We use to have a defense

1st game under a new coordinator.

Period.

The 1st half, they played zone and got grilled.

The 2nd half, they locked down man-to-man and outside of the last drive when LSU was in prevent, they shut down UW to roughly 70 yards in the half.

You can't tell jack-crap by the 1st game.

LSU's D looked amazing in the opener last year.

The 05 defense looked flat crap the opener that year.

A team progresses a lot between game 1 and game 2. Let's see how the boys look not playing across the globe and with a week to fix their boo-boos.

 

It was Washington's first game under a new coordinator also...I know they lost, but they really stopped the run.


I'm going to be patient and look for week to week improvement. opcorn:.


By the way, I saw the Bama game against VT and the two games were similar in a lot of ways. But ya gotta admit...Washington is no VT.

 

Did anyone notice that Keiland seemed lost on audibles? He'd always raise his hands as if saying "what play is that?"

 

he couldnt hear-- that place was a zoo-- even the tv camera was boucning from the noise and vibration of the crowd in teh stadium

 

I would not read too much into the defensive performance. If the trend continues, then it might be something to worry about.

The Tigers travelled a long way and played a very late game -- two things that they are not used to doing. From experience, when a team gets out of its normal routine, it can have an adverse effect on their preapration, focus, and emotional state. Football is a very emotional game. Washington played with a ton of passion, LSU did not.

First, this was a tough trip into a very hostile environment agaist a very hungry football team. Offensively, the Huskies have the makings of a very good football team. Without a trigger man, it is hard to get anything done in any league. They have an excellent QB who threw the ball very well. Overall, the coverage was pretty good -- UW's execution was good. THe QB made some excellent throws, many times under pressure. He's an exceptional player.

Tackling: It sucked during the first half. A lot of that stemmed from how UW was attacking the Tiger defense. The other part, LSU seemed a step slow all night in all phases of the game. I would expect the Tiger "D" to tackle much better when the play with a little "edge." They did not have that last night.
A lot of the tackling issues came form problems with our defensive fits. Defenisvley, our players did not keep good leverage on the football.. Repeatedly, we spilled the Power O and our safeties and LB's fits were way too tight. The Polk kid just our ran the defender and bounced the play. This is something that is easily recitified in practice, and I would expect us to perform better the more we play.

UW's "O" was probably not quite what LSU had prepared for. Remember, there was no tape on the team before this game. LSU's "D" staff probably prepped for a very similar "O" to what USC has had recently. In some ways, that is what they got, but other aspects where much more like a Boise State or Wake Forest. UW really hurt LSU on the Inside Zone with Orbit action or off the QB read. They were able to control the backside DE and Polk was able cram the cut in the backside "B" gap. There were a lot of aspects of their "O" that were un-USC like. I'm sure this created some confusion on the "D" side of the ball.

I will agree with a couple of things that was said, however, we lost contain way too much. Many times, the NG was unable to get outside and complete the wrap on the pass rush games. Locker had a lot to do with this. I think his speed really took the "D" by surprise. We lost contain on the boots and nakeds way too much. As a whole, the pass rush was not great. I was disappointed in that.

We have a DC that knows how to get the job done. They will improve. We might not be the dominate "D" that we had in the past few years, but I would guess that we are on our way there.