Tulane OL

[Pj4prez01]

The frosh runner is a speedy dude. Slides down the line to the outside similar to Duke Johnson. We will have to wrap up.

This guy can hurt us and we have to keep him contained. The Tulane STs are their liability and we have a big advantage there. Some pressure on the passer at opportune times is needed. If we can keep our O mistakes to a minimum we can outscore them, even with our soft DL. Tulane is young and prone to making game changing mistakes so we need to capitalize.[/QUOTE]

How did you come to the conclusion that our DL is soft?

 

[thwgjacket]

It alternates every five yards between kelly green and olive green with a white checkerboard endzone. The area where the two teams stand is a bold, neon blue.

Apparently y'all wanted to bring the Ramblin' Wreck but we said no because we were worried about tire marks on our new turf.

I've seen pictures and the field/stadium looks very nice. Turf won't be an issue. I played on it in college and it's basically fake grass with fake individual blades. You will see the black beads pop up every now and then but if it's the good stuff, which it appears to be, then you won't notice.

 

[Ibeeballin]

Speaking of the black beads, if you ever wondered what it felt like walking on coals play on those fields for an extended period time.

 

[danny daniel]

This guy can hurt us and we have to keep him contained. The Tulane STs are their liability and we have a big advantage there. Some pressure on the passer at opportune times is needed. If we can keep our O mistakes to a minimum we can outscore them, even with our soft DL. Tulane is young and prone to making game changing mistakes so we need to capitalize.

How did you come to the conclusion that our DL is soft?[/QUOTE]

Well "soft" was a word that came to mind (and there may be a better word) to describe a one data point performance that had no sacks, forced no turnovers, allowed the other team to win the battle of time of possession, allowed too many rushing yards when we knew the pass was not a great threat, could not get the other team off the field after 3rd down, allowed a 9 minute "death march", and gave up a one play touchdown from the 4 yard line without tackling the runner. Certainly credit is to be given to Wofford and there is plenty of Jacket blame to share outside the DL position, but this was not a DL performance to feel hyped up about. We certainly know our players were in shape, prepared, and put out a good effort. This week we get a second data point, a chance for improvement, and a reassessment. I am certainly ready to abandon the word "soft" if our performance merits it.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I remember watching the heat waves roil up on that old turf at grant field. Can see why we had trouble recruiting guys back then to play on 110 degree surface that was also hard as concrete.

 

[waveprof]

Not if he's a Saints fan.

Haven't watched a single NFL game since the Saints Super Bowl, and that was only because everyone else in town was watching it. So no fear

 

[Stonewall]

First thing came to my mind seeing there OLine was UVA. I wonder which league is the officiating this game bc a line this big and to be nice I'll go with average is bound to hold in a major way

Exactly my thoughts of a few years ago when UVA lined up those big boys and had their way with us. Just too much beef to stop. We still should have won that damn game, though.

 

[Pj4prez01]

How did you come to the conclusion that our DL is soft?

Well "soft" was a word that came to mind (and there may be a better word) to describe a one data point performance that had no sacks, forced no turnovers, allowed the other team to win the battle of time of possession, allowed too many rushing yards when we knew the pass was not a great threat, could not get the other team off the field after 3rd down, allowed a 9 minute "death march", and gave up a one play touchdown from the 4 yard line without tackling the runner. Certainly credit is to be given to Wofford and there is plenty of Jacket blame to share outside the DL position, but this was not a DL performance to feel hyped up about. We certainly know our players were in shape, prepared, and put out a good effort. This week we get a second data point, a chance for improvement, and a reassessment. I am certainly ready to abandon the word "soft" if our performance merits it.[/QUOTE]

That's fair. My only comment would be that if you were going to grade off of one data point, the Tulane game will be a much better gauge. The reason being is that in playing an option offense, the dline has to do much more reading, and due to scheme, they are not exploding off the snap to get upfield so you aren't going to see that push.

Having said that, no matter what the offense is, that 4 yd run should never happen (Stargell I believe and one of the Austin's at least missed the tackle). And then rook (41) missed a 3rd down tackle on the qb on another play. I am hoping these were just game 1 jitters though and the recurring theme of what would be a long season.

 

[danny daniel]

Well "soft" was a word that came to mind (and there may be a better word) to describe a one data point performance that had no sacks, forced no turnovers, allowed the other team to win the battle of time of possession, allowed too many rushing yards when we knew the pass was not a great threat, could not get the other team off the field after 3rd down, allowed a 9 minute "death march", and gave up a one play touchdown from the 4 yard line without tackling the runner. Certainly credit is to be given to Wofford and there is plenty of Jacket blame to share outside the DL position, but this was not a DL performance to feel hyped up about. We certainly know our players were in shape, prepared, and put out a good effort. This week we get a second data point, a chance for improvement, and a reassessment. I am certainly ready to abandon the word "soft" if our performance merits it.

That's fair. My only comment would be that if you were going to grade off of one data point, the Tulane game will be a much better gauge. The reason being is that in playing an option offense, the dline has to do much more reading, and due to scheme, they are not exploding off the snap to get upfield so you aren't going to see that push.

Having said that, no matter what the offense is, that 4 yd run should never happen (Stargell I believe and one of the Austin's at least missed the tackle). And then rook (41) missed a 3rd down tackle on the qb on another play. I am hoping these were just game 1 jitters though and the recurring theme of what would be a long season.[/QUOTE]

I agree about the Tulane game being a better guage of our DL. I am excited about our young DEs and hope to see some pressure on the passer. If so I will feel much better about the D as a whole. I'm afraid the DT situation is all up to not getting injuries to Green or Gotsis. I am hoping we play more people than Gamble to try to build some depth at DT. I really like our coaches and think overall they are doing a good job. However, they are not as creative in the OL and DL with substitutions as I would prefer .

 

[dressedcheeseside]

However, they are not as creative in the OL and DL with substitutions as I would prefer .

That's all about to change.

 

[Pj4prez01]

That's fair. My only comment would be that if you were going to grade off of one data point, the Tulane game will be a much better gauge. The reason being is that in playing an option offense, the dline has to do much more reading, and due to scheme, they are not exploding off the snap to get upfield so you aren't going to see that push.

Having said that, no matter what the offense is, that 4 yd run should never happen (Stargell I believe and one of the Austin's at least missed the tackle). And then rook (41) missed a 3rd down tackle on the qb on another play. I am hoping these were just game 1 jitters though and the recurring theme of what would be a long season.

I agree about the Tulane game being a better guage of our DL. I am excited about our young DEs and hope to see some pressure on the passer. If so I will feel much better about the D as a whole. I'm afraid the DT situation is all up to not getting injuries to Green or Gotsis. I am hoping we play more people than Gamble to try to build some depth at DT. I really like our coaches and think overall they are doing a good job. However, they are not as creative in the OL and DL with substitutions as I would prefer .[/QUOTE]

You were right. It looked like I was just overly optimistic.

 

[33jacket]

Tulane used 6 and 7 to block 4 alot this game.

go back and watch when they just used 5 to block 4....we got pressure. You have to gauge the DL against what the O is doing too.

More disappointing is there where times when they were blocking with 7, we only rushed 4, meaning they had a 3 man route and guys were way open. That can't happen. UGA did the same to us last year

I would love roof to call plays more foster like. If you rush 4 and your assignment stays to block (like a TE or FB) then read blitz....don't just stay in no mans land...Foster did this a ton vs OSU. He also played the screens perfectly, something we seem to struggle with; because his players were well taught in the read/rush scheme...it was nice to watch vs OSU last night. I think we can do more of that.

 

[GTech63]

I hate losing to Foster but his D can be tough. Seems to mix it up and have a 6th sense of when to call what.

 

[Squints]

More disappointing is there where times when they were blocking with 7, we only rushed 4, meaning they had a 3 man route and guys were way open. That can't happen. UGA did the same to us last year.

If you had to guess why do you think that's happening? Are they finding holes in the zone we running in the back end or is it just our guys getting beat with a bunch of guys standing around with no one to cover like you mentioned in the next paragraph?

 

[Longestday]

I watched the film again looking at the OL. Chamberlain has improved a lot from 2013.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I watched the film again looking at the OL. Chamberlain has improved a lot from 2013.

okay, but in fairness, you have to show the one of him whiffing on the OLB in a previous (or later) play. He basically dove at nothing and rolled around on the ground.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I watched the film again looking at the OL. Chamberlain has improved a lot from 2013.

Did you watch BC every snap for the whole game? Do that and I doubt you come away with the same impression.

 

[Longestday]

I watched every snap and I watched a lot from last year. Chamberlain has improved. I want to give support were I can, and he has improved.

He gets down field better and is having more of a positive impact on plays. I have several plays were he is significantly contributing. Both OT have a hard time getting in the way of the middle LB, but they are improving from last year (this was a big issue last year). Make sure you focus on the word "improving".

 

[Longestday]

There are more than these three... and if you wanted too you can find not good plays on anyone on the team. But he is better than last year for sure. I do know that it is hard to change a reputation....

 

[forensicbuzz]

I just remember the two specific times I decided to focus on BC, he whiffed on his blocking assignment. Not saying he hasn't improved, but I wouldn't say "improved a lot from last year." I don't think the coaches are going to be happy with his performance.