HRE Otto IV
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2016
- Messages
- 7,529
- Like
- 12,487
We got off the field pretty well. Colgate was 5 for 16 on 3rd down and 1 for their last 9. On 3rd and 7+ they were 2 of 10. On 3rd and 4-6 yards they were only 2 of 5.
3rd Down D
- Thread starter HRE Otto IV
- Start date
RF2044
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 30,803
- Like
- 99,578
3rd and long has been our Achilles heel for a LONG time. Will be interesting to see how/ if the Tampa 2 changes that. I think [believe?] that the D is going to be a little bit better and more advanced that many of us expected this year, but feel like we'll be better once we improve the personnel on that side of the ball and stack some depth. Right now, DE is a huge area of concern, but those true frosh playing now will make this a positional unit of strength in a year or two. The secondary is dangerously low on numbers / a bit short on talent right now. Ditto, we'll see improved performance once Babers and staff have time to get system fits on that side of the ball [bigger linebackers, more depth / size in the secondary, etc.].
When you consider how easily Colgate moved the ball on that first drive, 5 for 16 isn't too bad. FCS team, I know, but something for the D to build upon.
When you consider how easily Colgate moved the ball on that first drive, 5 for 16 isn't too bad. FCS team, I know, but something for the D to build upon.
I was impressed by our ability to get pressure on 3rd down with just the four linemen and some simple stunts. They didn't seem to have to sell out to get pressure as the game went on... That was always my concern with the HCSS d style... If we didn't get to the qb it was a big play in our secondary. Having said that I think we got a little lucky on some balls where a Colgate receiver got their hands on the ball... P5 receivers will catch those more often.
