Has there ever been a defensive coach that doesn't have more trouble with a guy who is fast than with a guy who is slow, all else being equal? ldskule::geaux:ldskule:
First of all, that's not an accurate way to frame that question. "A guy who is slow" wouldn't be running nearly as much; he'd operate out of a pro-set offense. Secondly, there are teams with overall weaker defenses that defend running QBs better than we do. Masoli wasn't going crazy week-in and week-out like he did against us, and Newton & Co. didn't rack-up 440yds on the ground against anyone else. It's been Chavis' only glaring weakness, really. And it's really counter-intuitive given our level of athleticism, particularly in the secondary. But he tends to go very conservative when facing a running QB and tries to let the play come to the defenders rather than being aggressive and flushing the play to one side or the other.
Units weakest to strongest: Wide receiver, offensive line, linebacker, qb, defensive line, runningback, tight end, secondary. Special teams should be very solid. Wide receiver is the biggest worrry. It wasn't deep last year and the unit lost two starters. Jeff Maehl was clutch for us the past two years. He will be missed. Lavasier Tuinei "LT" and Josh Huff are the guys with production last year. LT needs to step up in a big way and has disappointed a bit this spring. Huff has sat out most of spring but could play. Nick Cole, Eric Dungy and Justin Hoffman are the three seeing time. Eric seems to be getting the best reviews (son of Tony Dungy). Only Huff will stretch the field vertically. We got the best WR out of JUCO (Georgia was in pursuit of him big time) in Vaughn and an all american in Blackmon. However, Kelley out of Fresno is supposedly the most polished. The oline returns a pair of two year starters (Asper, a tackle, and York, a guard) and two players with extensive back up roles (Weems, tackle, and Cody, guard). Armstrong will be the new face at center and he is our fastest and strongest olinemen. Greatwood is the oline coach and oline has been a staple at Oregon. He experiments a lot in the spring, which really hinders their performance. If you watch the spring game on ESPN this saturday, expect for the defense to own the oline. Greatwood has not used the spring to gel this unit. Fall will be a different story and I expect this line to have greater upside than last years since the scholarship players filling in were actually recruited for this scheme. I do worry about our boys in the middle of the line. They pull a lot and as a result, we are light. York (286), Cody (296) and Armstrong (275) will have thier work cut out. Armstong is still a redshirt frosh, so I expect him to hit the buffets this summer. The only reason the linebacker spot is my third concern is because Matthews and Paysinger brought so much leadership. However, the guys filling in (Kiko Alonso and Michael Clay) are getting rave reviews. The SAM spot is loaded with Kaddu and Lokombo whom I name thing 1 and thing 2 because the Nigerian duo wreak havoc. Likewise, will need one of the 4 incoming frosh to play a reserve role. Watch for Wallace out of Texas, a five start guy at ILB that is a natural born run stuffer. I'd like to have one more guy that isn't redshirting at QB. The dline will probably look like an issue on paper because Rowe, Bair and Clark are gone. However, make no mistakes this unit has been the surprise of spring. It will be deep and full of impact players. Watch for newcomers Colt Lyerla (6'5" 225 athlete #1 or #2 athlete depending on the site). He is here for spring and should play the H back role. Michael Wallace, the aforementioned ILB, has been told he will compete for a spot. I will update everyone on the 4 WR that should yield an impact player. There is always a surprise guy as well.
Yeah . . . and those are not typically as effective as offenses run by guys who can pass and throw. True, that was a bad game. I just haven't seen a pattern of option/spread/mobile QB teams typically performing better against us than they do against other defenses. Eh, I see tons of yards on the field and none on the scoreboard. Yards are an incomplete measure at best of a defense's effectiveness. If I could take 440 yards on the ground and 24 points on the scoreboard every single time we faced a top-5 scoring offense in the country being run by the Heisman Trophy winning QB, I'm taking that 6 days a week and twice on Sunday. I guess I just don't see it that way, because I don't consider anything a "glaring weakness" for a defense unless opponents of that type are consistently putting up more points against him than they are against others at a higher rate than opponents of other types. I recognize that quality dual threat QBs in well-coached offenses that take advantage of their talents do better against Chavis than offenses with less talented QBs or less talented coaching. But I hardly think of that as a reflection on Chavis. To be clear, I'm not suggesting that Chavis is as good at defending those types of offenses as he is defending other, more traditional types of attacks. I'm suggesting that it is not a "weakness" as his defenses are not typically "weak" against them, and I'm not convinced that he's any more prone to struggling with those types of offense than other top notch defensive coaches. Looking at scoring, I see last year's Ole Miss game, '09 Miss. State, and '07 Tebow & Co., where those types of opponents went significantly above their average against Chavis. By constrast, I see Auburn last year, Miss. State last year, and Tebow & Co. in '08 and '09, all where Chavis' defense held those types of offenses about 2 TDs or more below their average. At best that suggests to me inconsistent results and potentially even positive results. ETA: Did a quick burst of research: vs. Urban Meyer, Gus Malzahn and Dan Cullen, Chavis has had the following results: Meyer -- 6 meetings, scored about 7 points per game below average Malzahn -- 3 meetings, scored about 14 points per game below average Cullen -- 2 meetings, scored about 10 points per game below average ldskule::geaux:ldskule:
Thomas isn't that fast anyway. He is much more of a passer than a runner. I think he ran a 5.0 forty but "SHHHHH"...don't tell anyone.
I dont quite understand Bama at 2. The defense will be good, but they lose every leader they had on offense; Ingram, Julio Jones (Whose blocking ability and service as a decoy helped the run game), McElroy, Carpenter, and Dial. They will be rotating pocket QBs, who happen to be a FR/SOPH combo. I think offense is a major concern for them. I think they will lose 2, and more likely 3 games again this year due to this. I don't like a QB rotation system unless 1 is a dual threat and the other is a pocket guy; such as Leak/Tebow, Perriloux/Flynn, etc.
Defensively, it was a dreadful game. Masoli was what, 4 of 5 on 4th and 10 that game? The scheme was terrible and it took JJ playing out of his mind to pull off the victory. A loss in that game would have fallen squarely on the defense. The 24pts would have been a lot more had it not been for AU turning the ball over in their territory and kneeling it at the end of the game. Trying to find any kind of solace with that kind of performance it futile at best. I've watched these same offenses go up against other defenses, and the defensive schemes are typically more aggressive and sound. The stressing of assignment football is generally more evident. Of course, the defenses aren't usually as physically talented as LSU's, and they eventually fold. Again, you're over-simplifying the results here. For one, see my previous statement about the Miss St. and AU games last year. Secondly, there are many other factors that can contribute to the final score of a game. But, since Chavis has been at LSU, his defenses have looked completely lost when going up against this type of offense, regardless of whether or not we won the game.
I was at the '09 Florida game, and our defense did not look in the least bit lost or anything in that game. For that game, and others I have mentioned, I will simply agree to disagree. Maybe if he continues to hold those offenses to relatively fewer points long enough, the perception might fade and we could come to an agreement. ldskule::geaux:ldskule:
Yes, they looked really good in that game. I'll give you that. However, it was Tebow's first game back from his concussion, and the Florida offense never really got going after that. And since that time, option-type offenses have really given us trouble, which is why I look at that game as an exception in keeping with the reasons stated above.
