CB Jordan Swann to transfer... | The Boneyard

CB Jordan Swann to transfer...

Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
27,056
Reaction Score
66,127
Jordan was one of our faster guys but had trouble tackling. Good luck to him as he moves on.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
1,944
Reaction Score
3,720
Ouch. He was the old man in that secondary. Now we have 2 Sophs (Coyle & Herring-Wilson) and about 11 frosh. ... ugh
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
10,425
Reaction Score
38,300
Fast, but struggled with tackling
Jordan was one of our faster guys but had trouble tackling. Good luck to him as he moves on.

That sums it up. Wasn't going to magically get more physical. Good luck to him. I think the kids coming in August would have pushed him deeper down the depth chart. I think we could see another departure/change of position in the secondary by Aug 30th with the existing crew. The talent coming in looks better.
 
Joined
May 19, 2015
Messages
1,025
Reaction Score
5,961
Fast, but struggled with tackling


That sums it up. Wasn't going to magically get more physical. Good luck to him. I think the kids coming in August would have pushed him deeper down the depth chart. I think we could see another departure/change of position in the secondary by Aug 30th with the existing crew. The talent coming in looks better.
When you bring in as many defensive backs as we have the last couple of years, it's inevitable that some won't stick. Good luck to Jordan.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,795
Reaction Score
7,805
When you bring in as many defensive backs as we have the last couple of years, it's inevitable that some won't stick. Good luck to Jordan.

In the 3- 3- 5, there is time available for 10 guys. I think it just looks like too many db's, because of the shift in strategy.
We need 15 of them, and can get away with anywhere between 13- 18 depending on the class sizes.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
8,682
Reaction Score
15,373
Jordan was one of our faster guys but had trouble tackling. Good luck to him as he moves on.

I got front row seats to that whiff by he and Terry for an 80 yard YAC TD by USF

woulda been a faboluous return man for us though..
 
Joined
May 19, 2015
Messages
1,025
Reaction Score
5,961
In the 3- 3- 5, there is time available for 10 guys. I think it just looks like too many db's, because of the shift in strategy.
We need 15 of them, and can get away with anywhere between 13- 18 depending on the class sizes.
Agreed, but it hurts that so many of them are being brought in within 2 years of each other. Balancing out the classes will (hopefully) result in less turnover.
 
C

Chief00

In the 3- 3- 5, there is time available for 10 guys. I think it just looks like too many db's, because of the shift in strategy.
We need 15 of them, and can get away with anywhere between 13- 18 depending on the class sizes.

This won’t win football games. How do they do against a guard on a running play?
 
C

Chief00

Someone wanna coach up the #casualfan?

I am a firm believer in big, physical guys up front with some edge pass rushers, who move the line of scrimmage backwards.

Expecting DBs to consistently take on guards and then tackle running backs, who have a head of steam - achieve results like we saw last year. Crocker’s system won’t work at this level unless Edsall modifies it, as I understand he is trying to do by putting more big bodies up front.

We totally wasted Foley last year in predictable double teams because we did not move him around enough. If we had more guys who could make plays it wouldn’t have been so bad - but it was really bad DC work.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
13,378
Reaction Score
33,674
I am a firm believer in big, physical guys up front with some edge pass rushers, who move the line of scrimmage backwards. Wow, that’s revolutionary stuff. I believe in small bodies up front that get blown off the line of scrimmage. The old “keep everything in front of you” defense.

Expecting DBs to consistently take on guards and then tackle running backs, who have a head of steam - achieve results like we saw last year. Crocker’s system won’t work at this level unless Edsall modifies it, as I understand he is trying to do by putting more big bodies up front. The 5th DB is more like a hybrid S/LB in this scheme. I’m not a big fan of it, but it can certainly work at this level of football. Our problem was that the roster is FCS.

We totally wasted Foley last year in predictable double teams because we did not move him around enough. If we had more guys who could make plays it wouldn’t have been so bad - but it was really bad DC work. Foley was not wasted. He did his job. The problem is that again, we didn’t have enough talent around him. If we played a traditional 4-3 he still would’ve gotten double teamed.

No more free lessons Chief. Anything more I’ll have to charge you.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,788
Reaction Score
10,064
I am a firm believer in big, physical guys up front with some edge pass rushers, who move the line of scrimmage backwards.

Expecting DBs to consistently take on guards and then tackle running backs, who have a head of steam - achieve results like we saw last year. Crocker’s system won’t work at this level unless Edsall modifies it, as I understand he is trying to do by putting more big bodies up front.

We totally wasted Foley last year in predictable double teams because we did not move him around enough. If we had more guys who could make plays it wouldn’t have been so bad - but it was really bad DC work.

Who said dbs would consistently take on guards?
 
C

Chief00

No more free lessons Chief. Anything more I’ll have to charge you.
Newsflash - when you play a 3-3-5 and recruit 8 DBs and have to move an OL recruit to defense - to have a DL recruit with any size - Jimmy if you can process all that you will realize people are running downhill on us.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
6,578
Reaction Score
16,671
Who said dbs would consistently take on guards?
They have to perform run fill, and the scheme is designed to hide and bring pressure. It’s a crappy scheme unless you have exceptional transitional sized DBs that have enough power, speed and aggression to be a run stopper, pass cover and bring a speed blitz. The D is hollowed out up the middle.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,788
Reaction Score
10,064
They have to perform run fill, and the scheme is designed to hide and bring pressure. It’s a crappy scheme unless you have exceptional transitional sized DBs that have enough power, speed and aggression to be a run stopper, pass cover and bring a speed blitz. The D is hollowed out up the middle.

I understand the scheme, I was wondering who thinks that dbs are consistently taking on guards? Because they don’t in the 3-3-5.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
12,394
Reaction Score
19,781
In an era when teams routinely throw 40-50 passes playing 5-6 dbacks is pretty common. We just use it as our base defense. We would have had problems last year whatever the defense. We lacked playmakers and the dbacks were all young and mostly slow. And the they didn’t teally understand it.
 
C

Chief00

In an era when teams routinely throw 40-50 passes playing 5-6 dbacks is pretty common. We just use it as our base defense. We would have had problems last year whatever the defense. We lacked playmakers and the dbacks were all young and mostly slow. And the they didn’t teally understand it.

If the opponent throws 40-50 times a game - more important than ever to get push up the middle and edge rush.

If the front wall doesn’t neutralize the OLine then you have just that - guards taking on DBs on running plays and screens. I don’t know what you were watching last year but we were consistently physically overmatch on blocks and on tackles.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
13,378
Reaction Score
33,674
If the opponent throws 40-50 times a game - more important than ever to get push up the middle and edge rush.

If the front wall doesn’t neutralize the OLine then you have just that - guards taking on DBs on running plays and screens. I don’t know what you were watching last year but we were consistently physically overmatch on blocks and on tackles.

We were physically overmatched at every position on defense because we had an FCS roster. Did you see what Missouri’s WR’s did to our DB’s?
 

Online statistics

Members online
634
Guests online
3,219
Total visitors
3,853

Forum statistics

Threads
156,863
Messages
4,067,673
Members
9,948
Latest member
ahserve34


Top Bottom