FILM ANALYSIS: Texas A&M defense relied mainly on getting pressure with four in opener, Canes will need to take advantage
The Miami Hurricanes faced a relatively easy Game 1 opponent in Miami (Ohio), winning in a blowout, and Texas A&M had the same result with its home opener vs. New Mexico – a 52-10 victory (although it was 14-7 Texas A&M midway through the second quarter).
Regardless of the level of opponent, certain things can be gleaned from the opening games based on schemes and talent level. We’ve been breaking down film of Miami already this week, looking at everything from Lance Guidry’s system and third down attack to what happened in the UM run game’s explosive plays.
Today it’s time for a look at what Texas A&M showed in its first game … and which of those areas can cause issues for Miami on Saturday or perhaps be exploited.
We broke down the Aggies’ offense and that challenge yesterday, now it’s time to look at the Texas A&M defense and that challenge.
INSIDE THE TEXAS A&M DEFENSIVE LINE USAGE
Miami’s offensive line easily handled an undersized Miami-Ohio RedHawks D line on Friday night, pushing them around in the run game and opening big holes. But what Texas A&M did Saturday is likely more of what the Canes will see and at a much different level. Texas A&M had 10 tackles for loss and two sacks in the game … and that was without doing anything too intricate. The team rushed the standard four quite a bit and would blitz off the edge every now and then (UNM totaled 222 yards).
Up front second-year DT Walter Nolan (6-4, 290, had 7 tackles and TFL) made his presence felt and Shemar Turner also had a sack. There are a host of linemen that are tough to handle on a team littered with 4- and 5-star DL prospects. It seems evident the Aggies think their DL is good enough where there isn’t a need to constantly bring more than just four in the rush. That could work to Miami’s advantage if the Canes hold up in pass protection/run blocking.
Examples of taking advantage when the rush doesn’t get there are below, with the first clip from early in the second quarter (Texas A&M rushes four, and the linebackers press up on the play action fake, QB has time to survey field and make the throw):
Another example was on the team’s very next pass play when four rushed and the linebacker pressed up to the RB going out for a screen pass and the QB initially feinting that way (with Aggies only rushing four the Lobos didn’t need RB to help protect):
Some more notes off the game film:
* The Aggies’ defensive front wasn’t trying to confuse the New Mexico offense much. They would line up four that would rush, and sometimes bring a single additional blitzer (often whoever was lined up at nickel/corner). So Miami has to be wary of that.
* On the first third-and-short situation of the game (third and three), the Aggies rushed five with the corners pressed up and at the snap blitzed the safety. A run up the middle by the Lobos converted. On the next play it was back to the base 4-3 D with no blitz, and the pass protection held up fine – when a corner fell down that resulted in a 21-yard catch by DJ Washington. It will be interesting to see if Texas A&M continues to feel like against UM it can get pressure with just four rushing or not.
* This is a big, fast defensive line with depth, and when New Mexico tried to take advantage of what it perceived as over pursuit with a reverse early in the second quarter it would have been a 10-yard loss if not for Shemar Stewart grabbing a facemask.
* The play-action fakes seemed to buy the Lobos some time in the passing game, so look for the Canes to take advantage of that.
* The Aggies blitzed aggressively on the game’s initial third-and-long. On that third-and-12 play Texas A&M brought six at the QB despite four receivers running routes. It ended with a bad pass into good one-on-one coverage to the left side (see below).
On the next third and long (third and 19)? Texas A&M showed a blitz at the snap but then dropped LB Edgerrin Cooper into coverage (see below). The four rushers didn’t get there quickly enough and the pass was almost caught just shy of the sticks.
A third-and-10 play after A&M had gone up 21-7 midway through the second quarter saw six at the line for the Aggies, with one backing off just before the snap to guard the slot receiver and the other five rushing. The pass into double coverage on the left sideline was incomplete.
Even against an overmatched New Mexico OL with top talent, the Texas A&M rush really wasn’t dominant snap after snap. So there could be some room to work for Tyler Van Dyke to be able to get some throws off down the field in favorable situations.
THERE IS SOME SOFTNESS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TEXAS A&M RUN D
Texas A&M had 10 tackles for loss on Saturday, led by three from LB Edgerrin Cooper (8 total tackles) and 1.5 from transfer CB Josh DeBerry (team high 10 tackles in opener, sack, INT). Up front second-year DT Walter Nolan (6-4, 290, had 7 tackles and TFL) made his presence felt as did safety Bryce Anderson (5 tackles, TFL, QBH). DL Shemar Turner also had a sack.
So it is a very active defense with all levels able to attack the line of scrimmage.
But, with that said, not including the two sacks, the UNM run game netted 104 yards on 30 attempts (3.5 YPC). For a team that was vastly overmatched up front, that’s not too bad. And the Canes will no doubt take note of it. It’s also not a secret that the A&M run defense was flat out awful last year, ranking No. 121 in the nation and allowing 208.8 rush yards per game.
Some notes:
* On its first third-and-three of the game, the Lobos ran a draw up the middle against a five-man front with a blitzing safety. It hit for a first down by using a pulling guard to take out one tackle and with the other tackle leaving his gap to try and out-leverage his man to the outside. It was not sound defense by the tackles, who left a decent sized wedge to run through.
* In general it seemed the runs up the middle fared better than the ones on the edge. The PFF numbers backed that up – 10 runs around the right side netted 10 yards (1.0 YPC); seven runs around the left side netted 19 yards (2.7 YPC). Meanwhile runs between the left guard and right guard saw 11 carries for 58 yards (5.3 YPC). So that could be an area Miami can attack given its strength on the interior with Matt Lee and Javion Cohen leading the way.
* You can see from the clip below some of the gap integrity issues up the middle that Texas A&M had. It appears the Aggies are anticipating a run right (despite a jet sweep motion in the other direction pre snap), and the defensive tackle on the left side crashes hard to his left at the snap which leaves a big hole. The tight end coming over to help open the hole wasn’t even needed – the gash play ends with a 27-yard TD.
QUICK HITTERS DOWN THE MIDDLE ARE LIKELY TO HAVE MORE SUCCESS THAN HORIZONTAL TOSSES
When New Mexico attempted quick lateral passes at the line (which UM used so effectively in its opener) they were stood up. That’s in part because Texas A&M tended to press up in coverage with the safeties also aggressive. So the Canes will likely be better off looking for quick hitters down the middle or downfield opportunities vs. the short game against this kind of D.
As for those quick passes attacking down the middle? See below:
So, to sum it all up, there are some big areas of concern that Texas A&M will pose for the Miami Hurricanes, but there can be some answers if Shannon Dawson schemes it up right. When Miami has the ball you can see there are opportunities to run successfully (particularly up the middle) … and hit on quick throws down the middle while attacking down the seams as well. That just might be a formula for success to a win this Miami program desperately needs to get the momentum going bigtime in 2023.
The post FILM ANALYSIS: Texas A&M defense relied mainly on getting pressure with four in opener, Canes will need to take advantage appeared first on On3.
