Terrance Coleman

[gravejd 3,272]

Once he gets someone to come in for him when he gets tired might help overall.

Fairly, Blanc and Ricks rotated last year. If three to play two positions isn't enough, somebody needs to get in shape...

Thats a little crazy to say you only need three DTs for a season. I won't argue with the people who say we need to be better up front cause we do. But gotta say I respectfully disagree with you post there mikep

[Mikey 16,777]

I didn't say we need three for a season. Injuries happen. I said if rotating three players in and out of two positions throughout a game isn't enough rest, those three aren't in the shape they should be in.

If the rotation is exactly even they each play only 2/3 of the snaps. In this case, 2/3 of the defensive snaps. They should be able to do that. If not, they need to spend some more time running in the off season.

[jvilletiger 0]

Fairley will be a beast and All SEC this year as a starter. Bank on it.

[Jonesy 1]

I didn't say we need three for a season. Injuries happen. I said if rotating three players in and out of two positions throughout a game isn't enough rest, those three aren't in the shape they should be in.

If the rotation is exactly even they each play only 2/3 of the snaps. In this case, 2/3 of the defensive snaps. They should be able to do that. If not, they need to spend some more time running in the off season.

Generally you want about 5 DTs to cover the two DT spots throughout the course of a game. This saves our best players up to 7 or 8 plays a game, not including special teams. Over the course of a season, some of our players are playing two games worth of snaps more than the OL they are going up against, and with our schedule sometimes three more because of our bye week being late. Last year, we had three to cover the two spots and I'm pretty sure they all worked on special teams which for our offense is a lot of work.

I don't care what shape you're in. If you're 300lbs and going up against big SEC OLs that have had up to three games less snaps than you have then you're not going to perform very well.

[5A-au-tiger85 0]

FAIRLEY IS A BEAST AND WILL MAKE ALL-SEC....  ZACH CLAYTON I RECALL MADE AN IMPACT IN MORE THAN 1 GAME EARLY IS HIS CAREER, INJURIES HAVE BEEN HIS DOWNSIDE THOUGH BUT I FULLY EXPECT HIM IF HEALTHY 2 HAVE A GREAT SENIOR SEASON !!!!    

AFTER ATTENDING A-DAY, I EXPECT BARRING MAJOR INJURIES THE D-LINE WILL BE THE CORE STRENGTH OF OUR DEFENSE       DE  ANTIONE "HOT BOY" CARTER ( ALL-SEC IMO )

                  DT  NICK FAIRLEY ( ALL-SEC IMO )

                  DT MIKE BLANC

                  DE MIKE GOGGINS ( REALLY IMPRESSED ME A-DAY )

2ND. STRING IS WHAT WILL BE THE DIFFERENCE IN '10

                  DE CRAIG SANDERS OR DEE FORD ( ON PASSING DOWNS )

                  DT ZACH CLAYTON ( HAS ALL-SEC TALENT )

                  DT JEFFREY WHITAKER ( INCOMING FRESH. WILL SEE MUCH ACTION IN '10, NO REDSHIRT )

                  DE NOSA EGAUE ( BREAKOUT DEF. PLAYER OF '10 )

                     

[texastiger09 0]

FAIRLEY IS A BEAST AND WILL MAKE ALL-SEC....  ZACH CLAYTON I RECALL MADE AN IMPACT IN MORE THAN 1 GAME EARLY IS HIS CAREER, INJURIES HAVE BEEN HIS DOWNSIDE THOUGH BUT I FULLY EXPECT HIM IF HEALTHY 2 HAVE A GREAT SENIOR SEASON !!!!    

AFTER ATTENDING A-DAY, I EXPECT BARRING MAJOR INJURIES THE D-LINE WILL BE THE CORE STRENGTH OF OUR DEFENSE       DE  ANTIONE "HOT BOY" CARTER ( ALL-SEC IMO )

                  DT  NICK FAIRLEY ( ALL-SEC IMO )

                  DT MIKE BLANC

                  DE MIKE GOGGINS ( REALLY IMPRESSED ME A-DAY )

2ND. STRING IS WHAT WILL BE THE DIFFERENCE IN '10

                  DE CRAIG SANDERS OR DEE FORD ( ON PASSING DOWNS )

                  DT ZACH CLAYTON ( HAS ALL-SEC TALENT )

                  DT JEFFREY WHITAKER ( INCOMING FRESH. WILL SEE MUCH ACTION IN '10, NO REDSHIRT )

                  DE NOSA EGAUE ( BREAKOUT DEF. PLAYER OF '10 )

                     

Good list!  However, I think Bonomolo will have something to say about that.

[jvilletiger 0]

FAIRLEY IS A BEAST AND WILL MAKE ALL-SEC....  ZACH CLAYTON I RECALL MADE AN IMPACT IN MORE THAN 1 GAME EARLY IS HIS CAREER, INJURIES HAVE BEEN HIS DOWNSIDE THOUGH BUT I FULLY EXPECT HIM IF HEALTHY 2 HAVE A GREAT SENIOR SEASON !!!!    

AFTER ATTENDING A-DAY, I EXPECT BARRING MAJOR INJURIES THE D-LINE WILL BE THE CORE STRENGTH OF OUR DEFENSE       DE  ANTIONE "HOT BOY" CARTER ( ALL-SEC IMO )

                  DT  NICK FAIRLEY ( ALL-SEC IMO )

                  DT MIKE BLANC

                  DE MIKE GOGGINS ( REALLY IMPRESSED ME A-DAY )

2ND. STRING IS WHAT WILL BE THE DIFFERENCE IN '10

                  DE CRAIG SANDERS OR DEE FORD ( ON PASSING DOWNS )

                  DT ZACH CLAYTON ( HAS ALL-SEC TALENT )

                  DT JEFFREY WHITAKER ( INCOMING FRESH. WILL SEE MUCH ACTION IN '10, NO REDSHIRT )

                  DE NOSA EGAUE ( BREAKOUT DEF. PLAYER OF '10 )

                     

Good list!  However, I think Bonomolo will have something to say about that.

Also Euguae or Bono will start ahead of Goggins IMO.

[brad5628AU 35]

Once he gets someone to come in for him when he gets tired might help overall.

Fairly, Blanc and Ricks rotated last year. If three to play two positions isn't enough, somebody needs to get in shape...

Once he gets someone to come in for him when he gets tired might help overall.

my man this the SEC, not the MWC..Were talking athletic 310 lbs against some of the best offensive lines in the NCAA..I know it's LSU and I hate them too but when Dorsey was there they had 8 DTs they used to rotate and had them at the top at the list in run def and pass def..not saying that is tyical but you need more than 3..Jonesy suggested 5 and I think that's about right.

Fairly, Blanc and Ricks rotated last year. If three to play two positions isn't enough, somebody needs to get in shape...

Thats a little crazy to say you only need three DTs for a season. I won't argue with the people who say we need to be better up front cause we do. But gotta say I respectfully disagree with you post there mikep

[Mikey 16,777]

Over the course of a season' date=' some of our players are playing two games worth of snaps more than the OL they are going up against, and with our schedule sometimes three more because of our bye week being late. Last year, we had three to cover the two spots and I'm pretty sure they all worked on special teams which for our offense is a lot of work.[/quote']

I can't make the math work out. Last year our DT's played 2/3 of the defensive snaps and yet played two to three more games than the guys they are lining up against?

At 2/3 of the snaps, our D-linemen played roughly 50 snaps per game each.

50 X 12=600 snaps. For 600 snaps to be two more games than the guys they are facing, the opposition would be playing 500 snaps, an average of about 42 snaps per game, yet most o-lines seldom substitute and they run around 75 plays a game.

It looks to me like the guys they are going up against are playing a lot MORE snaps.

It seems that opinions vary, but barring injury I think three guys should be able to handle two spots if they are in good physical condition.

[truefan73 0]

MikeP... It obvious that you are the cynical one, on nearly every thread, but apparently you don't know that much about football. A defensive lineman, especially a DT, expends much more energy than an OL does. For a DT to play 40-45 snaps a game is a lot to ask for, week in and week out, in the SEC. Also, the true number our DT's averaged would be more like 50-55 snaps a game. How about either admitting you are a bammer or tone down the cynicism regarding everything orange and blue??? War Eagle.

[righty1975 0]

I agree about Mike P. Seems to love to be argumentative in just about every thread. Could he be the return of The Valour Fog? If Mike P. starts bashing Christianity, we will know- LOL. Seriously though Mike P, lighten up bro. I'm not saying be a sunshine pumper but you don't have to disagree with every poster just to keep the conversation from becoming too homer.

[bills83au 0]

I'm in the camp that 3 is not enough to cover two, each position needs at least one back to rotate in and out with. all good points on the wt. they carry, downs they play, course of the game and not having the depth to go four qtrs with most of the big boys.

One thing missing here in terms of throwing it all down on the DL--which I agree needs improvement and there was a good article today on the Bleacher Report on its improvement last year over the course of the year---is that we also only had 3-4 LBs a lot of the year and one seemed to have a hard time keeping his head in the game and staying on the field. So there was  some worn out fellows there behind them as the game went on. I concur with the comment that you really could not ask more of any of them given the circumstances. That should definitely begin to change this year. War Eagle!

[Mikey 16,777]

MikeP... It obvious that you are the cynical one, on nearly every thread, but apparently you don't know that much about football. A defensive lineman, especially a DT, expends much more energy than an OL does. For a DT to play 40-45 snaps a game is a lot to ask for, week in and week out, in the SEC. Also, the true number our DT's averaged would be more like 50-55 snaps a game. How about either admitting you are a bammer or tone down the cynicism regarding everything orange and blue??? War Eagle.

Also to Righty, etc.

Who's being cynical? I said three DT's to cover two positions should be enough to get through a game with. No matter how many snaps per game, they are by definition playing 2/3 of the number of snaps the O-line guys across from them are playing. If they can't handle that they need to get in shape. How is that bashing Auburn?

I don't know who Valor Fog is/was. Maybe before my time here? You guys seem to mistake looking at things realistically as "bashing". As far as being a bammer, I'm guessing I graduated from Auburn before most of you were born. My son also graduated from Auburn.

While I'm no fan of religion I don't normally waste time bashing  Christianity or any other religious sect. If religion is your thing, have at it.

Back to the topic at hand, I sat in the stands at Legion Field and saw Shug and the Auburn Tigers beat Tennessee 10-6 using a total of 13 players on defense. That was a very good Tennessee team that finished the year 10-2. It can be done.

Saying that a guy on defense can't take 2/3 of the snaps sounds to me like he needs to get in shape. If Bynes, etc., can take 100 plus snaps why can't a DT take 67?

[au4eva1345162785 0]

MikeP... It obvious that you are the cynical one, on nearly every thread, but apparently you don't know that much about football. A defensive lineman, especially a DT, expends much more energy than an OL does. For a DT to play 40-45 snaps a game is a lot to ask for, week in and week out, in the SEC. Also, the true number our DT's averaged would be more like 50-55 snaps a game. How about either admitting you are a bammer or tone down the cynicism regarding everything orange and blue??? War Eagle.

Also to Righty, etc.

Who's being cynical? I said three DT's to cover two positions should be enough to get through a game with. No matter how many snaps per game, they are by definition playing 2/3 of the number of snaps the O-line guys across from them are playing. If they can't handle that they need to get in shape. How is that bashing Auburn?

I don't know who Valor Fog is/was. Maybe before my time here? You guys seem to mistake looking at things realistically as "bashing". As far as being a bammer, I'm guessing I graduated from Auburn before most of you were born. My son also graduated from Auburn.

While I'm no fan of religion I don't normally waste time bashing  Christianity or any other religious sect. If religion is your thing, have at it.

Back to the topic at hand, I sat in the stands at Legion Field and saw Shug and the Auburn Tigers beat Tennessee 10-6 using a total of 13 players on defense. That was a very good Tennessee team that finished the year 10-2. It can be done.

Saying that a guy on defense can't take 2/3 of the snaps sounds to me like he needs to get in shape. If Bynes, etc., can take 100 plus snaps why can't a DT take 67?

To put it bluntly, DTs are fat. LBs are not.

[bills83au 0]

I am not arguing, but the boys today carry a little more around with them, and are a little taller than most of the boys back in the 70s.....

[Mikey 16,777]

I am not arguing, but the boys today carry a little more around with them, and are a little taller than most of the boys back in the 70s.....

I fully understand that. They are also asked to play a good deal fewer minutes/snaps or however you want to count. I seem to be in the minority, but I still think three players should hold down two positions without huffing and puffing becoming an issue.

au4eva posted:  "To put it bluntly, DTs are fat. LBs are not."

Therein lies the problem. I really don't see the advantage to hauling around 50 lbs of extra fat. Fat never made anybody stronger, just slower and capable of less stamina.

[Guest WarTiger]

We rotated 4 guys at the 2 DT spots last season. Lykes played alot of football last year.

Goggans lost his starting spot last year to Carter, he has an uphill batlle to start again this year. Especially since we will have quality competition at both DE postitions in 2-a-days.

And the guys that saif Clayton has "all-SEC talent," was that a joke?

[Trench Warfare 0]

Over the course of a season' date=' some of our players are playing two games worth of snaps more than the OL they are going up against, and with our schedule sometimes three more because of our bye week being late. Last year, we had three to cover the two spots and I'm pretty sure they all worked on special teams which for our offense is a lot of work.[/quote']

I can't make the math work out. Last year our DT's played 2/3 of the defensive snaps and yet played two to three more games than the guys they are lining up against?

At 2/3 of the snaps, our D-linemen played roughly 50 snaps per game each.

50 X 12=600 snaps. For 600 snaps to be two more games than the guys they are facing, the opposition would be playing 500 snaps, an average of about 42 snaps per game, yet most o-lines seldom substitute and they run around 75 plays a game.

It looks to me like the guys they are going up against are playing a lot MORE snaps.

It seems that opinions vary, but barring injury I think three guys should be able to handle two spots if they are in good physical condition.

MikeP,

Playing 3 players for 2 DL positions while possible is not preferable.  I played DL at the Div. III level and we would never play a game without rotating at least 4 DT for 2 spots.  The reason for this is three fold: 

First, DL have to stay in good condition while holding significant playing weight.  A player who has to play much more has to practice that much more to be in reasonable condition for game days.  This can cause unwanted weight loss for interior linemen.  The last thing a coaching staff would want is the dline losing weight mid season.

Second, with more and more teams going to pass based attacks the pass rush has become more important.  Any lineman will tell you that pass rushing is far more energy draining that run stopping.  So it is helpful to your dline and defense as a whole to have fresh bodies to get after the quarterback.

Third, offensive linemen do on average play more snaps than every defensive lineman across from them.  The reason for this is simple, what offensive linemen do is not as energy sapping as what defensive linemen do.  This is not to deminish what offensive linemen do, but their position requires holding and sustaining blocks.  A defensive lineman must get off these block and then pursue the quarterback, running back, or receiver until the whistle blows every play.

This is just my humble opinion, but depth is crucial at the dline position.

TW

[aubieclaws 0]

hmm/.. why are you worried?  any DT's coming in !!!  LOL  whitaker for 1   

[DJ_Hatch 0]

I agree about Mike P. Seems to love to be argumentative in just about every thread. Could he be the return of The Valour Fog? If Mike P. starts bashing Christianity, we will know- LOL. Seriously though Mike P, lighten up bro. I'm not saying be a sunshine pumper but you don't have to disagree with every poster just to keep the conversation from becoming too homer.

Naaaah, he's no Frog! I had my concerns too, righty... but MikeP is okay... he just likes to debate! He's no bammer! He can be a TAD sarcastic/argumentative at times, but he hasn't crossed the line yet, IMO! Like he said though, he's an "Old School" AU fan, so maybe he just thinks differently! MikeP probably thinks that our guys should be playing both ways!

[TigerPaw1 0]

I see what MikeP is saying and I think if we had three outstanding DTs there would be no problems but personally I don't think Ricks and Blanc are big time DTs.... I would love for us to rotate 4 at least at that position. I think Blanc, Fairley, Clayton, Lykes, and then hopefully one of the freshies can all rotate and see significant playing time and give us more of a push on the front. That to me was what killed us last year. To be honest we had mediocre DL play besides Coleman's strong push at the end. If Farley, Carter, and some others step up and play at a higher level I think our defense will be exponentially better than last year

[Mikey 16,777]

MikeP,

Playing 3 players for 2 DL positions while possible is not preferable.  I played DL at the Div. III level and we would never play a game without rotating at least 4 DT for 2 spots.  The reason for this is three fold: 

First, DL have to stay in good condition while holding significant playing weight.  A player who has to play much more has to practice that much more to be in reasonable condition for game days.  This can cause unwanted weight loss for interior linemen.  The last thing a coaching staff would want is the dline losing weight mid season.

Second, with more and more teams going to pass based attacks the pass rush has become more important.  Any lineman will tell you that pass rushing is far more energy draining that run stopping.  So it is helpful to your dline and defense as a whole to have fresh bodies to get after the quarterback.

Third, offensive linemen do on average play more snaps than every defensive lineman across from them.  The reason for this is simple, what offensive linemen do is not as energy sapping as what defensive linemen do.  This is not to deminish what offensive linemen do, but their position requires holding and sustaining blocks.  A defensive lineman must get off these block and then pursue the quarterback, running back, or receiver until the whistle blows every play.

This is just my humble opinion, but depth is crucial at the dline position.

TW

Finally, a response that actually gives some reasons for wanting more than three. Thanks for explaining those things, T. W.

[righty1975 0]

I agree about Mike P. Seems to love to be argumentative in just about every thread. Could he be the return of The Valour Fog? If Mike P. starts bashing Christianity, we will know- LOL. Seriously though Mike P, lighten up bro. I'm not saying be a sunshine pumper but you don't have to disagree with every poster just to keep the conversation from becoming too homer.

Naaaah, he's no Frog! I had my concerns too, righty... but MikeP is okay... he just likes to debate! He's no bammer! He can be a TAD sarcastic/argumentative at times, but he hasn't crossed the line yet, IMO! Like he said though, he's an "Old School" AU fan, so maybe he just thinks differently! MikeP probably thinks that our guys should be playing both ways!

Never thought he was a bammer. Seems like he would argue with a fencepost though. My point was that you dont have to debate everything just for debating's sake. But to each his own I guess.

War Eagle Mike P.

btw, Valour fog was not a bammer, just a kid that argued about everything.

[aupops2 9]

I keep going to this topic, hopeing to hear something about a future DL or DE.  Guys, please look back at your recent posts, none of it has been about TC.

[Trench Warfare 0]

MikeP,

Playing 3 players for 2 DL positions while possible is not preferable.  I played DL at the Div. III level and we would never play a game without rotating at least 4 DT for 2 spots.  The reason for this is three fold: 

First, DL have to stay in good condition while holding significant playing weight.  A player who has to play much more has to practice that much more to be in reasonable condition for game days.  This can cause unwanted weight loss for interior linemen.  The last thing a coaching staff would want is the dline losing weight mid season.

Second, with more and more teams going to pass based attacks the pass rush has become more important.  Any lineman will tell you that pass rushing is far more energy draining that run stopping.  So it is helpful to your dline and defense as a whole to have fresh bodies to get after the quarterback.

Third, offensive linemen do on average play more snaps than every defensive lineman across from them.  The reason for this is simple, what offensive linemen do is not as energy sapping as what defensive linemen do.  This is not to deminish what offensive linemen do, but their position requires holding and sustaining blocks.  A defensive lineman must get off these block and then pursue the quarterback, running back, or receiver until the whistle blows every play.

This is just my humble opinion, but depth is crucial at the dline position.

TW

Finally, a response that actually gives some reasons for wanting more than three. Thanks for explaining those things, T. W.

No problem.  Glad I could help.