Where would you rank our d-line
- Thread starter Dinkle
- Start date
as "99". They are absolutely tough as hell against the run. Our offensive line is not chopped liver but they look bad against this front. I stated in 99 we would have the top defense in the SEC and i think we could be that good this year barring injuries. What made 99 d so good was the 2nd team was dominate. Also we had lockdown corners.
It's a tough call.....I think they certainly look the part from a size and athleticism standpoint, but Pernell McPhee is the only guy that has actually proved that he can be a difference maker in the SEC. Also, I think we'll have good depth at end but not so sure about the meat in the middle.
Edited to add:
No disrespect to any of our guys, especially since I firmly believe that corner is the toughest position toplay on D, but I haven't seen a"lockdown"corner in aState uniform since Fred Smoot. Anthony Johnson looked like hewas well on his way, but we all know how that turned out.
Edited to add:
No disrespect to any of our guys, especially since I firmly believe that corner is the toughest position toplay on D, but I haven't seen a"lockdown"corner in aState uniform since Fred Smoot. Anthony Johnson looked like hewas well on his way, but we all know how that turned out.
G
Goat Dawg
Guest
This D got ripped to shreds more than a few times last year. Let's wait on the '99 comparisons. They were the #1 defense in the country.
I don't think we can begin to compare the two teams. I think we have the potential to be VERY good, but our secondary has been questionable for the past few years...
As I said in an earlier thread, I expect this starting d-line to give that 99-00 d-line a run for their money. Cox, Boyd, Carmon, and McPhee are going to be stout. I wish they would move Cox to end opposite of Pernell with Carmon and Boyd in the middle.
We won't have Bean and Smoot at corner but our corners will look twice as good as last year just because they don't have to cover their man for 30 seconds while the QB stands in the pocket waiting to pick them apart. The attacking up front forcing QBs to make quick throws will be huge for pass coverage.
It's a different sport but same theory - Jarvis made the perimeter defenders look better because they could gamble and so what if they got beat, Jarvis would swat them.</p>
Similarly, the corners will be able to play tighter knowing the QB will be more rushed to throw the ball. This will create more incomplete passes, more interceptions, and should be less big yardage catches.</p>
It's a different sport but same theory - Jarvis made the perimeter defenders look better because they could gamble and so what if they got beat, Jarvis would swat them.</p>
Similarly, the corners will be able to play tighter knowing the QB will be more rushed to throw the ball. This will create more incomplete passes, more interceptions, and should be less big yardage catches.</p>
Not having a 3 man rush will make our secondary much better this year. I cannot remember how many times that we would rush 3 on 3rd and 8. When you have 6 blocking 3 you will find a open receiver. In 99 if we had not been able to rotate our front 6 we would not have been near as good. Our offense that year was so terrible that our defense played the whole game. Being able to have two platoons was essential to that team.</p>
studentdawg87 said:
first thing I thought before I read your response......um's was good this past year, but I would be my salary ours is stronger, faster, and .........smarter....
I think Manny turning people like Chris White loose on people is going to help us exponentially.
My biggest problem with Carl Torbush was the lack of creativity and the fact that he didn't really appear to be that motvated to me. I felt like he was there to collect a check, and when Dan called him out on it, I think he realized that this was not "good ol' MSU" anymore.
I am so thankful that Dan- unlike Mike Leach- actually realizes that while he is a very good offensive coach, that his offense is not unstoppable, and that having a good defense is actually going to help our offense be better. And vice versa.
To me, scoring 56 and then giving up 59 is just as bad as holding someone to 3 and scoring 2. A loss is a loss.
My biggest problem with Carl Torbush was the lack of creativity and the fact that he didn't really appear to be that motvated to me. I felt like he was there to collect a check, and when Dan called him out on it, I think he realized that this was not "good ol' MSU" anymore.
I am so thankful that Dan- unlike Mike Leach- actually realizes that while he is a very good offensive coach, that his offense is not unstoppable, and that having a good defense is actually going to help our offense be better. And vice versa.
To me, scoring 56 and then giving up 59 is just as bad as holding someone to 3 and scoring 2. A loss is a loss.