We are really missing last year's defense and it's only after game 1..
We are really missing last year's defense and it's only after game 1..
I am not sure anyone thought we would have the #1 defense in the country again after losing 3 1st round draft picks. I am sure some people thought with returning all the LBs and most of the secondary to go with ok depth at DE, that most didn't think we would look as bad as we did on Saturday.
None that I know ofQuote:
Originally Posted by fishwater99
I don't remember anyone taking that drastic of a stance but there were several who said we could still have a top 10-15 defensive unit which seems unlikely at this point although we have only played one game.
I do think the defensive issues are a tad overblown.
We forced 4 turnovers compared to 1 against them last year
They also only had like 200 yards of offense in the first 3 qtrs. Yes I know a football game is 4 quarters but it seemed as though we got up 35-14 and took our foot off the gas.
We also played them a little later in the season last year which allowed us to get some of the first game issues cleaned up and out of the way like missed tackles etc.
So, no this defense will not be as solid as last year but they still have a chance to be a fairly decent unit and if our offense has improved it could be enough to make up the difference. We will just have to wait and see.
This might be a fun look-back at pre-season opinions:
https://www.elitedawgs.com/showthrea...19-DL-Starters
I was one that stated top 20.
After one game. Boy you could end up eating shit.
My guess is that our defense looks really good against USM. Good matchup for us.
I think ULL having an experienced OL was underrated by our fans going into the game. They had a solid OL, I will bet most that it will be the best OL in the Sun Belt.
Lets see how we perform the next two weeks before he hit the "sky is falling post"
Also, was this before or after we found out that we lost our one Dline with game experience and Gay, our most athletic LB? I thought we might drop into the 25-30 range on Defense but losing those two guys is a big loss. I still think we win 7-8 games but I think the chance at 9 or at 6 is a lot higher now because of the suspensions.
I also said top 25 but that was also before suspensions. Gay and Autry are big hits. I'm not sure if we can be top 25 now or not. As we saw in first game, fatigue sets in by the 4th quarter. Our O will need to help us keep ball away from other team O and control clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach007
Sure, ULL's OL was pretty good, but that doesn't account for the missed tackles, the poor arm tackling, the lack of speed and aggression and being out of position. These things are internal and must be addressed by our coaches pronto if we are to finish in the middle of the SEC pack.Quote:
Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog
One thing is that the missed tackles issue was a problem for a lot of teams last week. Those are issues that at least can be addressed by coaching. Our DT depth is just an issue and Shoop is going to have to figure out how to work around it. Depending on the game situation, I imagine that he would prefer to keep a lot of things close to the vest until SEC starts. We were very vanilla last week.Quote:
Originally Posted by TaleofTwoDogs
I said top 20 as well, hopefully we can recover. At the time I also did not have the caveat of losing our starting DT and LB for 8 games. Gay and Autry are huge losses, Crumedy and Leo are not adequate replacements for them. I am hoping now for top 35 to 40 and our offense climbs higher than anticipated.
No, that can't be right! We were a weak CUSA defense! I know, I read it on here!****Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
They have an offensive-minded head coach and with their whole OL returning and that quick QB, they might be a top 20 offensive team in the country this year.
It's amazing what some have talked themselves into believing. Top 20 offense ? Smh..wow.Quote:
Originally Posted by MedDawg
I don't know about that but they did have the entire Oline returning and nearly 3,000 yards rushing from last season. According to Coach34, that means they should be badass since that same scenario with less returning applies to Auburn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
C'mon, T you know that stuff only works when it's used against us not for us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
Definitely were a couple posters talking Top 15, even Top 10 defense..........LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doggie_Style
Maroon shades anyone???
Just reread it and I said if we could get something out of the DT position then we could be in the 10-15 range. Of course that was before Autry and Gay were gone for most of the season and we did some shitty arm tackling. I think we have a good group of DEs, we had a great group of LBs with Gay, a good group of safeties with a possible great group (Cole, Landrews, Murphy, Morgan), and a great group of corners (Dantzler and Smitherman). Now if Shoop can scheme enough to cover for our DT deficiency, I guess we will find out this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by biggun
Most of ULLs yards were in the 4th quarter which makes a lot more sense with a young Dline.
A. It?s game 1. I?ll go ahead and say there weren?t 15 more impressive defensive performances this past weekend. We were one of the few teams who played a competent offense and won our game. Lots of sloppiness around college football.Quote:
Originally Posted by biggun
B. That was before WG/Autry were suspended. Part of my statement with returning talent was based around those two playing, especially Willie.
Let?s reserve judgment until the Auburn game shall we? That will be the barometer for our team overall.
A message board so interested in eating it's own.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishwater99
Miss State way. I try to be positive and try to find positive in everything. Like the suspensions. It is given valuable experience to someone for next season. It might also grantee a 4 star to come back for the fourth season.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgology
Most people’s defensive predictions were before we knew 3 key players were going to miss 8 games. There was always going to be dropoff but the lack of DT and Lb depth really showed in the 4th quarter.
Well let's be honest- it's also because many posters kept trying to say that the people who posted about suspensions coming didnt know what they were talking about. Steve didnt tell them it was true and neither did Pawwwwwl- so it was just message board nonsense in spite of the record this board has with breaking info.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
People are backtracking now like CNN on 2016 election night- but trying to play it off like they knew it was going to some big drop.
That was discussed in the offseason but some didn't want to give any credit to what ULL had returning. Too many people doing what we accuse others of doing - looking at the logo. Everyone come back in about 11 more games and see how this turns out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
Man you are constantly the most negative guy on the boardQuote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
Message board nonsense didn't project the suspensions that occurred. And I understand, people said "IT" was coming but nothing substantial was stated. I moved to this board so MSU folks could talk about MSU and leave the drama bullshit (TROLLING) with SPS. Isn't that why you created "IT"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
I must have missed where you or anyone else predicted 3 key players on our defense were going to miss 8 games all spring and summer when these defensive drop-off predictions were coming out. I apologize if you said it and I missed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
It started on draft day. I don't think anyone was predicting football suspensions back then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
None of the defensive suspensions were leaked before they were released. Gay was suspected, but that was all on defense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
As far as how we looked, most people forget the new practice limitations that went into effect this year. The ncaa prevented 2 a days on consecutive days and had different hours of football activities a day. This preseason was a new experience for everyone, and probably why you saw the lackluster week one across the nation. Nothing represents live action, like live action and this preseason had reduced live action.
I suspect we see improvements after games 2 and 3 like we saw previous seasons from week 1 to 2,due to these new limitations. The week 1 to 2 improvements will probably be more like week 1 to 2 and week 2 to 3 improvement.
All the more reason to expand the playoffs. The ncaa limits practice, which impacts early season game performances, yet one loss of a great team can eliminate you from playoff contention. Does not make sense and it will lead to expansion when teams start losing week one or two, run the table and get left out of the playoffs.
So.. you still high on Tennessee or naw?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Call it negative if you want. I call it realistic. We realistically can win 8 games. Schedule sets up for it. But bc I don't think U LA La is an offensive juggernaut them I'm negative. Ever how you see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
That offense is not a "juggernaut" but it ain't Alcorn level either. I don't understand why playing a non-conference team with a pulse sends some of y'all over the edge. Running through soft teams with starters that wouldn't even have made our 4th string doesn't help identify areas that need work. This was a good tune up game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
Especially for the DTs to face a good Oline. They are probably on the level of some of the SEC teams we will see, not Auburn or A&M good but probably UK or UT level good.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapGame
I'd say the ULL OL is a couple of notches better than OM's OL for sure. That ULL OL is one of the most experienced OLs in college football right now. But, this helps us see the problems and strive to improve them before we go up against AU and A&M.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe