote:

---

Auburn wasn't running that much zone read...we're running a form of veer, the read and blocking are different.

---

It looked a nice mixture of both zone read and midline and inverted veer.

Am I seeing the zone read wrong?

quote:

---

It has been an intelligent discussion. Just b/c I dont agree with you and Buck doesn't mean I am right. ALso doesn't mean y'all are either lol

---

Trout...it's not really a matter of right or wrong. It's opinions. Most folks that are looking at it like OBU and I, and understanding the risks of leaving your DBs in one on one man coverage are saying they don't think that the potential rewards of that outweigh the potential risks. That's all.

I also have a pet peeve of hearing people say or seeing them write "they didn't make adjustments" when they wouldn't know an adjustment if it was made. And I'm not cutting anybody down...unless you know what you're looking for, and watching a particular player...that stuff is very hard to see at game speed. And sometimes they're subtle adjustments too. I can't spot them without looking at film run back over and over, AND knowing what I'm looking for.

quote:

---

I also have a pet peeve of hearing people say or seeing them write "they didn't make adjustments" when they wouldn't know an adjustment if it was made.

---

The two things I've noticed in terms of adjustments:

1) We started playing Lavar Edwards a lot more in the 2nd half. He's a much more sound run defender. I think the initial idea was that Mingo gave us a better shot due to his speed and ability to "catch up" on plays, even if out of position... and he does bring that to the table. Problem was, he's still not as fast as Cam or the RBs, so once he was out of position, the play was over for him.

2) Subbing Brockers in for Pep made a tremendous difference on the interior. Brockers held the point of attack, even against double teams. Pep held his own some, but more often than not got blocked off the ball.

3) Adams and Edwards adjusting to playing that veer and forcing Newton to give rather than keep (which ended up burning us anyhow.

quote:

---

I'd have to go back and watch it...you have and I haven't...just going from memory, except that one play you mentioned (McCaleb's run) is an inverted veer. I don't know the percentage of Zone vs Veer, except to say we're running a lot more gap blocking schemes than Zone. Malzahn really was never a zone guy anyway, until he got to Tulsa and the Co-OC there is a former Rich Rod disciple. Veer and Power are what Malzahn had always done in the past anyway.

---

Yeah, you're right. I'm not going to go back and rewatch again, but I remember a lot more trapping and pulling, not zone blocking schemes.

Newton is a beast. He is better than I gave him credit for but while alot of people claimed he is their team I was impressed with their running backs as a whole and I thought people were overlooking their abilities prior to the game.