WichitaSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Messages
- 10,112
- Reaction score
- 6,757
Yea defensively what I fear is Sellers eluding pressure and one of our DBs getting burned deep once he extends the play. He will definitely avoid some sacks that most guys couldn’t, but we can’t let those turn into huge downfield plays.SC's O-line is arguably as bad as ours. The one thing on offense that they've shown an occasional knack for is the explosive passing play....which happens to be the only potential weakness on this defense (and BV's defenses in general). I expect our defense to play well. As far as our offense......as long as we aren't trying to use our TEs to run block (and instead run the ball out of 10 personnel - 1 RB/ 4 WR), then we could potentially have a little more success on the ground. But again, this coaching staff hasn't really shown me the ability to evolve and/or change what they are doing schematically. And it would be nice for once if we had a WR either make a big play deep or make someone miss in open space (against a decent team)....but I'm not holding my breath.
The most frustrating thing about the run game is that you would have hoped that the Auburn game would have been the impetus to make those adjustments. By that time we were four games in and clearly a terrible running team. We had a bye followed by Kent State, which should have given us time to make some of those changes before Texas. Instead, it was the same old crap. And that’s why it drove me crazy when people here would argue that our run game had been “good enough” up to that point. We had played three terrible teams, had squeaked by Auburn despite zero production from our RBs mainly because Arnold missed multiple easy TD throws, and leaned heavily on Mateer running against Michigan. Anyone should have been able to see what was coming, and the staff shouldn’t have waited for a loss to change things. If they didn’t do it then, I doubt they will at any point this season.