Mullen on our defense:
- Thread starter MSUCostanza
- Start date
I would like someone that's a little more creative as the DC, but the fact of the matter is Paul Johnson is a really, really good HC and offensive mind in his own right and he has done this to many DC's. He simply took advantage of our weakness- our secondary. If I have a beef with Torbush, it's the apprent lack of adjustment that he made throughout the game. I did think that we would have stopped the running game a little bit better- including the option, but every single play, we were getting gashed for yards. The rest of the time, our secondary was getting toasted. I was also disappointed in the secondary "rotation". Louis Watson does not belong in the SEC. I want to see Maurice Langston, but if he can't crack this rotation, maybe I don't want to see him after all. Zach Smith should be a linebacker. We need to bulk him up in the offseason. He can't cover anything, but he's pretty good at blitzing.
That said, even though our defense was less than stellar tonight, if we don't turn the ball over five times- I'll excuse the INT at the end of the game- I think we win a shootout. Ultimately that was the difference in the game. We turned the ball over, and they did not. I don't know how many points they got because of the TO's, but it had to have been conservatively 14. All we had to do was have a couple of stops on defense- and they actually did that, and hold onto the ball, and we win. And then we had a fumble that we recovered, but because of it, our drive stalled.
That said, even though our defense was less than stellar tonight, if we don't turn the ball over five times- I'll excuse the INT at the end of the game- I think we win a shootout. Ultimately that was the difference in the game. We turned the ball over, and they did not. I don't know how many points they got because of the TO's, but it had to have been conservatively 14. All we had to do was have a couple of stops on defense- and they actually did that, and hold onto the ball, and we win. And then we had a fumble that we recovered, but because of it, our drive stalled.
Yeah, GT got their share of yards running. But we had them in 3rd and long a bunch of times and they completed long passes at will. Thow it deep for an automatic big play or throw the quick pass to the WR for an automatic 10-15 yards. The only time we stopped the latter was when the WR slipped on his own.Todd4State said:
Well then "don't know" any longer. http://bulldawgjunction.c...s/story.php?article=3113Frexzell said:
He should though his coaches under the bus after that defensive effort.
Overall on defense, I think we could have done better against the option. But I have to give GT a lot of credit too. The should have gotten a lot of yards on the option and they did. We played well enough against the option that GT should have punted several times.
Which brings me to the DBs. Any time GT needed long yardage, they could simply sling it up there and have their guy come down with the football. And for that, the defensive coaches should be thrown under the bus.
No kidding. On the long pass play in the 4th, he was with the guy and had inside position on the guy. The WR just used his bigger body to get position and out jump Smith. I think I heard the word "SUCKS" shouted in about every direction from the stands when that happened. I was thinking then, poor guy. He is just in over his head. He tries his *** off but.......just another Croom recruit.
I said over and over that I think he's doing a great job as our coach, but I think his calls on the goal line were not good and cost us the game, and everybody on here is how they were GREAT CALLS BUT TYSON JUST DIDN"T EXECUTE. And Mullen put a few lines out there that fed that idea.
Now these same defenders are okay with him throwing the defensive coaches under the bus. I like Mullen fine but like I said last week, his farts stink just like mine, yours, and Torbush's.
Now these same defenders are okay with him throwing the defensive coaches under the bus. I like Mullen fine but like I said last week, his farts stink just like mine, yours, and Torbush's.
I thought Torchbush did a pretty bad job adjusting to Nesbitt up the middle. For most of the game we were playing 3 down linemen with VERY wide gaps and the LBs were 7 yards off the LOS. Nesbitt could get 5-7 yards whenever he wanted on first down up the middle which completely killed us on 2nd and 3rd downs. Except for a couple of individual plays made by McPhee, the defense couldn't stop it. As for the passing, he has to take the blame for that as well. This is the same Nesbitt that started 1-11, let me repeat that 1 FOR 11 against Clemson. He also had only completed 30 something passes on the season. You don't let a guy come in and throw for 250+ yards out of an option offense and gain that many easy yards. Zach Smith was personally responsible for about 150 yards of that and why he was in there after halftime is something the coaching staff will have to answer to.
OEMDawg said:
Code:
<font><font face="verdana">...Nesbitt,J. 23 81 28 53 0 13 2.3 The defensive strategy was to take away the dive and force Nesbitt to run the ball. The front 7 played well, in my opinion, but the secondary can't tackle a tackling dummy, nor can they cover a 6-3 230 WR. </font></font>