Let's speculate on starters if we get Woody

iceeater1969

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,668
THWG said:
I think Dawson beefed up to be a DT last year and I hope that Kaleb Oliver becomes an OLB. I think that he could be a double digit sack guy at OLB.
Click to expand...
Didnt kaleb get pj davis number 40? Hope he can keep it special.

I see so mmany athletes on sideline. Hopoe new dc can rotate guys in the game.
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,237
33jacket said:
I believe bjs gets moved to olb where he is a better fit imo than ilb.

Ilb is vic and mitchell, but either is on thin ice.
Click to expand...

From what CNW said in an interview about the types of LBs he uses:

Going back to the original concept of getting the quicker more athletic guys on the field, we recruit body types more similar to safeties than backers...When many defenses are turning to nickel and dime packages, we are able to leave our base personnel in the game vs. three or four wide-outs. Practice opportunities are maximized by playing with the same personnel. Blitz packages are easier to execute with the extra stand up player and pursuit turns up a notch with the faster players on the field.

Our inside backers generally are a little bigger than our outside backers. They take on blocks from linemen and backs just as our outside backers do, but usually in tighter space. We've been fortunate over the years to be able to move an inside backer to outside and vice versa. If you want to get your best eleven on the field, having the ability to interchange an inside or outside backer helps with depth as injuries occur. With the type of player we recruit at outside backer we've been fortunate to move some of them to safety when needed and some of our safeties to outside backer. Whether the flexibility for these position changes is a necessity or a luxury, it's an advantage either way.

I would think Mitchell stays on the inside, but Vic would more likely move to the outside than remain inside. Vic was not really good taking on blocks. I actually see BJS moving inside since he's probably one of our bigger LBs. Seems like CNW is looking for guys that can run and cover at OLB, an almost saftey/linebacker hybrid. That's why I think guys like AJ Gray and Jalen Johnson could move...AJ more situationally, but Jalen more permanently. One guy I think fits CNW's mold to a "T" for OLB is Charlie Thomas who we signed this year.

I can see the thought behind that as most seem to think a 3-4 system is weaker against the run. But by having bigger MLBs, they almost act as a second line of DLs, but obviously more flexible in responsibility and skillset.
 

Skeptic

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,372
I'm putting this here but it could go in any thread. This business of using initials in every reference to a player or position often with multiple references in the same sentence or paragraph, makes it just about impossible to read such a post coherently. It is particularly off-putting when referring to players. (Look, "CPJ" I get as it is repeatedly used as -- I guess -- typing shorthand. But all those players on defense, or elsewhere, offense? Nah, and particularly for a thread that kind of guesstimates and estimates who might or might not play and where they might or might not play if and when they do play. I'm probably not the only one passing on having to stop and interpret the initials to correspond, then doing a herky-jerky continuation reading something that might be interesting if a name was attached. I am too lazy to continue the imitation game. Sorry.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,653
Location
Georgia
Techster said:
From what CNW said in an interview about the types of LBs he uses:

Going back to the original concept of getting the quicker more athletic guys on the field, we recruit body types more similar to safeties than backers...When many defenses are turning to nickel and dime packages, we are able to leave our base personnel in the game vs. three or four wide-outs. Practice opportunities are maximized by playing with the same personnel. Blitz packages are easier to execute with the extra stand up player and pursuit turns up a notch with the faster players on the field.

Our inside backers generally are a little bigger than our outside backers. They take on blocks from linemen and backs just as our outside backers do, but usually in tighter space. We've been fortunate over the years to be able to move an inside backer to outside and vice versa. If you want to get your best eleven on the field, having the ability to interchange an inside or outside backer helps with depth as injuries occur. With the type of player we recruit at outside backer we've been fortunate to move some of them to safety when needed and some of our safeties to outside backer. Whether the flexibility for these position changes is a necessity or a luxury, it's an advantage either way.

I would think Mitchell stays on the inside, but Vic would more likely move to the outside than remain inside. Vic was not really good taking on blocks. I actually see BJS moving inside since he's probably one of our bigger LBs. Seems like CNW is looking for guys that can run and cover at OLB, an almost saftey/linebacker hybrid. That's why I think guys like AJ Gray and Jalen Johnson could move...AJ more situationally, but Jalen more permanently. One guy I think fits CNW's mold to a "T" for OLB is Charlie Thomas who we signed this year.

I can see the thought behind that as most seem to think a 3-4 system is weaker against the run. But by having bigger MLBs, they almost act as a second line of DLs, but obviously more flexible in responsibility and skillset.
Click to expand...

Techster, what do you mean that BJS is our bigger lb? He is lighter than both mitchell and Vic; taller, but thinner and lighter.
Vic is 240lbs and only 5 foot 10 inch; and imo should have been behind mitchell as backup MLB and BJS starting at olb. But roof did what he did. I see vic inside imo. Both vic and mitchell sucked to high heaven at taking on blocks. But again. That to me was a roof issue. The fundamentals on this team are poor today. I am hoping things like not leaving your feet to tackle, angles and taking on blocks with the correct shoulder are fixed under woody.

The OLB in this 3-4 has to play at the line. That is a very hard transition to make from CB or DB all the way to Line. If that happens, then it would be the boundary OLB who is most times off the line as a LB. Where the Field usually steps up. So in this case you may have a Gray or Johnson as boundary OLB; they often have to cover as well. But that is a big transition in the 3-4. So again, we will see. I think Gray could be a LB though for sure.....

but, to me BJS is 220 and quicker than vic; lighter and taller. He was being asked to play mlb in roofs' scheme because his scheme focused on that position and wanted the best talent there. Regardless of perfect fit; the mlb in the roof d was a golden child.

I think he gets a look at the olb spot. Also note he says he cross trains his inside and outside guys...so thats an aspect too.
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,499
33jacket said:
He was being asked to play mlb in roofs' scheme because his scheme focused on that position and wanted the best talent there. Regardless of perfect fit; the mlb in the roof d was a golden child.

I think he gets a look at the olb spot. Also note he says he cross trains his inside and outside guys...so thats an aspect too.
Click to expand...

So, in the new scheme, the NT is a critical piece--maybe the critical piece. Anyone else where you'd put the best athlete out of position just because you need them there?

Seems like for this defense, sometimes your ILB is the guy who gets the glory, sometimes the OLB, sometimes the DE, but I'm just guessing at this point.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,653
Location
Georgia
slugboy said:
So, in the new scheme, the NT is a critical piece--maybe the critical piece. Anyone else where you'd put the best athlete out of position just because you need them there?

Seems like for this defense, sometimes your ILB is the guy who gets the glory, sometimes the OLB, sometimes the DE, but I'm just guessing at this point.
Click to expand...

well, I am not totally sure what you are asking, but in my view, on D you try to get your best 11 on the field; which means some guys may be one position away from their ideal. Branch at the 3tech last year was a good example. He can be a more ideal SDE

I think roof tried to do that as well in spots, but also, tried to put the best players at his most critical positions based on his d design (ie BJS at MLB); which in essence killed getting the best 3 lb on the field at one time...imo....

I think Woody will try to get the best on the field. So for instance. If we have two DE in his scheme that are better than an ok DT and putting branch at end. Then you may see branch at DT and two other DE.
By the same token if the NT is good enough, then branch slides to end.

I think one thing, I have been reading on this board alot, is the perception of the NT in this defense. Its not the same as a 2gap NT in a 3-4 that Groh or others used. In this D, the NT is important but for different reasons and its more around penetration and getting the C to not handle you on attack, vs lining up a yard back and holding the center to control him side to side.

As a result. It would absolutely not shock me to see Branch win out the NT position. By the same token, If others at NT, like Glanton, Cerge or adams or whoever are good enough, and that combo with Branch at one DE spot is better...thats what he will do.

I feel the same for LB. If the best 4 are Vic, mitchell, BJS and one other, then, he will find a mix. In that mix, my point was simply about fit for position. I think BJS will look good at OLB in this scheme vs inside, as i think the speed body type etc for MLB seem to fit vic and brant better. But, if BJS does go inside with mitchell (as mitchell will never be outside); then the two other OLB have to be dynamic players. Both be able to play on the line and drop back. This is why I think Vic struggles here...he is not dynamic enough across two levels imo. But we will see...

Anyway just one opinion.....But I can see Gray getting walked up to one OLB position (boundary side); but again, this is only if that combo is better with a new S vs gray staying at S.
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,237
33jacket said:
Techster, what do you mean that BJS is our bigger lb? He is lighter than both mitchell and Vic; taller, but thinner and lighter.
Vic is 240lbs and only 5 foot 10 inch; and imo should have been behind mitchell as backup MLB and BJS starting at olb. But roof did what he did. I see vic inside imo. Both vic and mitchell sucked to high heaven at taking on blocks. But again. That to me was a roof issue. The fundamentals on this team are poor today. I am hoping things like not leaving your feet to tackle, angles and taking on blocks with the correct shoulder are fixed under woody.

The OLB in this 3-4 has to play at the line. That is a very hard transition to make from CB or DB all the way to Line. If that happens, then it would be the boundary OLB who is most times off the line as a LB. Where the Field usually steps up. So in this case you may have a Gray or Johnson as boundary OLB; they often have to cover as well. But that is a big transition in the 3-4. So again, we will see. I think Gray could be a LB though for sure.....

but, to me BJS is 220 and quicker than vic; lighter and taller. He was being asked to play mlb in roofs' scheme because his scheme focused on that position and wanted the best talent there. Regardless of perfect fit; the mlb in the roof d was a golden child.

I think he gets a look at the olb spot. Also note he says he cross trains his inside and outside guys...so thats an aspect too.
Click to expand...

You may be entirely right. One of the things that stuck out to me was this line: With the type of player we recruit at outside backer we've been fortunate to move some of them to safety when needed and some of our safeties to outside backer. Whether the flexibility for these position changes is a necessity or a luxury, it's an advantage either way.

Out of curiosity from what you replied, I went back to watch film of App State vs UT in 2016:



Looking at the body types, it appears the OLBs were the smaller safety/LB types that were explosive and quick with the ability to cover and chase depending on the situation. The MLBs were bigger bodies, plugging holes and making the line account for them to free up the OLBs to attack. Now this of course comes with the caveat that against UT they had to defend a LOT of 4 and 5 WR sets.

I kinda got more curious, so I watched a little of their game against Miami. Miami had more "standard" offensive personnel compared to UT. Lots of 2 back sets, TE packages, as well as 4/5 WR sets.



Pretty interesting what CNW did with personnel. One thing I noticed: LOTS of his guys get into the backfield. Makes you wonder what he can do with SAs that are more evenly matched...and he'll get that chance here at GT.
 
MikeJackets1967

MikeJackets1967

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,844
Location
Lovely Ducktown,Tennessee
Techster said:
You may be entirely right. One of the things that stuck out to me was this line: With the type of player we recruit at outside backer we've been fortunate to move some of them to safety when needed and some of our safeties to outside backer. Whether the flexibility for these position changes is a necessity or a luxury, it's an advantage either way.

Out of curiosity from what you replied, I went back to watch film of App State vs UT in 2016:



Looking at the body types, it appears the OLBs were the smaller safety/LB types that were explosive and quick with the ability to cover and chase depending on the situation. The MLBs were bigger bodies, plugging holes and making the line account for them to free up the OLBs to attack. Now this of course comes with the caveat that against UT they had to defend a LOT of 4 and 5 WR sets.

I kinda got more curious, so I watched a little of their game against Miami. Miami had more "standard" offensive personnel compared to UT. Lots of 2 back sets, TE packages, as well as 4/5 WR sets.



Pretty interesting what CNW did with personnel. One thing I noticed: LOTS of his guys get into the backfield. Makes you wonder what he can do with SAs that are more evenly matched...and he'll get that chance here at GT.
Click to expand...

Great post,Techster,i can't wait to see what the defense does in 2018:cool::D
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,237
Techster said:
From what CNW said in an interview about the types of LBs he uses:

Going back to the original concept of getting the quicker more athletic guys on the field, we recruit body types more similar to safeties than backers...When many defenses are turning to nickel and dime packages, we are able to leave our base personnel in the game vs. three or four wide-outs. Practice opportunities are maximized by playing with the same personnel. Blitz packages are easier to execute with the extra stand up player and pursuit turns up a notch with the faster players on the field.

Our inside backers generally are a little bigger than our outside backers. They take on blocks from linemen and backs just as our outside backers do, but usually in tighter space. We've been fortunate over the years to be able to move an inside backer to outside and vice versa. If you want to get your best eleven on the field, having the ability to interchange an inside or outside backer helps with depth as injuries occur. With the type of player we recruit at outside backer we've been fortunate to move some of them to safety when needed and some of our safeties to outside backer. Whether the flexibility for these position changes is a necessity or a luxury, it's an advantage either way.

I would think Mitchell stays on the inside, but Vic would more likely move to the outside than remain inside. Vic was not really good taking on blocks. I actually see BJS moving inside since he's probably one of our bigger LBs. Seems like CNW is looking for guys that can run and cover at OLB, an almost saftey/linebacker hybrid. That's why I think guys like AJ Gray and Jalen Johnson could move...AJ more situationally, but Jalen more permanently. One guy I think fits CNW's mold to a "T" for OLB is Charlie Thomas who we signed this year.

I can see the thought behind that as most seem to think a 3-4 system is weaker against the run. But by having bigger MLBs, they almost act as a second line of DLs, but obviously more flexible in responsibility and skillset.
Click to expand...

Hey look...sometimes a blind squirrel finds an acorn!

https://www.myajc.com/sports/colleg...tech-victor-alexander/I1Sd9aymrPouGtlyM0EMmN/

Some of the defensive positional changes are starting to become clearer. Watching film of how CNW's LB's play, I didn't think Vic would stay inside. ILB's are bigger body types, almost glorified DLs that take on blocks. OLBs are the fast/athletic types that "seek and destroy". It's more important for OLBs in this scheme to shed blocks, as opposed to take on blocks. No way Vic survives the inside in CNW's scheme given what ILBs are tasked with.

It looks like CNW is putting a premium on speed and quickness at OLB, especially the "jack" position, as opposed to pseudo DEs that Saban likes at OLB.

It may be that others will pass Vic at the position as the season goes on, but it does give you a glimpse at how CNW is thinking about LBs in his scheme.
 

YJMD

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,622
Techster said:
Hey look...sometimes a blind squirrel finds an acorn!

https://www.myajc.com/sports/colleg...tech-victor-alexander/I1Sd9aymrPouGtlyM0EMmN/

Some of the defensive positional changes are starting to become clearer. Watching film of how CNW's LB's play, I didn't think Vic would stay inside. ILB's are bigger body types, almost glorified DLs that take on blocks. OLBs are the fast/athletic types that "seek and destroy". It's more important for OLBs in this scheme to shed blocks, as opposed to take on blocks. No way Vic survives the inside in CNW's scheme given what ILBs are tasked with.

It looks like CNW is putting a premium on speed and quickness at OLB, especially the "jack" position, as opposed to pseudo DEs that Saban likes at OLB.

It may be that others will pass Vic at the position as the season goes on, but it does give you a glimpse at how CNW is thinking about LBs in his scheme.
Click to expand...

Love the article and the words Vic says. The scheme is more complex but the players themselves are being given straightforward assignments, 1 or 2 things to do on each play, and they have a narrower field of vision required to execute their assignment. I really think that works better for college athletes. And I really like how Woody tries to find out what players are good at and use them in that way. If you take someone lacking in some way (speed, athleticism, play recognition, etc.) and ask them to be versatile against a team with better all-around athletes, you're choosing to play at a disadvantage. But so long as the sum of the parts can defend the whole field, I think it's better to leverage a player's individual strengths, and doing so can neutralize a lot of talent advantages.

But there will be growing pains. Our success will rest on our ability to learn the defense and execute it without missing assignments.
 
MikeJackets1967

MikeJackets1967

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,844
Location
Lovely Ducktown,Tennessee
Techster said:
Hey look...sometimes a blind squirrel finds an acorn!

https://www.myajc.com/sports/colleg...tech-victor-alexander/I1Sd9aymrPouGtlyM0EMmN/

Some of the defensive positional changes are starting to become clearer. Watching film of how CNW's LB's play, I didn't think Vic would stay inside. ILB's are bigger body types, almost glorified DLs that take on blocks. OLBs are the fast/athletic types that "seek and destroy". It's more important for OLBs in this scheme to shed blocks, as opposed to take on blocks. No way Vic survives the inside in CNW's scheme given what ILBs are tasked with.

It looks like CNW is putting a premium on speed and quickness at OLB, especially the "jack" position, as opposed to pseudo DEs that Saban likes at OLB.

It may be that others will pass Vic at the position as the season goes on, but it does give you a glimpse at how CNW is thinking about LBs in his scheme.
Click to expand...
Nice article,thanks;)(y)
 
Top