Another Question Concerning Our Leadership . . . .

Wartdawg wrote: I think we are seeing a D coach who wants to build a team capable of stopping those spreads. He's just got to have more ammo in the cupboard.

We can talk about him winning with other player at other places, but our secondary and defense were just terrible last year... and now we are playing the guys in the secondary that were playing behind the terrible guys. That's not exactly the same situation he walked into at some other jobs. I still have a ton of faith this group gets better as the year goes on although I'm sure there will be a couple of more bumps in the road.

Believe this to be true, maybe expanding a little over what you said. I think we are seeing a D coach who wants to build a team capable of stopping those spreads. He's just got to have more ammo in the cupboard.

Might be sour grapes on my part, do not believe grantham would have faced up to the present situation if still here. Sure as heck did not last season. Don't see Pruitt going down without throwing some punches. Players seemed to agree to the man that from Spring practice on they had a defensive coach that stayed true to his word(s). Open competition, favorites not played here.

Also, sflanagan21 mentioned Maty Maulk above, watched the Missouri game last Saturday, he is a football player, and their defense will come after you. Have always liked their coach. Joined the SEC and he is proving he can coach, and does just that . . . . coach.

Our D will get better, but yes Wart, there will be a couple of bumps in the road, and those bumps will be the teams with big O lines. Many people questioned Pruitt's theory of smaller, faster front 7, and I think it's been proven that it works against smaller O lines (ACC, ie klumpsun) but not so much against the SEC lines that make their living recruiting motor graders for the O line. Not saying we will lose every game against big O lines, but we will most likely give up a bunch of yards and points, and hope the O can score enough.
And sflanagan, as Buc says, lots of good stuff to read in your posts, but I can't get on board with Troy being a statement game. I mean how low has a program sunk that Troy would ever be a statement game? And even if we win 70-0, the only statement we'll be making is we did what we were supposed to do, and what we should have been doing to the Troys of the world for years.

The only way Troy is a statement game is if we don't win big.

In that case, the statement would be a very negative one.

sadlerdawg wrote: Our D will get better, but yes Wart, there will be a couple of bumps in the road, and those bumps will be the teams with big O lines. Many people questioned Pruitt's theory of smaller, faster front 7, and I think it's been proven that it works against smaller O lines (ACC, ie klumpsun) but not so much against the SEC lines that make their living recruiting motor graders for the O line. Not saying we will lose every game against big O lines, but we will most likely give up a bunch of yards and points, and hope the O can score enough.
And sflanagan, as Buc says, lots of good stuff to read in your posts, but I can't get on board with Troy being a statement game. I mean how low has a program sunk that Troy would ever be a statement game? And even if we win 70-0, the only statement we'll be making is we did what we were supposed to do, and what we should have been doing to the Troys of the world for years.

sadlerdawg, I was saying it needs to be a statement from our D to our O. I think our offense did enough to beat SC and Pruitt even said the same. We all know in football that a team can be torn if one side of the ball is really stinking it up and not pulling their fair share of the weight, it just puts a lot of unnecessary pressure on lets say HM since he is our QB. The D needs to step it up and shut down Troy to a big fat 0. Then our offense isn't expected to try to do to much. That's what I was trying to say...

I get what you're saying, Flanagan...I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't put any more weight to shutting Troy out than I would, say, shutting the scout team out. It's expected, and should be guaranteed. With this regime (richt, not Pruitt) the expected, guaranteed things just don't seem to happen with regularity. If they can shut out or at least hold our next 3 opponents to under 10, that would be a statement, IMO.

sadlerdawg wrote: I get what you're saying, Flanagan...I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't put any more weight to shutting Troy out than I would, say, shutting the scout team out. It's expected, and should be guaranteed. With this regime (richt, not Pruitt) the expected, guaranteed things just don't seem to happen with regularity. If they can shut out or at least hold our next 3 opponents to under 10, that would be a statement, IMO.

I hear ya sadlerdawg, but shutting down the scout team in "practice" and shutting down a team no matter how bad they are on national TV in a real "game" carries a lot more weight in the players eyes IMO. I too believe like you that it would be more of a statement to hold our next 3 opponents to less than 10. I guess I'm looking at it at one game at a time as far as building confidence and chemistry goes. Our D shuts down (which I believe they can do) Troy then that rolls over to the Tennessee game and so on. I'm not telling you anything you don't already know but so much of building a good football team is about building confidence not only in yourself but also within the team. Gurley knows what Gurley can do but does he believe that his team can do the same??? If I'm Pruitt I'm telling my D that we have to step up against Troy this weekend and make a statement!