THIS!!!Originally Posted by Bigdog13
|
|
|
|
|
THIS!!!
Right. With a half decent D, we end up at 12-0 and playing in the Orange Bowl against FSU....
So we didn't need to play offense in the first half against ATM and USU?
Have y'all EVER considered ( I know Dykes/Franklin fans are blind to the fact) that when teams are beating the CRAP out of you they tend to lay down like ATM and USU did?
All very good points. The 6 or 7 min time factor (if you assume a player won't be playing BOTH ways) really highlights the importance of a player not "taking a play off". They shouldn't be resting while on the field.
Actually, he does. MD gets free consultation from me, Rhinodawg, and others every Saturday afternoon in the fall before home games. :icon_wink: but there's no way in hell we've encouraged him to say this stuff. In this case, the pupil has gone astray.
So 57 points on the board isn't enough for you? You are asking for more? You are saying we lost not becuase we gave up 59 POINTS but because we couldn't score more than 57??
So we didn't need to play defense LAST SEASON?
Yeah, that's always a point. The sad conclusion to that point is that even with ATM and USU laying down, our defense still couldn't stop them.
Not if you consider shutting USU out in the 4th quarter. People forget the game went into OT. Our high octane offense couldn't score in OT.
The D only gave up 20 to ATM and Johnny Football in the second half. Better than most SEC teams did against him.
Now do you want to know how our offense did in the second half vs. TCU in the bowl game?
Yes our D was horrible last year, but our offensive coaching decisions hurt us too. It's not as simple as saying "well we scored 50 so we should have won". The game is played for two halves and 4 quarters. A snapshot of the final score is not a good indication of how the offense played.
Of course it is. What is the difference between a high scoring team who's defense is forced to play more because they score fairly quickly or sometimes turn the ball over after 4 or 5 plays and a team who's offense can't move the ball forcing the defense to have to take the field more often after 4 plays? I'll tell you the difference. The high scoring team has most likely put points on the board whereas the other cloud of dust offense has only run 4 plays and punted. The defenses on those types of teams have to play just as much due to lack of offense as does our defense due to possibly quick scoring. If somebody doesn't have it already, I think I might spend time looking to see the average number of plays we ran in a series compared to the not so high octane offenses. I suspect there won't be much of a difference.
I could buy into your point more easily if every other team we played lined up like we did without there being much delay in snaps, but that simply wasn't the case. Like 13 says, these guys only have to go all out for 4-8 seconds on any given play then get to rest and catch their breath for the next 20 seconds or so regardless of what type of what their offensive unit is running. Look, it wasn't our fast paced offense that was responsible for so many blown coverages and wide open receivers when he had them in long yardage situations. If it were a situation of poor tackling and execution due to fatigue, that would be a different factor and would lend credence to your position. But that just wasn't the case. We had too many wide open receivers or dlinemen hitting the wrong gaps, lbs out of position, etc... for this to be put on the type of offense we ran.
That's because they were worn out from having to dig us out of the hole the defense put us in the rest of the game. If the defense had done their job and stopped USU from scoring so much early on and played a little bend don't break game, our offense would have been more rested to be able to execute more perfectly and wouldn't even have had to go to overtime.
Dirty, I rebutted your point from post 113 (a bit of irony). Try to stay on track by replying to my rebutt. Don't act like a Democrat and BD13 by trying to change the subject after getting schooled.
Seriously? The Defense SHUT THEM OUT in the 4th quarter. The offense was tired(?) because they had to score 38 after only scoring 3 in the first half.
And I rebutted your rebut with my rebuttal in post 115 and did my best not to show my butt in doing so, to a certain extent.Dirty, I rebutted your point from post 113 (a bit of irony). Try to stay on track by replying to my rebutt. Don't act like a Democrat and BD13 by trying to change the subject after getting schooled.
Lay down? Well from a player who was out there the whole game, I can tell you they didn't "lay down" for one second. Every defensive lineman and linebacker that I hit that game hit me the same from start to finish and the effort never changed either. This notion that players lay down while they are up in a game is ridiculous. None of us laid down while we were beating the brakes off of Idaho, I wanted to put 70 up on them just as bad as everyone else and I wasn't going to "lay down" and hope we still got it. I was going to play as hard as possible all game no matter what. Nobody from USU or TAM laid down that entire game. We found holes in their defense and scored at will after that. Same with USU. But this crap about teams laying down and that's how we stayed in the game is a truck full of BS.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
