re: 3rd and Chavis as something that cost LSU = Myth

quote:

---

120th ranked offense with the lowest number of plays (128th)

---

que? Only 120 teams totally in FBS.

Do you realize LSU ranks 10th in the SEC on 3rd down defense efficiancy?

10th in the SEC is good enough for all the tiger faithful?

How about 4th down conversions? Opponents converted 10 of 19.

quote:

---

Do you realize LSU ranks 10th in the SEC on 3rd down defense efficiancy?

---

I bet much of that came in the second half, especially 4th quarter when the defense was gassed from being on the field most of the game because the sucky offense was 3 and out constantly.

Why when this subject comes up why don't people look at the defense early and late.
If our defense does not force turnovers teams went pretty much down the field on us.
Early in year they were forcing turnovers left and right and scoring on them, later in year when the defense quit forcing turnovers they started allowing 375+ yards weekly it seemed.

quote:

---

Do you realize LSU ranks 10th in the SEC on 3rd down defense efficiancy? 10th in the SEC is good enough for all the tiger faithful? How about 4th down conversions? Opponents converted 10 of 19.

---

Yes, and I didn't say it was good enough or OK. 3rd and Chavis is the myth that a Chavis D gets worse the longer a 3rd down is, and that a Chavis D is unusually bad on those long 3rd downs. Today we had posters saying that not only did such a thing exist, but it cost us games this year. On the contrary, we did comparatively(to shorter 3rd downs) well on longer 3rd downs even when we lost this year.

We couldn't stop people on 3rd and short and 4th and short and did give up the occasional longer 3rd down mostly due to a very poor DL, not because of some particularly horrible scheme. That is the point of this thread, not to say that everything was roses with our D.

quote:

---

But how do you explain the game winning/tying drives by Bama, Ole Miss, Arky, Penn State that ate up the clock?

---

Because the defense had been on the field the bulk of the game and were damned tired. How do you explain not having a sustained drive by our offense?

112th in offense is going to mean you lose games, much more than 27th total or 12th scoring defense.

quote:

---

you know what our 3rd down defense was in the 4th quarter? 53%

fricking 53, thats awful

so yea, 3rd and chavis is real and it did help us lose games

---

I don't think you understand what this thread is about. Florida, Alabama, Penn State, ect can get any 3rd and 1 they want against LSU in the 4th quarter when our DL is warn down to even worse than they were earlier in the game. They can also complete a few short passes for the same reason. Our DL was bad in the 1st half of games, how bad do you think it is after being on the field all game?

The point is, the scheme defends long conversions, comparative to short ones, fine. That is what "3rd and chavis" is suppose to be about, the inability to stop what should be easier defensive conversion stops.

Excellent work.

Of course, there will still be people who will argue with you despite the undeniable facts.

please don't confuse the negative attitude about chavis with reasoned well thought out logic; rather it's because a hand full of tn fans coined the phrase 3rd and chavis and it instantly became truth to a segment of fans that embrace anything negative they can about our football team whether its true or not. there is no way you will ever change their minds because it doesn't fit their image of themselves as the smartest football people on the planet (even though said segment never played or coached themselves).