2016 Week 1 Depth Chart (MERGED)

[ValleyTiger 2,894]

27 minutes ago, SugarBowlSon said:

Alright, so Clemson goes with a 4WR/1TE set. Who do you man up with on each? -I'll play along assuming man, but I'd prefer to play a zone or a combo coverage depending on the formation. Switching to Dime & playing Cover 1 with Ruffin as the FS. Maybe M. Atkinson or D. Williams to spy Watson.

Mike Williams, 6'3" 225 / 57-1030, 6 TD (DNP 2015; 2014 stats used) - Carlton

Artavis Scott, 5'10" 190 / 93-901, 6 TD -Rudy

Deon Cain, 6'1" 210 / 34-582, 5 TD -J. Davis

Hunter Renfrow, 5'11" 180, 33-492, 5 TD -Holsey

Jordan Leggett, 6'5" 260 / 40-525 8 TD - Trigga

 

[ellitor 33,093]

33 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

He was recruited both ways out of high school as I remember. 

It was heavy at DB til the last 2 months. That's why UGA got his commitment & had the lead most of the way. They recruited him as a WR from the get go. AU did not have him as a WR take til the last few months.

[Malcolm_FleX48 1,869]

 

Just now, ValleyTiger said:

Alright, so Clemson goes with a 4WR/1TE set. Who do you man up with on each? -I'll play along assuming man, but I'd prefer to play a zone or a combo coverage depending on the formation. Switching to Dime & playing Cover 1 with Ruffin as the FS. Maybe M. Atkinson or D. Williams to spy Watson.

Mike Williams, 6'3" 225 / 57-1030, 6 TD (DNP 2015; 2014 stats used) - Carlton

Artavis Scott, 5'10" 190 / 93-901, 6 TD -Rudy

Deon Cain, 6'1" 210 / 34-582, 5 TD -J. Davis

Hunter Renfrow, 5'11" 180, 33-492, 5 TD -Holsey

Jordan Leggett, 6'5" 260 / 40-525 8 TD - Trigga

 

There is a large issue with trying to have THAT many DB's on the field as well as running a spy. It's not a good mix, especially with a running QB. For one thing your pass rush is going to be severely crippled if you're sending your base 4 with no close quarters support from linebackers due to running out of a dime formation. They're basically going to be rushing on egg shells knowing that they've can't break their lanes and so that's definitely going to slow them down.

A single spy player is a bad idea, although people tend to try and drum up it's effectiveness against a running QB, it's a one on one situation with a wide field and a fast QB. That's not the best situation to run. Especially when given the situation where the offense can run a QB Draw out of that formation and simply have a guard or center release to the second level. Now you've basically got a hat on a hat, and with single matchups man across the line, the DBs already have themselves either blocked or depending on if the WRs are running chase-off routes, they're covering and not checking for the QB to break the pocket. 

Another issue that this coverage presents is that assuming the pass rush cant get to the elusive Watson, he has all day in the pocket to stretch the play out, not to mention when he finally does throw, chances are, having your secondary play man for so long is going to either 
A.) Allow for someone or multiple people to get beat
B.) Stretch the field out so much that Watson has ALL kinds of field to run and pick up yards before being tackled and it makes it harder for your spy player to do his job of keeping the QB in check.

 You're seeing a huge size mismatch also by placing a single man on Leggett in an already small package (personnel wise). I wouldn't trust many DBs to match up with him from a size or length standpoint, and since you've got multiple DBs all having to cover man, it's literally going to be one on one until the safety (If you have him playing zone for a leaker, and no one else has leaked.) has to help out. Even then, the damage is already done. If he doesn't get a TD it's a play for a massive gain. 

Another issue is one you've pointed out, based on the formation, Leggett could be as attached, as an H-Back, or in the slot. Sometime he might be playing nub side split out, but if he is a part of the first 2, then they've either got the defense out manned from a size perspective if they decide to go with a QB dive or run, or even worse with him in the H-Back spot, they can run a QB Power and have him take cruise to the other side of the formation with a pulling guard and now you've got Watson in the alley against DBs with a convoy of big bodies. Hell I've even seen QB powers ran where the center, guard, and H-Back pull and the backside guard walls the nose leaving the 2 frontside D-linemen as well as DBs out of the picture against skinny personnel to the backside. Massive convoy with a shifty runner against a predominantly pass personnel. What's worse is that they can audible to this play and it takes almost no setup, so they can run it out of a pass heavy sets that are built with 01 personnel as a trap. Lets not forget that their WRs aren't necessarily THAT small either which affords a matchup issue for most except for C.Davis. That's also not taking into account their other stable of WRs they have. 

[SugarBowlSon 0]

5 minutes ago, Malcolm_FleX48 said:

That's also not taking into account their other stable of WRs they have. 

I did not include Ray Ray McCloud or Trevion Thompson in there, both of whom are very good receivers. Or the 3 4-stars we signed in February. I prefer 4/1 to 5 Wide just because Leggett is a nightmare. He's a big cat with soft hands. 

[Malcolm_FleX48 1,869]

1 minute ago, SugarBowlSon said:

I did not include Ray Ray McCloud or Trevion Thompson in there, both of whom are very good receivers. Or the 3 4-stars we signed in February. I prefer 4/1 to 5 Wide just because Leggett is a nightmare. He's a big cat with soft hands. 

Problem is, that would most likely be the set they run with Thompson, which puts us at more of a size disadvantage. It also makes them more multiple of an offense to show that look because they'll have run supremacy without sacrificing the pass any. 

[ValleyTiger 2,894]

Great insight @Malcolm_FleX48. Like I said, I was only playing along with his scenario of man2man. Not only formation, but down & distance and field position is going to play heavily into an actual play call. I agree on the spy concept, that's why I said maybe. More likely than not, this personnel package would warrant a zone coverage and unless it's obvious passing down & distance you'd try to stay in your Nickel package to avoid those run game problems Flex mentioned.

[Malcolm_FleX48 1,869]

Just now, ValleyTiger said:

Great insight @Malcolm_FleX48. Like I said, I was only playing along with his scenario of man2man. Not only formation, but down & distance and field position is going to play heavily into an actual play call. I agree on the spy concept, that's why I said maybe. More likely than not, this personnel package would warrant a zone coverage and unless it's obvious passing down & distance you'd try to stay in your Nickel package to avoid those run game problems Flex mentioned.

Yeah, the only issue with this game is that you ARE playing against such a dangerous team with plenty of spread out formations that don't sacrifice the run near as much. Clemson is a very balanced offense and as such, you're left with very little options as everything is a guessing game with built in alternatives. So it's a hard offense to have a solution for because it's a hard offense in general. 

[AUsince72 11,084]

1 hour ago, ValleyTiger said:

 

 

44 minutes ago, Malcolm_FleX48 said:

 

 

There is a large issue with trying to have THAT many DB's on the field as well as running a spy. It's not a good mix, especially with a running QB. For one thing your pass rush is going to be severely crippled if you're sending your base 4 with no close quarters support from linebackers due to running out of a dime formation. They're basically going to be rushing on egg shells knowing that they've can't break their lanes and so that's definitely going to slow them down.

A single spy player is a bad idea, although people tend to try and drum up it's effectiveness against a running QB, it's a one on one situation with a wide field and a fast QB. That's not the best situation to run. Especially when given the situation where the offense can run a QB Draw out of that formation and simply have a guard or center release to the second level. Now you've basically got a hat on a hat, and with single matchups man across the line, the DBs already have themselves either blocked or depending on if the WRs are running chase-off routes, they're covering and not checking for the QB to break the pocket. 

Another issue that this coverage presents is that assuming the pass rush cant get to the elusive Watson, he has all day in the pocket to stretch the play out, not to mention when he finally does throw, chances are, having your secondary play man for so long is going to either 
A.) Allow for someone or multiple people to get beat
B.) Stretch the field out so much that Watson has ALL kinds of field to run and pick up yards before being tackled and it makes it harder for your spy player to do his job of keeping the QB in check.

 You're seeing a huge size mismatch also by placing a single man on Leggett in an already small package (personnel wise). I wouldn't trust many DBs to match up with him from a size or length standpoint, and since you've got multiple DBs all having to cover man, it's literally going to be one on one until the safety (If you have him playing zone for a leaker, and no one else has leaked.) has to help out. Even then, the damage is already done. If he doesn't get a TD it's a play for a massive gain. 

Another issue is one you've pointed out, based on the formation, Leggett could be as attached, as an H-Back, or in the slot. Sometime he might be playing nub side split out, but if he is a part of the first 2, then they've either got the defense out manned from a size perspective if they decide to go with a QB dive or run, or even worse with him in the H-Back spot, they can run a QB Power and have him take cruise to the other side of the formation with a pulling guard and now you've got Watson in the alley against DBs with a convoy of big bodies. Hell I've even seen QB powers ran where the center, guard, and H-Back pull and the backside guard walls the nose leaving the 2 frontside D-linemen as well as DBs out of the picture against skinny personnel to the backside. Massive convoy with a shifty runner against a predominantly pass personnel. What's worse is that they can audible to this play and it takes almost no setup, so they can run it out of a pass heavy sets that are built with 01 personnel as a trap. Lets not forget that their WRs aren't necessarily THAT small either which affords a matchup issue for most except for C.Davis. That's also not taking into account their other stable of WRs they have. 

 

30 minutes ago, ValleyTiger said:

Great insight @Malcolm_FleX48. Like I said, I was only playing along with his scenario of man2man. Not only formation, but down & distance and field position is going to play heavily into an actual play call. I agree on the spy concept, that's why I said maybe. More likely than not, this personnel package would warrant a zone coverage and unless it's obvious passing down & distance you'd try to stay in your Nickel package to avoid those run game problems Flex mentioned.

Y'all WAY WAY WAY too smart for me.

Just sayin....  Please continue...

War Eagle!

Edited September 1, 2016 by AUsince72

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

 

5 minutes ago, ValleyTiger said:

Great insight @Malcolm_FleX48. Like I said, I was only playing along with his scenario of man2man. Not only formation, but down & distance and field position is going to play heavily into an actual play call. I agree on the spy concept, that's why I said maybe. More likely than not, this personnel package would warrant a zone coverage and unless it's obvious passing down & distance you'd try to stay in your Nickel package to avoid those run game problems Flex mentioned.

I would agree here, but would love Flex's insight into this thought.  I believe that our best shot defensively is to play a hybrid defense consisting of Carlton playing man-to-man while the rest of the back 7 essentially plays zone.  Carlton is good enough to essentially shut down 1/3 of the field, allowing the other players to help each other out and taking the stress off of man coverage all around.  This should also allow our LBs to keep an eye on Watson if he were to take off running.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

7 minutes ago, Malcolm_FleX48 said:

Yeah, the only issue with this game is that you ARE playing against such a dangerous team with plenty of spread out formations that don't sacrifice the run near as much. Clemson is a very balanced offense and as such, you're left with very little options as everything is a guessing game with built in alternatives. So it's a hard offense to have a solution for because it's a hard offense in general. 

Which is why the key to the game is to disrupt. Get in their backfield quickly and make them have to improvise. If everything we are hearing about our line is true, we should be the best at doing that of any team Clemson has faces with this offense. It won't stop them cold, but it's our best shot at getting an edge.

[Tiger 8,826]

24 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

 

I would agree here, but would love Flex's insight into this thought.  I believe that our best shot defensively is to play a hybrid defense consisting of Carlton playing man-to-man while the rest of the back 7 essentially plays zone.  Carlton is good enough to essentially shut down 1/3 of the field, allowing the other players to help each other out and taking the stress off of man coverage all around.  This should also allow our LBs to keep an eye on Watson if he were to take off running.

Let's pump the brakes on Carlton Davis slightly. He cannot shut down 1/3 of the field quite yet with just 13 games under his belt. Even Carlos Rogers wasn't doing that until his last year and the last few games of 03. Opposing offenses were picking on Davis early but he stepped his game up. My point is with only 1 year of experience he likely will not be that guy yet. Part of shutting down 1/3 of the field is the QB ahead of time knowing he won't even look in that direction. In due time I have all the confidence that he will be that type of player for us, but as a sophomore it is a stretch. I hope you're right though!

Edited September 1, 2016 by Tiger

[Malcolm_FleX48 1,869]

4 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

 

I would agree here, but would love Flex's insight into this thought.  I believe that our best shot defensively is to play a hybrid defense consisting of Carlton playing man-to-man while the rest of the back 7 essentially plays zone.  Carlton is good enough to essentially shut down 1/3 of the field, allowing the other players to help each other out and taking the stress off of man coverage all around.  This should also allow our LBs to keep an eye on Watson if he were to take off running.

Well that's actually a bit of a tough one. If you watch most of the film, I don't think that Carlton could really do a MEG type scheme. Or a Man Everywhere he Goes type scheme with a single receiver matched up in man. But you also don't want to keep him just to one side if you're going to have him playing man otherwise you're going to end up with a situation where they put their weakest WR to his side. Though if you have him travel, then they may either do a couple of things:

For one thing, from what I can remember, Davis is a boundary corner, which means he is used more for run support. Taking him and assigning him to a man the whole game takes away one of your strongest boundary defenders should a run bounce out to his side. and there is no one that is "Wadded up in the middle of the action" that can stop a runner until the safety comes down. Also should Watson come running, yes you'll have your LBs free, but if he is fast enough to beat them to the edge, then with Davis playing in man, he is going to be out of the picture on that edge. 

Another issue that you run into is that being a primarily boundary corner, Davis' man coverage skills might not be good enough to handle one man on an entire 3rd of the field. Part of the issue with having him to the field or in an area where he has a nickel defender on his side is that he HAS to play off. That's where we see Davis get into trouble because his key style from what I can tell is to press and physically jam and direct the receiver to the outside in a one on one matchup where he can use his length to his advantage in the case that the QB either underthrows the ball, or puts it on the inside, but also being long, he can possibly disrupt back shoulder fades and edge balls. The issue with having him to the field is that in the last defense, he had to play OFF and sit back in a zone in those situations and it left him in some bad places where he would let short passes get ripped on him a lot and also it just seemed less natural of a fit for him. Still, you can't play him man in those situations because your slot defender isn't going to be nearly as good possibly and you need that safety over the top that you've got in Zone coverage to be able to bracket the 1st to leak. If that ends up being Davis who lets his man leak, then the safety HAS to take that man because otherwise that's a TD. (And that's more likely to happen since Davis is now playing with a wider field and a more varied set of routes to possibly cover against. The Post-Corner is one that I see being particularly deadly in this set.) But if the slot is also threatening vertical in a similar manner, then now it's a damned if you do or don't situation because the nickel has no over the top help since the safety vacated so that means he is against arguably the FASTEST receiver with no help and in a widened out area. They can also run rubs and picks as well as crosses to take Davis out of his game and exchange men, or create a collision between the 2 defenders if you tell him to play press man on a 3rd of the field. This basically either ensures a mismatch or a free receiver if both your defenders aren't plugged into the same tune. And it can happen sooner than later.

 

If you're going to micromanage a game plan in this manner, what you're going to run into is the offense dictating what you do rather than you just playing your game because it's contingent on offensive factors. 

 

These are just a limited set of possibilities with this strategy that don't even take into account the fact that they've still got to be cognisant of Watson should the D-Line or LBs not contain or catch him out to the edge. It's a pessimistic view, but when game-planning, you've got to plan as if everything is going to go to s*** from snap one that way you can be better prepared.  

[Malcolm_FleX48 1,869]

1 minute ago, Tiger said:

Let's pump the brakes on Carlton Davis slightly. He cannot shut down 1/3 of the field quite yet with just 13 games under his belt. Even Carlos Rogers wasn't doing that until his last year and the last few games of 03. In due time I have all the confidence that he will be that type of player for us, but as a sophomore it is a stretch. I hope you're right though!

Thanks, you must have peeked at my post before I even got to post it. That's definitely risky given what I had stated earlier. 

[Tiger 8,826]

1 minute ago, Malcolm_FleX48 said:

Thanks, you must have peeked at my post before I even got to post it. That's definitely risky given what I had stated earlier. 

Haha in all fairness, you said it better than I could have.

[SugarBowlSon 0]

Just curious: I know your DLine is scary. Are they better than Bama's last year? I honestly don't know. Bama was the best we faced last year and I think our offense as a whole and particularly our OLine will be better than last year. 

[Malcolm_FleX48 1,869]

19 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

Which is why the key to the game is to disrupt. Get in their backfield quickly and make them have to improvise. If everything we are hearing about our line is true, we should be the best at doing that of any team Clemson has faces with this offense. It won't stop them cold, but it's our best shot at getting an edge.

True, defense has to be VERY aggressive, while still somehow being disciplined enough to not get caught out of the play on their own. That's a hard game to play. Edge pressure has to be quick and needs to try to avoid stretching out the pocket when the tackle high hats them. With Watson's wheels, any sort of space in that B gap means he will be gone, provided he doesn't decide to just stand in the pocket kill you through the air. It's a limiting way to rush to try to create a smaller ring, but they've got to be able to do that. Either that or A-Gap pressures and blitzes need to push the middle of the pocket inwards. 

On the run side of things. This is a strong example of what Watson can do with LITTLE space along the edges, granted it's a ZR, their offense basically leaves a one on one with Left tackle and the backside 5-tech, and LETS the 3-Tech play aggressive and get into the backfield as you've stated. But what happens there is that Watson is already by him in the minute time that it takes for him to freeze and recognize that he IS the read man. Watson is so quick that he can still burn the DT even running right beside him. 

[McLoofus 35,182]

6 minutes ago, SugarBowlSon said:

Just curious: I know your DLine is scary. Are they better than Bama's last year? I honestly don't know. Bama was the best we faced last year and I think our offense as a whole and particularly our OLine will be better than last year. 

In terms of raw talent, yes. Maybe more athletic on the edge. Can we function at their level? No idea. 

[WDEKC 187]

I think all the talk about how our secondary matches up with their WRs and TE is somewhat moot. They are better and have the best QB in the country spreading the football around. Our opportunity to disrupt their offense lies solely in the hands of the DL.

[Malcolm_FleX48 1,869]

Just now, WDEKC said:

I think all the talk about how our secondary matches up with their WRs and TE is somewhat moot. They are better and have the best QB in the country spreading the football around. Our opportunity to disrupt their offense lies solely in the hands of the DL.

Its terrible to admit, but yes, in these conditions that would hold true. But like I said, that's a lose lose for the DL early on. People right now are basically asking the DL to play a near FLAWLESS game on their own and just hang on. It's not a good situation by any stretch of the imagination. Best strategy is to keep things vanilla and worry about the rest of the SEC. Yes beating Clemson is literally a game changer, but if you've got to elevate your play to un-maintainable standards and risk losing your stars to do it, then you're not really doing yourself a favor if you end up losing that rank to another team and are out of contention because of injuries or worse. 

[WDEKC 187]

1 minute ago, Malcolm_FleX48 said:

Its terrible to admit, but yes, in these conditions that would hold true. But like I said, that's a lose lose for the DL early on. People right now are basically asking the DL to play a near FLAWLESS game on their own and just hang on. It's not a good situation by any stretch of the imagination. Best strategy is to keep things vanilla and worry about the rest of the SEC. Yes beating Clemson is literally a game changer, but if you've got to elevate your play to un-maintainable standards and risk losing your stars to do it, then you're not really doing yourself a favor if you end up losing that rank to another team and are out of contention because of injuries or worse. 

Right, I'm just saying we really don't matchup well on paper with them as a secondary. Almost everything you can analyze points to them having an advantage there other than C. Davis.

 

Who knows, maybe they step up and have a big game to help the front 7 out and the stars align to set up a dream season. Great thing about college football is that so many things can change from year to year and game to game.

[AUsince72 11,084]

26 minutes ago, SugarBowlSon said:

Just curious: I know your DLine is scary. Are they better than Bama's last year? I honestly don't know. Bama was the best we faced last year and I think our offense as a whole and particularly our OLine will be better than last year. 

We'll have a decent idea after September.

The words on paper seem to suggest AU has a tremendous D-Line.  Just gotta let it translate to the playing field.

[cole256 17,074]

21 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

In terms of raw talent, yes. Maybe more athletic on the edge. Can we function at their level? No idea. 

 different schemes, different responsibilities. I don't think we're close to being as good against the run, maybe better at pass rushing, if that one guy Williams I believe is listed as a linebacker instead of a d end would have a role to the answer of that question.

[ValleyTiger 2,894]

As talented as they are, they've still got to go out there and execute. As do we.

[SugarBowlSon 0]

Next question: what do you think of the Steele hire now that it's almost game time? I will tell you that I always liked him as a person and think he's a really smart guy. My biggest gripe was that I thought either his D was to complex or he got vapor lock on the sidelines. We constantly had lineman standing up looking at the sidelines with their arms out and shoulders raised while the center was over the ball. Always. Players were visibly frustrated.  

[McLoofus 35,182]

11 minutes ago, SugarBowlSon said:

Next question: what do you think of the Steele hire now that it's almost game time? I will tell you that I always liked him as a person and think he's a really smart guy. My biggest gripe was that I thought either his D was to complex or he got vapor lock on the sidelines. We constantly had lineman standing up looking at the sidelines with their arms out and shoulders raised while the center was over the ball. Always. Players were visibly frustrated.  

I don't think you're going to get a lot of really good, insightful opinions from Auburn fans on our new coach that's never coached a game for us. If you're generally interested, check back with us in a month or so.