Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: BZ770 on July 06, 2010, 11:22:10 PM

Title: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: BZ770 on July 06, 2010, 11:22:10 PM
http://www.auburnundercover.com/news/articles/2010/7/6/auburn-cornerback-is-leaving-the-program (http://www.auburnundercover.com/news/articles/2010/7/6/auburn-cornerback-is-leaving-the-program)

Our Secondary was already thin.  Hope the Freshmen can step it up.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Townhallsavoy on July 07, 2010, 12:31:12 AM
Well, Mr Hood.  You final Auburn memory will be loafing off of the field only to be benched in a classic (if meaningless) bowl victory over the academic powerhouse Northwestern. 
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: GH2001 on July 07, 2010, 09:42:44 AM
Just couldn't cut the mustard like Cousin Rod. I hate that he is from my HS as well.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: JR4AU on July 07, 2010, 09:43:32 AM
Dude was a special teamer/nickle back.  Hate it when we lose any kidk, but probably best for all parties concerned. 
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: djsimp on July 07, 2010, 10:22:28 AM
It is what it is but I hate it for him. Like said, we really didn't need to lose any from the Secondary. I am wondering now if D Washington will stay at LB.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Snaggletiger on July 07, 2010, 11:33:02 AM
It is what it is but I hate it for him. Like said, we really didn't need to lose any from the Secondary. I am wondering now if D Washington will stay at LB.

D. Washington is a little light for teh backers, wouldn't you say? 

Besides, we didn't need him anyway.  We're rolling 10 deep....wait, what?
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: djsimp on July 07, 2010, 11:40:27 AM
D. Washington is a little light for teh backers, wouldn't you say? 

Besides, we didn't need him anyway.  We're rolling 10 deep....wait, what?

Wasn't it Washington who the coaches were moving up LB from the secondary? Now that Hood is gone, I would be willing to bet that this will change.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Aubie16 on July 07, 2010, 11:43:57 AM
Wasn't it Washington who the coaches were moving up LB from the secondary? Now that Hood is gone, I would be willing to bet that this will change.

No. Demond Washington has always been in the secondary. He played a little Safety last year but I think he'll be a starting corner this year.

Darren Bates moved up to LB this spring and I suspect he will still stay there. He can play the Anterrius Williams role that Gene Chizik loves.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: JR4AU on July 07, 2010, 11:53:10 AM
No. Demond Washington has always been in the secondary. He played a little Safety last year but I think he'll be a starting corner this year.

Darren Bates moved up to LB this spring and I suspect he will still stay there. He can play the Anterrius Williams role that Gene Chizik loves.

Don't know when it was updated, but Bates is still listed on the roster as a DB on the 2010 spring roster.  My personal feeling is that he'll be a DB, and the LB depth will come from the incoming Fr.  JMHO, YMMV.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: GH2001 on July 07, 2010, 11:54:30 AM
Don't know when it was updated, but Bates is still listed on the roster as a DB on the 2010 spring roster.  My personal feeling is that he'll be a DB, and the LB depth will come from the incoming Fr.  JMHO, YMMV.

I concur with this.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: djsimp on July 07, 2010, 12:03:54 PM
Darren Bates moved up to LB this spring and I suspect he will still stay there. He can play the Anterrius Williams role that Gene Chizik loves.

There we go. So you don't think after Hoods departure that the coaches will re-think this move?
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: JR4AU on July 07, 2010, 12:13:21 PM
I concur with this.

It has been my hope that Auburn will get away from the 200lb LB of the Tuberville era, and with Bynes and Freeman we seem headed that way, along with those in the 2010 class.  

From the 2010 class (don't get too excited if I've missed some big news on one or two of these names), I think the depth issue at LB and DB has been somewhat addressed:

LBs: Jessel Curry 6'2" 215, Jake Holland 6'1" 228, LaDarius Owens 6'2" 225, Jawara White 6'2" 220.  (none of these guys fits that previous mold of a Safety playing LB.  I think they may have tried Bates out in the spring simply because some of these kids weren't on campus yet.  At a minimum, I think Jake Holland contributes immediately.  

Athletes that are potential DBs: Ryan White 6'0" 185, Ryan Smith 6'2" 208, Trovon Reed 6'0" 173, Shaun Kitchens 6'3" 211, Chris Davis 5'11" 175,

DBs:  Demetruce McNeal 6'1" 176, Jonathon Mincy 5'10" 175

If 3 or 4 of the above can CONTRIBUTE this season we'll be MUCH better off.  
 
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Aubie16 on July 07, 2010, 12:25:28 PM
There we go. So you don't think after Hoods departure that the coaches will re-think this move?

No I think playing as a coverage linebacker in Chizik's Cover 2 is his true calling. People talk about Tuberville's small linebackers, but that was very much a Chizik thing as well. I think in Chizik's perfect linebacking corp, you have 2 bigger guys and one smaller, faster linebacker. Think Antrerius Williams, Mayo Sowell type.

Bates had a phenomenal freshman year for what he was forced to do but the fact is he was out of position a couple times as a safety. He is very aggressive at the point of attack and that can play perfectly as the coverage linebacker. Once he continues to add some weight, he can be the guy that can cover the 3rd or 4th receiver, but can also step up in run support.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Godfather on July 07, 2010, 12:30:32 PM
No I think playing as a coverage linebacker in Chizik's Cover 2 is his true calling. People talk about Tuberville's small linebackers, but that was very much a Chizik thing as well.

Bates had a phenomenal freshman year for what he was forced to do but the fact is he was out of position a couple times as a safety. He is very aggressive at the point of attack and that can play perfectly as the coverage linebacker. Once he continues to add some weight, he can be the guy that can cover the 3rd or 4th receiver, but can also step up in run support.
Think Karlos Dansby. (One of my all time favorite players BTW)
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: JR4AU on July 07, 2010, 12:38:13 PM
No I think playing as a coverage linebacker in Chizik's Cover 2 is his true calling. People talk about Tuberville's small linebackers, but that was very much a Chizik thing as well.

Bates had a phenomenal freshman year for what he was forced to do but the fact is he was out of position a couple times as a safety. He is very aggressive at the point of attack and that can play perfectly as the coverage linebacker. Once he continues to add some weight, he can be the guy that can cover the 3rd or 4th receiver, but can also step up in run support.

I guess we could quibble over terminology...Darren Bates will be a Safety/Nickel Back.  In Nickel Defenses he'll sometimes be in basically a hybrid NB/LB role.  He'll still be a DB, but a DB with strong run support ability and assigment.  A role necessitated by today's spread offenses.  He will not be playing a true LB position in the base 4-3 unless we're severly injury depleted. 
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Aubie16 on July 07, 2010, 12:45:21 PM
I guess we could quibble over terminology...Darren Bates will be a Safety/Nickel Back.  In Nickel Defenses he'll sometimes be in basically a hybrid NB/LB role.  He'll still be a DB, but a DB with strong run support ability and assigment.  A role necessitated by today's spread offenses.  He will not be playing a true LB position in the base 4-3 unless we're severly injury depleted.  

We'll just disagree. We won't find out til fall practice and to a certain extent the first game but I believe when we are in our 4-3 Tampa 2 defense we'll see Stevens, Bynes, Bates and Freeman rotating as our main linebackers.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: JR4AU on July 07, 2010, 01:39:14 PM
We'll just disagree. We won't find out til fall practice and to a certain extent the first game but I believe when we are in our 4-3 Tampa 2 defense we'll see Stevens, Bynes, Bates and Freeman rotating as our main linebackers.

Like I said, semantics.  Call him a linebacker, nickelback, safety, or fucking unicorn, I don't give a shit.  I've read all the things the coaches said about the move.  "Linebacker with a nickel mentality"  "Chizik said the team plans to play him in what will largely be a linebacker position this season."  

Here's the thing...all of the things talk about coverage responsibility.  In the run game there are 8 gaps to defend.  Almost nobody plays a true "2 gap" 34 anymore, meaning having DLs responsible for playing their man head up, and accounting for gaps on both sides of him.  Saban's vaunted 3-4 defense is more a hybrid 3-4/4-3.  So, names of positions are largely a matter of preference rather than actual function.  So, whether you call it a 3-3, 3-5, 3-4, 4-3, or 4-4, you have to have gap responsibility for each gap.  Since most defenses have 7 DL's and LBs total, then that extra player has to come from somewhere other than the front 7.  Usually a Safety.  Even if you're in a Nickel Package, you still have to account for all the run gaps, someone has to play contain on the backside and force in the ally.   In pass coverage, you have a man, or a zone responsibility.  It's not all that complicated.

Back to the original point of the thread...I doubt we miss Hood too much.  
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Aubie16 on July 07, 2010, 01:46:08 PM
It's not really semantics when you say:

Quote
He will not be playing a true LB position in the base 4-3 unless we're severly injury depleted. 

and I disagree. I think he will play a true LB position in the base 4-3 regardless of injuries. No big deal though, just a simple disagreement.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: JR4AU on July 07, 2010, 02:02:02 PM
It's not really semantics when you say:

and I disagree. I think he will play a true LB position in the base 4-3 regardless of injuries. No big deal though, just a simple disagreement.

Yes, I was saying he won't be playing a true LB spot.  But whatever.  If it makes you happy to call him a true 4-3 LB, then by all means, have at. Just curious, is he going to be playing Sam, Mike, or Will?
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Godfather on July 07, 2010, 02:04:01 PM
Ah San Diego...Drink it in, it always goes down smooth. Discovered by the Germans in 1904, they named it San Diego, which of course in German means "a whale's vagina".
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: JR4AU on July 07, 2010, 02:29:28 PM
It's not really semantics when you say:

and I disagree. I think he will play a true LB position in the base 4-3 regardless of injuries. No big deal though, just a simple disagreement.

Some pics to show you what I mean...(you know I luvs me some teh googles)

4-3 Over (Chiz's base front), but there are 5 on the line of scrimmage.  Who are the LBs, who is the safety?

(http://trojanfootballanalysis.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Over-Cover-1-SL.jpg)

4-3 Under...but wait, only 3 men have a hand on the ground and there's 5 defenders on the line of scrimmage, WTF?  Can't be a 4-3 then...can it?

(http://trojanfootballanalysis.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Under-Cover-1-SL.jpg)

4-3 Double Eagle.  Should look familiar from the Iron Bowl...again, 3 with a hand on the ground, 5 on the line of scrimmage, 8 in the box, yet it's a "4-3" defense. 

(http://trojanfootballanalysis.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Double-Eagle-C1-Special-SL.jpg)

Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Godfather on July 07, 2010, 02:38:19 PM
I didn't know Chizik coached at USC, was he involved in the scandal at all...omg are we gonna be on probation.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Jumbo on July 07, 2010, 03:20:53 PM
I didn't know Chizik coached at USC, was he involved in the scandal at all...omg are we gonna be on probation.
Were fucked......in da mouth.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Buzz Killington on July 07, 2010, 05:23:39 PM
I didn't know Chizik coached at USC, was he involved in the scandal at all...omg are we gonna be on probation.

Good thing he lost his cell phone.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: The Prowler on July 07, 2010, 06:57:55 PM
Me thinks Darren Bates is filling out nicely at the Safety/Linebacker position...(Eagle position)

(http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j212/woodmaj/db-3.jpg)
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: djsimp on July 07, 2010, 07:58:45 PM
Me thinks Darren Bates is filling out nicely at the Safety/Linebacker position...(Eagle position)

(http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j212/woodmaj/db-3.jpg)

That looks like Natural Lights in the background?
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: No Huddle on July 09, 2010, 09:22:31 AM
Don't hate.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: The Prowler on July 09, 2010, 06:35:37 PM
That looks like Natural Lights in the background?
Nah...that's a case of that "Drank".
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: djsimp on July 09, 2010, 08:43:34 PM
Nah...that's a case of that "Drank".

Wrong Tigers.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: GH2001 on July 12, 2010, 12:26:06 PM
Wrong Tigers.

Thats a Longhorn beverage too....aka Texas Drank. I am actually not joking.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: djsimp on July 12, 2010, 01:26:23 PM
Thats a Longhorn beverage too....aka Texas Drank. I am actually not joking.

Would that be the "Beevo drank" or the "Horny drank"?
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: GH2001 on July 12, 2010, 01:29:50 PM
Would that be the "Beevo drank" or the "Horny drank"?

I remember a few years back Mack Brown was having some issues with players and this beverage. Apparently its huge in South Texas and Houston. TW - lot of this chit going around out there?
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: The Prowler on July 12, 2010, 09:58:20 PM
I remember a few years back Mack Brown was having some issues with players and this beverage. Apparently its huge in South Texas and Houston. TW - lot of this chit going around out there?
If I'm not mistaken, it started in Houston.  Paul Wall, Mike Jones and Big Pokey, basically, made it mainstream.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: wesfau2 on July 16, 2010, 11:53:30 AM
If I'm not mistaken, it started in Houston.  Paul Wall, Mike Jones and Big Pokey, basically, made it mainstream.

Those new jacks can step.

UGK and DJ Screw made that shit popular.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Aubie16 on August 04, 2010, 10:12:32 PM
Yes, I was saying he won't be playing a true LB spot.  But whatever.  If it makes you happy to call him a true 4-3 LB, then by all means, have at. Just curious, is he going to be playing Sam, Mike, or Will?

Quote
I guess we could quibble over terminology...Darren Bates will be a Safety/Nickel Back.  In Nickel Defenses he'll sometimes be in basically a hybrid NB/LB role.  He'll still be a DB, but a DB with strong run support ability and assigment.  A role necessitated by today's spread offenses.  He will not be playing a true LB position in the base 4-3 unless we're severly injury depleted.


Today at practice the players broke off into position groups. Daren Bates went with the linebackers and worked with Roof in a group of three consisting of Bynes, Stevens, and Bates. He didn't work with the DB's, Lolley, Thig, or Chizik at all. I expect that to continue throughout Fall practice.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: RWS on August 04, 2010, 10:33:20 PM

Today at practice the players broke off into position groups. Daren Bates went with the linebackers and worked with Roof in a group of three consisting of Bynes, Stevens, and Bates. He didn't work with the DB's, Lolley, Thig, or Chizik at all. I expect that to continue throughout Fall practice.
Call me misinformed, but I think this is a bad move. Bates was great in the secondary as a freshman. Why are you going to fuck with that with a year in at that position? Or are they just going to use him in a hybrid role similar to how UT used Eric Berrey? I know rumors went around that he would be moved to LB, but he may just be working with LBs to get their position down in addition to his normal spot, thus hybrid.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Aubie16 on August 04, 2010, 10:36:57 PM
Call me misinformed, but I think this is a bad move. Bates was great in the secondary as a freshman. Why are you going to fuck with that with a year in at that position? Or are they just going to use him in a hybrid role similar to how UT used Eric Berrey? I know rumors went around that he would be moved to LB, but he may just be working with LBs to get their position down in addition to his normal spot, this hybrid.

Well you can read the first couple pages of the thread if you want a detailed explanation of the reasoning. (JR4AU obviously disagrees with my assessment). Basically Bates was out of position a fair amount in pass coverage but was awesome in run support. The coaches want someone that can really move at the LB position while still providing solid run support. Chizik has used this in the past at Auburn with other smallish LB's. Not too mention, with McNeil, Etheridge, and Savage back...we have more depth than we are used to at S.

If a depth chart gets released at the end of fall camp, I fully expect Bates to be listed as a starter at one of the OLB positions. (Once again, JR4AU will disagree).
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: RWS on August 04, 2010, 10:45:58 PM
Well you can read the first couple pages of the thread if you want a detailed explanation of the reasoning. (JR4AU obviously disagrees with my assessment). Basically Bates was out of position a fair amount in pass coverage but was awesome in run support. The coaches want someone that can really move at the LB position while still providing solid run support. Chizik has used this in the past at Auburn with other smallish LB's.

If a depth chart gets released at the end of fall camp, I fully expect Bates to be listed as a starter at one of the OLB positions. (Once again, JR4AU will disagree).
But that puts you guys that much thinner in the secondary and relying on younger guys. But then again, maybe its all the same since AU's LB corps was thin in the first place. I guess at this point, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul. Plus, adding a 195 lb guy to the LB corps doesn't really pose that much of a threat to a good running game, imo. I guess in a perfect world you would have an elite 215-225 range LB that can move like he's 195-205 lbs. That poses a problem to opposing offenses.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: Aubie16 on August 04, 2010, 10:47:08 PM
But that puts you guys that much thinner in the secondary and relying on younger guys. But then again, maybe its all the same since AU's LB corps was thin in the first place. I guess at this point, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul. Plus, adding a 195 lb guy to the LB corps doesn't really pose that much of a threat to a good running game, imo. I guess in a perfect world you would have an elite 215-225 range LB that can move like he's 195-205 lbs. That poses a problem to opposing offenses.

I edited my previous post, but don't forget we are adding 3 veteran safeties that we did not have the last 5 games of last year. That will provide a lot of depth in the secondary.

Daren Bates weighed in at 203 for Fall camp btw. Very similar in weight to Karibi DeDe, Travis Williams, and Anterrius Williams their sophomore years. Those guys were just fine against the run.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: RWS on August 05, 2010, 08:35:18 AM
I edited my previous post, but don't forget we are adding 3 veteran safeties that we did not have the last 5 games of last year. That will provide a lot of depth in the secondary.

Daren Bates weighed in at 203 for Fall camp btw. Very similar in weight to Karibi DeDe, Travis Williams, and Anterrius Williams their sophomore years. Those guys were just fine against the run.
Still, I think you would want to see a 215-225 lb type guy in your LB spot. 
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: GH2001 on August 05, 2010, 10:39:50 AM
Still, I think you would want to see a 215-225 lb type guy in your LB spot. 

We hadnt seen those types since Dansby and Thomas before this past year or two. I prefer bates in a Safety role close to the line ala Roy Williams when with OU and Dallas or Eric Berry at UT. I'm not exactly comfortable with a 203 lb  LB either.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: AUTiger1 on August 05, 2010, 10:45:53 AM
Still, I think you would want to see a 215-225 lb type guy in your LB spot. 

You go with what you have and hope that he can add the lbs as time goes on.  10 more lbs or so isn't out realm.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: djsimp on August 05, 2010, 11:04:34 AM
You go with what you have and hope that he can add the lbs as time goes on.  10 more lbs or so isn't out realm.

Not if coach Yoxall has anything to do with it.
Title: Re: D'Antoine Hood Gone
Post by: JR4AU on August 05, 2010, 03:39:36 PM
But that puts you guys that much thinner in the secondary and relying on younger guys. But then again, maybe its all the same since AU's LB corps was thin in the first place. I guess at this point, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul. Plus, adding a 195 lb guy to the LB corps doesn't really pose that much of a threat to a good running game, imo. I guess in a perfect world you would have an elite 215-225 range LB that can move like he's 195-205 lbs. That poses a problem to opposing offenses.

Not saying the secondary is back up to par, but with the return of some upperclassmen from last year that were injured, it will look much better. 

Aubie 16.  I wrote a little blog that Godfather says he's going to post here eventually, that will lay out what I think about it.