quote:
I get so amused when I see this. He was trying to win the damn game. He had a lead and a great OL and all-time great RB. I don't see the problem in that he thought he could take this safer approach and be successful. If you recall, as well, there were some execution issues on 2nd down that hurt us badly...or his plan may have worked...not to mention he did throw it a few times unsuccessfully.

I understand you guys like the Baylor approach though.

I just love this flawed logic.

We're only arguing for aggressive play-calling to utilize all of our weapons. Nobody's advocating a "Baylor approach." Classic over exaggeration.

And you do realize that twice this year (MSU and Florida) an overmatched opponent had a chance to win or tie the game on the last play.

You may say "but we won, so Les' strategy works." I'd say that Les' conservative second half approach let's opponents linger, and they never should even have a chance to win at the end, so the strategy is flawed and will ultimately cost us a game.

But I know I'll never convince you.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by lsufanz

NOLA

Member since Dec 2008

4726 posts

Posted on 10/22/15 at 1:57 pm to atltiger6487

According to comments from the coaching staff, they went into the game wanting to limit FL's opportunities to get turnovers on their side of the field as this was seen as the key to them having won a couple of games that they were not expected to. Deep in our territory, they played it safe and opened it up as the offense moved down the field. In the second half, there were not many opportunities to do so, as drives stalled due to penalties, drops, etc. They did not abandon the pass, just played it safe in enemy territory.

Apparently, they stuck to the gameplan they had going in and had no reason to deviate.