We can make a living off of teams guessing Dixon or Driskel.Originally Posted by SicemDawgz
|
|
|
|
|
We can make a living off of teams guessing Dixon or Driskel.
If we don't lose games we SHOULD win, we'll be okay. Then stealing one vs. a superior foe would be icing on the cake.
I don't have any particular expectation for the season as a whole. 7 wins? 8 wins? More? and bowling! yeah, that works.
I agree with ya, '80. And ANYONE who ASSUMES the Southern game is a "mail-in win" -- hasn't been a Tech fan as long as you and I have been.
Have seen up put of lackluster performances, lose games which were well in hand, and lose games that no one on the planet can explain. Never take a game for granted as a Tech fan. I just hope that Tulane, NWSt, and ODU are fresh enough in our current players minds that they keep their heads on straight this year.
Eternal optimist!
Have seen up put of lackluster performances, lose games which were well in hand, and lose games that no one on the planet can explain. Never take a game for granted as a Tech fan. I just hope that Tulane, NWSt, and ODU are fresh enough in our current players minds that they keep their heads on straight this year.
Eternal optimist!
Really good post. I agree almost completely. My biggest concern is our new DC, Baker. He will really be under the microscope this fall. We certainly have talent on defense. But if we don't time those blitzes properly against WKU's All-World QB when we play AT WKU, it could get ugly. Otherwise, the Dawgs should steam roll thru CUSA.....we just have better players and coaches.
I'm just hoping that Baker has the same skill set and timing that Manny Diaz had.
Last year we feasted on turnovers. It made a very mediocre defense into a very good one. The Super Bowl Saints did the same thing. Average defense (ranked about 15th that year in total defense) but led the league in forcing TO's (39 in 16 regular season games), but it was also WHEN those TO's occurred, always at CRITICAL moments, such as:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8Dexwd9wew
Love that!
And in the bowl game last year, the TO's we forced, were huge! We got 5 vs. WKU, and so on.... It got so bad at times....like at crucial times in the ODU and MU games, all I could do was hope the D delivered some killing blow....again. Overall, the 2014 defense was average, at best. With the TO's they were very effective.
Interesting take 80. Turnovers at opportune times made the "average D" great;
or, did an "above average defense CREATE trun-overs at opportune times? Forced, or unforced????
This could be an interesting discussion.
I can only relate what my high school defensive coach, Henry Rando, said: the sign of a truly great defense is the other team punting a bunch.
Granted, any defense can play it the way they want. For instance, you can coach your players to jump routes, or strip the ball, OR you can play it safer and have your guys make solid tackles, your DBs break up passes, not gamble for the INT. Etc... they are different approaches.
But, I know this, I'd rather my defense force a 3-and-out and the other team punt, from deep in their own territory, than watch the other team march down field hoping my D makes a big play.
I certainly don't dispute that the turnovers created and converting these turnovers into points was a tremendous part of our success last year. I will state however that turnovers had nothing to do with having the 17th ranked D against the run. When a team struggles to run they are put in bad down and distance situations and THIS leads to turnovers. Last year's D was excellent at forcing opponents into bad situations and putting the opposing QB in uncomfortable situations.
Good point. The first order of business of a defense is to stop the run. The Dawgs did a good job of that last year.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote