Morristown East at Sullivan South

[compusatman]

I do not have a son on the team, but have been coming to most of the games. I am very impressed with the youth on this team, and Seniors, as well.

I would guess that #44 is at DE in order to Sure-Up that position.

Defensive End is a very important position and he is doing a great job

there. Don't know why #50 is not playing more DE, he is quick and

seems to give the Def. a shot in the arm when he comes in (doing great at center, as well). If you put #44 at MLB, and move #33 to Strong LB,

as you suggest, --would you leave #5 at the other LB??? Seems that

the 2 sophomores are getting more than their fair share of tackles--MORE than their FAIR SHARE!!!!!!!!!! Speaking of #15, where on the field would you put him to allow him to be uncommitted. I am not aware of a postion that doesn't have reads and responsibilities. It appears that he is often, as OLB, out of position and does not cover the pass well.

As far as #33, have you been watching the same games as I have. He is all over the field, from sideline to sideline, making tackles and causing fumbles and even when he's not the first tackler, he is hanging on at the bottom of piles. Wonder why South does not use more of the 5 man front against the predominant running teams?? I keep hearing people in the stands asking the same question!!! I may not know everything

about football, but some things just seem apparent to me. South

Coaches are doing a great job--and I am not trying to question their judgment, just a casual observer here, asking silly questions----------- /popcorneater.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":popcorneater:" border="0" alt="popcorneater.gif" />

 

I would guess that #44 is at DE in order to Sure-Up that position. The reasoning for #44 to be at DE is good management. It won't change. But under ideal conditions he should and would be at MLB.Don't know why #50 is not playing more DE, He should be strong side DE. would you leave #5 at the other LB??? No. Move him to short side DE. Speaking of #15, where on the field would you put him to allow him to be uncommitted. I am not aware of a postion that doesn't have reads and responsibilities. It appears that he is often, as OLB, out of position and does not cover the pass well. The position of Rover or Dog is a "free" position. His only responsibility is to find the ball. He would do well at such a position. He can't seem to grasp the "stay home" concept of being a LB and reading the play so yes he does get suckered many times and doesn't understand pass coverage from a LB's point of view. As a rover he would be a contractor of sorts not having an attachment to the D as such. Both DB and THS use this concept. Against a predominantly running team a free safety is almost a wasted position. Then I would bring in Bobbeye Taylor for the short side LB. This setup will kill the run and play havoc on the flat route. The rest of the D is fine. Then you would see no more big plays. Then our offense could get down to the business of playing run and gun like we know how to.

[VolmanScott]

I would guess that #44 is at DE in order to Sure-Up that position. The reasoning for #44 to be at DE is good management. It won't change. But under ideal conditions he should and would be at MLB.Don't know why #50 is not playing more DE, He should be strong side DE. would you leave #5 at the other LB??? No. Move him to short side DE. Speaking of #15, where on the field would you put him to allow him to be uncommitted. I am not aware of a postion that doesn't have reads and responsibilities. It appears that he is often, as OLB, out of position and does not cover the pass well. The position of Rover or Dog is a "free" position. His only responsibility is to find the ball. He would do well at such a position. He can't seem to grasp the "stay home" concept of being a LB and reading the play so yes he does get suckered many times and doesn't understand pass coverage from a LB's point of view. As a rover he would be a contractor of sorts not having an attachment to the D as such. Both DB and THS use this concept. Against a predominantly running team a free safety is almost a wasted position. Then I would bring in Bobbeye Taylor for the short side LB. This setup will kill the run and play havoc on the flat route. The rest of the D is fine. Then you would see no more big plays. Then our offense could get down to the business of playing run and gun like we know how to.

 

 

Agreed on all. Good assesment Comp. The only thing we disagree on is the FB position for next year.

[compusatman]

Agreed on all. Good assesment Comp. The only thing we disagree on is the FB position for next year.

 

I'm sure #33's timidness from Frosh year ballcarrying has dissappeared. I haven't seen evidence of it but the way he plays D would make one think that he has learned the concept. OTOH, #5 was bulldoging up the middle as a Frosh. In fact, in the games I saw he was the only one that had the correct posture. That was then. Even Ricky Bobby wouldn't put his head down. And now he has a future. Suffice to say we have probably the best stable of RB's for '08 that we could hope for. If they could just be taught a couple of things they would all be killers. '08 will be powerful.

[maroonandgrey]

Wasn't this game last week? Just curious how it keeps rolling along?

[Rebeltothecore]

I'm sure #33's timidness from Frosh year ballcarrying has dissappeared. I haven't seen evidence of it but the way he plays D would make one think that he has learned the concept. OTOH, #5 was bulldoging up the middle as a Frosh. In fact, in the games I saw he was the only one that had the correct posture. That was then. Even Ricky Bobby wouldn't put his head down. And now he has a future. Suffice to say we have probably the best stable of RB's for '08 that we could hope for. If they could just be taught a couple of things they would all be killers. '08 will be powerful.

 

With Fletch back, along with #2, #5, #33, and #25 , and then theres #24 (all who have been pretty proficient at one time or the other at running and blocking) (all sophs this year, by the way, except for #15) there will be a stable full of quick-powerful-bruising runners. Makes one wonder if our Off.scheme will be altered somewhat in '08. Although we'll still have Kitz, Waterson, Zanoni as some excellent receivers, many of these potential backs are more suited for the the I or T, with a leading fullback to make holes. I believe Jeffers will be a great QB and will manage the spread efficiently, I'd kind of get excited to see some power football when we need 2 or 8.

 

How's this sound----#33 at one TE, #5 at the other TE, #25 at L-back (in the power I), #2 at fullback and #15 dotting the I, and hut-hut----run off tackle for 12 yds in a cloud of dust. Whooooooo-oooooo, that's what I'm talking about!!!!

[compusatman]

With Fletch back, along with #2, #5, #33, and #25 , and then theres #24 (all who have been pretty proficient at one time or the other at running and blocking) (all sophs this year, by the way, except for #15) there will be a stable full of quick-powerful-bruising runners. Makes one wonder if our Off.scheme will be altered somewhat in '08. Although we'll still have Kitz, Waterson, Zanoni as some excellent receivers, many of these potential backs are more suited for the the I or T, with a leading fullback to make holes. I believe Jeffers will be a great QB and will manage the spread efficiently, I'd kind of get excited to see some power football when we need 2 or 8.

 

How's this sound----#33 at one TE, #5 at the other TE, #25 at L-back (in the power I), #2 at fullback and #15 dotting the I, and hut-hut----run off tackle for 12 yds in a cloud of dust. Whooooooo-oooooo, that's what I'm talking about!!!!

 

No doubt Bradley will be able to concentrate on airing it out 'cause when it comes time for some ground work we got the blue collar boys.