Page 1 of 2
We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:19 pm
by BUS
We need three more D--line recruits this class.
Two NG's and anothe D-end.
We are young and THIN.
How many thought we would win 6 games? As one of the coaches said last week... That's Bull Crap.
The other real word would not print out.
Next year I hope to win the division and win the Championship game and go to the Liberty Bowl.
Go Mustangs
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:23 pm
by Big Hoss
We need some DB's, too. McCann, Dennis, & Hudman all graduate. Bell's career s potentially over. Our linebacking corps should be solid next year, even with Kennemer graduating. But we need help pretty much everywhere else on D or we are in for another long year.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:28 pm
by SMU 86
Our Defensive line could not stop the run. Any good defense is built around a strong defensive line. Bus is right we need one more 300 pound DT and a big DE. If not we will get run over for a couple more years at least. We've got DB's comng in this class we need DT's and a big DE.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:29 pm
by Charleston Pony
I'd be happy if we could find a JUCO NG who could help right away. We should have pretty good 2 deep depth at DE next year
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:34 pm
by mrydel
Our lack of run stop was mainly on the LBs. The back continually started up the middle and then headed to the sideline and we had no contain by the outside backers. We did not do much better up the middle but it was that lack of contain that killed us.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:36 pm
by George S. Patton
This defensive front is not applying any pressure and hasn't for a good part of this season. I think Taylor Thompson can get there but this group cannot by itself force the issue. Fail to do that and it leaves guys like Bennie Thomas more vulnerable.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:38 pm
by SMU 86
I think Tulane will definitely try to run the ball on us.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:43 pm
by ponyscott
SMU 86 wrote:I think Tulane will definitely try to run the ball on us.
You think?.......
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:43 pm
by mrydel
George S. Patton wrote:This defensive front is not applying any pressure and hasn't for a good part of this season. I think Taylor Thompson can get there but this group cannot by itself force the issue. Fail to do that and it leaves guys like Bennie Thomas more vulnerable.
I really believed we would have a good pass rush defense this year and that has not happened.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:45 pm
by larskjenstad
SMU 86 wrote:Our Defensive line could not stop the run. Any good defense is built around a strong defensive line. Bus is right we need one more 300 pound DT and a big DE. If not we will get run over for a couple more years at least. We've got DB's comng in this class we need DT's and a big DE.
And linebackers, we run a 3-4, DL's are double teamed leavin LB's open to roam and tackle, defensive scheme not very good..too many big runs and DB's nowhere to be found on 4-5 long passes
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:46 pm
by SMU 86
If we don't recruit heavy on the defensive line for the next 2 classes we are in trouble. They had Kevin Grenier at 250 pounds playing DT at one point. With Parham graduating we could be in for a long year next year in that area.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:51 pm
by mrydel
Jones made it pretty clear in his interview that his recruiting will concentrate on the offensive side until the run and shoot is in full mode and then he said the success will allow him to recruit good defensive players.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:19 pm
by JasonB
Agree about the DT. We are stocked with young LBs, not worried about that area. We also have DBs redshirting this year that the coaches are excited about. Biggest holes to fill for next year are at saftey and NT. I woudl look for a JUCO to come in at both positions.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:25 pm
by BUS
Above, it was said that a JUCO NG would be nice.
I concur.
Re: We need three more

Posted:
Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:42 am
by MUTeke
I hope you guys don't mind an outsider chiming in but I kind of agree with Jones on this one. Playing in the West Division it's probably best to get that O up to speed first. Do you guys really need big run stopping LBs and 300 lb DTs at this point? How many teams in the West are going to run the ball against you 51 times like we did tonight?
The biggest difference I saw today was the difference in divisions. SMU is built to run past you and Marshall is built to bash your brains in. You could see the size difference in almost every head-to-head match-up. In the West it's about outscoring your opponent in the East it's playing solid defense, time of possession and field position.
Right now I see Jones' point in wanting to worry about outscoring the West before he worries about playing smash mouth with the East. It will take a couple wins against the East every season to get to the Conference Championship game, but if you can't outscore Houston and Tulsa then it's kind of a moot point.