I spent some time this week watching replays of A&M's games vs. Clemson, Alabama, and Arkansas to try to get an idea of what UK is up against this Saturday. Here are some casual observations on Texas A&M:
OFFENSE
Players to watch:
· # 11 Kellen Mond, QB, SO:6' 2", 210 -- Run oriented quarterback in the mold of Terry Wilson. Very quick, very fast, but not terribly accurate. Does not possess a particularly strong arm and is clearly in the developmental stages of his career. Is dangerous in the open field but surprisingly inaccurate in the intermediate passing game.
· #5 Trayveon Williams, RB, JR: 5' 9", 200 – Feature back with nearly 2000 yards his career so far. Bowling ball type runner with a low center of gravity. Great speed and body that does major damage when the holes are there. However, he does not have great feet or vision. Rarely makes “shift” moves for extra yardage. Seems like he should get more yards out of his talent than he does.
· #2 Jhamon Ausbon, WR, SO: 6' 2", 220 – Big-bodied possession receiver that thrives on physicality at the point of the catch. They like to run him on crossing routes and intermediate corner / sideline routes. Not a burner (YPC is under 15 per catch) and not a threat in the bubble screen game. His game does not mesh well with Mond’s, but it’s the best they have.
· #54 Carson Green, OL, SO: 6' 6", 300 – A&M his high hopes for Green, who they consider the top talent in their OL. He has the size and instincts to make an impact in the run game. But can he handle Allen / Watson in the pass game?
Packages & Schemes:
· The first thing you’ll see is that it’s surprisingly old-school. They do their share of shotgun sets with 3 and 4 wide, but they’ll also go under center with two TE’s or a HB paired with a FB. In the running game they’ll give you your traditional dives and guard-pull sweeps, dives, and the occasional read option. They also throw in some designed QB draws. It’s clear that Fisher wants an athlete at QB because he picked Monds over a more productive passer in the spring. Ideally, they want to ram it down your throat and only pass when they have to. I like their mix of size and athleticism at WR and they have a stable of athletic (if unproven) RB’s. The OL is clearly the weak link, as it is both inexperienced and has struggle against ‘Bama, Clemson, and even Arkansas. Basically, it all comes down to Monds. If he’s missing his intermediate routes you can bully them in the box. If he on, then the threat of the pass can open some real running lanes for the QB.
Overall: I like the matchup here for Kentucky. Their offense is very much like MSU's, only without as much experience. Mond can be tough out, but he's not the power runner Fitz is. They are extremely dependent on the run, which plays right into UK's strengths. I really like UK's front seven vs. A&M's OL. That's going to be a huge advantage for us.
_________________________________________________________________
DEFENSE:
Players to watch:
· #46 Landis Durham, DE/OLB, SR: 6' 3", 255 – Hybrid Josh Allen type that excels at rushing the passer. Had double-digit sacks last year from end position. Only average in coverage and can be overwhelmed at the point of attack. Aggies tend to have him line up on the weak side of the formation in a 2 point stance. On obvious passing downs he can be a holy terror.
· #25 Tyrel Dodson, SLB, Jr: 6' 2", 242 – The most versatile of their LB, Dodson doesn’t get the media attention that Durham gets but is perhaps a more vital cog in the defense. Covers TE’s and RB’s out of the backfield and plays the run well. Is often asked to be a 3-4 Jack on one down and a 4-3 SLB on another. When he plays well, the defense plays well.
· #6 Donovan Wilson, S, SR: 6' 1", 207 – One of the few upperclassmen in a young but talented secondary. Wilson is active in the run game and patrols centerfield with authority. If UK allows him to stay in the box all night we'll have trouble.
Packages and Schemes:
· A&M prides itself on being very multiple and not bound to any one particular scheme. This is evident when watching them on film. Their base defense will have three down linemen, a DE / OLB in a 2-point stance over the weakside tackle (usually Durham) and three linebackers. So it looks like a 4-3 with one of their DE’s in standing up. When they switch to nickel, that’s when things get interesting. They may go to a 4-2-5, a 3-3-5, or a straight nickel. They don’t come at you with a lot of numbers on the blitz. Instead, they like to get penetration from the D-line and create confusion with multiple looks. Their secondary features great length, but it is also very young. The LB's are a bit on the light side but very athletic and quick to the ball. Their DL is made up of unusually light DT’s, so don't look for any 330 lbs lane cloggers. The D-Linemen are more like Oliver at Houston--light and quick off the snap.
Overall: This feels like a bad matchup for A&M. I think that their scheme was meant to stop spread offenses, not old-fashioned ground and pound. They're light every where (much like USC is) and vulnerable to the power running game. Normally, I'd say that they'd simply stack the box, but their secondary is extremely young and has had injury issues as well. Again, I think these factors work in UK's favor.
Final Analysis: Early in the year, I penciled this in as a loss for UK. Now that UK is much better than I expected I have to rethink that notion. Plus, A&M seems to be going through the growing pains of switching coaches, with lots of nice blocks that belong in someone else's set of Legos. It may take a few years before Jimbo get's what he wants on offense and defense. Until then, Kentucky has the identity, the talent, and the experience. If Wilson can be just good enough to keep eight men out of the box, Stoops will be draining the clock in the 3rd quarter: UK 27 - A&M 17
OFFENSE
Players to watch:
· # 11 Kellen Mond, QB, SO:6' 2", 210 -- Run oriented quarterback in the mold of Terry Wilson. Very quick, very fast, but not terribly accurate. Does not possess a particularly strong arm and is clearly in the developmental stages of his career. Is dangerous in the open field but surprisingly inaccurate in the intermediate passing game.
· #5 Trayveon Williams, RB, JR: 5' 9", 200 – Feature back with nearly 2000 yards his career so far. Bowling ball type runner with a low center of gravity. Great speed and body that does major damage when the holes are there. However, he does not have great feet or vision. Rarely makes “shift” moves for extra yardage. Seems like he should get more yards out of his talent than he does.
· #2 Jhamon Ausbon, WR, SO: 6' 2", 220 – Big-bodied possession receiver that thrives on physicality at the point of the catch. They like to run him on crossing routes and intermediate corner / sideline routes. Not a burner (YPC is under 15 per catch) and not a threat in the bubble screen game. His game does not mesh well with Mond’s, but it’s the best they have.
· #54 Carson Green, OL, SO: 6' 6", 300 – A&M his high hopes for Green, who they consider the top talent in their OL. He has the size and instincts to make an impact in the run game. But can he handle Allen / Watson in the pass game?
Packages & Schemes:
· The first thing you’ll see is that it’s surprisingly old-school. They do their share of shotgun sets with 3 and 4 wide, but they’ll also go under center with two TE’s or a HB paired with a FB. In the running game they’ll give you your traditional dives and guard-pull sweeps, dives, and the occasional read option. They also throw in some designed QB draws. It’s clear that Fisher wants an athlete at QB because he picked Monds over a more productive passer in the spring. Ideally, they want to ram it down your throat and only pass when they have to. I like their mix of size and athleticism at WR and they have a stable of athletic (if unproven) RB’s. The OL is clearly the weak link, as it is both inexperienced and has struggle against ‘Bama, Clemson, and even Arkansas. Basically, it all comes down to Monds. If he’s missing his intermediate routes you can bully them in the box. If he on, then the threat of the pass can open some real running lanes for the QB.
Overall: I like the matchup here for Kentucky. Their offense is very much like MSU's, only without as much experience. Mond can be tough out, but he's not the power runner Fitz is. They are extremely dependent on the run, which plays right into UK's strengths. I really like UK's front seven vs. A&M's OL. That's going to be a huge advantage for us.
_________________________________________________________________
DEFENSE:
Players to watch:
· #46 Landis Durham, DE/OLB, SR: 6' 3", 255 – Hybrid Josh Allen type that excels at rushing the passer. Had double-digit sacks last year from end position. Only average in coverage and can be overwhelmed at the point of attack. Aggies tend to have him line up on the weak side of the formation in a 2 point stance. On obvious passing downs he can be a holy terror.
· #25 Tyrel Dodson, SLB, Jr: 6' 2", 242 – The most versatile of their LB, Dodson doesn’t get the media attention that Durham gets but is perhaps a more vital cog in the defense. Covers TE’s and RB’s out of the backfield and plays the run well. Is often asked to be a 3-4 Jack on one down and a 4-3 SLB on another. When he plays well, the defense plays well.
· #6 Donovan Wilson, S, SR: 6' 1", 207 – One of the few upperclassmen in a young but talented secondary. Wilson is active in the run game and patrols centerfield with authority. If UK allows him to stay in the box all night we'll have trouble.
Packages and Schemes:
· A&M prides itself on being very multiple and not bound to any one particular scheme. This is evident when watching them on film. Their base defense will have three down linemen, a DE / OLB in a 2-point stance over the weakside tackle (usually Durham) and three linebackers. So it looks like a 4-3 with one of their DE’s in standing up. When they switch to nickel, that’s when things get interesting. They may go to a 4-2-5, a 3-3-5, or a straight nickel. They don’t come at you with a lot of numbers on the blitz. Instead, they like to get penetration from the D-line and create confusion with multiple looks. Their secondary features great length, but it is also very young. The LB's are a bit on the light side but very athletic and quick to the ball. Their DL is made up of unusually light DT’s, so don't look for any 330 lbs lane cloggers. The D-Linemen are more like Oliver at Houston--light and quick off the snap.
Overall: This feels like a bad matchup for A&M. I think that their scheme was meant to stop spread offenses, not old-fashioned ground and pound. They're light every where (much like USC is) and vulnerable to the power running game. Normally, I'd say that they'd simply stack the box, but their secondary is extremely young and has had injury issues as well. Again, I think these factors work in UK's favor.
Final Analysis: Early in the year, I penciled this in as a loss for UK. Now that UK is much better than I expected I have to rethink that notion. Plus, A&M seems to be going through the growing pains of switching coaches, with lots of nice blocks that belong in someone else's set of Legos. It may take a few years before Jimbo get's what he wants on offense and defense. Until then, Kentucky has the identity, the talent, and the experience. If Wilson can be just good enough to keep eight men out of the box, Stoops will be draining the clock in the 3rd quarter: UK 27 - A&M 17
