Jump to content

Who Does Muschamp Trust?


Proud Tiger

Recommended Posts

Good read. No so encouraging depth at DB. Hope we don't get more injuries.

http://auburn.247spo...unt-on-36956561

AUBURN – Will Muschamp opened spring practice looking for a few good men.

By the end of 15 practices Auburn's defensive coordinator wanted to know who he could count on when the Tigers take the field in the fall.

"At the end of spring -- and I told our guys after the first practice, 'If it's 11, it's 11. I'd love for it to be 25 guys that I know we can go in and count on,'" Muschamp said in mid-March. "Any combination of 12-13 guys up front with five linebackers and a combination of 14-16 secondary guys. That's in a perfect world, so I don't know if we'll get there."

With spring complete, Muschamp identified about half of the players needed to meet his ideal scenario, with the front seven being much clearer than the secondary.

On the D-line, Montravius Adams,Dontavius Russell, Maurice Swain and Devaroe Lawrence set themselves apart among the tackles with "some capabilities that need to be more consistent in some areas, but guys that can contribute and help us win."

At end, Muschamp singled out Carl Lawson, who was limited in the spring as he recovers from knee surgery, DaVonte Lambert, who was held out due to a torn ACL, Elijah Daniel and Gimel President.

Top recruit Byron Cowart will join the line in fall camp, bringing another pass rusher to the room.

"We're going to have to have some freshmen to come in and help us," Muschamp said, "especially with pass rush."

Despite having Kris Frost and Cassanova McKinzy, perhaps the best linebacker duo in the SEC, returning, Muschamp said there is no "starter" at linebacker, where he included Tre' Williams and Justin Garrett in the conversation.

Regardless of how the depth chart would fill out, Muschamp has a dozen players identified in the front seven.

"It's going to be a lot of fun in the fall as far as guys that are competing for playing time and competing to start and understanding about being a part of that rotation up front," Muschamp said. "We have a lot of competition up front so that makes my job a lot easier, especially in the summer."

The secondary is where Auburn is severely lacking in depth.

Injuries dealt blows to an already thin group, as Jonathan Jones sat out A-Day due to foot surgery and T.J. Davis tore his ACL, leaving walk-on corner Michael Sherwood to start with the first-team defense opposite Josh Holsey.

"I told our team (Monday) that we've got two safeties and two corners and one corner is in a walking boot," Muschamp said. "That's not a great situation right now, but it is what it is. We have time and ability and talent to be where we need to be, we're just not there yet."

At the Sam/nickel position, which Auburn will likely utilize more than a traditional linebacker, true freshman Tim Irvin, Derrick Moncrief and Holsey each have a way's to go.

Johnathan Ford and Tray Matthews were the only safeties to earn Muschamp's trust in the spring.

"Me and Rudy, we got a really great bond," Matthews said. "It's a 1-2 punch. You got the speed and the power."

Ford's size and speed make him the third corner, ahead of Stephen Roberts, to close spring.

Even with three defensive backs set to join the team over the summer, there is still a long way to go before Muschamp finds 14-16 members of the secondary he can rely on.

Though Nick Ruffin is the third safety on paper, Muschamp would not identify his third safety.

"You're looking at him," Muschamp said. "I don't know, we need to make some progress."

Link to comment
Share on other sites





He likes eight on the D-line and the two safeties. He mentions J.Jones and Holsey at corner. Beyond that, he's apparently not satisfied with any linebacker or the depth at safety and cornerback.

Judging by the A-day game, it's going to be another recruiting class or two before we're ready to stop a good opponent on a crucial drive in the fourth quarter. JJ is going to need to be as good as his potential indicates because we'll need points in bushels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I told everybody we weren't as talented in the secondary as people would say

Who ever said we were talented in the secondary? Our secondary play as well as our entire D has sucked out loud since Tuberville was the HC.

wde

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He likes eight on the D-line and the two safeties. He mentions J.Jones and Holsey at corner. Beyond that, he's apparently not satisfied with any linebacker or the depth at safety and cornerback.

Judging by the A-day game, it's going to be another recruiting class or two before we're ready to stop a good opponent on a crucial drive in the fourth quarter. JJ is going to need to be as good as his potential indicates because we'll need points in bushels.

We may not be good enough for what CWM wants but we will be better. I don't think the offense will have quite the pressure to be perfect like last year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I told everybody we weren't as talented in the secondary as people would say

Who ever said we were talented in the secondary? Our secondary play as well as our entire D has sucked out loud since Tuberville was the HC.

wde

Usually most people try to pass off the bad secondary play to not having a pass rush (yes I know it was a factor but I also know good and bad secondary play as well)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is always amazing how folks can put words in peoples mouth. I believe if you go back and listen to what CWM said was far different than what is being posted here. He said he knew KF and CM were good. What he wanted was more leadership out of them. He never once insinuated that neither was doing a good job, in fact he pretty much said he had them and a couple others that were moving that way. Said he had four but would like to get some quality depth (depth not starters). Same coach speak as we heard about JJ, when all along there was no doubt he would start,Both of these guys have numerous starts and playing time against tough opponents. TW will be good but he is not equal to those guy yet, and TW would be the first to tell you that. WDE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is always amazing how folks can put words in peoples mouth. I believe if you go back and listen to what CWM said was far different than what is being posted here.

Yup. That's why I posted

this article from The Montgomery Advertiser** (not from 24/7) is based on.

**Never rely on the Advertiser's coverage of AU. Never. I lived in Prattville and Montgomery for years. The Advertisers AU coverage was bad then. It's worse now. (But if you love bammer, be sure and subscribe. The Advertiser has your back.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No media source will ever put Auburn completely in a positive light. If there are compliments, they will often be backhanded compliments and the state media will never miss a chance to get in a jab at Auburn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No media source will ever put Auburn completely in a positive light. If there are compliments, they will often be backhanded compliments and the state media will never miss a chance to get in a jab at Auburn.

Yeah. In this case however it wasn't backhanding, it was completely mischaracterizing what WM had to say (in context) in the presser about his linebackers. What gets me is how when the

, folks will act as if a reporter's take is the gospel and not check it for themselves. Also, in this instance, Gus Malzahn's interview with Bruce Feldman** -- in which Gus, asked if anything stood out as a positive on defense in the spring, specifically referred to the linebackers as a bright spot -- is in direct opposition to the spin here.

**Malzahn's Feldman interview. The show hosts start talking about Malzahn and AU around 37 minutes in or so. The actual interview with Malzahn begins around 40-41 minutes in and lasts pretty much until the end of the podcast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No media source will ever put Auburn completely in a positive light. If there are compliments, they will often be backhanded compliments and the state media will never miss a chance to get in a jab at Auburn.

Yeah. In this case however it wasn't backhanding, it was completely mischaracterizing what WM had to say (in context) in the presser about his linebackers. What gets me is how when the

, folks will act as if a reporter's take is the gospel and not check it for themselves. Also, in this instance, Gus Malzahn's interview with Bruce Feldman** -- in which Gus, asked if anything stood out as a positive on defense in the spring, specifically referred to the linebackers as a bright spot -- is in direct opposition to the spin here.

**Malzahn's Feldman interview. The show hosts start talking about Malzahn and AU around 37 minutes in or so. The actual interview with Malzahn begins around 40-41 minutes in and lasts pretty much until the end of the podcast.

Oh, believe me I know. Notice I said IF THERE ARE COMPLIMENTS. Rarely do I ever expect a compliment on Auburn football from anybody in the media. I wish someone with Auburn ties would take over one of the state publications and we would finally get a voice in the state that didn't spin everything we did into a negative thing. That same source could also relegate uat news (except negative news) to the back pages like all the state media does to Auburn now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Muschamp said was directly counter to Mikey's assessment. He said he had about 16 guys that he could trust.

DT - Adams, Russell, Swain, and Lawrence

DE - Lawson, Lambert, Daniel, and President

LB - Frost, McKinzy, Williams, and Garrett

CB - Jones and Holsey

S - Matthews and Ford

That's the list of 16. He said there were no starters at LB, which was meant to imply that none of the four are clearly ahead of the other, but all four were in the small group of players he already feels good about. In his perfect world, he has five guys he can rely on at LB, which makes LB the position closest to his ideal scenario. If there's an issue at LB, there's a glaring issue at basically every other position.

It's going to be a BIG summer for guys like Roberts, Ruffin, Moncrief, Thornton, Kennion, and Toney. Those are all guys with experience (except for Thornton) and an open path to playing time. If they don't make it count this summer, they may be passed on the depth chart by incoming (or currently available) freshmen. Should be fun to see the group develop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Muschamp said was directly counter to Mikey's assessment. He said he had about 16 guys that he could trust.

DT - Adams, Russell, Swain, and Lawrence

DE - Lawson, Lambert, Daniel, and President

LB - Frost, McKinzy, Williams, and Garrett

CB - Jones and Holsey

S - Matthews and Ford

That's the list of 16. He said there were no starters at LB, which was meant to imply that none of the four are clearly ahead of the other, but all four were in the small group of players he already feels good about. In his perfect world, he has five guys he can rely on at LB, which makes LB the position closest to his ideal scenario. If there's an issue at LB, there's a glaring issue at basically every other position.

Er, no, what Muschamp said is in no way different from what I posted. Here's my quote: "He likes eight on the D-line and the two safeties. He mentions J.Jones and Holsey at corner. Beyond that, he's apparently not satisfied with any linebacker or the depth at safety and cornerback." That makes 12, not 16.

So what Muschamp said and what I said are exactly the same. He has 12 he likes. How you got the idea that Muschamp had found 16 he trusts is beyond me. You've tried to spin "no starters at linebacker" into a positive thing. When a coach says he has no starters at any given position, he means he has nobody he can trust to perform at that position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Muschamp said was directly counter to Mikey's assessment. He said he had about 16 guys that he could trust.

DT - Adams, Russell, Swain, and Lawrence

DE - Lawson, Lambert, Daniel, and President

LB - Frost, McKinzy, Williams, and Garrett

CB - Jones and Holsey

S - Matthews and Ford

That's the list of 16. He said there were no starters at LB, which was meant to imply that none of the four are clearly ahead of the other, but all four were in the small group of players he already feels good about. In his perfect world, he has five guys he can rely on at LB, which makes LB the position closest to his ideal scenario. If there's an issue at LB, there's a glaring issue at basically every other position.

Er, no, what Muschamp said is in no way different from what I posted. Here's my quote: "He likes eight on the D-line and the two safeties. He mentions J.Jones and Holsey at corner. Beyond that, he's apparently not satisfied with any linebacker or the depth at safety and cornerback." That makes 12, not 16.

So what Muschamp said and what I said are exactly the same. He has 12 he likes. How you got the idea that Muschamp had found 16 he trusts is beyond me. You've tried to spin "no starters at linebacker" into a positive thing. When a coach says he has no starters at any given position, he means he has nobody he can trust to perform at that position.

"Muschamp identified 16 players total -- four tackles, four defensive ends, four linebackers, two safeties and two cornerbacks, as trustworthy options."

Thats the quote from Brandon Marcello

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mikey, listened to the interview. That's how I got the idea that he liked 16 guys, including four LBs. We're pretty close to having the five guys he needs at that position. The number of guys needed at LB is lower than some spots because Muschamp plays a lot of Nickel. He doesn't have a guy at Nickel that he trusts right now (Moncrief, Holsey, and Irvin filled the role this spring).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is hard to reconcile the idea that Boom doesn't trust Cass and KF with CGM's claim in the Feldman interview that our LBs stood out as a bright spot. That claim lends some support to mcgufcm. On the other hand, the scuttlebutt about Cass, especially, lends some support to Mikey -- unless that was mostly to motivate Cass and KF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll concede that there may have been statements in the interview that weren't in the above posted article. I live in the boonies and don't get the kind of internet connection that makes looking at live interviews and you-tube things appealing. If he says in the interviews that he's sold on the linebackers in spite of what the article says, ok. I'm not calling anybody here a liar over something I haven't seen.

I do read as many published written comments as possible and I've seen nothing in writing that suggests the linebackers have advanced to the level of the 12 guys named at other positions. It's certainly not in the 247 article in the OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody go pull up some articles and interviews from this exact same time last season, see what the coaches were saying about the defense 12 months ago.............

Bottom line, until I see marked improvement on the field I'm taking the coaches comments with a grain of salt. I haven't seen a stout, "Auburn" defense since freaking 2005-2006.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody go pull up some articles and interviews from this exact same time last season, see what the coaches were saying about the defense 12 months ago.............

Bottom line, until I see marked improvement on the field I'm taking the coaches comments with a grain of salt. I haven't seen a stout, "Auburn" defense since freaking 2005-2006.

And guess who was dcoordinator during those years? U guessed it, BOOM!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I told everybody we weren't as talented in the secondary as people would say

Who ever said we were talented in the secondary? Our secondary play as well as our entire D has sucked out loud since Tuberville was the HC.

wde

+1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scheme has a huge part to play in how ineffective our defenses were over the past few years. I've preached over and over that scheme had a bigger role than the personnel. The 2 defense we ran while in the subpar defense era were the 4-3 Tampa 2 and the 4-2-5. Both of these defense work but also have glaring weaknesses as all defense will. Strong defense is built on stopping the run and forcing the pass. When defenses force the pass you now have taken away the element of surprise.

The 4-2-5 and the Tampa 2 defense both used 4 down lineman in a 1 gap scheme meaning the lineman have 1 gap that they need to blowup and cause penetration to work. That has been accomplished in the past with the help of 3 to 4 linebackers. However in the age of superior offenses and rules built to aid in more scoring, this has hurt all defenses in general. Some more than others.

The first adjustment to high powered offenses was to shore up the weakness of the 4-3 base defense by dropping the middle linebacker into coverage taking away the middle passing lanes. This player became smaller and faster to accomplish this goal therefore being a hybrid sort of linebacker/defensive back. This adjustment was in the hey day of the pass catching TE (KC's Tony Gonzalez).

This leaves a hole in run fits and now the MLB is forced to read and react instead of attack. This is not good for any defense. As offenses figured this out, running on this defense became easier due to only having 6 players to fill the gaps instead of 7.

The 4-2-5 is another response to high powered offense. Personally I am a big fan of the 4-2-5 when run correctly. TCU does this very well. Again, as in the Tampa 2, you remove a linebacker and replace him with a hybrid player who is better at coverage. Now the defense schemes off of this one player. The hybrid lines up to the pass strength and the SS or Boundary Safety to the run strength. Again now you have 2 players reading and reacting instead of attacking. Spread those two players out and now running becomes easier.

Hybrid players are here to stay. But in my opinion keeping those players closer to the line of scrimmage makes it harder for offenses to adjust. The next thing is those hybrid players are usually physically more gifted then most. Giving that hybrid one task as in the Buck Lb or Jack Lb could take your best player and not ask him to read then react but just relentlessly attack and use his ability.

Some people here believe the only way to fix the problem is to discard the players we have and start over until we hit the jackpot. That comes at a cost. You may not hit the jackpot. No matter if you've played in or even won a national championship, one win less year in conference will get you fired. Playing a bunch of guys a couple of years into pubity is asking for trouble. Development takes time and recruiting will only give you a few pieces to the puzzle. Our linebackers will be improved but confidence takes knowing and trusting you can accomplish the goal. I'm not so sure they trusted if they could in our last two defenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody go pull up some articles and interviews from this exact same time last season, see what the coaches were saying about the defense 12 months ago.............

Bottom line, until I see marked improvement on the field I'm taking the coaches comments with a grain of salt. I haven't seen a stout, "Auburn" defense since freaking 2005-2006.

And guess who was dcoordinator during those years? U guessed it, BOOM!!!

Actually Muschamp (I assume that's who you are referring too) was there in 2006 and 2007 not in 2005. And Tommy tuberville was the head coach which was the real reason the defense was consistently good for all the years he was head coach. Tuberville was more responsible for our defensive success than Muschamp was,, IMO. That's why the defense was good year after year regardless of the DC was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody go pull up some articles and interviews from this exact same time last season, see what the coaches were saying about the defense 12 months ago.............

Bottom line, until I see marked improvement on the field I'm taking the coaches comments with a grain of salt. I haven't seen a stout, "Auburn" defense since freaking 2005-2006.

And guess who was dcoordinator during those years? U guessed it, BOOM!!!

Actually Muschamp (I assume that's who you are referring too) was there in 2006 and 2007 not in 2005. And Tommy tuberville was the head coach which was the real reason the defense was consistently good for all the years he was head coach. Tuberville was more responsible for our defensive success than Muschamp was,, IMO. That's why the defense was good year after year regardless of the DC was.

Yeah but he does know from coaching with tubs on how AU fans feel about defense
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...