'76 Tiger 108 Posted September 4, 2005 Share Posted September 4, 2005 I like this board because some of its members actually OBSERVE what is happening and bring some issues to light. Here are a few questions for consideration? 1. What went wrong on the offensive line? Were we physically not up to the Job? Did the centers call the right signals? Did the backs pick up their blocks or miss their assignments? 2. What went wrong on the Defensive Front. Why was Herring our leading tackler? 3. How did each of the corners perform? 4. Was the lack of a running game the fault of the running back, or of the blocking? How should the coaches react to the above? It is details such as this that make the game interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger88 934 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 Well, our d really tightened up after the first half. They had a good plan to drop and throw, not giving us much time to rush the qb. I think we may have some issues on the d line which hurt our linebackers too. We lost a thorp award winner an one helluva safety so I think our secondary recovered well after the first half. I think they were really coming hard up front to get cax which affected the running game as well. I would like to see irons get some more reps. We may have center issues again which is always painful. We had an unnecessary holding call on the called back touchdown that would have given us the lead. A couple things go our ways instead of theirs and it's a different game. Hats off to tech, they came to play. We did too but were a little greener. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phigamTIGERfan 0 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 What went wrong? Hmm. Good question. We moved the ball well but 4 second half interceptions on GA Techs side of the field killed us. That is obvious. But why? Throwing the ball 44 times increases your chances of throwing interceptions. Not to mention the bland offense that showed up. I formation max protection 2 recievers running routes will only get you so far. GA Tech is a good defensive team and they figured that scheme out quick. Cox showed good arm strength but he CANNOT carry this team, he isn't that mature of quaterback YET. I know the running game is nowhere near where it was last year but, I believe we should have kept it on the ground more. Seriously, who can remember the last time auburn threw the ball 44 times??? The recievers made cox look better than he was in the first half, the second half, however, noone could help him look good. I also firmly believe Auburn was outcoached on both sides of the ball. GA Tech ran all over us it was the most de-moralizing thing I have seen in recent years of Auburn football. I think pass coverage was good, they kept C. Johnson in check all game(besides the first quarter TD) but with their first down production being so good(mainly 5-7 yd run plays) they kept us on the ropes. Auburn had every chance to make this game a blowout, but the turnovers absolutely killed us. Furthermore, physically we are not where we need to be for SEC play. I am now a bit worried about Miss. St. This week is done and over with, atleast it was a non-conference game. 13-0 or 0-11 WDE!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan4Auburn 1,626 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I like this board because some of its members actually OBSERVE what is happening and bring some issues to light. Here are a few questions for consideration?1. What went wrong on the offensive line? Were we physically not up to the Job? Did the centers call the right signals? Did the backs pick up their blocks or miss their assignments? 2. What went wrong on the Defensive Front. Why was Herring our leading tackler? 3. How did each of the corners perform? 4. Was the lack of a running game the fault of the running back, or of the blocking? How should the coaches react to the above? It is details such as this that make the game interesting. 178456[/snapback] Lot of that pressure came right up the middle, as mentioned above I think we have a problem at center. Backs did miss quite a few blocks, the one where Cox fumbled and Tre recovered it was a guy that just went around Tre like he was nothing. We are going to miss Brown a ton in pass protection. Probably need more discipline up there also as Cox was getting our own line to jump as much as he was GT (ug if only one of those free plays would have connected). Overpursuit killed our defensive front, Herring was our second leading tackler last season btw. Corners looked ok once they settled in, I was glad to see the play of Pitts as he looked like a man determined to get his job back. Think the lack of the running game was one, we were trying to play to our strength which is the recievers and two was the blocking. First half they were busting up the middle and hitting the back right after hand-offs. I also think we were using the wrong backs (not trying to bash Tre btw), I just have a feeling that Stewart and Irons with their size and speed are the better backs for this conference. Tre reminds me of a Bowden style back. Reactions: Take a look at center and who is up for the position again and drill it hard the next three weeks. Preach and preach and preach assignment football to stop the overpursuit. Secondary just needs to keep working. Don't be afraid to sit Tre just cause he is the edler of the bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgr4lfe 220 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I like this board because some of its members actually OBSERVE what is happening and bring some issues to light. Here are a few questions for consideration?1. What went wrong on the offensive line? Were we physically not up to the Job? Did the centers call the right signals? Did the backs pick up their blocks or miss their assignments? 2. What went wrong on the Defensive Front. Why was Herring our leading tackler? 3. How did each of the corners perform? 4. Was the lack of a running game the fault of the running back, or of the blocking? How should the coaches react to the above? It is details such as this that make the game interesting. 178456[/snapback] 1. Of all of the starter changes on depth that came out last week, I was most concerned with the center position. Ross had the experience from last year, and from what I understand didn't make 1st team b/c of injury. I am not sure how much he played, but I think we need his leadership. I saw many missed blocking assignments by the OL AND the RBs, one by Tre caused a fumble when Cox got hit from behind. 2. DL - no idea, what I thought was strength on D, turned out not to be. I barely heard McGlovers name mentioned Groves only once or twice. Herring was leading tackler b/c the Tech RBs were not getting stopped up front. LBs missed a ton of tackles...especially Antarrious Williams. Last year he was a sure tackler, he missed a bunch in the first half. 3. I thought the corners did a pretty decent job after the 1st qtr. But it is hard for them to cover for 5 minutes, which is how long Ball had to sit back and pass sometimes b/c of the lack of a pass rush. 4. I thought the RBs did a good job running, but couldn't get it going b/c of a lack of any where to go. Cadillac could make something out of nothing b/c of his amazing ability to start and stop and get it. Right now we don't have it Coaches reactions. I hope Nall gets on the OL. I think things all across the board will be up for sructiny except special teams. Should be interesting week of practices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CCTAU 3,656 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I like this board because some of its members actually OBSERVE what is happening and bring some issues to light. Here are a few questions for consideration?1. What went wrong on the offensive line? Were we physically not up to the Job? Did the centers call the right signals? Did the backs pick up their blocks or miss their assignments? 2. What went wrong on the Defensive Front. Why was Herring our leading tackler? 3. How did each of the corners perform? 4. Was the lack of a running game the fault of the running back, or of the blocking? How should the coaches react to the above? It is details such as this that make the game interesting. 178456[/snapback] 1. Of all of the starter changes on depth that came out last week, I was most concerned with the center position. Ross had the experience from last year, and from what I understand didn't make 1st team b/c of injury. I am not sure how much he played, but I think we need his leadership. I saw many missed blocking assignments by the OL AND the RBs, one by Tre caused a fumble when Cox got hit from behind. 2. DL - no idea, what I thought was strength on D, turned out not to be. I barely heard McGlovers name mentioned Groves only once or twice. Herring was leading tackler b/c the Tech RBs were not getting stopped up front. LBs missed a ton of tackles...especially Antarrious Williams. Last year he was a sure tackler, he missed a bunch in the first half. 3. I thought the corners did a pretty decent job after the 1st qtr. But it is hard for them to cover for 5 minutes, which is how long Ball had to sit back and pass sometimes b/c of the lack of a pass rush. 4. I thought the RBs did a good job running, but couldn't get it going b/c of a lack of any where to go. Cadillac could make something out of nothing b/c of his amazing ability to start and stop and get it. Right now we don't have it Coaches reactions. I hope Nall gets on the OL. I think things all across the board will be up for sructiny except special teams. Should be interesting week of practices 178471[/snapback] One thing many of us are wondering is how Irons, touted as a Carnell type, was left out of the game. I feel, as many on this board, that Irons may have broken the plays that Tre got good yardage on. And Stewart moved the pile. Conversely, the pile moved Tre. Where were the little passes out of the backfield to RBs running north and south. All the info we have heard in the pre-season seems to be crap. Either that or the coaches had a total brain fart for 60 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger88 934 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I forgot the world record we set on biting on the bootleg. I think we were there like 1 out of 100 times for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUloggerhead 2,582 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I like this board because some of its members actually OBSERVE what is happening and bring some issues to light. Here are a few questions for consideration?1. What went wrong on the offensive line? Were we physically not up to the Job? Did the centers call the right signals? Did the backs pick up their blocks or miss their assignments? 2. What went wrong on the Defensive Front. Why was Herring our leading tackler? 3. How did each of the corners perform? 4. Was the lack of a running game the fault of the running back, or of the blocking? How should the coaches react to the above? It is details such as this that make the game interesting. 178456[/snapback] 1. Missed blocking, especially in picking up the blitz. I'll include the backs in on this too. Part of that is QB's fault for not recognizing it coming & audibling. I don't want to pick on Cox because that kind of skill only comes with experience (Jason struggled with it too until last year.) Also penalties -- the false starts killed what little momentum we were generating & couldn't have come at a worse time (not to mention the holding penalty on the TD pass.) Penalties and mental mistakes are easily corrected, though. Coach Nall needs to have a few "heart-to-heart" sessions with his starters (can you say, stadium steps? ) 2. Wow. I thought this was the most alarming thing about the game. Our DL was getting pushed around like they were on roller skates. Herring was leading tackler as a result -- it's never a good sign to have your safety be the leading tackler. The DL needs to be more active to keep blockers off the LBs. Jay Ratliff will be sorely missed. Also, the DEs absolutely need to contain a mobile QB like Ball. 3. I thought they did alright. They got jobbed on a few questionable PI calls but hey, that's life. Calvin Johnson is a future NFL player. 4. Blocking. In the 2nd half, the offense actually moved the ball on the ground. I like to see Jake Slaughter in there because I know he's going to blow someone up. Coaches need to react immediatley. I saw some adjustments being made in the 2nd half already so I'm sure they know what needs correcting too. AU will see a steady diet of blitzing until they prove they can counter it. The DL ... I don't know. Maybe we need a little more beef & not so much speed? tiger88 is right -- AU set some kind of record for biting & not containing. WDE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auskull 242 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 We've certainly got to improve in several areas. I am more concerned about the Center position than before. This has got to be a recruiting concern (Michael Harness). Our Defensive tackle was not making penetration into the backfield and their OL was teeing off on our LBs. Defensive speed, when its going the wrong way can also be a killer. Maybe just some big strong and slow to react players sprinkled in with this killer speed of ours might help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAR EAGLE!!! 0 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I like this board because some of its members actually OBSERVE what is happening and bring some issues to light. Here are a few questions for consideration?1. What went wrong on the offensive line? Were we physically not up to the Job? Did the centers call the right signals? Did the backs pick up their blocks or miss their assignments? 2. What went wrong on the Defensive Front. Why was Herring our leading tackler? 3. How did each of the corners perform? 4. Was the lack of a running game the fault of the running back, or of the blocking? How should the coaches react to the above? It is details such as this that make the game interesting. 178456[/snapback] 1. Not sure. I need to watch again. I think basically though, Tech wasn't worried about the run. When you make a team 1 deminsional, it is easy to rush the passer. Also, I did see a couple of blocks missed. But that is going to happen when you bring a blitz like Tech did. 2. One of the problems with having a fast defense is the defense will over persue. The ends and line backers over ran the play a couple of times and were hurt by the back cutting against the grain. With Herring,I am not sure, but in my opinion Herring is brought up tho fill the back side gap. That is his assignment. Teams are going to try nd cut back against our defense and run a lot of counter plays. That means Herring will have to continue making stops. 3. Not to bad. Good reciever in #21. I thought they played decent though. 4. Neither. I personally believe it was the coaches fault. I fell we abandoned the running game way to early which made Auburn a one demensional team. The coaches chose to move the ball passing instead of running. The times we did run the ball I thought we had some success. I thought that Tre had a decent game. Irons didn't play because we didn't run any pass plays. Not sure how his hands are... Like I said on another post...I think Auburn could still make a run at the SEC. We are still defending champs until someone knocks us off...one bad game out of 16 doesn't make Auburn a bad team!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vatz22au 146 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 I forgot the world record we set on biting on the bootleg. I think we were there like 1 out of 100 times for it. 178479[/snapback] You know....I think I said the same thing during the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger88 934 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 Well, from unbiased sources I am hearing the following in the last 24 hours or so. They think Cox looked great when not under extreme duress. Unusually so for a first time starter. Most outsiders seem to want to put the blame squarely on the o-line for the most part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerjoe 0 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 A couple of points: 1. If you are going to schedule a quality opponent for your first game (Ga Tech this year, USC in 2002 and 2003, Washington State in 2006) take more than one week to start game scenario preparations. I guarantee you that GT started its game day prep very early. We were still trying to figure out several positions up until a week prior to the game. 2. Yes we need to run the ball more. Tre is not the guy, this is a big physical game and while Tre is valuable to the team, his size limits him from being the number one tailback, he is just not physical enough to bust through tackles or for that matter to pass block on a blitz (obvious during GT game.) He has talent --use him on short passes beyond the line of scrimmage. Irons and Stewart are the guys, Stewart has the size and Irons has the speed. 3. Gibbs needs to have his defensive play called prior to the other team coming to the line. did anyone notice that our defense was very seldom set especially in the first half. It seemed as if they were looking to the sidelines waiting waiting waiting for the defense to be called. 4. Cox is smart he will learn from his mistakes and will make the corrections. We can all remember Jason Campbell when he first started (and he wasnt the same QB that he was last year) WAR EAGLE!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKieAuburnDoug 1 Posted September 5, 2005 Share Posted September 5, 2005 COPE,Ross and Duckworth just aren't as good as Ingle and Lindsay..simple. McNeill is awesome but he got burnt like he was a limp noodle on the first play after Pitts' INT in the 4th qrtr..Tre went nowhere as aresult and tried to cut back but didn't have a single block to get him around the right end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadillacattack 0 Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 Auburn's fundamentals were lacking. (poor blocking, weak tackling, and inconsistent play on special teams.) Ga Tech had a superb gameplan for attacking AU's most noticable weaknesses: 1. Go deep early, take the crowd out of the game. 2. Disguise frequent blitzes designed to expose RB's with little experience in picking up blitzes. 3. Use draws and misdirection to neutralize AU's defensive speed (especially in obvious passrush situations) GT had the senior leadership and experience to execute a good gameplan, and they knew the little things they could get away with under an ACC officuating crew. And it worked. Do I believe AU should have won? Certainly ..... but Ga Tech deserves respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draven 0 Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 Think the lack of the running game was one, we were trying to play to our strength which is the recievers and two was the blocking. First half they were busting up the middle and hitting the back right after hand-offs. I also think we were using the wrong backs (not trying to bash Tre btw), I just have a feeling that Stewart and Irons with their size and speed are the better backs for this conference. Tre reminds me of a Bowden style back. I am with most of you, not to bash tre but good god on 3rd and 2 feet when you have Slaughter and Stewart why on earth would you give Tre the ball and not one of them. Coach's should hammer home fundamentals young guys i could understand a little more but we had veterans playing like they had never stepped in a game before, at times. WDE beat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKieAuburnDoug 1 Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 Borges abandoned the run after they ran all over GT's defense on our last real drive... :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oysterman 0 Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 I think Cox is definately the future at Auburn, his mistakes seemed to be just those of someone lacking experience. I think most will be corrected as time goes on. I am very disappointed in our OL. I feel like Cox had hardly any time to throw, and they didn't seem to do a good job blocking for Tre when he did try to run up the middle, forcing him into a gamble situation trying to always run up the sides. The DL also didn't do their job. To have the safety have the most tackles in the game proves this point. I agree with others that said fundamentals seemed to be lacking, and play calling seemed to be missing. The coaches are definately the ones to blame on this loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 21,580 Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 I like this board because some of its members actually OBSERVE what is happening and bring some issues to light. Here are a few questions for consideration?1. What went wrong on the offensive line? Were we physically not up to the Job? Did the centers call the right signals? Did the backs pick up their blocks or miss their assignments? 2. What went wrong on the Defensive Front. Why was Herring our leading tackler? 3. How did each of the corners perform? 4. Was the lack of a running game the fault of the running back, or of the blocking? How should the coaches react to the above? It is details such as this that make the game interesting. 178456[/snapback] 1. Can't say I analysed this enough to know. Just seemed like there were too many people to block. I did see Tre one time badly miss his assignment though. 2. Mostly overpursuit. They killed us with cutbacks and counters. But the defensive tackles need to toughen up too. 3. Early on, they were looking shellshocked. But they really tightened up. I liked how Patrick Lee looked and Montae Pitts did ok too. Irons settled down after being burned early. 4. I think it was mostly the fault of having 8 men in the box most of the night, but that said, Tre is not Caddy and Carl is not Ronnie, so the O-line needs to step it up. The coaches should preach fundamentals, mental assignments and such. The effort was there, they just need to cut down on mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.