Rice game - what was expected...
Posted: Mon Oct 11, 2004 11:08 amI predicted beforehand that we would lose this game. Although I didn't expect such a blowout, I did indicate that the game could get out of hand if our offense struggled to move the ball.
When you have a defensive line that plays a defensive end at tackle, two outside linebacker-sized players at defensive end, and your linebackers consist of a defensive end and two safeties, you are in trouble against an option team. Anyone who analyzed the game logically before hand could see that.
Our lack of size at linebacker and DL scares me. And it is going to hurt us again in the LT and Fresno games. A team can get away with a quick, undersized line if they have big strong linebackers. And quick, undersized linebackers if they have a DL large enough to occupy blockers. But the weakside of our defense, with Rogers and Adami on the line and McCray running behind them is really small.
The only thing I would say about Bennett is that he probably shouldn't have been hyping this game up as a possible road win as much as he did. The mismatch was pretty obvious.
That said, I do have some concerns:
1) Hall and Cleveland are bigger than the linebackers we have out there right now. Why aren't those guys seeing time? Are they that bad? I felt that Hall in the middle would have been an effective option because of his size.
2) I think there should have been some d-line adjustment before the game. Bonds and Jones in the middle, move Adami outside, and let Williams play because he is stronger than the other ends against the run.
3) I probably also would have tried to do something against the option scheme because of our lack of penetration. If the DL is nullified, and basically has to watch the fullback, that takes your DL and middle LB out of the play. So when the qb runs wide, your outside LB gets caught trying to make a play on the QB, to force him to make a decision, or trying to contain the outside. If the WR seals off the corner, the outside LB is forced to take both players, which is obviously not a good thing. Just a thought, but I would have tried a nickel formation with Fitzgerald in there as an extra safety. Stick your corners in man coverage, one safety has deep coverage. Blitz one of the other safeties every play. Force quick decisions. Gives you an extra player to cover the perimeter. Just a thought.
When you have a defensive line that plays a defensive end at tackle, two outside linebacker-sized players at defensive end, and your linebackers consist of a defensive end and two safeties, you are in trouble against an option team. Anyone who analyzed the game logically before hand could see that.
Our lack of size at linebacker and DL scares me. And it is going to hurt us again in the LT and Fresno games. A team can get away with a quick, undersized line if they have big strong linebackers. And quick, undersized linebackers if they have a DL large enough to occupy blockers. But the weakside of our defense, with Rogers and Adami on the line and McCray running behind them is really small.
The only thing I would say about Bennett is that he probably shouldn't have been hyping this game up as a possible road win as much as he did. The mismatch was pretty obvious.
That said, I do have some concerns:
1) Hall and Cleveland are bigger than the linebackers we have out there right now. Why aren't those guys seeing time? Are they that bad? I felt that Hall in the middle would have been an effective option because of his size.
2) I think there should have been some d-line adjustment before the game. Bonds and Jones in the middle, move Adami outside, and let Williams play because he is stronger than the other ends against the run.
3) I probably also would have tried to do something against the option scheme because of our lack of penetration. If the DL is nullified, and basically has to watch the fullback, that takes your DL and middle LB out of the play. So when the qb runs wide, your outside LB gets caught trying to make a play on the QB, to force him to make a decision, or trying to contain the outside. If the WR seals off the corner, the outside LB is forced to take both players, which is obviously not a good thing. Just a thought, but I would have tried a nickel formation with Fitzgerald in there as an extra safety. Stick your corners in man coverage, one safety has deep coverage. Blitz one of the other safeties every play. Force quick decisions. Gives you an extra player to cover the perimeter. Just a thought.