- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Let's hear from those complaining about the Miles "offensive philosophy"
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:36 pm
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:36 pm
Tiger n Atl you go first. You posted this last week:
Every coach has an over arching strategic philosophical approach to football. If you have to be told or explained to what Mile's philosophy is after 9 years of watching him I pity you. But basically it's:
1. run first is the best option, passing leads to turnovers (unbalanced)
2. limit mistakes by the QB even if that means making him 'just another player' (not an on the field general and playmaker)
3. avoid turnovers at all costs even if it means shutting down your offense and major playmakers/producers (see Jeremy Hill comment in this thread)
4. rely on defense to win games, make stands late in the game to 'save it' and 'get victory'
5. sit on a lead, don't attack when ahead
-win games by a close margin, point differential doesn't matter, just win (win ugly)
1. We did run first. How did that work for us?
2. We did limit Jennings.
3. Well we failed miserably in avoiding turnovers in both the running and passing game.
4. We did rely on our defense. How did that work for us?
5. We did sit on our lead on that last possession. Three straight running plays.
6. We only won this one by 3 and some might say this was an "ugly win."
Every coach has an over arching strategic philosophical approach to football. If you have to be told or explained to what Mile's philosophy is after 9 years of watching him I pity you. But basically it's:
1. run first is the best option, passing leads to turnovers (unbalanced)
2. limit mistakes by the QB even if that means making him 'just another player' (not an on the field general and playmaker)
3. avoid turnovers at all costs even if it means shutting down your offense and major playmakers/producers (see Jeremy Hill comment in this thread)
4. rely on defense to win games, make stands late in the game to 'save it' and 'get victory'
5. sit on a lead, don't attack when ahead
-win games by a close margin, point differential doesn't matter, just win (win ugly)
1. We did run first. How did that work for us?
2. We did limit Jennings.
3. Well we failed miserably in avoiding turnovers in both the running and passing game.
4. We did rely on our defense. How did that work for us?
5. We did sit on our lead on that last possession. Three straight running plays.
6. We only won this one by 3 and some might say this was an "ugly win."
33
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:37 pm to NorthTiger
lets not and say we did
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:38 pm to Sampson
Why?
What do you want them to say? Well we started off sloppy and lost 2 games in horrible fashion then turned it around and now its gods offense? No one could really foresee this team turning it around and playing as hard as they do.
What do you want them to say? Well we started off sloppy and lost 2 games in horrible fashion then turned it around and now its gods offense? No one could really foresee this team turning it around and playing as hard as they do.
This post was edited on 10/26/14 at 8:56 pm
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:39 pm to NorthTiger
quote:
5. sit on a lead, don't attack when ahead -win games by a close margin, point differential doesn't matter, just win (win ugly)
I feel bad for you if you believe this is what Les tries to do.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:39 pm to NorthTiger
When it works, its awesome
When it doesn't, it looks god awful
Basically like anything
When it doesn't, it looks god awful
Basically like anything
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:39 pm to NorthTiger
This philosophy can work when you play great defense and special teams. Last night our defense overcame poor special teams and 4 turnovers. They were truly great.
That was not the case earlier this year.
That was not the case earlier this year.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:41 pm to NorthTiger
I have always loved his philosophy if you have the right players (we do).
Something that is beautiful when you can line up...they know it's coming...and you break the defense like a virgin.
Also something to consider...with just about 70% of teams moving to the spread and up tempo crap..it's becoming more of an upper hand for us. Most defenses are now built to stop the spread.
Something that is beautiful when you can line up...they know it's coming...and you break the defense like a virgin.
Also something to consider...with just about 70% of teams moving to the spread and up tempo crap..it's becoming more of an upper hand for us. Most defenses are now built to stop the spread.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:43 pm to NorthTiger
quote:
Tiger n Atl
I doubt he can answer you right now. He's probably still out on the ledge with people trying to talk him down. Had to be a rough night for him and some of the other tards on here.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:43 pm to dreaux
Les is going to punch Bama in the mouth repeatedly until they say uncle. Saban knows this and half his team will come to Death Valley hurt trying to toughen them up in practice.
In 2011 they crumbled in the fourth quarter like a cracker.
In 2011 they crumbled in the fourth quarter like a cracker.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:47 pm to NorthTiger
I think you are mistaking me as someone who was supporting the philosophy. I don't. I was only pointing out what the philosophy was.
I dont hate Les, he's a good guy. But that doesn't mean I agree with taking a bunch of elite 4 and 5 star athletes and using them to 'play down' with that philosophy so that we can brag about 'come from behind victories'.
I dont hate Les, he's a good guy. But that doesn't mean I agree with taking a bunch of elite 4 and 5 star athletes and using them to 'play down' with that philosophy so that we can brag about 'come from behind victories'.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:50 pm to NorthTiger
Funny thing is we went back to doing what we do best and have won 3 in a row. We spread the field and lose 41-7.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:51 pm to Tigerinthehollow
quote:
Posted by Tigerinthehollow
quote:
Tiger n Atl
I doubt he can answer you right now. He's probably still out on the ledge with people trying to talk him down. Had to be a rough night for him and some of the other tards on here.
Total bullshite as most of your posts are. I answered below and put some thought into my reply unlike you.
I was far from "being on the ledge", I was cheering, watching and supporting the Tigers like I always am every Saturday night douchebag.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:53 pm to AirborneJonnyA
quote:
? Well we started off sloppy and lost 2 games in horrible fashion then turned it around and now its gods offense?
The o isn't great, but our best threat is running it. Why do you guys want the qbs to throw the ball 40 times?
Posted on 10/26/14 at 8:58 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:
I was far from "being on the ledge", I was cheering, watching and supporting the Tigers like I always am every Saturday night douchebag.
trying to sound like a true fan now....when most of the time you are bashing your arse off...typical.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:07 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:
I think you are mistaking me as someone who was supporting the philosophy. I don't. I was only pointing out what the philosophy was. I dont hate Les, he's a good guy. But that doesn't mean I agree with taking a bunch of elite 4 and 5 star athletes and using them to 'play down' with that philosophy so that we can brag about 'come from behind victories'.
I don't think you were supporting the philosophy you wrote below. I think you were being critical of it.
1. run first is the best option, passing leads to turnovers (unbalanced) Are you not saying you want Camerson to throw more, to be more balanced?
2. limit mistakes by the QB even if that means making him 'just another player' (not an on the field general and playmaker)
So you think Jennings can do more, meaning you think Cameron and Miles are holding him back?
3. avoid turnovers at all costs even if it means shutting down your offense and major playmakers/producers (see Jeremy Hill comment in this thread)
Tell me who we shut down last night?
4. rely on defense to win games, make stands late in the game to 'save it' and 'get victory'
Rely on defense is a pretty old strategy. They even have a saying about defenses and championships.
5. sit on a lead, don't attack when ahead
-win games by a close margin, point differential doesn't matter, just win (win ugly)
Our offense is dictated by the skill of our QB. Are you saying he is quote "an elite 4/5 star athlete who they are playing down."
You are being critical of our offense in this post and don't even see it.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:24 pm to dgnx6
quote:predictable attitude. Nobody said throw 40 times. We need balance. Not 75% running and not 75% passing. We don't have balance, and there is no excuse for it. it's all on Miles. Remind me again how we scored a TD against OM. How many times did we run the ball into the end zone?
Why do you guys want the qbs to throw the ball 40 times?
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:28 pm to NorthTiger
We won in spite of the offense not because of the offense.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:30 pm to NorthTiger
negas say things like playing down to opponents and the offense is too predictable. if lsu is a run heavy, pro style offense, the only alternative is a more college oriented spread offense. perhaps even more up tempo.
the problem with this thinking is that the teams that run those kinds of offenses are not winning nearly as many games as miles is.
it could be said that if those teams had better defenses, they would win more than miles does. it's possible but, why criticize a winning strategy when the alternative isn't even playing itself out in reality?
as I have said many times, negas don't see the whole picture. they focus on the qb and individual plays. they don't factor in all 3 phases of the game. when they consider miles' overall record, they chalk it up to mere talent. however, if the team is winning on talent alone despite miles, then the sec isn't the toughest conference.
the problem with this thinking is that the teams that run those kinds of offenses are not winning nearly as many games as miles is.
it could be said that if those teams had better defenses, they would win more than miles does. it's possible but, why criticize a winning strategy when the alternative isn't even playing itself out in reality?
as I have said many times, negas don't see the whole picture. they focus on the qb and individual plays. they don't factor in all 3 phases of the game. when they consider miles' overall record, they chalk it up to mere talent. however, if the team is winning on talent alone despite miles, then the sec isn't the toughest conference.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:39 pm to Salmon
quote:
When it works, its awesome When it doesn't, it looks god awful
Just like my bedroom moves.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:42 pm to tenderfoot tigah
quote:
We won in spite of the offense not because of the offense.
We won on a 95 yd touchdown drive.
Page 1 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News