Page 1 of 2
Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:19 pm
by NewApp
Why was Evans being stopped at the line so much last night? He didn't seem to have his usual explosive game. Were they keying on him?
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:22 pm
by Rick83
NewApp wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:19 pm
Why was Evans being stopped at the line so much last night? He didn't seem to have his usual explosive game. Were they keying on him?
Seems like I recall hearing Napier say they had to stop Evans to win.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:29 pm
by McLeansvilleAppFan
Yes, I think so which opened up some of the early passing, though that did not hold the entire night either.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:31 pm
by CheckYosef94
Probably a mixture if Louisiana having a great rushing defense and them knowing he's a weapon and focusing on limiting him.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:35 pm
by biggie
They seemed to be stacking the box, a lot of single coverage on the WRs.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:38 pm
by appstatealum
NewApp wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:19 pm
Why was Evans being stopped at the line so much last night? He didn't seem to have his usual explosive game. Were they keying on him?
They pretty much stacked the box with 8 man fronts the entire game. Drink has fallen in love with controlling the clock (rightfully so, i guess) and he decided that as long as we were getting 3+ yards a clip, he could control the coverages and clock. We rotated 4 RBs the entire game, which told me Drinks plan was to "Floyd Mayweather" UL to death last night. As I referenced in another thread, we had plenty of things open with the way they sold out on Evans and Henni, Drink just kept jabbing with the run game.
I've heard that Drink has an obsession with Belichick, and im starting to see the parallels, on and off the field. He knew he had single coverage opportunities all game with Sutton and he didnt pull that spade out until the moment he needed it. Somebody referenced that they shouldnt have counted on getting a PI on that moment, but the reality is Sutton is either going to catch that, he is going to get a PI, or Zac is going to make a bad throw. Drink had set it up the whole drive and played the percentages knowing that Corey would do his part. The only gamble was if Zac would throw a catch-able ball.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:41 pm
by Rick83
The yards he did get were hard-fought and not the break out runs he's accustomed to. Gotta believe he's pretty sore today, that goes for Zac as well between the sacks and hits on his runs. Glad we have the extra days after this game before next Saturday.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:57 pm
by Yosefus
There were times the 8 man box was literally like a 15 foot wide wall with all red on one side and white a yellow on the other. Pretty impressed we got yards at all, and that it took almost the entire 4th quarter to wear them down. We beat a pretty dang good football program last night.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 4:15 pm
by App91
Could not watch, but did La-La rotate D Linemen?
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 5:35 pm
by appbio91
appstatealum wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:38 pm
NewApp wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:19 pm
Why was Evans being stopped at the line so much last night? He didn't seem to have his usual explosive game. Were they keying on him?
They pretty much stacked the box with 8 man fronts the entire game. Drink has fallen in love with controlling the clock (rightfully so, i guess) and he decided that as long as we were getting 3+ yards a clip, he could control the coverages and clock. We rotated 4 RBs the entire game, which told me Drinks plan was to "Floyd Mayweather" UL to death last night. As I referenced in another thread, we had plenty of things open with the way they sold out on Evans and Henni, Drink just kept jabbing with the run game.
I've heard that Drink has an obsession with Belichick, and im starting to see the parallels, on and off the field. He knew he had single coverage opportunities all game with Sutton and he didnt pull that spade out until the moment he needed it. Somebody referenced that they shouldnt have counted on getting a PI on that moment, but the reality is Sutton is either going to catch that, he is going to get a PI, or Zac is going to make a bad throw. Drink had set it up the whole drive and played the percentages knowing that Corey would do his part. The only gamble was if Zac would throw a catch-able ball.
Or get sacked like he did multiple times, I agree it was a great call at the right time but the pucker factor was sky high in my recliner
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 5:38 pm
by /\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09
We ran the stretch play too many times IMO. Not saying we rush for 500 yards without running the stretch, but it had a very low success rate last night.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:15 pm
by Rekdiver
I kept waiting for a Virgil reverse..... or the Jet sweep.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:35 pm
by Appstate88
Their job number 1 was to stop our runningbacks. They stopped us by crashing down on Evans but that meant QB1 was free to run.
Re: Evans
Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:51 pm
by appgrad95&97
I'm no expert, but to me it looked like we won because they focused on him, which allowed Zack to make some decisive runs.
Re: Evans
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 2:52 am
by NewApp
Perhaps another reason we won was because our defense held them to one TD.
Re: Evans
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 6:42 am
by BUTCH1991
Or perhaps we won because we had more points than they did.
Re: Evans
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 7:08 am
by HighPointApp
BUTCH1991 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 6:42 am
Or perhaps we won because we had more points than they did.
Or our Coach drank more Diet Mt Dew.......
Re: Evans
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 7:20 am
by bigdaddyg
I think we also proved (again) that we have too many weapons and there is no way to beat us by keying on just one aspect and hope that the others don't work. La could be the toughest remaining opponent on our schedule and we really beat them pretty good. I still believe that we could have scored at least one more TD but a win is a win.
Re: Evans
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 7:42 am
by Stonewall
He didn't have a lot of daylight to run to...
Re: Evans
Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 7:49 am
by NewApp
BUTCH1991 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 6:42 am
Or perhaps we won because we had more points than they did.
That's a possibility. lol