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

quote:

---

Those that think the solution is to play man coverage need to watch the designed QB draw they ran with 6minutes left in 2nd qtr. They swing the back to the right and KS has him so he has to run with him. Our 4 dbs are in man and running down the field. Cam is 10 yds down field before our dbs come off of coverage to try and make the play.

---

Yeah that one was painful and was one of the few times on the day when we literally had no one around.

quote:

---

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.

---

Oh I agree, it's the whole backfield that make the engine churn.

I don't think Newton would be AS effective with weaker RBs back there, though I also think his presence improves the backs quite a bit.

Dyer is a horse.

quote:

---

Claiborne got blocked, so I assume you are talking about Taylor crashing hard and whiffing.

---

It was badddddddddddddd. Real bad.

A few thoughts more on this:
- First, this is one of the better threads to last this long on the Rant; great work Dan, Buck Sweep, Trout, et al
- By "scheme", most of us would take that to encompass the matchups along with line-ups. IOW, part of the scheme is to create mis-matches, not just how many are in the box, blitzes, etc.
- Although Dan and Buck Sweep have made a strong case, I still think they're thinking too much inside the box. I don't think we really felt AU would accrue 400+ yds rushing so in that respect our scheme failed. On the other hand, even deep into the 4th Qtr there was no pressing reason to change things drastically. It was only when it became 4th and 6 on our last possession that our scheme was condemned (basically, Les had no confidence left in our D; else we would've punted). This is where the bend-don't-break approach failed.
- The couple of times Cam actually tried to read the coverage he seemed to throw into at least double-coverage. In hindsight, I would've went man-on-man even if 4-wide (with Mo, PP7, TM, and Jai) and played 7-on-7 in the box. Would it have worked who knows but it would have forced AU to play outside their comfort zone (something we never did all game). Basically, we seemed very vanilla. All they had to do was run their base O and they were successful.
- Not enough credit is being given to AU's OL. With Sam out only Nevis is really a stand-out and AU's OL is very solid. This was a huge (unforeseen) advantage to AU.

quote:

---

And this is the last resort of the incompetent coach. "They just missed tackles." As if that doesn't happen to any defense against great runners when the runners have momentum and plenty of open space. Get real.

---

This right here. So what the players, who are playing for a possible NFL future, decided to miss tackles this game right? With a big physical runner like Newton, he has to be bottled up quickly or you will have many broken tackles. It all comes down to the coaches no matter how you stack this shite. The coaches recruit, so get players who can handle your schemes, they game plan, so make sure the players understand the plan and if not you have 85 to choose from if you can't find 22 out of the 85 you done a piss poor job recruiting. It all boils down to the coaches.

Alwys - great reply. Likewise, OBUDan and Buck Sweep thanks for the great discussion.

If people can't appreciate the dissection of the finer points of a super football game such as LSU at Auburn, we (as LSU and Auburn fans) need to find better things to do.

LSU's #14 and #15 should fend off blocks and tackle better (be in a better position to tackle) on the game winning 70 yard TD run. Other than that, LSU missed many more tackles in the entire game.

But, as I've said in my post on p. 10 of this thread, QB play (to wit, Cam vs. LSU's inept QB play) determined the end result of our encounter. I'm trying to be factual - not derogatory. I'm a long time LSU fan (50s listening to radio - check my posts).

I think LSU's defense played as well as could be expected against a super player like Cam Newton. LSU just needed a "little" help from our offense. Am I oversimplifying this?????

quote:

---

This right here. So what the players, who are playing for a possible NFL future, decided to miss tackles this game right? With a big physical runner like Newton, he has to be bottled up quickly or you will have many broken tackles. It all comes down to the coaches no matter how you stack this shite. The coaches recruit, so get players who can handle your schemes, they game plan, so make sure the players understand the plan and if not you have 85 to choose from if you can't find 22 out of the 85 you done a piss poor job recruiting. It all boils down to the coaches.

---

When you put it in the context of Loss = poor coaching, then you're correct. If it's that simple in your mind, then there's no arguing with that. But, if you want to argue about "schemes" and "adustments"....it's best to actually know what you're are seeing and talking about...I mean you can just pop off about that type of shite...but it doesn't mean you know anything about it.