COACHING

[aubrandon 5]

This was the worse coaching job since the GA Tech game last year. Memo to Muschamp, when you are playing against a running QB he might actually run the FREAKIN ball. PUT A SPY ON HIM. How can you rush four, play man on their best two recievers, but yet still not have someone watching a running quarterback. Second, Zach Gilbert could not cover their second reciever. Why the hell do you wait until late in the ball game to make a change after he has 115 recieving yards. Third, a tight end running down the field is an eligiable reciever. We might need to cover him.

Memo to Borgeous, When there is nine guys at the line of scrimmage and you only have seven blockers, guess what, they will stop you. Nice work on turning Cox loose. Is Cox's arm hurt or something? Can we not throw the ball longer than 15 yards. All I heard was we were going to throw the ball all over the place to open the run. CAN YOU SAY FUSTRATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I do not know what the deal is with this team this year. We have a chance to make a statement on National TV and we stink it up. Don't give me a win is a win, or we were on the road crap. We looked good at times and other times we looked like $@##$.

[AUloggerhead 2,252]

Memo to aubrandon: AU won the game.

You want to talk about coaching: how about Steve Spurrier changing his QB 3 games into the season and getting his passing offense clicking almost as good as he had it at UF. I swear to God, Spurrier gets the absolute most out of the players he's got at USC. UGA better be glad they played them as early as they did. If I was the Miami AD, I'd be putting a package together to offer Spurrier at the end of the season. Can you imagine what he could do with the caliber of players that end up at the U? It would be a perfect fit as Spurrier hates recruiting and the U practically recruits on autopilot.

[kickerman97 3]

Spurrier @ the U? God save us.

[An Auburn Fan 0]

Second, Zach Gilbert could not cover their second reciever. Why the hell do you wait until late in the ball game to make a change after he has 115 recieving yards.

Its hard to believe that Zach Gilbert is a Junior DB....He had three assignments during the closing minutes of second quarter and he missed all three and SC scored a TD....

(Note: He was very close to get a pass interference call against LSU during the 4th qtr....and Eric Brock saved the penalty by tipping the ball)

[aumd03 2]

I thought our coaching was bad too. When we blitzed, we lined up over the lineman. Hmmm, big surprise where its coming from. If you are looking to confuse that young line, thats not the way to do it. It wasn't until late in the game until we started mixing up the blitz and stacking one side of the line and it worked. Also, we did have a spy. But it was a DEFENSIVE TACKLE! How is he gonna run down an ex wide reciever. I thought our fundamentals were poor. Poor tackling. Bad angles. And I thought we looked completely uninspired. No gang tackling like we've done in the past.

[AUesquire 1]

This was NOT Spurrier. A high school coach could see we were rushing three and dink the ball down the field at 8 yards a pop. Every time (The FEW times) we blitzed or rushed more than 4...guess what? We ripped him a new one. Every time we rushed 3 (90% of the time) we got burned.

[aumd03 2]

Second, Zach Gilbert could not cover their second reciever. Why the hell do you wait until late in the ball game to make a change after he has 115 recieving yards.

Its hard to believe that Zach Gilbert is a Junior DB....He had three assignments during the closing minutes of second quarter and he missed all three and SC scored a TD....

(Note: He was very close to get a pass interference call against LSU during the 4th qtr....and Eric Brock saved the penalty by tipping the ball)

I agree. He takes bad angles. I don't like our nickel packages. I think Dede and Herring are better db's when they need to be than bringing in someone like Gilbert with Wilhite being hurt.

[drewau02 0]

AUloggerhead,

I agree with everything that you said in your post. However, allow me to play devils advocate here for a moment. Brandon and many AU fans across America understand that SC is a Spurrier coached team and expected them to play well at home in Columbia. I don't think that most Auburn fans expected a blowout similar to the 48-7 thumping we gave the gamecocks in Auburn last year. I don't even think that most Auburn fans are upset with a 7 point win over a very resilient, yet stubborn South Carolina team coached by one of the greats. People are upset by the way in which the defense played. Auburn's defense forced only one punt and that was the first possession of the first quarter. Every Carolina play offensively went for an average of 5+ yards. The only times in which Carolina's plays went less than 5 yards were on third and short and fourt hand short. Our secondary looked befuddles all night long. Our front four on the defensive line are undersized and the only pressure that we get on a QB comes from our Defensive Ends or Defensive backs. Carolina's offense, who started three true freshmen on the offensive line, manhandled our defense all night long. This has become a common theme for a Tommy Tuberville defense. Our D-line is undersized and they get pushed around often. This came into focus during the Capital One Bowl game last year against Wisconsin.

People are upset that we had to kick an onsides and go four it on fourth down three different times against South Carolina's defense, obviously not their strong suit. People are upset that Brandon Cox sits there in the pocket and holds the ball for five or six seconds because our young receivers can't get open. Furthermore, people are upset because we haven't won a title since 1957 and this is a so called golden era of Auburn Football. Close victories against South Carolina won't convince many Auburn fans that this is the year.

In any case, a win is a win. I know it's trite, but it's true. And let me tell you something loggerhead, at the end of the night, you may be the only person making sense around here.

[AUloggerhead 2,252]

AUloggerhead,

I agree with everything that you said in your post. However, allow me to play devils advocate here for a moment. Brandon and many AU fans across America understand that SC is a Spurrier coached team and expected them to play well at home in Columbia. I don't think that most Auburn fans expected a blowout similar to the 48-7 thumping we gave the gamecocks in Auburn last year. I don't even think that most Auburn fans are upset with a 7 point win over a very resilient, yet stubborn South Carolina team coached by one of the greats. People are upset by the way in which the defense played. Auburn's defense forced only one punt and that was the first possession of the first quarter. Every Carolina play offensively went for an average of 5+ yards. The only times in which Carolina's plays went less than 5 yards were on third and short and fourt hand short. Our secondary looked befuddles all night long. Our front four on the defensive line are undersized and the only pressure that we get on a QB comes from our Defensive Ends or Defensive backs. Carolina's offense, who started three true freshmen on the offensive line, manhandled our defense all night long. This has become a common theme for a Tommy Tuberville defense. Our D-line is undersized and they get pushed around often. This came into focus during the Capital One Bowl game last year against Wisconsin.

People are upset that we had to kick an onsides and go four it on fourth down three different times against South Carolina's defense, obviously not their strong suit. People are upset that Brandon Cox sits there in the pocket and holds the ball for five or six seconds because our young receivers can't get open. Furthermore, people are upset because we haven't won a title since 1957 and this is a so called golden era of Auburn Football. Close victories against South Carolina won't convince many Auburn fans that this is the year.

In any case, a win is a win. I know it's trite, but it's true. And let me tell you something loggerhead, at the end of the night, you may be the only person making sense around here.

Uh ... thanks. Have another drink. Our "undersized" defensive line looks like this:

DE Quenton Groves 6-3 254

DT Pat Sims 6-4 312/S'enderick Marks 6-1 287

NG Josh Thompson 6-0 302

DE Chris Browder 6-5 260

I'd like to know where you think AU should beef up. Maybe you should e-mail Kevin Yox and give him some suggestions.

Some of y'all are upset with the pass defense. OK, be upset. The D needs some work. It's OK to play soft but they have to make the immediate tackle when it's thrown underneath. Newsflash: USC isn't the only team that's going to throw on us. UF, UGA & uat will try to do the same. I'm glad the AU secondary got another testing tonight. It will make them better down the road. Give USC a little credit too. Newton placed some passes perfectly and their WRs made the catches. Yeah, I know they dropped a sure TD. Big deal. You throw it up and people sometimes drop it. Happens to EVERY team. It's a road win in the SEC. Take it & learn from it.

[GalensGhost 0]

Here's something to consider. Spurrier has NEVER been a ball-control-type coach. I've watched his teams for years and I can't ever remember seeing a team of his play the way they did tonight. Short passes, dink throws, runs to the boundary to move the chains.

I think (and I stress think, here) that Muschamp's plan was for us to keep everything in front of us and force SC to drive the field if they intended to score. The idea was that at some point, they wouldn't be able to resist going for the big play and we'd be there. And that if we forced them to move methodically down the field, they'd self-destruct more often than not.

If you'd told me that was the plan before the game, I would have been satisfied. Nobody -- not me, not Spurrier, not Muschamp, not Tuberville -- thought that SC would have the patience to work it like that. Every time they had the ball, I expected them to finally make a goof or drop a pass or something. I don't think the plan was necessarily flawed. In retrospect, I'm not sure that it was the wrong plan. SC just played about as far over their heads as they can. The only thing I'd wonder about was the inability to wrap up. Hit a guy four yards deep and he bounces ahead for six yards. That's frustrating and can be managed.

[TigerGlide 1]

Here's something to consider. Spurrier has NEVER been a ball-control-type coach. I've watched his teams for years and I can't ever remember seeing a team of his play the way they did tonight. Short passes, dink throws, runs to the boundary to move the chains.

I think (and I stress think, here) that Muschamp's plan was for us to keep everything in front of us and force SC to drive the field if they intended to score. The idea was that at some point, they wouldn't be able to resist going for the big play and we'd be there. And that if we forced them to move methodically down the field, they'd self-destruct more often than not.

If you'd told me that was the plan before the game, I would have been satisfied. Nobody -- not me, not Spurrier, not Muschamp, not Tuberville -- thought that SC would have the patience to work it like that. Every time they had the ball, I expected them to finally make a goof or drop a pass or something. I don't think the plan was necessarily flawed. In retrospect, I'm not sure that it was the wrong plan. SC just played about as far over their heads as they can. The only thing I'd wonder about was the inability to wrap up. Hit a guy four yards deep and he bounces ahead for six yards. That's frustrating and can be managed.

I agree that there were some things that need to be improved, but we are overlooking one thing. This is the third defensive scheme these guys have had to learn in three years. Yes the tackling tonight was not very good, but I think that was due to Newton getting everyone off balance and making them indecisive. But, I haven't seen anything that can't be improved and Muschamp and the other position coaches have the track record of doing that.

[mcgufcm 4,107]

first off, it's not the third scheme in three years. we run a base 4-3, and we have since tubby came to auburn. are they learning new blitz packages? yes. are they learning to play more bump coverage? supposedly. but they aren't learning a new scheme.

the further we get from the game, the less upset i am. we played really, really, really bad on defense. anyone disputing that either didn't watch the game or doesn't know what he was watching. also, muschamp called the worst game i've seen by a coordinator at auburn in a long time. the gameplan tonight made me long for david gibbs... that's not a good thing. BUT there are a number of reasons to be hopeful.

reason number one: we get jonothan wilhite back next week. you never realize how much you miss someone until his absence makes you play zach gilbert. no seriously, i have all the respect in the world for zach. he's worked as hard or harder than anyone on that sideline, and he deserves to put on that jersey and helmet every single week. i just don't think he deserves to play. it's not his fault God made him 5'8" and a touch slow, but it also doesn't make those two things go away. with irons and wilhite as your one and two, pat lee as your nickelback, and powers as your dime... he doesn't have to. getting jonothan back is going to be huge.

reason number two: muschamp's track record. if borges gets a mulligan for the georgia tech game plan last year, muschamp gets one for this game. the game plan was ridiculous. the lack of adjustments was even worse. rushing three didn't work in the first quarter, but there we were doing it in the fourth as they marched down the field again and again. our blitz packages worked; if we'd done it more, newton would've made mistakes or drives would've sputtered.

however, muschamp has been great here. that defense has been great. he was great at lsu. that defense was great. tubby'll call him on a bad plan, and he'll get it right.

reason number three: we have more offensive weapons! look, i'm not sure what we're complaining about offensively. we punted twice the whole night, and held the ball for 30 straight plays putting 10 points on the board. we're a ball control offense, and tonight, we found out that trott and mckenzie can consistently catch and run after the catch. we found out that rod smith can get open from time to time. we found out brandon can actually throw the football under pressure (like he did last year). and we did all this without using brad lester (why? no idea). we've got options now.

reason number four: groves can't play worse. look q is our best pass rusher, but he was lost tonight. he lined up offsides twice. he missed tackles when he operated as the spy (4th quarter, first drive). we talked about how versatile he is, but sometimes that really means we've taken away what's comfortable for him and know he's just average at everything. he'll either get better at all the extra stuff (zone drops and linebacker plays) or we'll stop using him for it. either way, he's not going to have many nights as bad as tonight, and he's a big time player.

we're going to be okay. i'm not sure this team can win all its games (that takes a special, special type of team), but we can win the sec. that's still a really big deal. i'm looking forward to next weeks game so the defense can get the bad taste out of its mouth.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Second, Zach Gilbert could not cover their second reciever. Why the hell do you wait until late in the ball game to make a change after he has 115 recieving yards.

Its hard to believe that Zach Gilbert is a Junior DB....He had three assignments during the closing minutes of second quarter and he missed all three and SC scored a TD....

(Note: He was very close to get a pass interference call against LSU during the 4th qtr....and Eric Brock saved the penalty by tipping the ball)

I agree. He takes bad angles. I don't like our nickel packages. I think Dede and Herring are better db's when they need to be than bringing in someone like Gilbert with Wilhite being hurt.

I agree with that statement concerning replacing Wilhite with Herring until he returns. It would have been better to replace a linebacker and move Herring to corner.

[jw 4 au 526]

first off, it's not the third scheme in three years. we run a base 4-3, and we have since tubby came to auburn. are they learning new blitz packages? yes. are they learning to play more bump coverage? supposedly. but they aren't learning a new scheme.

the further we get from the game, the less upset i am. we played really, really, really bad on defense. anyone disputing that either didn't watch the game or doesn't know what he was watching. also, muschamp called the worst game i've seen by a coordinator at auburn in a long time. the gameplan tonight made me long for david gibbs... that's not a good thing. BUT there are a number of reasons to be hopeful.

reason number one: we get jonothan wilhite back next week. you never realize how much you miss someone until his absence makes you play zach gilbert. no seriously, i have all the respect in the world for zach. he's worked as hard or harder than anyone on that sideline, and he deserves to put on that jersey and helmet every single week. i just don't think he deserves to play. it's not his fault God made him 5'8" and a touch slow, but it also doesn't make those two things go away. with irons and wilhite as your one and two, pat lee as your nickelback, and powers as your dime... he doesn't have to. getting jonothan back is going to be huge.

reason number two: muschamp's track record. if borges gets a mulligan for the georgia tech game plan last year, muschamp gets one for this game. the game plan was ridiculous. the lack of adjustments was even worse. rushing three didn't work in the first quarter, but there we were doing it in the fourth as they marched down the field again and again. our blitz packages worked; if we'd done it more, newton would've made mistakes or drives would've sputtered.

however, muschamp has been great here. that defense has been great. he was great at lsu. that defense was great. tubby'll call him on a bad plan, and he'll get it right.

reason number three: we have more offensive weapons! look, i'm not sure what we're complaining about offensively. we punted twice the whole night, and held the ball for 30 straight plays putting 10 points on the board. we're a ball control offense, and tonight, we found out that trott and mckenzie can consistently catch and run after the catch. we found out that rod smith can get open from time to time. we found out brandon can actually throw the football under pressure (like he did last year). and we did all this without using brad lester (why? no idea). we've got options now.

reason number four: groves can't play worse. look q is our best pass rusher, but he was lost tonight. he lined up offsides twice. he missed tackles when he operated as the spy (4th quarter, first drive). we talked about how versatile he is, but sometimes that really means we've taken away what's comfortable for him and know he's just average at everything. he'll either get better at all the extra stuff (zone drops and linebacker plays) or we'll stop using him for it. either way, he's not going to have many nights as bad as tonight, and he's a big time player.

we're going to be okay. i'm not sure this team can win all its games (that takes a special, special type of team), but we can win the sec. that's still a really big deal. i'm looking forward to next weeks game so the defense can get the bad taste out of its mouth.

Great analysis, I couldn't agree more. On offense though, I know Kenny had a good (not great) game. But did he seem to be going down easier, like with arm tackles, at times? He may still be injurred a little. I wish we could have spelled him more with Lester or even Tate (since we seem to not be redshirting him, we might as well use him). He also left his feet more than he usually does, instead of driving with those legs. Just an observation.

[auwallace 6]

i think south carolina just converted another third down

[channonc 466]

first off, it's not the third scheme in three years. we run a base 4-3, and we have since tubby came to auburn. are they learning new blitz packages? yes. are they learning to play more bump coverage? supposedly. but they aren't learning a new scheme.

the further we get from the game, the less upset i am. we played really, really, really bad on defense. anyone disputing that either didn't watch the game or doesn't know what he was watching. also, muschamp called the worst game i've seen by a coordinator at auburn in a long time. the gameplan tonight made me long for david gibbs... that's not a good thing. BUT there are a number of reasons to be hopeful.

reason number one: we get jonothan wilhite back next week. you never realize how much you miss someone until his absence makes you play zach gilbert. no seriously, i have all the respect in the world for zach. he's worked as hard or harder than anyone on that sideline, and he deserves to put on that jersey and helmet every single week. i just don't think he deserves to play. it's not his fault God made him 5'8" and a touch slow, but it also doesn't make those two things go away. with irons and wilhite as your one and two, pat lee as your nickelback, and powers as your dime... he doesn't have to. getting jonothan back is going to be huge.

reason number two: muschamp's track record. if borges gets a mulligan for the georgia tech game plan last year, muschamp gets one for this game. the game plan was ridiculous. the lack of adjustments was even worse. rushing three didn't work in the first quarter, but there we were doing it in the fourth as they marched down the field again and again. our blitz packages worked; if we'd done it more, newton would've made mistakes or drives would've sputtered.

however, muschamp has been great here. that defense has been great. he was great at lsu. that defense was great. tubby'll call him on a bad plan, and he'll get it right.

reason number three: we have more offensive weapons! look, i'm not sure what we're complaining about offensively. we punted twice the whole night, and held the ball for 30 straight plays putting 10 points on the board. we're a ball control offense, and tonight, we found out that trott and mckenzie can consistently catch and run after the catch. we found out that rod smith can get open from time to time. we found out brandon can actually throw the football under pressure (like he did last year). and we did all this without using brad lester (why? no idea). we've got options now.

reason number four: groves can't play worse. look q is our best pass rusher, but he was lost tonight. he lined up offsides twice. he missed tackles when he operated as the spy (4th quarter, first drive). we talked about how versatile he is, but sometimes that really means we've taken away what's comfortable for him and know he's just average at everything. he'll either get better at all the extra stuff (zone drops and linebacker plays) or we'll stop using him for it. either way, he's not going to have many nights as bad as tonight, and he's a big time player.

we're going to be okay. i'm not sure this team can win all its games (that takes a special, special type of team), but we can win the sec. that's still a really big deal. i'm looking forward to next weeks game so the defense can get the bad taste out of its mouth.

Couldn't agree with you more. Hopefully, with the couple extra days before Arkansas, we can make some adjustments on Defense. If our pass rush doesn't get better, we will lose a couple of games this season. I just hope the team from now on takes it one game at a time.

[TigerinBham 1]

The Ole Ball Coach took Muschamp to the WOODSHED last night. We are LUCKY to have won. Granted, I am glad we did. We are 4-0. I hope that USC struggles at WSU.

[saniflush 0]

The Ole Ball Coach took Muschamp to the WOODSHED last night. We are LUCKY to have won. Granted, I am glad we did. We are 4-05-0. I hope that USC struggles at WSU.

Fixed that for you.

[80Tiger 899]

Second, Zach Gilbert could not cover their second reciever. Why the hell do you wait until late in the ball game to make a change after he has 115 recieving yards.

Its hard to believe that Zach Gilbert is a Junior DB....He had three assignments during the closing minutes of second quarter and he missed all three and SC scored a TD....

(Note: He was very close to get a pass interference call against LSU during the 4th qtr....and Eric Brock saved the penalty by tipping the ball)

I agree. He takes bad angles. I don't like our nickel packages. I think Dede and Herring are better db's when they need to be than bringing in someone like Gilbert with Wilhite being hurt.

I agree with that statement concerning replacing Wilhite with Herring until he returns. It would have been better to replace a linebacker and move Herring to corner.

I hope you mean move someone else do corner besides Herring. Herring could never play corner. He does not have the speed. He would give up long pass after long pass.

[BGoodTiger 0]

I just have 2 things to say. On third and short in the 4th quarter, why not line KI up behind Carl Stewart and pound it right at them? SC was not falling for the trips to the wide side and stopped the dive play. We should have called a timeout and thought about it (since I don't believe we used 1 all game).

Second, our special teams is extremely special ( Kody Bliss) except in the return game. I don't know about any of you but our guys need to learn dropping the ball does not help them move it down the field. Every single returner we have had has dropped at least one punt/kick.

Now that I've said that, WAR EAGLE and bring on the bacon.

[drewau02 0]

AUloggerhead,

I agree with everything that you said in your post. However, allow me to play devils advocate here for a moment. Brandon and many AU fans across America understand that SC is a Spurrier coached team and expected them to play well at home in Columbia. I don't think that most Auburn fans expected a blowout similar to the 48-7 thumping we gave the gamecocks in Auburn last year. I don't even think that most Auburn fans are upset with a 7 point win over a very resilient, yet stubborn South Carolina team coached by one of the greats. People are upset by the way in which the defense played. Auburn's defense forced only one punt and that was the first possession of the first quarter. Every Carolina play offensively went for an average of 5+ yards. The only times in which Carolina's plays went less than 5 yards were on third and short and fourt hand short. Our secondary looked befuddles all night long. Our front four on the defensive line are undersized and the only pressure that we get on a QB comes from our Defensive Ends or Defensive backs. Carolina's offense, who started three true freshmen on the offensive line, manhandled our defense all night long. This has become a common theme for a Tommy Tuberville defense. Our D-line is undersized and they get pushed around often. This came into focus during the Capital One Bowl game last year against Wisconsin.

People are upset that we had to kick an onsides and go four it on fourth down three different times against South Carolina's defense, obviously not their strong suit. People are upset that Brandon Cox sits there in the pocket and holds the ball for five or six seconds because our young receivers can't get open. Furthermore, people are upset because we haven't won a title since 1957 and this is a so called golden era of Auburn Football. Close victories against South Carolina won't convince many Auburn fans that this is the year.

In any case, a win is a win. I know it's trite, but it's true. And let me tell you something loggerhead, at the end of the night, you may be the only person making sense around here.

Uh ... thanks. Have another drink. Our "undersized" defensive line looks like this:

DE Quenton Groves 6-3 254

DT Pat Sims 6-4 312/S'enderick Marks 6-1 287

NG Josh Thompson 6-0 302

DE Chris Browder 6-5 260

I'd like to know where you think AU should beef up. Maybe you should e-mail Kevin Yox and give him some suggestions.

Some of y'all are upset with the pass defense. OK, be upset. The D needs some work. It's OK to play soft but they have to make the immediate tackle when it's thrown underneath. Newsflash: USC isn't the only team that's going to throw on us. UF, UGA & uat will try to do the same. I'm glad the AU secondary got another testing tonight. It will make them better down the road. Give USC a little credit too. Newton placed some passes perfectly and their WRs made the catches. Yeah, I know they dropped a sure TD. Big deal. You throw it up and people sometimes drop it. Happens to EVERY team. It's a road win in the SEC. Take it & learn from it.

Loggerhead,

I'm not the only who thinks that AU should "beef up" on the Defensive Line. You can throw out the actual size of our D-line guys all you want. Remember the Georgia Tech game last year? Remember the Wisconsin game last year? Many experts and Auburn fans have complained about this for the past three years now. I'm not giving you any new information, I'm just repeating what I've been hearing for quite some time now. Maybe you tune a deaf ear to this criticism, but I don't. I'm not gonna email Kevin Yox because he has nothing to do with the size of the defensive line. Our D-line guys are the size that Tuberville wants them to be. Tuberville has always opted for speed over size on the defensive line. Have more speed, get a quick push off on the line of scrimmage, get to the quarterback quicker. That's been his philosphy from day one. This philosophy worked, but only for a while. The majority of our quarterback pressures come from our defensive ends and when they overplay their hand against a scrambling quarterback, trouble ensues. Just look at the Georgia Tech game last year for reference. In the last three seasons, the only time that I really saw AU get consistent pressure on the QB was in the Bama game last year. Then again, who am I to argue. I don't get paid the big bucks to coach Auburn football and the guys who do are 20-1 in their last 21 SEC games. I guess they're doing something right. I would just like to see more QB pressures and that's not going to happen anytime soon with this undersized offensive line. Our DB's, Linebackers, and Defensive Ends will have to win games for us on defense.

[GoAU 1,600]

If you base your opinions on the size of our D line on what others say, you should also take into account all of the positives that people say about how fast our D is, how you can't run around the outside, etc. Sure there are times I would like to see more beef to, but not at the expense of the speed. It's not like they get shoved around on a regular basis. If you are setting your standards on the Bama game for sacks, you'll be setting your self up for failure - not to many teams will ever get that many sacks in a single game. We were pressuring the QB last night, the issue is he has 4.4 speed and we lost containment.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Second, Zach Gilbert could not cover their second reciever. Why the hell do you wait until late in the ball game to make a change after he has 115 recieving yards.

Its hard to believe that Zach Gilbert is a Junior DB....He had three assignments during the closing minutes of second quarter and he missed all three and SC scored a TD....

(Note: He was very close to get a pass interference call against LSU during the 4th qtr....and Eric Brock saved the penalty by tipping the ball)

I agree. He takes bad angles. I don't like our nickel packages. I think Dede and Herring are better db's when they need to be than bringing in someone like Gilbert with Wilhite being hurt.

I agree with that statement concerning replacing Wilhite with Herring until he returns. It would have been better to replace a linebacker and move Herring to corner.

I hope you mean move someone else do corner besides Herring. Herring could never play corner. He does not have the speed. He would give up long pass after long pass.

He sure had the speed last night. He had an excellent game covering receivers to end zone. He has more experience as a defensive back than Gilbert, plus he doesn't turn his back to the quarterback, very important. One loses about a half a second or more with their back to the quarterback while defending a receiver. Plus, re-adjusting to the ball if one has time. Never , I mean never turn you back to the quarterback, never. Defensive back coaches need to break him of that habit. Sometimes one cannot help it, but for the most part it is rule DBs are taught in high school ball.

[aubrandon 5]

Our defense does have tremendous speed. Do you know how you isolate that? You run right at them. South Carolina did that well. Does anyone remember how many times USC had to punt? Enough said. Extremely disappointed in Muschamp and the play of the defense.