Null



Win4AU

Kam Martin would start today

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

That's good to hear about the weight gain and effort.

Thing is, a RB doesn't have to be a full-blown road block.  That's the OL's job.  If he can simply slow down a blitzer or someone who breaks free for a couple seconds, he's usually done his job.

Absolutely, nobody expects a blocker to completely neutralize a defender, a successful block is giving a person 2-3 more seconds.....we don't even really throw downfield enough imo to even think it's a big issue. I think the line is either going to be good or bad, I don't see a great blocking back making that big of an impact. Maybe a great fullback.....

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




1 minute ago, McLoofus said:

Agree. Looking at that play, it seems like he just needed to go in a lot lower and it would have made a huge difference. And, as @bigbird says, he might've been taken by surprise. He definitely failed in a big way, no sugar coating that. But as you and I and many others agree, it's hardly the post mortem on his career and it was nothing that wasn't correctable.

To be fair to the poster who put up the video, it was just an example. Horton flat out said Kam didn't play against Clemson because of physicality and pass protection. Not a post mortem on his career (agree 1000%), but I don't think there's an argument that Kam didn't struggle in that area last season. Just is what it is.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

My limited brain power says this statement is a home run....er, uh...99 yd TD run.

Ahhhhhh

Ahhhhhhhh

Ahhhhhhhhhh

(And the crowd goes wild)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Barnacle said:

To be fair to the poster who put up the video, it was just an example. Horton flat out said Kam didn't play against Clemson because of physicality and pass protection. Not a post mortem on his career (agree 1000%), but I don't think there's an argument that Kam didn't struggle in that area last season. Just is what it is.

Absolutely. And was evidently still struggling some in spring. 

I clumsily and unwisely said "that play" as though it were the only example, which significantly alters the message (and renders it off target). 

TL;DR- Point deduction for Loof

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Absolutely, nobody expects a blocker to completely neutralize a defender, a successful block is giving a person 2-3 more seconds.....we don't even really throw downfield enough imo to even think it's a big issue. I think the line is either going to be good or bad, I don't see a great blocking back making that big of an impact. Maybe a great fullback.....

Yessir!  Very good point.

Let the OL block and the Running Back run.

The OL's improvement, or lack thereof, will be a MUCH greater key to improving AU's passing game than whether Kam Martin can block.

OH, and I'm still out of Likes, so.... LIKE.

Edited by AUsince72
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, cole256 said:

we don't even really throw downfield enough imo to even think it's a big issue. I think the line is either going to be good or bad, I don't see a great blocking back making that big of an impact. Maybe a great fullback.....

Great points, especially the bolded. I read it and gave one of those sad laughs - because it's true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fyi, scouting report on the 35th pick in this year's draft:

Quote

He often came off the field on third downs and passing situations so his receiving and pass blocking acumen are big question marks for any team interested in him.

Much different offense than ours, but unless we actually return to tempo football, I'm not sure how much it matters.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we utilized our backs in the passing game more effectively (flare,Texas,angle,) then teams would be much more hesitant to blitz and, in turn, would negate a lot of the need to have them in pass pro. However it seems like we max protect 90+% of the time.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

TL;DR- Point deduction for Loof

A man who has much, has much to give. 

or something like that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Fyi, scouting report on the 35th pick in this year's draft:

Much different offense than ours, but unless we actually return to tempo football, I'm not sure how much it matters.

Wow nice dig. But this also furthers the point in how certain players find spots in the NFL, but didn’t seem to make much of an impact at Auburn. In the NFL, you best believe a team will give you a chance, if your strengths outweigh the weaknesses. They have no problem adapting to the ability Of each player and putting them in the best position for the team. 

This is my constructive criticism haha

 

Edited by DAG
Clarification
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bigbird said:

If we utilized our backs in the passing game more effectively (flare,Texas,angle,) then teams would be much more hesitant to blitz and, in turn, would negate a lot of the need to have them in pass pro. However it seems like we max protect 90+% of the time.

My concern has always been in play-action.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, AU64 said:

JMO but you still have to weigh the timing of the OP quote...

..at the time the comment was made about Kam, I expect if asked the question,  Gus would probably have said, if we played today, Malik Willis would be the QB....which of course would have meant nothing for when the season actually starts. .    

The Washington game is not about who was ready and able to play in April...but who will be healthy and ready to give us the best chance to beat the Huskies. 

You make a great point.

What Gus says in pressers is often hard to "read". :headscratch:

You clearly have Ralphie's Secret Decoder Pin. :thedeal:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AUsince72 said:

You make a great point.

What Gus says in pressers is often hard to "read". :headscratch:

You clearly have Ralphie's Secret Decoder Pin. :thedeal:

It's all a crummy commercial, when you get down to it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Fyi, scouting report on the 35th pick in this year's draft:

Helps when you've got Sony Michel and Swift back there. Those guys were insane in the screen game. 

But, the point is well taken. Either way, we are going to need at least three backs who we can rotate throughout the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bigbird said:

If we utilized our backs in the passing game more effectively (flare,Texas,angle,) then teams would be much more hesitant to blitz and, in turn, would negate a lot of the need to have them in pass pro. However it seems like we max protect 90+% of the time.

Amen. Ole Miss is a great example of a team that passes at will and rarely has a RB on their roster that would be second string at Auburn. If we have a blocking deficiency in our pass blocking from RB, Chip has several months to tweak the offense to adapt accordingly. 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

A man who has much, has much to give. 

or something like that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Image result for you're too kind gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

It's all a crummy commercial, when you get down to it. 

SONUVA...

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gowebb11 said:

Amen. Ole Miss is a great example of a team that passes at will and rarely has a RB on their roster that would be second string at Auburn. If we have a blocking deficiency in our pass blocking from RB, Chip has several months to tweak the offense to adapt accordingly. 

Even if it were so big a problem that we would need to tweak our entire offense, we all know Gus wouldn't do it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

Helps when you've got Sony Michel and Swift back there. Those guys were insane in the screen game. 

But, the point is well taken. Either way, we are going to need at least three backs who we can rotate throughout the game. 

Ahh... The other great debate.

The use of more than 1 back to keep them fresh, change of pace, specific skill set for package of plays, etc...

You're gonna derail us here, if you're not careful.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aujeff11 said:

The defenders blew by them and they failed. Number 9 was in great position to make tbe block as Stidham’s last line of defense though and was rendered nothing more than a slight speed bump. That’s more problematic than just missing the block. 

Hopefully Grimes fixes our OL. That’s the one reason why we lost to UCF. 

Guess we will agree to disagree if we are even doing that. Although kami got steamrolled looked to me he misstepped alil also which can be corrected but 2 lineman who trained most of their lives to block failing so badly is more concerning to me.

Edited by Southwest
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

Yessir!  Very good point.

Let the OL block and the Running Back run.

The OL's improvement, or lack thereof, will be a MUCH greater key to improving AU's passing game than whether Kam Martin can block.

OH, and I'm still out of Likes, so.... LIKE.

Can someone remind me how often and when the Site refills the damn' things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AUsince72 said:

Ahh... The other great debate.

The use of more than 1 back to keep them fresh, change of pace, specific skill set for package of plays, etc...

You're gonna derail us here, if you're not careful.

Got there before me friend 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AUld fAUx@ said:

Can someone remind me how often and when the Site refills the damn' things?

HAHA, exactly!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DAG said:

Got there before me friend 

:cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AUsince72 said:

Ahh... The other great debate.

The use of more than 1 back to keep them fresh, change of pace, specific skill set for package of plays, etc...

You're gonna derail us here, if you're not careful.

Haha - is it even a debate though??? No back can do it all - unless you are Bo Jackson. In fact, my experience taking reps at RB taught me that some can't do anything well. 

You just have to hope that your player's weaknesses aren't so weak that they become liabilities. In our case, a lot will turn on personnel. So long as we've got other backs who can mitigate for the others' weaknesses, without their own weaknesses becoming liabilities - we should be good. In the case of Georgia last season, whatever weaknesses their backs had never arose to that level. 

Free likes to anyone who followed that, by the way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now