Will Muschamp came out today and blasted his defensive line, saying "Nobody has to throw the ball against us. I wouldn't." Auburn is 107th in the country in rush defense, allowing an average of 221.8 yards per game on the ground in games against FBS opponents. Oh yeah, we only rushed for 56 yards against them, which is the fewest rush yards they have given up in a game in the past seven years. If Muschamp even admits that his rush defense is crap, what does that say about our rush offense? Is there any hope of it getting better? I think it's critical we use these two games to improve our rush game, and that includes getting our freshmen RB's some quality playing time. Shump isn't cutting it. If we aren't able to run the ball, we will be staring 6-6, 7-5 right in the face. If we can develop one, then we have a good shot at potentially 9 wins.
Running game
- Thread starter FlotownDawg
- Start date
Shumpert basically got benched against A&M. I don't remember him playing much in the second half. I think that ship has sailed. Problem now becomes who is better option. Im not sure there is a great one on staff.
I would push real hard for Williams, but that fumble was huge. Holloway is fast, maybe they can find something around the edge for him. I can't see Mullen changing how he uses Dear very much. I don't know what the issue with Lee is, does he limit the playbook or maybe he isn't getting it done in practice, but he's been the #4 RB all year. They must have a good reason.
Long story short - it isn't changing much. Increasing Prescott's carries will help. But there isn't a running game to be found with this team.
I would push real hard for Williams, but that fumble was huge. Holloway is fast, maybe they can find something around the edge for him. I can't see Mullen changing how he uses Dear very much. I don't know what the issue with Lee is, does he limit the playbook or maybe he isn't getting it done in practice, but he's been the #4 RB all year. They must have a good reason.
Long story short - it isn't changing much. Increasing Prescott's carries will help. But there isn't a running game to be found with this team.
We need to stop turning the ball over. That is a much bigger problem than anything else. Our qb has thrown 0 interceptions and we have a turnover problem. That isn't normal.
This. I too think Shump is going to be limited. Even in his press conference Mullenz said something like "no one has stepped up but maybe some have taken a step back". I think that was in reference to Shump dropping another 4th down pass that was in his hands. If we can stop putting the ball on the turf and maybe get some breaks on creating turnovers we have a chance for 9+ wins. I think the run game is going to be better...it has to.
Need to get the freshman some significant playing time over next couple weeks, especially this weekend. freshman are going to make mistakes and the turn the ball over if they are thrown out on a big stage like aTm or Bama. need to use these next games to build their confidence and experience. Need to also transition Shumpert into a different role, he seems to have talent, he is just playing out of position as a RB.
I'm with you. I don't want to see him put out to pasture completely. He's too athletic not to find a spot somewhere. I'd like to see him at SS or Matt wells former spot, but I'm sure that's a discussion for the offseason.
With Dak graduating, I'd like to see Shump in the h-back position and get back to a power running game next season
Shump can catch and block....yeah I know he missed those two in the flat that were important.....i must have missed Mullen's call asking me what to do.....but third down back either blocking or catching in the flat is how i would use him.
Shump is a wasted career at this point IMO, and I'm not sure if that's on Mullen or him. There was a reason everyone else including Alabama was recruiting him as a safety, and we simply(me included) got that one wrong. Now it's arguably too late in his career to make that move unless he's willing to redshirt once, and there are still 3 young safeties on roster everyone is extremely high on...
Everybody acts like it's the RB's fault we can't run. Unless you are a special talent, you aren't going anywhere with the blocking we have going on right now.
Now, couple that with the need to pass block really well because: a. You need to pass more since you can't run, and b. your ****** LT is getting destroyed and needs help.
That's why we see Shump. He has been around long enough to know who to block. Every time you put somebody else in, if you are not running, you risk getting Dak destroyed. Not ideal.
We have one guy that's too small. Another that can't hold on. One more that doesn't know the playbook, a true freshman that is doing well to make it to both class and football practice, and Shump.
The line needs to get its act together and the RBs need to grow up. I'm not sure this is the year that's going to happen.
Now, couple that with the need to pass block really well because: a. You need to pass more since you can't run, and b. your ****** LT is getting destroyed and needs help.
That's why we see Shump. He has been around long enough to know who to block. Every time you put somebody else in, if you are not running, you risk getting Dak destroyed. Not ideal.
We have one guy that's too small. Another that can't hold on. One more that doesn't know the playbook, a true freshman that is doing well to make it to both class and football practice, and Shump.
The line needs to get its act together and the RBs need to grow up. I'm not sure this is the year that's going to happen.
I agree with you, but every other RB on our team is a yard or two more per carry than Shumpert's 4 ypc. It's because of plays like this (hope this works):
Last edited:
Our OL needs to improve run blocking. It is amazing how our line is pretty good at pass blocking and pretty sorry at run blocking. Usually OL loves to drive block / run block and they hate pass blocking.
But you can run some fly sweeps and option plays even if your OL is struggling---you just transfer the burden of blocking to your WRs and TEs. The fly sweep is a Dear specialty and would also work awesomely with Holloway.
But you can run some fly sweeps and option plays even if your OL is struggling---you just transfer the burden of blocking to your WRs and TEs. The fly sweep is a Dear specialty and would also work awesomely with Holloway.
What I see on this clip more than anything is...
62 getting blowed up. Hard to run after that. But I agree with almost everyone of the points in this thread. And that ain't encouraging. One question, who is the freshman "doing well to make it to class and practice"? Because that ain't encouraging either. Please, God, don't be Dear.
I agree with you, but every other RB on our team is a yard or two more per carry than Shumpert's 4 ypc. It's because of plays like this (hope this works):
62 getting blowed up. Hard to run after that. But I agree with almost everyone of the points in this thread. And that ain't encouraging. One question, who is the freshman "doing well to make it to class and practice"? Because that ain't encouraging either. Please, God, don't be Dear.
What you actually see us 62 turning his man to the outside creating a monster running lane in the middle that Holloway probably could have taken to the house -- Shumpert not seeing the hole and trying to bounce it while running straight into the back of his blocker and turning a sure 5 yard gain into a 3 yard loss -- and that is everyone's complaint about his vision. Our zone blocking is about creating seams instead of just running over the guy in front of you. That play was 100% on Shump and does a great job of showing the issue.
Shump should have taken that run inside, but it still would have only been a 2 yard gain as you see #1 coming off his block inside as well. Shump ran into #62 (who is getting run over) and made the wrong choice to bounce it outside instead of in.
Shump isn't out best RB, but he's our best everything else. Everyone else is going to get used situationally until they can do all the other little things including protecting Dak. Dan should ease up and let the other guys do more, but he isn't just be hard headed.
Shump isn't out best RB, but he's our best everything else. Everyone else is going to get used situationally until they can do all the other little things including protecting Dak. Dan should ease up and let the other guys do more, but he isn't just be hard headed.
Your video works, but it doesn't help your argument. Its tough to get positive yards when you are hit in the backfield milliseconds after receiving the handoff due to your OL being blown up.
To argue that he should have seen a hole develop up the middle when the route calls for him to bounce outside and he is hit 1 large step after receiving the ball, is nuts. That's way too high an expectation.
To argue that he should have seen a hole develop up the middle when the route calls for him to bounce outside and he is hit 1 large step after receiving the ball, is nuts. That's way too high an expectation.
Last edited:
I agree with the miss to go inside instead of out, but also notice that Shump is running into 62. He turned him outside, but he's still in the lane. Also, #1 (I assume a safety) is already at the LOS and coming off his block from inside and would have probably made the tackle too, especially if it was Holloway.
Now, I'm not saying that another back would not have turned that into something if he turns it inside and breaks that tackle, but he might have also gotten Dak decapitated on the play before because the LT is a turnstile.
Yeah. That's my point. It should have never been 2 or 3 yard loss.
On a different note, I'm not sure who tries to block #17, but he ends falling down for no particular reason after making contact.
On a different note, I'm not sure who tries to block #17, but he ends falling down for no particular reason after making contact.
No, it's not. You have to take that play inside. That DE is left unblocked by design, and 62 is just trying to kick that guy out after he flies up field.
That hole is there.
That hole is there.
The hole is there, but it's not where it's supposed to be. Notice Shump almost runs directly into 62 and his man b/c 62 is getting pushed back. Shump then makes the wrong call to go outside, but it's hard to make the right call when an OL and DE are in the backfield where the hole is supposed to be. Everybody 17ed up on that one, but it started with 62.
Was 62 suppose to leave the end for Wally to kickout? Or was wally suppose to lead up the hole and find a linebacker? If wally was the lead man and suppose to go up the hole then he missed the hole and shump followed his blocker straight into the man 62 was kicking out.
62, 19, and 32 are on three different pages there. And somebody shot bear.
62, 19, and 32 are on three different pages there. And somebody shot bear.
New poster. I have been a long time reader and don't think I have posted but once. Anyway the issue I see with Shumpert is obviously he does not have the speed or the quickness plus has poor vision which makes him look even worse at running back. If I were coach DM I would try him out at tight end because he has fairly good hands and is definitely a better blocker than Walley. He would actually be pretty good when we run the option with the tight end coming underneath for the pitch. What do you guys think?
It's called vision. The good RB's have it. Shump does not
Shump should've seen the hole develop right in front of him, and hit it hard. At worst its a 3 yard gain instead of a 3 yard loss. He has absolutely no vision, and bounces outside by default because he can't see any holes developing in the line. Too bad we don't have a fullback in our offense, because that should be Shump's position.
Agreed, Shump was attempting to run through the B gap but #62 failed to drive his man back and instead the defender pushed his way into the hole and Shump by instinct or momentum was forced outside and was tackled. Looks like Walley sealed the OLB (#17) as designed by the play had already blown up. Did #62 think it was a pass play? He was standing still in this clip, he should have been driving forward to shut down the DE.
How you could even say that is baffling...
There was a clear hole behind 62 and Shump just missed it...
I referenced this exact play in a thread a few days ago. Thanks stratdog for the .jiff
Edit: Who are you??? Do you even watch football or what? What is your beef with Dear?
There was a clear hole behind 62 and Shump just missed it...
I referenced this exact play in a thread a few days ago. Thanks stratdog for the .jiff
Edit: Who are you??? Do you even watch football or what? What is your beef with Dear?
Last edited:
I feel like you probably won't get anywhere with some people because they don't understand the game. I am no coach myself but it is obvious that there is a mammoth hole that Shump avoided.
What the 17 are you talking about?
Beef with Dear? No. I don't watch football at all. I just like to come sports message boards to see how many ******** don't understand the English language.
Beef with Dear? No. I don't watch football at all. I just like to come sports message boards to see how many ******** don't understand the English language.
A real RB uses his vision to find daylight. Shumpert has vision, he just looks for the next collision and then get`s knocked on his *** by the first tackler to make contact.
Shump has no vision. Sorry. If he was looking for the next collision, then he would hit the hole hard. Shump is more of a fullback than a tailback.
Sigh...
I hate having to explain to stupid people why they are stupid. Feels like screaming into the void. But maybe I can help your reading comprehension. So think of it as a favor to you.
But I'll just take on one of your awful points in the interest of time. You said "what is your beef with Dear" which shows a clear lack of understanding of context. The previous poster stated, "a true freshman that is doing well to make it to both class and football practice". By process of elimination, I determined that that may have been implying Malik Dear, whereupon my reaction to that possibility was, "please don't be Dear". You somehow, against all logic and reason, interpreted that as a "beef" against Dear. I have no idea how.
Good luck out there. You may want to wear a helmet.
I hate having to explain to stupid people why they are stupid. Feels like screaming into the void. But maybe I can help your reading comprehension. So think of it as a favor to you.
But I'll just take on one of your awful points in the interest of time. You said "what is your beef with Dear" which shows a clear lack of understanding of context. The previous poster stated, "a true freshman that is doing well to make it to both class and football practice". By process of elimination, I determined that that may have been implying Malik Dear, whereupon my reaction to that possibility was, "please don't be Dear". You somehow, against all logic and reason, interpreted that as a "beef" against Dear. I have no idea how.
Good luck out there. You may want to wear a helmet.