Assessing AU this season.

[DKW 86 7,419]

As far as AU, we have these things to watch:

Negatives

1) Muschamp, new DC, that usually means that an SEC team will lose a game or two. However, we got Borges and promptly went 13-0.

2) DLine, we are a bit weaker there to start the season than usual. Experience will build quickly however.

3) WR, We lost a ton here. CT, PR, RS, and TH need to step it up immediately to have a great season.

4) The First game/Big game hoodoo for AU.

Positives:

1) Muschamp will likely be far more aggressive than Gibbs. I like a more aggressive D myself. I hope aggressiveness turns into Turnovers....

2) Borges finally has a starting backfield back for a second year. We could be record setting good if we can catch the ball. Watch for Trott to be used constantly.

3) Focus, Seems this AU team has more focus than any team I can ever remember at AU.

[SKCAUB 0]

As far as AU, we have these things to watch:

Negatives

1) Muschamp, new DC, that usually means that an SEC team will lose a game or two. However, we got Borges and promptly went 13-0.

2) DLine, we are a bit weaker there to start the season that usual. Experience will build quickly however.

3) WR, We lost a ton here. CT, PR, RS, and TH need to step it up immediately to have a great season.

4) The First game/Big game hoodoo for AU.

Positives:

1) Muschamp will likely be far more aggressive than Gibbs. I like a more aggressive D myself. I hope aggressiveness turns into Turnovers....

2) Borges finally has a starting backfield back for a second year. We could be record setting good if we can catch the ball. Watch for Trott to be used constantly.

3) Focus, Seems this AU team has more focus than any team I can ever remember at AU.

251051[/snapback]

Negatives:

1) DC-Unknown...though I think we should be pretty good if we can stop the run. Muschamp's track record says we should be pretty good...we have the talent.

2) DL-gotta find some depth in the middle to stop the run!

3) WR-Have to build experience FAST.

4) First Game Hoodoo??? :-) I like that one...but we should beat a rebuilding WSU team.

Positives:

1) Controlled Agression on D is the key...and I think that's what Muschamp brings.

2) Lots of depth at RB...should be a strength by far.

3) Focus? I'll tell you at half time of the WSU game....

...and

4) COACHING!!! We're pretty well set there. Willis and Muschamp should add some fire....

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

The biggest negative I see is lack of depth/experience at QB. There isn't a proven QB behind Cox.

[rchandlerh 0]

The only other QB we have that even has any pt is Field but it came against WKU.

[johnwegl 11]

If the WRs step from the beginning of the season, that will show teams that we haven't dropped off in that position. If they struggle, teams will start stacking the box, thus making the running backs jobs a lot harder. Also, with the WRs stepping up, teams will be less likely to put a ton of preasure on a o-line that some teams are questioning.

Personally, I think CAB will put our WRs in a position to take preasure of O-line and RB.

Defense, the only concern is the size of the D-line. Yeah, we have alot of speed, but we also have to be able to push them back at the line.

Overall, I think the team is in as good of shape as any in the SEC. Yeah, there's some weeknesses, but that can be covered up by good coaching and players playing smart.

You know, the SEC is tough, if you don't come out with your "A" game every week, you can lose to the worse of teams.

[AUloggerhead 2,229]

As far as AU, we have these things to watch:

Negatives

1) Muschamp, new DC, that usually means that an SEC team will lose a game or two. However, we got Borges and promptly went 13-0.

2) DLine, we are a bit weaker there to start the season that usual. Experience will build quickly however.

3) WR, We lost a ton here. CT, PR, RS, and TH need to step it up immediately to have a great season.

4) The First game/Big game hoodoo for AU.

Positives:

1) Muschamp will likely be far more aggressive than Gibbs. I like a more aggressive D myself. I hope aggressiveness turns into Turnovers....

2) Borges finally has a starting backfield back for a second year. We could be record setting good if we can catch the ball. Watch for Trott to be used constantly.

3) Focus, Seems this AU team has more focus than any team I can ever remember at AU.

251051[/snapback]

I will add:

Neg:

5) Have to replace McNeil & Reddick at the tackles & not much experienced depth for the rest of the OL.

6) No experienced depth at QB.

7) Need for Vaughn to step up this year & demonstrate the consistency/accuracy which he was known for during his HS years.

Pos:

4) AU has another stud logjam at the RB positions (come on & show us your stuff, Ben Tate!)

5) AU has potential at the WR positions, and a willing leader in CT.

6) New LB coach in Willis

7) Will Herring to LB -- brilliant move by the staff & I think Herring finds his true calling.

8) The bowl loss to Wisconsin has motivated the team far more than a win could have. (Not implying we should ever lose our bowl games as a motivational strategy. I'm just saying ...)

9) Kody Bliss, 1st string All SEC punter.

[SKCAUB 0]

Oh...and another HUGE plus could be Tommy Trott. If he can become a big time receiver from the TE position...the possibilities become endless.

[quietfan 233]

The only other QB we have that even has any pt is Field but it came against WKU.

251069[/snapback]

Will Caudle and/or Ensminger redshirt this year?

Focus/intensity/motivation? Between the Wisconsin game and the NYT controversy, I think this year's team just may be the most motivated/focused that CTT ever had. Or at least as motivated as the 2004 team that wanted to prove something after the 2003 let down.

[rchandlerh 0]

The only other QB we have that even has any pt is Field but it came against WKU.

251069[/snapback]

Will Caudle and/or Ensminger redshirt this year?

Focus/intensity/motivation? Between the Wisconsin game and the NYT controversy, I think this year's team just may be the most motivated/focused that CTT ever had. Or at least as motivated as the 2004 team that wanted to prove something after the 2003 let down.

251100[/snapback]

I think since Field has a start under his belt Caudle will redshirt then come in and take over the helm as a redshirted Soph like Cox did last year.

[ValleyTiger 2,894]

I will add:

Neg:

5) Have to replace McNeil & Reddick at the tackles & not much experienced depth for the rest of the OL.

6) No experienced depth at QB.

7) Need for Vaughn to step up this year & demonstrate the consistency/accuracy which he was known for during his HS years.

Pos:

4) AU has another stud logjam at the RB positions (come on & show us your stuff, Ben Tate!)

5) AU has potential at the WR positions, and a willing leader in CT.

6) New LB coach in Willis

7) Will Herring to LB -- brilliant move by the staff & I think Herring finds his true calling.

8) The bowl loss to Wisconsin has motivated the team far more than a win could have. (Not implying we should ever lose our bowl games as a motivational strategy. I'm just saying ...)

9) Kody Bliss, 1st string All SEC punter.

I'll second everything you said.

Will Caudle and/or Ensminger redshirt this year?

Focus/intensity/motivation? Between the Wisconsin game and the NYT controversy, I think this year's team just may be the most motivated/focused that CTT ever had. Or at least as motivated as the 2004 team that wanted to prove something after the 2003 let down.

With the departure of Booker, the staff will need to find a 3rd string guy in the fall and the winner is likely to be a late redshirt(ala Trott, possibly play the minimum # of snaps and still redshirt).

I'll add that WSU has a pretty good DE that could give our O-line and Cox fits if the tackles cannot step up; Cox has to have time to find the WRs first. Also, since Muschamp has experience in the SEC, I think thats definitely a positive. Does anyone in the know have any idea whether CWM will be on the sidelines(ala LSU) or in the booth?

[CircleDrill 178]

Lack of depth at QB could be a problem if....God forbid...something happened to Cox.

That being said, from everything I have seen and heard, this team is a winner. A lot of people seem to want to compare this year to 2004. Well, don't hold your breath that we will go 12-0.

But, you can bet that all around the coaches and players on this 2006 team will be a winner. That's all I'm going to say out of respect for the superstitious fans around here that worry about jinxes. ;-)

I think that Gibbs was overall the odd piece that did not fit well last year. Having Muschamp is VERY exciting to me.

[tombigbeetiger 223]

i promise you guys, you can stop worrying about the DT's.....pat sims is going to be the man.....just wait and see.....when he and his daddy asked for another chance, he grew up and from what i hear, he is working his way back into the coaches plans very quickly

[abrnfanatc 6]

IMO, the biggest negatives at this point are:

1) Experience at DT (I remember watching the first drive of the '04 LSU game and seeing the DL get pushed around because they were a little young, small and quick) Of course, we all know the story there and I see Muschamp as being more agressive than Chizik was. That could be good, but not necessarily early in the season.

2) Experience at WR. Courtney Taylor should expect a lot of double-teams which should open the door up for Robert Dunn and/or Tommy Trott in the slot position. If they step it up and can hold onto the ball, that could turn into a huge plus a few games into the season.

3) Depth and experience at OT. I really think Palmer will shine this year, but I am a little worried about Dunlap early on. If he develops like they seem to expect and the two of them can stay healthy, this will not be a major factor either.

Biggest positives:

1) Experience and depth in the offensive backfield. Second year starters at QB and RB with loads of depth at RB. Only possible problem will be developing Stewart into a pseudo FB.

2) Experience in Defensive backfield. With the exception of Tristan Davis, all players have at least a year of experience. Losing Pitts could hurt depth a little, but most likely will only hurt opposition when trying the 4th quarter posts to get back into the game...

3) Al Borges. Maybe it was because Cox was a first time starter in '05, but I don't remember too many changes in formations like we saw in '04 to confuse the defenses in the league. I expect to see some of that in '06 as well as another 2 RB backfield like Carnell and Ronnie just to stretch defenses out a little more. Combine that with Tre Smith, Robert Dunn and Tommy Trott in the slot position, and defenses should have a tough time stopping every possibility IMO.

Looking at the lists, the only negative that doesn't relate to experience is depth at OT. If, and that can be a big IF, the youngsters develop like expected; this could be another special year for the Tigers. If not, look for another 9-3 campaign.

[lukeduke 8]

3)  Al Borges.  Maybe it was because Cox was a first time starter in '05, but I don't remember too many changes in formations like we saw in '04 to confuse the defenses in the league.  I expect to see some of that in '06 as well as another 2 RB backfield like Carnell and Ronnie just to stretch defenses out a little more.  Combine that with Tre Smith, Robert Dunn and Tommy Trott in the slot position, and defenses should have a tough time stopping every possibility IMO.

251218[/snapback]

You will also see this a lot early on due to lack of experience at OL. I think the 2 RB set will be used as the extra blockers in case of a blown block. You will probably see a lot of delay patterns to both running backs.

[Longtrainn 2]

Has anyone mentioned the safeties yet? To me, that's a rather large question mark as well (although if you've played NCAA 07 for the 360, Eric Brock and TD are studs... anyone else notice this?).

I would also like to address the "lack of depth at QB" thing. Folks, anyone in college or pro football (with the exception of LSU or Arizona State) would be in trouble if their starting QB got hurt. It's just a fact of life. Field, IMO, is better than most backups, but sure, we'd be hurting if he had to start a big game.

As for the rest, I pretty much agree with what's been said before.

[WinCrimson 61]

-Your getting Will Muschamp as a DC. There is NOTHING negative about that.

-Taylor is a standout WR; Rodreguiez is decent. You'll be able to get by in that department.

-The only chink in 's armor could very well be overconfidence. I see you guys winning 10-11 games this season.

[rchandlerh 0]

i don't see CWM being a negative either. The reason we dropped off in defense from 2004 is because we had a "bend don't break" mentallity last year. This year i think we are gonna have a mentallity that it's not ok if we give up 1 yard.

[ValleyTiger 2,894]

i don't see CWM being a negative either. The reason we dropped off in defense from 2004 is because we had a "bend don't break" mentallity last year. This year i think we are gonna have a mentallity that it's not ok if we give up 1 yard.

Most considered Chizik's defense a "bend but dont break" defense. Remember we were prodominately a Cover 2 team under Chizik. Problem with Gibbs was that he failed to maintain either mentallity. Having said that, I am looking forward to seeing CWM getting fired up on the sidelines after G & G eat opposing QBs alive and an arrant pass flutters to D. Irons.

[DKW 86 7,419]

I dont mean CWM is a negative, just the inevitable transition period, bad communications, slow play calls, etc.