The SEC Forum at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

UGA just showed us how important good play from the QB is- Fromm was out of sync all afternoon.  

go back and watch the last three UGA drives.  Fromm took the snap, turned toward the right side of the field, and attempted passes he shouldn't have been attempting- meanwhile, on the left side of the field, there was a receiver WIDE OPEN every. single. time.  I kept waiting for him to turn and discover that- thinking that receiver was a safety dump 'when all else failed' but he never aimed at him.  He never even looked- instead opting for difficult throws he usually makes- but being out of sync for whatever reason he couldn't.... all the while, the top of the field and ten to fifteen yards of open field was wide. slam. open.  it's perplexing.  

judging on 'drive' alone, which i define as 'effort beyond the design of the play', LSU AND UF have it.  What i mean by that is: a swing pass to the outside at shallow depth is intent to gain around 5~7 yards and is contingent on the CB and/or LB pulling off the receiver and attacking the ball- the RB being the target as the DL's close in on the pocket and after the RB feigns block... it's generally a good play to screen on aggressive D's, if for nothing else to keep them honest and reluctant to attack the QB.. 5~7yards is the goal.  

problem:  both LSU and UF RB's missed the memo that they're supposed to go down when hit either open field or by the 'gang', and fight through.  MOST teams do just that- it's a 'go to work' mentality meaning "job is accomplished; reset".  Those yards after contact are substantial, and NOT only in the described play, but by all players... QB's picking up blocks... Players pushing from behind.  the level of EFFORT is substantial and a reason for both these teams success thus far.  They're not relying on scheme alone- they're MAKING the plays happen.  They're capable of finesse, but they're 'powering' too.  

that shows me a team that has fully 'bought in' and putting effort into every play, which is demonstrative of superb coaching.  

that's why these teams will win now and in the future.  There is a lot to look forward to with these programs... and I love it when LSU wins, because I get to see more of Coach O 'talking' to the media... "dem boys gone play dare heart out durn foobah playhah don quit on dat fiel till hear dang whistle meanin time expihe. i love dem some fight but gotta figah what do bout dem sho fieldage plays and gonna figuh dat out come sat-day wif dat tuff game 'head.."  

Ohio State in Columbus looms in 2 weeks, and they can't afford any letdown at Illinois this week.

I'm starting to believe in them. They look really good, especially on defense. Kudos to Jimmy Leonhard.

I do a modified YPA formula for QBs and defenses for another site for a piece we do.  Obviously schedules are extremely dissimilar in this sport, but it makes for good conversation anyway.  Wisconsin's DPI (defensive productivity index) right now is an amazing 1.45 ypp play allowed.  It probably won't stay that way, elite defenses usually finish a year in the 3's, but I've only seen elite defenses dip down into the 2's in the middle of the season.  In all the years I've been tracking it, I've never seen a 1.45 at the halfway mark.  Remarkable.  Missouri is leading the SEC with a 3.34 right now, and Clanga finished last year with about a 3.49 (iirc), if that gives you some reference.  

LSU definitely wanted the game to be fast paced and high scoring, but it played into Florida's hands about as well as it could.  Florida did slow the game down with time-consuming methodical drives, ending in points, none of which LSU wants.  

LSU did not a want a rock fight where Florida could hang around and pull something out at the end.  They wanted a boatrace because they figured they would have more drives for points than Florida.  They thought they could get some stops and go up by 2+ TDs and take Florida way out of their comfort zone.  The thought was right, LSU's defense just couldn't get off the field when they needed to and LSU wasn't ready for that.  

The real back and forth wasn't just on the scoreboard, but described in the TOP stat.  LSU kept trying to force the issue with a faster pace but Florida kept slowing it down, successfully, and with points.  LSU only punted twice, but if they'd scored after moving the ball on the first drive--or even hit the FG try--it would've been headed more into the territory LSU wanted it.  They couldn't convert and the game got perpetually stalemated between LSU's pace and Florida's.  

It's still quite an adjustment as a fan.  Once LSU gets a lead at the end of a game I'm so used to seeing defense close it out and the offense run the clock out.  Staying balls out and throwing for first downs is not the way I'm accustomed to seeing LSU try to end games they're winning.  This offense is what it is.  Their play selection on the back end wasn't just bravado with the weaker teams....it's how this offense is built and called now.  When you're up by 6 on Texas at their place near the end, it's 3rd and 17, and you don't just run and punt, but throw a strike that converts for points, and when you have the lead against UF with a weaker OL and the defense has finally gotten home a couple times, but you keep running the same offense.....it just is what it is now.  

He's still running the 3-4, correct? I mean, I know it's a 3-4 but it doesn't look like a 3-4 most of the time when he's got LB's lined up with their hands in the dirt and all that.


Is the NT and DE's the problem here, or is it the LB's?

the rush LB doesn't play with a hand in the dirt.  

"problem" is maybe not the term I'd use, but for this particular ailment, it's the entire front 4.  They're great at run stuffing, and they're great two-gappers, when Aranda lets the LBs work to that end behind them.  The issue is Aranda keeps prefers to use his LBs in other ways most of the time, the rush LB basically has one move and doesn't often beat a tackle, let alone demand a double team, and the 3 down linemen just aren't the type to shed blocks and penetrate the backfield.  They're much more of the occupy blockers ilk.  This just isn't a front 4 that's going to cause a lot of disruption by themselves, which is what we've been seeing the last 2+ years.   

The NT did push the pocket back very well most of last night.  Aranda kept taking him out of the game on 3rd and long.  It was infuriating.  He'd be a driving force between two good defensive plays, then he'd come out, Florida would convert.  

The unit looks best to me when Aranda blitzes a LB or a safety from tricky angles or uses well designed stunts.  The front 4 eats so much space that those other guys have a lot of room to work.  It's just not something we do much.  Me personally, if a team like Florida is going to eat us up in man coverage anyway, I'd rather go straight man, let our great DBs earn their schollys, and let the front 7 attack more.  In a game like last night's, it really couldn't go any worse.  Our coverage was good and we made tackles, so if they're gonna hit completions anyway and we limit the damage, I'd rather take more chances on getting negative plays since the risk of attacking more is something we were pretty much experiencing anyway.  Indeed, when Aranda finally took some chances, we got a few key stops.  

Orgeron has repeatedly stressed the need for linemen who can get after the QB.  He just hasn't recruited any so far.  

That's not how Aranda's D worked in Madison, and I guess it's the same in Baton Rouge.

The front 3 are there to eat space and let the LB's do their work. I've noticed over the years that it's tough to get higher rated DL kids in that system, because the "glory" isn't there for them. It's still like that today in Madison, under Leonhard (and for the year before him, Wilcox).

That nose tackle is a beast.  And 18 was good, but LSU is missing that Mingo/Key-type guy.