CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => SEC => Topic started by: Drew4UTk on September 08, 2024, 10:34:18 PM
-
... that should have been seen by more than me.
If it was, nobody is talking about it.
460yds isn't bad yardage, but NCST isn't a great D, either. They were doing something that every other team on UTs schedule may take notes from. If the pack had better individual components on D, and better scheme, that game could have been tighter. I gotta give Doren credit. Yeah, that's right- it isn't components nor scheme so much as it is adopting a bend don't break overarching mindset.
UTs O is tricky as we all know. They reload quickly, faster than any other team running a play something like one every 25seconds ... they do this EVERY single game. The threat is "once they see the D set on the field they know they can exploit, they don't let them off the field and do it by quick sets and snaps, and not substituting". All it takes is catching the right exploitation present and they are just about guaranteed points.
NCST was only caught in a bad set one time last night, that I saw. It cost them points, too. Other than that one breakdown they had the right D on the field... and that D wasn't intending to stop the O cold, but to bend and slow them down....... and it seemed to work. Without it, they'd have been up 50pts at the half.
Now take a team like OK, or bama, they've got Hella better components than NCST does. If they (especially OK) come in with a 335/nickel set and play the entire game with the intent to keep the play within 5-10yds of the LoS, they do two things- they use tennessee's tempo against them because tennessee players get winded, too, and, they increase the number of plays that have to be ran which increases the opportunity for mistakes/misfires.
If I'm right about that being the intent of NCST or even just serendipity rearing it's head, it's a weak spot in the TN armor and if done right, methinks, can make UT a lot more manageable... DCs may use it and keep their teams out of shootouts.
Thoughts?
-
I think teams know the 'how' to slow UT's offense.
Last year, Florida, A&M, Bama, Mizzou, and UGA did it (20 pts or less).
You just have to have the personnel to do it (both ability and discipline).
NCST doesn't have the personnel of a good SEC team.
Looking at the schedule, OU may, but they look pretty pedestrian so far. Florida may, if only because we did last year.
But from a talent standpoint, there's only 2 teams (Bama, UGA) that should contain the Vols on offense.
10-2 = a playoff trip, by and large.
-
I think teams know the 'how' to slow UT's offense.
Last year, Florida, A&M, Bama, Mizzou, and UGA did it (20 pts or less).
You just have to have the personnel to do it (both ability and discipline).
NCST doesn't have the personnel of a good SEC team.
Looking at the schedule, OU may, but they look pretty pedestrian so far. Florida may, if only because we did last year.
But from a talent standpoint, there's only 2 teams (Bama, UGA) that should contain the Vols on offense.
10-2 = a playoff trip, by and large.
I think that OU's defense will be pretty good. But the offense's current ineptitude should ensure that the Vols have plenty of possessions to stress that D.
-
Here is the thing about only rushing three. Not only do you have to get the push to get to the quarter back (which NC State couldn’t) without him having all day to throw but you must be able to stop the rush that way too. Sampson had 130 yards against NC State. So our rushing attack helps to force teams to rush more than three. NC State did it because they knew they couldn’t stop Tennessee. So they decided to stop the deep threat to keep the score low as you said. Because we would have hung in the forty’s on them in the first half if they tried a more traditional defense.
But most teams that don’t use a 3-3-5 are not going to bother to learn it a week before the game and then go back to their normal defense. I think they know that would be ineffective since it’s not their normal muscle memory for their normal playing positions.
That said, if a team could do it, there is only one team that has the horses. That team is Georgia. The rest couldn’t do it. I think they have a better chance playing their normal defense. And to tell the truth I think we would still be somewhat successful against Georgia also.
-
A 4-2-5 is basically the same, with some more run-support to it.
-
A 4-2-5 is basically the same, with some more run-support to it.
Not on both sides. That defense is not balanced. You just run against the side without the overhang. You put a lot of pressure on your weak safety to help in run support to that side. You get a hat on him and you could have some big gains running the ball that way. Run to that side for a few plays with good gains and then you catch the weak safety creeping up and then take advantage deep.
who uses that formation much? Only one I can think of is TCU.
-
a 335/nickel is almost the same thing, and can be the exact same thing if you have a hybrid LB/DB. the thing is, though, a 46 is a better set IF you have that hybrid LB/DB... VT ran that back in the 90's when they had Joe Lee Dunn at the D helm... he never wore socks is the best way folks recall him... he lifted that set directly off of the mid 80s Chicago Bears. i can't for the life of me recall the name of that LB/DB but i THINK his first name was Cory? He MADE that set, and it was effective. It's a staple that "scheme puts the players in position; talent/skill makes the play"... NCST was only out of position a couple times- the most obvious being the unopposed 20 or so yd TD pass.
the point i'm making has been restated a lot better than i made it- and that is to 'allow' plays to be made in the flats and center within 5 yds of the LoS, and simply to keep the O on the field as long as possible- they'll burn themselves out hopefully, and, more plays is more opportunities for mistakes.... and don't, i mean DO NOT put a set of guys in specific to run or pass- because as soon as the wrong components are present UT will NOT let them off the field and will eat them alive.
-
a 335/nickel is almost the same thing, and can be the exact same thing if you have a hybrid LB/DB. the thing is, though, a 46 is a better set IF you have that hybrid LB/DB... VT ran that back in the 90's when they had Joe Lee Dunn at the D helm... he never wore socks is the best way folks recall him... he lifted that set directly off of the mid 80s Chicago Bears. i can't for the life of me recall the name of that LB/DB but i THINK his first name was Cory? He MADE that set, and it was effective. It's a staple that "scheme puts the players in position; talent/skill makes the play"... NCST was only out of position a couple times- the most obvious being the unopposed 20 or so yd TD pass.
the point i'm making has been restated a lot better than i made it- and that is to 'allow' plays to be made in the flats and center within 5 yds of the LoS, and simply to keep the O on the field as long as possible- they'll burn themselves out hopefully, and, more plays is more opportunities for mistakes.... and don't, i mean DO NOT put a set of guys in specific to run or pass- because as soon as the wrong components are present UT will NOT let them off the field and will eat them alive.
Corey Moore -- from right up the road from me. Brownsville, TN
-
Not on both sides. That defense is not balanced. You just run against the side without the overhang. You put a lot of pressure on your weak safety to help in run support to that side. You get a hat on him and you could have some big gains running the ball that way. Run to that side for a few plays with good gains and then you catch the weak safety creeping up and then take advantage deep.
who uses that formation much? Only one I can think of is TCU.
Meh, these aren't 240 lb ILBs and 5 little DBs here, the LBs are small and fast and you have 2-3 tweeners on the field at any given time. I'm not sure planning on running weak side a bunch is a great plan. And there's so many zone concepts you can implement anyway.
Anyway, having dudes than can win 1-on-1s makes life easier in any defense.
-
A thing I've noticed about most ACC teams is relatively weak line play, especially on defense. You can line up, usually, knock them off the ball and RTDB. Or pass. Or about anything.
-
Makes me think of those great DLs of UNC in the mid-90s. Greg Ellis, Julius Peppers, Ebeneezer Ekuban.....GT's NC team and soon after had a good DL with Coleman Rudolph and Marco Coleman.
Clemson's had a great DE more often than not the past 20 years. And their DL in their saga vs Bama was all-time great.
But yeah, by and large, everyone falls short to the SEC when it comes to large athletes on the DL.