Football. LA Tech transformed under incoming Holtz regime - latechsports.com

Holtz's only 2 quotes in the article basically said Tech needs to mix in a little defense. The offense last year got us a 3rd place finish in the WAC, but it was the defense in 2011 that won the WAC championship. I would personally rather see the 2011 version of Tech football than the 2012 version. It drove me nuts last year knowing that if we had to punt or if we had a turnover, we were going to lose. Sonny said he wanted to outscore the other team; Skip is saying he wants to hold the other team to fewer points. A win is a win guys.

Damn depressing!!!! Did the author go to NC State?

I doubt our new OC will deviate from our/his form too much but our strength is the run. If the balls can't be thrown or be caught, then we run resulting in lower scoring. Let's go with our strength this year...maybe this article is a smoke screen???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Docman5

Are you guys mad because you heard the truth?! We all know our running backs are very good. We all know how gut wrenching it was last year to watch the other teams move almost at will against our defense. So, if we slow down some and run the ball down our opponent's throat and win, is that worth whining about? And while we run, our QB should become more comfortable with throwing and have a better chance at completion because we can run. Last years defense did get tired because they were on the field a lot. If we find we can't run, I expect our QB will be throwing the ball a lot. The truth - it hurts sometimes.

---

Come on now. Don't tell me you've fallen victim of the "tired defense" adage. Our defense did all of the same conditioning as the offense all summer last year and they went against us (the #1 offense in the country) all day in practice. And EVERY game, we ran more plays than they did at least by 20-30 plays. And still everyone wants to blame our #1 offense for our #120 defense. It doesn't matter what you think the reason for their poor performances was, the truth is that they didnt perform up to the standard that was set during the WAC Chapuinship year when we still ran the fast paced offense. And you can say "well the offense wasn't as good the championship year as it was last year." Exactly. We got better and performed to our highest level like we were supposed to, the defense didn't. Bottom line, expectations of a defensive drop off, coaching error, and whiny selfish players was what made us bad on defense last year, NOT the offense. Hell, Oregon's defense was top 50 last year, they prolly ran pretty close to the same pace as us, and nobody said their offense cost them games. So don't blame putting up points for losses. That's what an offense is supposed to do, it's when you don't score, or can't prevent a score that you lose. Would anybody like to revisit the Dooley days? Fans beg for better offense, we get it, and now everybody wants to go back to Dooley and score 17 a game again and give up 25 and go 4-8. Awesome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWarner63

Come on now. Don't tell me you've fallen victim of the "tired defense" adage. Our defense did all of the same conditioning as the offense all summer last year and they went against us (the #1 offense in the country) all day in practice. And EVERY game, we ran more plays than they did at least by 20-30 plays. And still everyone wants to blame our #1 offense for our #120 defense. It doesn't matter what you think the reason for their poor performances was, the truth is that they didnt perform up to the standard that was set during the WAC Chapuinship year when we still ran the fast paced offense. And you can say "well the offense wasn't as good the championship year as it was last year." Exactly. We got better and performed to our highest level like we were supposed to, the defense didn't. Bottom line, expectations of a defensive drop off, coaching error, and whiny selfish players was what made us bad on defense last year, NOT the offense. Hell, Oregon's defense was top 50 last year, they prolly ran pretty close to the same pace as us, and nobody said their offense cost them games. So don't blame putting up points for losses. That's what an offense is supposed to do, it's when you don't score, or can't prevent a score that you lose. Would anybody like to revisit the Dooley days? Fans beg for better offense, we get it, and now everybody wants to go back to Dooley and score 17 a game again and give up 25 and go 4-8. Awesome.

---

Lol. You WOULD know!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T1

Holtz's only 2 quotes in the article basically said Tech needs to mix in a little defense. The offense last year got us a 3rd place finish in the WAC, but it was the defense in 2011 that won the WAC championship. I would personally rather see the 2011 version of Tech football than the 2012 version. It drove me nuts last year knowing that if we had to punt or if we had a turnover, we were going to lose. Sonny said he wanted to outscore the other team; Skip is saying he wants to hold the other team to fewer points. A win is a win guys.

---

I believe it was the defense that got us 3rd place. We should have won them all. :shocked2:

Probably should have stated it better: the best offense in the nation, without a defense gets you very little.... I can't complain that a coach wants to mix in some defense. Utah St deserved the WAC championship because they had a good offense AND a good defense. The "just outscore them" philosophy didn't work for us. Let's try something else now.

Really? Suicide watch because a coach says he wants to protect the defense?

I'll tell you what i think. Dykes' brand of football was a pain in the ass. Shorter games cause the clock is running and better balance between o & d should not be a cause for concern. Its a team game and focusing only on offense gets u beat by good defensive teams.

I like football but i dont like the clock stoppage that comes with dykes ball. 4+ hrs in a stsdium= pain in my ass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LATechBanjo

I think BTB wrote it

---

wrong

Warner - all valid points. Appreciate the analysis; keep it coming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWarner63

Come on now. Don't tell me you've fallen victim of the "tired defense" adage. Our defense did all of the same conditioning as the offense all summer last year and they went against us (the #1 offense in the country) all day in practice. And EVERY game, we ran more plays than they did at least by 20-30 plays. And still everyone wants to blame our #1 offense for our #120 defense. It doesn't matter what you think the reason for their poor performances was, the truth is that they didnt perform up to the standard that was set during the WAC Chapuinship year when we still ran the fast paced offense. And you can say "well the offense wasn't as good the championship year as it was last year." Exactly. We got better and performed to our highest level like we were supposed to, the defense didn't. Bottom line, expectations of a defensive drop off, coaching error, and whiny selfish players was what made us bad on defense last year, NOT the offense. Hell, Oregon's defense was top 50 last year, they prolly ran pretty close to the same pace as us, and nobody said their offense cost them games. So don't blame putting up points for losses. That's what an offense is supposed to do, it's when you don't score, or can't prevent a score that you lose. Would anybody like to revisit the Dooley days? Fans beg for better offense, we get it, and now everybody wants to go back to Dooley and score 17 a game again and give up 25 and go 4-8. Awesome.

---

Good post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWarner63

Come on now. Don't tell me you've fallen victim of the "tired defense" adage. Our defense did all of the same conditioning as the offense all summer last year and they went against us (the #1 offense in the country) all day in practice. And EVERY game, we ran more plays than they did at least by 20-30 plays. And still everyone wants to blame our #1 offense for our #120 defense. It doesn't matter what you think the reason for their poor performances was, the truth is that they didnt perform up to the standard that was set during the WAC Chapuinship year when we still ran the fast paced offense. And you can say "well the offense wasn't as good the championship year as it was last year." Exactly. We got better and performed to our highest level like we were supposed to, the defense didn't. Bottom line, expectations of a defensive drop off, coaching error, and whiny selfish players was what made us bad on defense last year, NOT the offense. Hell, Oregon's defense was top 50 last year, they prolly ran pretty close to the same pace as us, and nobody said their offense cost them games. So don't blame putting up points for losses. That's what an offense is supposed to do, it's when you don't score, or can't prevent a score that you lose. Would anybody like to revisit the Dooley days? Fans beg for better offense, we get it, and now everybody wants to go back to Dooley and score 17 a game again and give up 25 and go 4-8. Awesome.

---

Thanks for Posting, the insight is appreciatted!

Whoever said USU deserved the wac championship last year...... No no they didn't. I don't remember but who was the player getting wailed on by the USU player on DJ Bank's kick off return td? WITH THE REF STANDING RIGHT THERE! I won't say there was cheating, but that is the CLOSEST I have ever seen to a fix and we still almost won.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rabiddawg

Really? Suicide watch because a coach says he wants to protect the defense?

I'll tell you what i think. Dykes' brand of football was a pain in the ass. Shorter games cause the clock is running and better balance between o & d should not be a cause for concern. Its a team game and focusing only on offense gets u beat by good defensive teams.

I like football but i dont like the clock stoppage that comes with dykes ball. 4+ hrs in a stsdium= pain in my ass.

---

Protect the defense? What is this, middle school? This is D-1 football, if you're a player, you show up and play. I get that scheme is a big factor, but you shouldn't be "taken care of" as a college player. Nobody complains ab taking care of an offense when a defense gets a turnover and the offense just finished a 15 play series and has to go right back out there. We're expected to score, defenses should be held to the same standard no matter how "tired" they get. You should have taken better care of your body if you aren't in good enough shape to do whatever is asked of you in a game you want to excel at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ANODESSEY

Way to try to lower expectations. Slower offense won't be like last year which was fun to watch, run more, won't score over 40, probably will finish .500.

---

I do not believe that. Last year I posted we would have trouble with UtAh state and San Jose -when we were 9-1. Took heat. We had no defence and both teams were better balanced offensively and solid on D. We have 7-8 teams on schedule in bottom 100 . I have no problem watching Dixon-king- maybe even Hunter. I expect us to play Tulsa in Ruston for the division championship. I have been wrong before but I expect us to be a really solid team. Our offensive coach LEAD nation in passing -- Go Dogs -- 26/28 !!!