PonyFans.comBoard IndexAround the HilltopFootballRecruitingBasketballOther Sports

W2W4 - Navy

This is the forum for talk about SMU Football

Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower

W2W4 - Navy

Postby JasonB » Fri Oct 30, 2020 9:08 am

I took a look at PFF this week and found some really interesting data.

1) Delante Scott was elite last year. His ratings were off the charts, especially against the run.
2) Scott, Abercrombia, Nelson, Clemons, and Pono were all rated very well by PFF. We haven't replaced those numbers on the field.
3) While our tackles are rated well, our DEs are struggling. Coxe rated out very highly last season, but is struggling in his new spot.
4) Johnson and Stephens have regressed significantly.
5) Nelson versus Denbow is not a contest. Their utilization I found interesting. Nelson was involved in pass rush situations 10% of his plays; with Denbow it is only 5%. Denbow is in coverage 50% of the time, while Nelson was only 47%. Those percentages combined with Denbow's performance would seem to indicate we would be better off with a nickel corner than Denbow on the field.

Our safeties are pretty good against the run and our corners are pretty physical. But what I have seen in the running game is that we have to commit to something to make plays. We stopped the run against Memphis often because we committed everyone to the RB. But once the QB kept it, nobody was setting the edge and we had no OLB in support.

I hope I am wrong, but I see either a lot of 3.5 yard gains by the FB, or the QB gashing us off tackle. If we are in a 4-3, I don't think McBryde on his own makes enough plays against the FB, and the FB will get 3 yards a carry. If we play Delano and McBryde in the middle to stuff the FB, them and our tackles are good enough to make it happen. But if we are doing that in a 3-4 system, Denbow and Coxe aren't both physical and athletic enough to set the edge to prevent the QB from gashing us. If we play a 4-4 with a single safety, that will help, but our safeties struggle in coverage and it will make us less effective against the pitch to the RB.

I could be wrong. But unless we get some significantly upgraded performances from LB and DE, or their QB is absolutely horrible at running the ball, this could be a really frustrating game defensively.
JasonB
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 7130
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Allen, Tx, USA

Re: W2W4 - Navy

Postby BUS » Fri Oct 30, 2020 9:58 am

Coaching will tell the story. We have a scheme that might work with the right players. Right now we don't have the players to pull it off. Or, they have not shown they are the players to pull this off.

A coach has to... should... try to... adjust, to place the best plyers in the best scheme for success.

From what I see it would be the 4-2- and nickel backs.
See you Saturday.
Mustang Militia: Fight the good fight"
User avatar
BUS
PonyFans.com Super Legend
 
Posts: 6994
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 4:01 am
Location: Richardson, Tx usa

Re: W2W4 - Navy

Postby HubbaHubba » Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:50 pm

Our secondary players do not seem to make good reads. They also seem to not be athletic enough to compensate for being out of position. If Navy does not have good team speed they might be adequate. I'm worried our CBs and safeties will arrive too late to stop the run until 7-10 yards are gained on the pitch and will start to anticipate run and get burned on the pass. This group worries me most on defense.
User avatar
HubbaHubba
All-American
 
Posts: 914
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 10:37 am


Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 55 guests