Faster Defense in 2001

[Texasfootball]

Thanks for the super post. In my opinion, from the time a future LB starts playing backyard football as a kid, he will start developing his instincts. He will learn to make decisions based on his recognition (nose) for the game OR he will play just to have fun. Great H.S. LB's always seem to be at the right place at the right time. This recognition is a by product of repetition. They have spent their entire football lifetime honing their skills of recognition. When you ask a really good LB about why he did something on a particular play the likely response you get is I'm not sure. Usually they will follow with something didn't look right or a guard pulled across my face or the fake looked three-quarter speed etc. Good LB's just don't get fooled very often. Repetitions on the practice field are quality reps. A good LB must honor his responsibilities first. Play action shouldn't bother a good LB. If he has the back out, he can't respect the play fake on a play action pass. If it was a run, the back would be blocking.Same principle on the TE. If his responsibility is the counter, he can't run across the formation until the threat of the counter is gone. He must visually trail as he pursues to enable him to make the play on counters, inside reverses, and cutbacks. If the LB has second contain on the QB, he must recognize when containment has been lost and react accordingly. LB's that have offensive linemen crossing their face (screen, counter trey, bootlegs, reverses) must believe their eyes. The good LB's will tell themselves Something's Wrong I have linemen pulling one way and flows going the other way. They won't continue chasing dead soldiers--they will react to the misdirection and believe what he has seen. A good LB must arrive at the point of contact with a hostile attitude. Good LB's want that sweet feeling you get when you stuff a play. You don't experience that feeling by overrunning the ball, dodging the blockers, or chasing the fakes. How do the SR. LB's measure? Recognition-- one was a running back till his 2nd year, one was a safety, and the last one did play LB in H.S. but made many plays on stunts. Repetitions-- questionable recognition makes one wonder if these are quality repetitions they are recieving on the practice field. Responsibilities-- is execution limited by the deception of play fakes? Does this SR. group play with a hostile attitude or does uncertainity or confusion cause this group to hesitate instead of letting it all hang out? Will next year be any different for this Sr. group? I guess time will tell--

 

[Scipio Tex]

You really need to post more often TexasFootball. That's a fantastic synopsis of what it is to be a LB.

 

[mileslong]

I think TexasFootball touched on something that I have been thinking for a long time. It has been correctly pointed out that "instincts" have been missing in our LB play for a while now. There have been those that have said despite this glaring need, no Freshman LB will start or play much.

It occurred to me that none of our starting LB's ever played that position before they earned the starting job had they? Weren't they all spun down or switched from the other side of the ball? I could be missing someone but that tells me that it has obviously taken a while for them to get their reads down and they have struggled with trick misdirection plays because they don't have the instincts as decribed by TF.

Having said all that, don't we have an incoming Freshman superstar LB who has been playing that position for years. He also looks as if he will not be spun down to the line, at least anytime soon. He may be the first true LB we have had come in at his true position in a while. I think his learning curve will be much shorter than our current group and I think he will surprise many on how fast he breaks into the lineup.

"You'll be getting more than just a lawyer, Mr. Simpson. You'll also be getting this exquisite faux pearl necklace, a $99 value, as our gift to you." - Lionel Hutz

 

[kchorn]

Thanks for the excellent thread, SLX. And that was some post by TexasFootball. All-in-all, a very interesting and logical analysis of the defensive situation in general and the LB situation in particular.

Without disagreeing with any of the salient points (except maybe the ones that CTJ "would" have written -- if his post had not been lost), what's the answer to Cory's question?

If you're Bull, Akina and/or Mack -- aren't you going with the seniors because you honestly believe the pluses outweigh the minuses?

In other words, even though every point about the LB's instincts may be correct -- the experience, quickness and capacity for effective coverage against both the run and pass (on any given play in a big game) may be best embodied at the moment in the senior starters.

Which apparently is what the UT coaching staff believes and, as a consequence, is the alternative they have chosen upon which to stake their reputations.

Hook 'em.

 

[Excitable Boy]

Great thread, full of food for thought.

My contribution will be tangental, and technical: when you get that 'internal server' message, don't freak out. Just hit the "refresh" button, and click "Yes" when it asks you if you want to resend info to the server. I've done that a bunch of times, and it always posts like nothing happened. I'd hate to think I'd miss a CTJ post just because of that.

 

[Horn From So Cal]

i think our pass rush will be ten times better than last year's. didn't Marcus Tubbs have more sacks all by himself than Hampton and Rodgers combind? doesn't that say anything to you?

 

[marley]

CarKev14,

You are certainly right in that the current UT coaching staff does not like to play freshmen. Mack Brown has talked many times about how deep FSU was/is and how they have experienced seniors at virtually every position, backed up by 2 or 3 highly experienced players who are almost as good as the starter. And he has repeatedly talked over the last three years about how it has been his goal to get UT to that same roster makeup.

The Stanford game results ultimately may have rested on one substitution in which a senior was put in the game instead of a more athletically capable, but much less experienced, freshman.

Sometimes that strategy will work and sometimes it won't. It will be interesting to see what this staff does about that dilemma at LB in 2001.

 

[Uninformed]

It is interesting that this thread started as a commentary on team speed and turned into a debate about our linebackers. Obviously most of us feel that the biggest weakness on our D appears to be at linebacker. What's surprising is that we considered it a team strength after the "upgrade" in personnel with the departure of Dusty.

For what it is worth, I think the three most important factors to an improved D this year are:
1) improved linebacker play
2) improved schemes against the spread
3) improved field leadership
1 and 2 have been discussed in detail as of late. 3 has not received as much attention. To me it appeared that Hampton was the heart and soul of our D. He was the one that kept us in the Stanford game. Though we lost, he ran around and tried to get everyone fired up while the rest of the team appeared to be sleep walking. At halftime he was the only one really showing any emotion. All year, Hampton inspired our D. With the loss of Hampton, who will be the leader on D? It won't be Lee J. because he will probably not be an every down player. My feeling is that it has to be middle linebacker. Does this scare you?

 

[IBleedOrange]

What is it going to take to field a better defense in 2001? Our defense was GOOD last year but not GREAT. What is so wrong with our LB's? I think DD is great and Lee will make a great attribute as a new LB. The games we lost were against major passing teams, so what do we need to do better? Do you think we will really live up to the hype we are built up to this year?