Defensive Unit Rankings

[Levibooty]

Still it's a huge stretch to be calling 240 and 250 lb freshmen with the letters DE behind their name Defensive Tackles. Plus using 14 roster spots to man 2 positions is ridiculous also, 7 deep at one position would be a monumental waste. It's not like DE's have never put their hand in the dirt before. Like I said above if this is the logic one uses then we will need to start calling Snell, and all the other backs in the wildcat QB's. It's just gibberish and misleading as heck to be calling 240 lb freshmen who played DE in HS a DT now.

I call balderdash!

 

[RV2]

Thanks, RV. We have some bodies who might surprise.

There were many years in this program, when we had 6 to 8 bodies stretched across the defensive line, by whatever position name they were called.

Stoops first three years we had 4 and 5 guys play nearly every snap each year at the 3 down positions. MOF, his first year they had something like only 14-15 guys that got any snaps on defense that year. That's literally no depth and that's insane but the roster was bereft of SEC talent. This year we will probably play 25 or so.

 

[WildCard]

Still it's a huge stretch to be calling 240 and 250 lb freshmen with the letters DE behind their name Defensive Tackles. Plus using 14 roster spots to man 2 positions is ridiculous also, 7 deep at one position would be a monumental waste. It's not like DE's have never put their hand in the dirt before. Like I said above if this is the logic one uses then we will need to start calling Snell, and all the other backs in the wildcat QB's. It's just gibberish and misleading as heck to be calling 240 lb freshmen who played DE in HS a DT now.

I call balderdash!

Well, the point is that in a base 3 down front (3-4 or 33 Stack) that 250# "DE "is going to align head up or inside a 310# OT. Personally I would want a bigger guy to put in that position; somebody as big as, well, a DT.

This is not about "logic"; it is about the size and type of player you need to line up and play head to head against the 5 biggest guys on the field. In no way, is the equivalent of a RB or WR stepping in and taking a direct snap from center a few times per game.

Peace

 

[Levibooty]

Stoops first three years we had 4 and 5 guys play nearly every snap each year at the 3 down positions. MOF, his first year they had something like only 14-15 guys that got any snaps on defense that year. That's literally no depth and that's insane. This year we will probably play 25 or so.

At Defensive Tackle?

 

[Levibooty]

Well, the point is that in a base 3 down front (3-4 or 33 Stack) that 250# "DE "is going to align head up or inside a 310# OT. Personally I would want a bigger guy to put in that position; somebody as big as, well, a DT.

This is not about "logic"; it is about the size and type of player you need to line up and play head to head against the 5 biggest guys on the field. In no way, is the equivalent of a RB or WR stepping in and taking a direct snap from center a few times per game.

Peace

That's not what is being argued here. RV2 listed 14 Defensive tackles and on that list are freshman who played DE in HS were recruited as a DE and are listed as a DE's, they weigh 240 and 250 lbs. Anybody who would put them out on the field as a DT against SEC OL's doesn't have the best interest of that young man at heart for one thing The other thing is the only place I can find they are listed as DT's is in this thread by this poster who I'm taking issue with. Produce an official roster that lists them all as DT's and I will capitulate. In the end I'll go with what the official roster and depth chart says rather than a internet poster. I feel the official roster and depth charts are compiled by the coaching staff and I'll go with that.

 

[The-Hack]

I went back to the beginning of the thread to see if I could wedge my way into the RV/LeviBooty debate, but got caught up in Levi's phrase about not being the "Picasso of whimsy. . . . "

I think that qualifies for some kind of technical knockout rule.

At least I'll be using it for a week, but not on this forum.

 

[redbudman]

Sounds like a question for Phil Steele!

Every year he ranks his projected "top units". I have no idea what his selection process is but I guess it is safe to assume it is vested heavily in the same performance driven criteria that he uses for just about everything. Anyway...

Defensive Line: 54 ranked units; UK unranked (11 SEC teams in top 54)
Linebackers: 50 ranked units; UK #22 (4 SEC teams ranked higher)
Defensive Backs: 51 ranked units; UK #27 (6 SEC teams ranked higher)

Peace

Thanks, RV. We have some bodies who might surprise.

There were many years in this program, when we had 6 to 8 bodies stretched across the defensive line, by whatever position name they were called.

I expect a lot of blitzs and stunts! The "D" line will make or break us! We also need a plus 20 in turnover margin for season! I know, I know that is unreasonable! But HELL after 45 years of following it bound to start bouncing are way! The Cubs won the World Series, so maybe are curse will be broken!

 

[The-Hack]

I expect a lot of blitzs and stunts!

I'm not sure that they intend to stunt much.

As I related on a thread a few months, ago, Coach Elliott literally asked me what I meant by a "stunt," when I asked him at a QB Club meeting. When I described it, he said that is called a "trick," and he was generally dismissive of the idea.

 

[jauk11]

I'm not sure that they intend to stunt much.

As I related on a thread a few months, ago, Coach Elliott literally asked me what I meant by a "stunt," when I asked him at a QB Club meeting. When I described it, he said that is called a "trick," and he was generally dismissive of the idea.

Wow, I knew that football terminology passed me by years ago, but that is something I had never heard of.

Guess I am going to have to give up the single wing buck lateral reverse as my favorite play of all time too, lol.

And if he was really ignorant of what you meant and not just pointing out how things have changed then it is a good thing that he is gone.

 

[The-Hack]

Jauk, it was a weird conversation, indeed.