The CardBoard
Line play Sat - 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: Line play Sat (/thread-14150.html)


Line play Sat - lex24 - 08-28-2017

I  understand that they were not exactly playing against Alabama. But  I think the discussion on the line play has been a little understated First, The offensive line absolutely obliterated Rice in the run game. They  mostly ran straight up the gut. Love and Scarlett combined to average 11.3 on 21 carries. Take away Scarlett's 1 and 2 yd TD and you have 12.4 a carry on 19 tries. Even taking away Love's 63 on play 1, they averaged over 8 a carry. That is major dominance.  Yes, there were a couple missed block on pass plays but some of that is communication issues. You expect that in game one.  Hamilton got beat on a speed rush outside early but seemed to adjust after that.

For a first game the offensive line play was superb.  (Also no false starts and I don't believe they had a holding call). They are not going be able to physically obliterate most of the teams on the schedule. But I think they showed that they can physically beat most of the teams on the schedule. Particularly inside.

On the defensive side, they played about as vanilla as possible. I don't recall many stunts or blitzes. Rice did absolutely nothing straight up running the football. They got most of their yards later in the game, and most came on misdirection. So in one on one battles, the defensive
line won.  They did not put a ton of pressure on the quarterback but you are not going to do that rushing three. 

Here's the question I do have defensively. Given the strength of their backfield how much will they press and blitz.  I absolutely hate it when they blitz and play somewhat soft on the corner. To me if you're going to send pressure, get up in their face and press the receivers. I think we may see that a lot this year. They didn't do it at all against Rice – nor would I have expected them to.  Defensively I think the game plan will be very different against SC. 



Re: Line play Sat - Hulk01 - 08-29-2017

If and when we play our corners off the receivers, it's because we don't think that offense can inch its way up the field.  We will give it the short throw to ensure we take away the bigger plays.

We did this against Washington because we were without Meeks and Holder and they had John Ross.  We also did it against Washington State the year before, partly because we were confident we could stop their offense in red zone. 



It is Impossible to Analyze Every Possibility But Much is Still Obvious - AncientCityIndian - 08-29-2017

Darnold has a really quick release with great accuracy and given time he will pick you apart. Last year, USC had a veteran O line that played better as the year wore on.  This year they lost 3 of 5 starters and while the new guys are probably very talented, we all know there is a learning curve to the line playing as a cohesive unit.  I am glad we play them early.  It is incumbent upon us to play tight man coverage and put pressure on Darnold.  This can only be accomplished with a great line push up the middle, excellent cornerback play and incessant blitzes from multiple directions to keep them off balance and guessing.  We certainly will not stop Darnold all day but if we make him pass under pressure and into our strength, the secondary, we will force some errant tosses.  Of course, if USC is able to run on us, we are in trouble.  I have every hope that we are capable of forcing Darnold to have to pass to defeat us.  We just cannot give him all day to do it or we will become toast.  It will also be incredibly helpful if we dominate the TOS and limit their opportunities to score and if we do not turn over the ball at all.  It is also an advantage that their wide receivers are inexperienced although they have strength at tight end. I expect them to test our OLB`s with some passes out of the backfield to their running backs, possibly early and often to negate the blitzes from the outside.  Because of that and a few other matchup considerations, I suspect we may also blitz a secondary guy on occasion.

The great unknown, the elephant in the room, is how Darnold will react to constant pressure since he had so little of it last year.  Let us hope we can bring it and he has a learning curve problem of his own.

Re: It is Impossible to Analyze Every Possibility But Much is Still Obvious - Goose - 08-29-2017

(08-29-2017, 06:08 AM)AncientCityIndian link Wrote:<snip>
It is incumbent upon us to play tight man coverage
I don't expect we are going to play much "tight man coverage". We are going to use multiple coverages depending on the situation. We want to make Darnold think we are in a certain scheme and actually be in another. Trust Akina.
Quote: and put pressure on Darnold.
Absolutely true. I personally think that we are going to try for quick pressure to make him decide to throw quickly. This means mostly blitz pressure, not line pressure, as I doubt we can defeat their 5 with our 3 quickly.
Quote:This can only be accomplished with a great line push up the middle and incessant blitzes from multiple directions to keep them off balance and guessing.  We certainly will not stop Darnold all day but if we make him pass under pressure and into our strength, the secondary, we will force some errant tosses.
I agree. Unlike some others, I am not so sure Darnold will keep cool under this pressure. A few bad throws, misreads,  and dropped passes due to the ball being early could create some cracks.
Quote: Of course, if Under Stanford Control (again) is able to run on us, we are in trouble.
This is my fear, that they will just run right at us until we prove we can stop them. If we can, great, but that is not a given.
Quote:  I have every hope that we are capable of forcing Darnold to have to pass to defeat us.  We just cannot give him all day to do it or we will become toast.
My hope is that Darnold and the coaching staff WANTS to pass and won't try to beat us on the ground. I think that plays into our strength. It is the running game that I fear the most, because that is where our DL depth could easily become an issue.


Re: Line play Sat - OutsiderFan - 08-29-2017

I open this thread expecting to see a discussion about Stanford line play, and all of a sudden I'm reading about Sam Darnold?  Can there be a USC game discussion thread for that? 

Points Well Taken, Goose But a Strong Line Push Up the Middle - AncientCityIndian - 08-29-2017

prevents him from being able to step into the throw quickly and forces him to one side or the other which works to our advantage 50% of the time if we are coming from one side or the other.  We need to make him "uncomfortable" and not able to fall into a rhythm. 

Re: It is Impossible to Analyze Every Possibility But Much is Still Obvious - stupac2 - 08-29-2017

(08-29-2017, 06:49 AM)Goose link Wrote:My hope is that Darnold and the coaching staff WANTS to pass and won't try to beat us on the ground. I think that plays into our strength. It is the running game that I fear the most, because that is where our DL depth could easily become an issue.

I'm still utterly unconvinced that Helton is competent, and he clearly wants to be a players' coach, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if this happened. Plus it's just so USC.

(08-29-2017, 06:55 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:I open this thread expecting to see a discussion about Stanford line play, and all of a sudden I'm reading about Sam Darnold?  Can there be a Under Stanford Control (again) game discussion thread for that? 

At least it's still about football! We could be talking about graphene or the civil war.

Re: Line play Sat - martyup - 08-29-2017

Or coffee.  :D

Re: Line play Sat - martyup - 08-29-2017

I watched the game again, using rewind to isolate on every lineman on every snap.  I saw solid performances at every position.  Sarell and Little looked very good.  I think we can keep rotating fresh bodies into our OL and pound the crap out of opponents.  Big and Little have to play together.  :o

I'm stoked about our OL.