quote:
quote:
As bad as YOU think Jefferson was in the BCSCG, he completed almost 65% of his passes in that game
Whoopee...for how may yards though. His pass completions dd not come at critical junctures of the game nor did they extend drives in a meaningful way.

It's not Jefferson's fault that the o-line could not run block or pass block, or not commit penalties.

Jefferson is NOT the reason why LSU lost the BCSCG.

1. LSU did not run well against top five defenses. In the first half of the SECCG, LSUs' RBs gained 21 yards on 9 attempts. That's 2.3 YPC. On one possession, Jefferson completed a 9 yard pass on first down. LSU's RBs ran the ball twice and could not get the first down. The first half of the SECCG sucked for the entire LSU offense. During the BCSCG, LSU's RBs gained 24 yards for the whole game.

The problem with the BCSCG and the first half of the SECCG is that LSU's offense did not work against those defenses. The problem was the offensive line. For the BCSCG, the O-line couldn’t move the Bama D-line, and they couldn’t hold them back either. There was no run game, and there was no time to pass.

In nearly every series of the BCSCG, the offense line failed to execute on at least one play. Bama had the best defense in college football. It would have been difficult to beat Bama unless they made a costly mistake or the offense executed at a very high level.

2. The GOTC loss motivated Bama to better prepare for and play the NC game. Bama was playing for redemption. Bama was very well-prepared for the game. The Bama defense was fully prepared to shut down the option. The Bama defense was fully prepared to shut down LSU's deep threat.

3. Bama lost the GOTC with their prior offensive strategy, so they were forced to abandon it. Bama took greater risks to win the BCCG. The Bama offense went in a completely different direction than it had all season. Bama relied on McCarron and passing rather than Richardson and rushing to move the ball. Saban took the ball out of Richardson’s hands and made McCarron win the game. Bama threw on nearly every first down. It was a risky strategy, but what did Bama have to lose? They had already lost to LSU trying to run the ball. McCarron had a terrific night; thus, the strategy worked.

4. Even though Bama had flipped its offensive strategy, it does not necessarily mean that LSU should have inserted Lee at any point in the NC game. Hindsight is always 20/20, and we know now that LSU’s plan did not work. However, LSU trailed Arkansas 14-0 in the second quarter. The offense came around in the second quarter, and LSU blew out Arkansas. LSU trailed Georgia 10-0 at the half in the SECCG. The offense was atrocious the first half but came around in the second half, and LSU blew out Georgia. With a few dozen plays left, it was not unreasonable for Miles to go with the strategy that worked so well in the two previous games. It was at least as reasonable as trying a QB that was the antithesis of the ideal QB to use against Bama.

5. Jefferson was the right choice for the entire game. Lee would have been ineffective. Jefferson in the pocket slowed down the Bama rush because Bama used a mush rush to contain Jefferson and prevent him from running. It’s the same idea LSU used against Manziel to keep him from breaking off long runs. Slow the rush and contain the QB. Bama would not have used a mush rush against Lee because Lee is no threat to run.

So if Miles put in Lee, there’s still no run game, and now there is even less time to pass. If there is one thing Bama feasted on, it was immobile pocket passers. Lee’s historic numbers against Bama confirm this fact. His QB Rating against Bama could fit in a shoe box.