tarheeltiger 0 Posted October 2, 2005 Share Posted October 2, 2005 Let me preface by saying I have not been down on this team but there are some areas on offense which appear to be suspect from the performence in last nights game. I also understand (which many don't, I think) that this is, in essense, a building year. CTT has stated that NEXT year is the year to watch. I also beleive that every game we play the remainder of the season is winnable yet I see we could have 3 legitimate losses. I have no problem with either but hope for the first! Defense was spectacular! Period. End of discussion. I was concerned with our running game against a team that has had so much difficulty stopping the run. Yes, there were some key gains at crucial times but the stats from the game were as I suspected. Our average gain per running play was 3.2 yards. Irons had a net 27 yrads on 11 attempts. Lester did do better with 53 yards on 13 attempts. The best AVG was Tre at 6.7 yrds but only 3 attempts. I still think we have to address some issues which may be as simple as the line beginning to gel and dominate. BC was only sacked 1 time but there were several times defensive linemen were penetrating better than I thought they should. It is possible SC has a couple of very good pass rushers which are as good as we will see. Can anyone expand on this? BC was off last night. There were several throws that were off target. Receivers had to extend or dive for some catches instead of catching instride limiting the ability to obtain yards after the catch. One and possibly two passes would have been easy interceptions had the DB's been just a hair quicker - the caliber of what we will see with LSU, UGA, UAT. These are just observations - probably wrong - on what I still see as a work in progress. Ok. Flame me NOW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,571 Posted October 2, 2005 Share Posted October 2, 2005 No flame, but I think this was a case of taking what the defense was giving. SC was determined not to get beat by the run like they've been doing. They had 8 men in the box all night long, so Borges adjusted and threw it. And we could have racked up 600 yds passing if we'd wanted to because they were that serious about packing the box. That's not to say we couldn't be better, but you do need to look at how the game was actually being played by the defense and not just stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,499 Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 No flame, but I think this was a case of taking what the defense was giving. SC was determined not to get beat by the run like they've been doing. They had 8 men in the box all night long, so Borges adjusted and threw it. And we could have racked up 600 yds passing if we'd wanted to because they were that serious about packing the box.That's not to say we couldn't be better, but you do need to look at how the game was actually being played by the defense and not just stats. 185709[/snapback] Titan is right. They were so overmatched, CSS made almost a scrimmage out of it for the D. He may have also hoped that BC threw a few INTS. It did not work. Bottom line 48-7 is a good day at the office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,457 Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 When you BEAT an SEC team, ANY SEC team, by 41 points, it has been a very good day at the office. True enough, we can get better. I think with this Staff, they will continue to push this team to get better. I was glad to see the players come out of the locker room "hooked up" as they did so often last year. This may be the start of something very good indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GalensGhost 0 Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 I agree that the running game is a source of major concern. I am not sold on Irons. What I really want to know is who glued the cinder blocks to Carl Stewart's feet? I was also displeased with Brandon repeatedly throwing off-balance and off his back foot. He had plenty of time on several occasions to set his feet and make a good throw, but instead short-armed it while leaning backward. This led to underthrows at the cost of several potential big plays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80Tiger 904 Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 I do believe there is some concern for the running game and most of that issue is with the offensive line. There are way too many plays with an opponent in the backfield. This has been going on for a few years but we had such great backs previously that they could either break a tackle or dodge a tackler before getting dropped with a loss or short gain.. We (fans and coaches) use the "eight men in the box" excuse like it only happens to AU. It happens to every team every game if they are ahead and trying to use clock..You have to be able to run the ball during the course of a game and certain situations. I also noticed in watching the repaly last night, very seldom did I count 8 in the box. It was usually 7 men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,457 Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 I guess if the best we can do is have the #1 scoring offense in the SEC(Not to mention the #1 scoring defense too), well, we had better just pack it in and look forward to '06. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattd 3 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I agree that the running game is a source of major concern. I am not sold on Irons. What I really want to know is who glued the cinder blocks to Carl Stewart's feet? I agree...Irons goes down if he gets touched..not a hard runner and I've thought the same thing about Stewart..he looks much slower... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vatz22au 142 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I agree that the running game is a source of major concern. I am not sold on Irons. What I really want to know is who glued the cinder blocks to Carl Stewart's feet? I agree...Irons goes down if he gets touched..not a hard runner and I've thought the same thing about Stewart..he looks much slower... 186127[/snapback] Comparing to Tre....Irons has the capability to break through defenders and juke them out of their shoes. Tre would fall down if a small breeze blew by. Lester is a great back with explosion and speed...Irons can juke your ankles out of place. Neither back had a great day, I wouldnt be so quick to throw in the towel on any of them just yet. Combined, we still had 100+ yards rushing...And when a team does that, more times than none, they are successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegalEagle 22 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Don't forget that our coaches are looking at the film for areas to be improved each week. They will be working on the issues brought up in this thread, and our players will be doing their part. As long as we get better each week, we'll be hard for anyone to beat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Sanders 123 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I am also sick of hearing the excuse that they are stacking in the box to stop the run. I just have one question, what has our team done this year that makes teams afraid of our running game? LOL. If I was the opposing coach, I would be more worried about Brandon Cox. It will get better though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUesquire 1 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 But they did stack the box. The coaches saw that and adjusted. That accounts for the high number of passing yards and the numerous receivers who got touches and ultimately, 48-7. Great job of recognition by the staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vatz22au 142 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I am also sick of hearing the excuse that they are stacking in the box to stop the run. I just have one question, what has our team done this year that makes teams afraid of our running game? LOL. If I was the opposing coach, I would be more worried about Brandon Cox. It will get better though. 186207[/snapback] Its not more of the fact that our running game is scaring opponents...its the fact that we have a "new starting" qb and defensive coord. all around want to put the game in his hands. They are starting to pay dearly for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,571 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I am also sick of hearing the excuse that they are stacking in the box to stop the run. I just have one question, what has our team done this year that makes teams afraid of our running game? LOL. If I was the opposing coach, I would be more worried about Brandon Cox. It will get better though. 186207[/snapback] Well, it doesn't matter if you're sick of it or not, it's just a fact of life. They figure that we've got decent talent back there and the O-line is intact, so they won't allow us to win it "easy" with the running game. Our brand new QB is the one they want the onus to be on to make plays and so far (since the GT game), he seems to be stepping up to meet that challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texaubie 0 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 Maybe we should just go back to 2003 and let the RB go off tackle left and off tackle right on every play even when the defense is putting everybody in the box to stop it. Geez, we score 48 points on an SEC team and its still not good enough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,457 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 THE SKY IS FALLING...THE SKY IS FALLING. :huh: No...wait...AU has the #1 Scoring Offense & #1 Scoring Defense in the SEC. Nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aucorner 0 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 One and possibly two passes would have been easy interceptions had the DB's been just a hair quicker - the caliber of what we will see with LSU, UGA, UAT. 185708[/snapback] This is the only statement that I would say is not a valid concern. may not have top-tier SEC talent across the board, but there DBs as a unit are probably some of the best in the conference. Another point is that the same USC defense that we saw on Saturday night only allowed 54 points to and bammer combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,096 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I don't want to sound pessimistic,,,,,,, Then don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tigrinum Major Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 I agree that the running game is a source of major concern. I am not sold on Irons. What I really want to know is who glued the cinder blocks to Carl Stewart's feet? I agree...Irons goes down if he gets touched..not a hard runner and I've thought the same thing about Stewart..he looks much slower... 186127[/snapback] Not a flame, but just a question: how many games have you watched from start to finish? I have seen three in person from start to finish and seen one of the others on television and I have seen plenty of hard runs by Kenny Irons. There have been several runs where he gets hit at the line and and fights for three to five more yards. Is he Ronnie Brown or Carnell Williams? No, but they were not all world when they were starting their third game of their life in college either. Folks, we have gotten spolied after last year. Carnell and Ronnie did not morph into Kenny and Brad. We have a stable of sound running backs, one or two that have the potential to be something very special and a few more waiting in the wings or finishing their high school seasons right now. They are all young and we shouldn't expect them to be as great as Carnell and Ronnie were in their 4th and 5th seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.