The CardBoard
Defensive Line concern - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Defensive Line concern (/thread-14138.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Defensive Line concern - OutsiderFan - 08-27-2017

Not only was it evident to all who watched the Rice game, the drop-off between the 2nd unit DL from the 1st, but the color guy Tom Ramsey noted on the broadcast how from watching Stanford practice, he didn't see a very physically impressive DL.

As it is, Cotton, Phillips and Jackson are a bit undersized, but, Williams and Swann are not nearly as physically imposing.  Schaffer is more in the Dylan Jackson mold, but he doesn't seem to be a particularly great athlete, or he would be playing before the second half against Rice.  Peek obviously didn't play against Rice.  Hopefully it isn't a reason that will keep him out against USC and beyond, because it seems he will be needed.

The fact Little, Sarell, Parkinson, and Wedington all played a lot as True Frosh, and Dalyn Wade-Perry didn't see the field, is really disappointing.  Not going to claim he should be playing, because if the coaches thought he was ready - particularly with Peek and Annan not there as they were in Spring - he would have played.  But man is this a suspect Defensive Line that could really use Wade-Perry making whatever jump is necessary to get him on the field, if only to be a backup to provide some depth for a very thin unit.


Re: Defensive Line concern - Hank 91 - 08-27-2017

I'm not discounting your concerns about the defensive line, but just a word on why I think we didn't see the true freshmen there. It takes a while to grow those guys. Consider that Solomon Thomas didn't play as a true freshman. Little and Sarell are clearly outliers, and it's no surprise that they were the two top-rated linemen in the country. Wedington obviously doesn't have to get bigger; he's skilled enough to he plays.

Re: Defensive Line concern FRONT 7 CONCERN, - johnnyo53 - 08-27-2017

PUNT RETURNER, QB, AND RB CONCERNS REMAIN FOR ME.  I WANT TO SEE IF LOVE CAN HANDLE GETTING HIT, AND RUNNING TOUGH INSIDE, BECAUSE I NEVER SAW HIM DO THAT IN THE PAST.  WE NEED MORE THAN ONE BACK, AND WE NEED AT LEAST ONE BANGER.  WHILE I ENJOYED SEEING US BOATRACE A JC TEAM, WE WON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT WE HAVE UNTIL WE PLAY THE 2ND GAME.  THAT'S THE BELLWEATHER.  OTOH, AT LEAST WE DOMINATED AS WE SHOULD'VE.  ONLY 2 SACKS AGAINST RICE IS SOMEWHAT INDICATIVE OF THE DLINE QUESTIONS...

Re: Defensive Line concern - fullmetal - 08-27-2017

Scarlett looks like a banger--I just think the blocking was good enough to leave him untouched inside.  Didn't Scarlett punch in that second TD vs. a Rice goal line stand?

Also, I'm glad Scarlett can juggle.

johnnyo -- not sold on Jay Tyler as PR?

Re: Defensive Line concern - ATLCard - 08-27-2017

Re Tyler, there appeared to be a significant sun problem for punts (and kick-off) on that side at the beginning.  With said Tyler didn't look confident and didn't show much.  With Rice having multiple 3 and outs and their punter out-kicking his coverage, this game should have been a punt-returner's dream and it wasn't.

Re: Defensive Line concern - standfan - 08-27-2017

(08-27-2017, 10:26 AM)Hank 91 link Wrote:I'm not discounting your concerns about the defensive line, but just a word on why I think we didn't see the true freshmen there. It takes a while to grow those guys. Consider that Solomon Thomas didn't play as a true freshman. Little and Sarell are clearly outliers, and it's no surprise that they were the two top-rated linemen in the country. Wedington obviously doesn't have to get bigger; he's skilled enough to he plays.

+1. Was anyone watching DW-P closely enough at the open practices to have an opinion as to whether he might play this year? We certainly need a player with his body type but not many OL and DL are ready for D-1 ball freshman year.
On a related issue, Herbig had some great blocks yesterday. I've been curious as to why the rating services seem to have misjudged Nate badly. Theories?

Re: Defensive Line concern - oman - 08-27-2017

Eh, just throw one of out thicker, shorter tight ends in there.

Re: Defensive Line concern - Goose - 08-27-2017

(08-27-2017, 12:01 PM)oman link Wrote:Eh, just throw one of out thicker, shorter tight ends in there.
We did that, Cotton. Still takes a while.

Re: Defensive Line concern - BostonCard - 08-27-2017

(08-27-2017, 11:36 AM)standfan link Wrote:[quote author=Hank 91 link=topic=17240.msg198192#msg198192 date=1503854777]
I'm not discounting your concerns about the defensive line, but just a word on why I think we didn't see the true freshmen there. It takes a while to grow those guys. Consider that Solomon Thomas didn't play as a true freshman. Little and Sarell are clearly outliers, and it's no surprise that they were the two top-rated linemen in the country. Wedington obviously doesn't have to get bigger; he's skilled enough to he plays.

+1. Was anyone watching DW-P closely enough at the open practices to have an opinion as to whether he might play this year? We certainly need a player with his body type but not many OL and DL are ready for D-1 ball freshman year.
On a related issue, Herbig had some great blocks yesterday. I've been curious as to why the rating services seem to have misjudged Nate badly. Theories?
[/quote]

Rating services are imperfect.  Players develop.  Also, Hebrig was out in Hawaii, and I'm guessing the recruiting services don't get out there as much as to college hotbeds such as Texas.

BC

Re: Defensive Line concern FRONT 7 CONCERN, - CowboyIndian - 08-27-2017

(08-27-2017, 10:45 AM)johnnyo53 link Wrote:ONLY 2 SACKS AGAINST RICE IS SOMEWHAT INDICATIVE OF THE DLINE QUESTIONS...

Not sure if this is the reason but prior to the game, a few articles listed the strengths of the Rice team and an experienced OL was one of the few.

Re: Defensive Line concern - CompSci87 - 08-27-2017

(08-27-2017, 11:36 AM)standfan link Wrote:On a related issue, Herbig had some great blocks yesterday. I've been curious as to why the rating services seem to have misjudged Nate badly. Theories?

When you first see Herbig, he looks way too massive to move well and be athletic. Maybe some services didn't watch him move and play his position enough to overcome their first impression.

Re: Defensive Line concern - Goose - 08-27-2017

(08-27-2017, 02:55 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:When you first see Herbig, he looks way too massive to move well and be athletic. Maybe some services didn't watch him move and play his position enough to overcome their first impression.
Further, I bet Stanford coaching has emphasized and improved his athleticism considerably, as well as running plays that maximize his abilities.

Re: Defensive Line concern - Hurlburt88 - 08-27-2017

HeBig also seems pretty good in pass protection! 

Re: Defensive Line concern - OutsiderFan - 08-27-2017

(08-27-2017, 04:02 PM)hurlburt88 link Wrote:HeBig also seems pretty good in pass protection!

Hey, this is a DL concern thread.  Feel free to make a - totally deserved and appropriate - HeBig (so much better than the Big Island) slurping thread.  :P

Re: Defensive Line concern - Phogge - 08-27-2017

Perry was seen in a few bench shots. Had a big white wrap around his left knee. Don't know anything about an injury but I'm cursed with instant scanning of an entire frame because of my job.

Re: Defensive Line concern FRONT 7 CONCERN, - johnnyo53 - 08-27-2017

(08-27-2017, 02:33 PM)CowboyIndian link Wrote:[quote author=johnnyo53 link=topic=17240.msg198196#msg198196 date=1503855926]
ONLY 2 SACKS AGAINST RICE IS SOMEWHAT INDICATIVE OF THE DLINE QUESTIONS...

WELL COWBOY,  SURELY YOU DONT THINK RICE'S OLINE COMPARES TO SC, UW, ETC...AND NO LINE'S GOOD ENOUGH TO PREVENT "COVERAGE SACKS" CAUSED BY OUR DEFENSIVE BACKFIELD WHICH APPEARS SOLID, AND OUR SUPPOSEDLY SOLID LB CORP, SO SPLAIN TO ME AGAIN WHY ONLY TWO AGAINST THIS ESSENTIALLY D2 TEAM?  I'M JUST FROM MISSOURI ON OUR FRONT 7.

Not sure if this is the reason but prior to the game, a few articles listed the strengths of the Rice team and an experienced OL was one of the few.
[/quote]

Re: Defensive Line concern - Snorlax94 - 08-27-2017

My two thoughts on the defensive line:

While the def line may be a relative weakness on an excellent defense, due to a slight lack in depth and size (for running a 3-4),

1) I am not at all concerned about getting only 2 sacks against Rice. My understanding of the 3-4 is that by having only 3 dlinemen up front, you have a lot more flexibility to keep offenses guessing where a linebacker is blitzing from. But if you don't run any blitzes, you may not get pressure.

If your minimalist, vanilla defense is pitching a shutout, why change anything that game?

2) I have seen multiple times people calling for playing fresh recruit Dalyn Wade-Perry as a true freshman. So I watched some of his high school highlight tape, and he struck me as a raw talent and one that is particularly ill-suited to play as a true freshman.

His main plus is his size, he is brobdingnagian, which is thrilling because to my understanding, in a typical  NFL-style 3-4 you want larger-than-usual d linemen absorbing double teams, plugging two holes or more each, and occupying as much of the  oline as possible, and many of our past d linemen have seemed undersized for that role. So that's exciting with Dalyn.

However, on the tape, he is a little slow, he seems a bit unbalanced and top heavy, sometimes his head is down, and he seems to use his raw girth to generate power but not his muscles, so his power is more of a head-on, straight one, and his technique was a bit raw.

Frankly, despite his size, I'd worry that some elite college competition could harm him. If you play a heads down, lumbering style in high school, your sheer size may keep you safe. But if you're lumbering and heads-down against a great lineman, you might take some serious blows that could impact your long-term prospects.

So the tape was from a year ago, and Stanford coaches are amazing and Stanford athletes are amazing and from the videos I saw, Dalyn looks very committed and hard-working. But I would not have expected him to play this year.

Maybe he will learn so much he will surprise me, which would be wonderful,  but I don't think it's probable.

Re: Defensive Line concern - socalstanfan1 - 08-28-2017

My very, very boring advice:

Patience, and trust the coaches.

We all want these true freshmen to come in and have an immediate impact, and honestly I was pleasantly surprised that Weddington and Parkinson both achieved exactly that in the first game.  (I was just as pleasantly surprised by the apparent grown of Scarlett, who looked light years ahead of any other point in his Stanford career.)

Massive size, by itself, doesn't always translate to success.  A lot of players coming out of HS are covered with a layer of soft squishy goo that needs to be hardened into stronger stuff to make the jump to the college game. (Not saying this is necessarily the case with DWP, but it might be); and some are just more athletic than their size might lead one to believe (Nate Herbig).  Either way, the fact that Parkinson and Weddington saw so much action, and both Sarrell and Little also saw action, should reassure us that the coaches are not afflicted with some innate conservatism that makes them resist putting game-ready freshmen into the contest.  From there, I'd surmise that DWP and others are just not yet ready.

BUT, the fact that others were not ready for game#1 doesn't mean they won't be ready by game #3, or #5, or some other point.  Players, especially freshmen, are always developing. I hope DWP has the talent, and develops it, to the point that he can make a significant contribution this year.  If not, then hopefully Peek or someone else can step up, and DWP will be ready after another year of training camp and off-season conditioning.  But I am very, very enthused about the possibilities of all the other true freshmen who already started getting their feet wet, and will grow more quickly.

Also not too concerned about lack of sacks.  The opponent is mostly running the ball, keeps jet-sweeps in play to cause the defense to slow down in order to read and react to that possibility, and the DC may be holding back on blitzes and stunts rather than putting them on tape for future opponents to start analyzing.  I think its a mild concern, something to keep an eye on, and if we are in week 4 or 5 and still have no pass rush, then I'll be very concerned.

Re: Defensive Line concern - Hurlburt88 - 08-28-2017

We were mostly vanilla I agree.  I think kalambayi came in the playoffs where Glaeseman was shaken up, and Perez came in a delayed blitz late in the game. 

Re: Defensive Line concern - washingtonismoney - 08-28-2017

2 sacks on 26 pass attempts ain't so bad. It's about the same sack percentage as 2016, and higher than 2015. While I'm still concerned about the DL I'm not necessarily concerned by this particular stat.

Tyler is a significant concern for me. Thinking Wedington might give the team what we want there.

EDIT, and NOTE: If I had to pick out the most surprising stat of the game, it'd be pass attempts. If you'd said before the game that one team had 26 and the other, 39, I'd've said, "Sounds like the typical blowout game." Shaw passing 39 times in a dominant win is... highly unusual.