JessN: Sugar Bowl wrap-up: What will this game mean for Alabama’s future?
- Thread starter JessN
- Start date
Wow. Jess, I usually agree with you, but I disagree on a few points in your initial article.
You pointed out Stanford. If you can see what they do different, then tell me. Everyone wants to complain, yet no one can tell me exactly how to change. You don't change just for the sake of changing. What if the change makes it worse? Tell me exactly what Stanford does different.
Second, I don't think it is scheme or size of player as much as it is player execution. I watched Adrian Hubbard multiple times get sucked in not contain. He gets lazy and plays straight up. Hubbard is like Clowney. He plays about 1 out of 3 plays hard. When he does, he makes a contribution.
Saban and Smart know defenses much better than you or I. They have a scheme that will work if players do what is expected. And that is football. Sometimes our players get beat.
Saban will adapt and is adapting. DJ Pettway and Dalvin Tomlinson were supposed to be DL that can help against the HUNH. That didn't work out unfortunately because of injury and expulsion.
You pointed out Stanford. If you can see what they do different, then tell me. Everyone wants to complain, yet no one can tell me exactly how to change. You don't change just for the sake of changing. What if the change makes it worse? Tell me exactly what Stanford does different.
Second, I don't think it is scheme or size of player as much as it is player execution. I watched Adrian Hubbard multiple times get sucked in not contain. He gets lazy and plays straight up. Hubbard is like Clowney. He plays about 1 out of 3 plays hard. When he does, he makes a contribution.
Saban and Smart know defenses much better than you or I. They have a scheme that will work if players do what is expected. And that is football. Sometimes our players get beat.
Saban will adapt and is adapting. DJ Pettway and Dalvin Tomlinson were supposed to be DL that can help against the HUNH. That didn't work out unfortunately because of injury and expulsion.
I've had one person tell me exactly how to change. And he admitted there is a big risk if you don't guess correctly.
OU had some perfect play calls against our blitzes. they exectuted at an extremely high level. 5/5 on 3rd downs in the first half. Our players were in position, but passes were perfect and WR made great acrobatic catches sometimes.
Plus, our tackling was horrible. That happens sometimes for bowl games.
Sunseri was a big loss, but his injury is not the reason we lost the last 2 games.
OU had some perfect play calls against our blitzes. they exectuted at an extremely high level. 5/5 on 3rd downs in the first half. Our players were in position, but passes were perfect and WR made great acrobatic catches sometimes.
Plus, our tackling was horrible. That happens sometimes for bowl games.
Sunseri was a big loss, but his injury is not the reason we lost the last 2 games.
Last edited:
My point remains I'll take the good (let's see, three titles) with the bad (a handful of losses).
I don't worship Saban, but I see Alabama fans falling into the same trap of insane expectations. We're asking Nick Saban to do things no football program, ever, has done. We really seem to be acting like oh yeah, 3 straight in the BCS era, that should have happened and because it didn't, Saban must have done something wrong.
Or, may be that's virtually impossible and Saban came closer than anyone else ever has because he's the best at what he does.
As to this whole, this is Alabama stuff... come on now, really? Alabama was Alabama with Dubose, with Fran, with Shula (mind you, I had a rather unpopular opinion of Shula on this board, at least for a little while), with Curry, with Perkins, etc... Alabama is "Alabama" under great coaches. Nick Saban doesn't need, or benefit from us giving him pointers. And yes, I do think it has to be really annoying...
I think you're really good at commentary, you're a good writer, you're insightful... but I don't see how you arrived to the point that criticism is warranted. Fumbles, missed field goals, sure, but complaining about a defense that's been amazing over the years? Intentional or not, you're aligning yourself with a crowd that expresses resentment as often as appreciation.
Last edited:
Thanks Jess, very good write-up. Definite changes need to be considered on defense. Before the season everyone said that with a year to prepare we would figure out Johnny Football and A&M....didn't happen. It was also said that we had Gus's offense (post Cam) figured out....well we didn't. The same with a month to prepare for Oklahoma. The offense seemed to work pretty well in those games, However....the offense turned the ball over in critical times (and missed field goals). Those mistakes put the defense in hard places. Without the turnovers (caused by lack of focus) we win each of those games.
The targeting rule change with the the DB's has hurt our execution more than other teams, since that has been our biggest strength. I believe we would have been better off with a couple of game suspensions than playing timid, or not timing the boom like we have in the past.
Stanford runs a much simpler front rotation with fewer at-the-snap adjustments. The DL plays a lot more single-gap technique than Alabama does (Alabama runs mostly two-gap) and is also more aggressive with its penetration push. Alabama very often uses a "mush rush" philosophy with the front three (or front four, in increasingly more cases) whereby the aim is to have the DL control the OL and manipulate the gaps so that the linebackers can get the penetration (I'm to assume it's because the LBs are quicker and less apt to get outmaneuvered by the QB once they have penetration). This has led to some difficulty against zone-read teams, which are more susceptible to highly penetrative defensive lines than they are gap-contain fronts.
No accident that Stanford ranks 5th in the nation in sacks. Alabama is 86th.
.
The play calling has been horrible all year long. When we played auburn and went for it on 4th down. We Tried to run the ball up the middle with no blocker in the backfield, and au had 6 or 7 guys right on the line (crazy).
Stanford also tends to give up more points...
I think most of the issues this year, in terms of the Alabama defense came down to personnel issues in the defensive backfield, but Alabama had 7 instances in which they held teams to below Stanford's best effort.
Thanks for posting to share this with us. Alabama has obviously had horrible play calling the past two years, and they just got lucky a thousand times or so. The national championship, the 11 wins this season, it was basically like that Auburn reception in the Georgia game over and over.
Last edited:
I've never been stingy with the praise, when it is warranted. But I'm not going to stifle criticism, either. If you're expecting me to do that, I can't help you.
Alabama has won national championships under five coaches. Shula won 10 games once, DuBose won an SEC championship. Certainly, Alabama will succeed on a larger scale under a Bryant or a Saban, but Gene Stallings won 70 games in 7 seasons, and a national championship, but while I have a very high opinion of Coach Stallings, look at his career record and tell me what the statistical outlier is. It's the seven years he coached in Tuscaloosa. Point being, once Nick Saban moves on -- and I'm guessing he'll do that around age 70, which is 7-8 seasons from now -- Alabama will have no choice but to find someone else, and the school will continue to be among the nation's leaders in the sport even if they hire someone the next rung down from Saban or someone close to him in ability (Meyer?). The idea that Nick Saban makes Alabama is as ludicrous as the idea that the fans don't appreciate what he's already done for the program. I'm not advocating a change in personnel, anyway, so it's a moot point.
As for your disagreement over criticism of the Alabama defense, Alabama played six tempo offensive teams in 2013. Alabama played very well in three of those games -- Ole Miss, Tennessee and Mississippi State, yielding an average of 5.7 points per game. In the other three -- Texas A&M, Auburn and Oklahoma -- Alabama gave up an average of 40.3, and while some of those points were scored in ways other than offensively, the total yardage allowed in those three games was through the roof. There was actually a seventh tempo opponent, Kentucky, but the injury to Jalen Whitlow early in that game caused Mark Stoops to curtail the pace of the offense significantly. I don't think Kentucky would have threatened Alabama regardless, but it's probably no accident that the three teams who had decent offensive talent carved up Alabama's defense. Players have to make plays, but plenty of times in all three of those games, defenders had their backs to the ball and were looking to the sideline for adjustments. That's a coaching/scheme issue.
I'm most disappointed in the DBs. Yes, I think scheme can change, but the DB guru CNS is has not translated to them this season.
Who has the better pure talent, Alabama or Stanford? Alabama by miles.
There are guys playing at Stanford who wouldn't run down on kickoffs in Tuscaloosa. The fact Stanford gets what they get out of the talent onhand speaks to the acumen of their coaches.
But the biggest point to make about Stanford is this: The Cardinal's worst effort against a tempo offense came against Arizona State. Stanford allowed 28 points and won the game. Alabama may have pitched more shutouts/low-point games, but Stanford never allowed an opponent more than ASU's 28 and this was their points allowed to tempo teams on the year: 28 (ASU), 17 (WSU), 27 (UU), 12 (Ore St.), 10 (UO), 13 (Cal), 14 (ASU in the PAC-12 champ game).
Sometimes that just takes time. I seem to recall Javier Arenas showing some areas of concern (and a complete breakdown on his part that helped LSU beat Alabama), and he's in the NFL now. That's why I'm not that concerned, going in DBs were an issue, injuries didn't help, but the recruits and a year of coaching will.
Stanford's defense averaged 19 points a game this year (6 spots behind Alabama). Both teams have something in common, though: each defense didn't allow its regular season opponents to exceed its points per game average. Alabama, however, let Oklahoma exceed its average by 12 points.
Look at the opponents, too. Stanford faced:
4. Oregon
13. Arizona State (twice)
18. Washington
20. UCLA
29. Oregon State
37. Arizona
44. San Jose State
Half of Stanford's opponents ranked in the top 50 scoring offenses in the nation, yet Stanford held all of them below their average.
Alabama, OTOH, has two opponents (Georgia State and UT-Chatt) not in FBS and two others (Arky and Kentucky) ranked outside the top 100. Alabama played top 50 offenses in Texas A&M, Auburn, Colorado State, LSU, and Oklahoma.
Yes, they gave up 5 points more a game than Alabama. However, look at the offenses they faced.
I would counter that those offenses tend to have inflated stats due to the weaker defenses they face on average. Also, while Stanford's talent level might be lower than Alabama's, I'd wager they are more experienced on defense and that means a great deal.
The biggest issue Alabama faces each year is to try and replace defensive players. As good as Alabama's talent level is, a senior who has started for a couple years has a good chance of outdoing a freshman, even if the freshman is more talented. I'd have to study Stanford's roster, but I surmise you'd see a fair bit more experience.
Edit: See for yourself
http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools.../depth_chart_non_event/Spring_Depth_Chart.pdf
Last edited:
Stanford (starters): 7 juniors, 3 seniors, 1 sophomore.
Alabama (starters): 6 juniors, 3 seniors, 2 sophomores. Replace one of the sophomores with a freshman if you like, to account for the carousel at cornerback opposite Belue.
Heh, let's be clear. That's a true freshman, a former WR, and another freshman all getting starts at DB, right? I guess we can pretend the WR is a veteran though, just not a veteran of a Nick Saban defense...
I don't have the time right now, but I'm fairly certain that the number of years those Stanford guys have in college, and the number of starts are both significantly higher.
Yeah let's be clear. That "former WR" played one season at WR, and he didn't play much. He was a 5* recruit listed as an athlete because he was a star WR and CB in high school. Bradley Sylve, OTOH, just started playing because he didn't have much, if any, CB experience prior to arriving in Tuscaloosa.
So you're hanging all Alabama's defensive problems on a single cornerback? Don't forget that one of the guys that rotated through the position was Bradley Sylve, who was in his third year on defense.
I think you were expecting a lot different stats than the ones that I put up and now you're trying to downplay it somehow.
Oh, and one other thing: The figures I gave you were the game 1 starters at each school. Here's how they started in their most recent games:
Alabama - 5 juniors, 3 seniors, 2 sophomores, 1 freshman
Stanford - 3 juniors, 1 senior, 6 sophomores, 1 freshman
In other words, the argument is getting worse.
Amazon Deals for TideFans!
Purchases may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.
Latest threads
-
No. 18 Alabama Erases Five-Run Deficit, Wins 7-5 over Missouri on Thursday- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
-
Alabama’s Ozmer Named to Stopper of the Year Midseason Watch List
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
News Article: Jalen Hurts ties the knot with Bry Burrows
- Started by JustNeedMe81
- Replies: 5
-
