- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
Disspelling the offense caused the defense to be bad thought.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:14 am
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:14 am
OK, so I started a thread yesterday about how porous our defense was last year, and nearly every response was centered around the idea that our defense was tired because they were on the field too long from lack of offensive production. Well that idea doesn't hold water.
I think we can all agree that this idea would be plausible in the second half of games, or even late 2nd quarter. But opening drives for the opposing team, number of plays in a drive, and time of possession would be a valid yard-stick if taken in the first half. We can also take into account the number of 3 and outs that LSU had in the first half of games.
Washington:
1st possession: 85 yards in 10 plays.
2nd possession: Int returned for a TD.
3rd possession: 69 yards in 9 plays
All of the above is in the 1st quarter and LSU had 1 - 3 and out.
Moo State:
1st possession: 1 play intercepted by PP.
2nd Possession: 9 plays 66 yards.
LSU had 1 three and out in the 1st quarter.
In the second quarter Moo State had 7 and 6 play drives. LSU had 1 three and out.
Georgia:
LSU absolutely dominated this game offensively. They had 0 three and outs in the 1st half. Georgia's opening drive of the 3rd quarter went 18 plays. Georgia also had another drive that went 18 plays in the 4th quarter.
Florida:
Florida's opening drive went 13 plays and used 8 minutes off the clock. LSU had 0 three and outs in the 1st quarter and 1 in the second quarter.
Alabama:
Bama's opening drive went 9 plays. LSU's 1st 2 possessions were 3 and outs, but LSU's offense had more yards in the 1st quarter then Bama. LSU's opening drive of the 3rd quarter went 9 plays...Bama's went 8 plays for 81 yards.
La Tech:
La Tech had drives in the first half of 6, 10, 7, 11, and 13 plays. LSU had 2 three and outs in the 1st half.
Ole Miss:
LSU's defense could not stop Ole Miss at all. LSU had 0 three and outs, but did throw an itnterception on their 1st possession.
The reason LSU's offense ran so many fewer plays than their competition is because the defense couldn't get the other team off the field. Perhaps LSU's defense is why the offense looked so bad.
Chavis' bend but don't break defense is leaving the other team on the field too long. Our defense didn't cause 3 and outs very much. In addition to making the defense tired, it takes the offense out of any rhythm they may have had.
I don't care if you don't agree, but the facts are the facts.
I think we can all agree that this idea would be plausible in the second half of games, or even late 2nd quarter. But opening drives for the opposing team, number of plays in a drive, and time of possession would be a valid yard-stick if taken in the first half. We can also take into account the number of 3 and outs that LSU had in the first half of games.
Washington:
1st possession: 85 yards in 10 plays.
2nd possession: Int returned for a TD.
3rd possession: 69 yards in 9 plays
All of the above is in the 1st quarter and LSU had 1 - 3 and out.
Moo State:
1st possession: 1 play intercepted by PP.
2nd Possession: 9 plays 66 yards.
LSU had 1 three and out in the 1st quarter.
In the second quarter Moo State had 7 and 6 play drives. LSU had 1 three and out.
Georgia:
LSU absolutely dominated this game offensively. They had 0 three and outs in the 1st half. Georgia's opening drive of the 3rd quarter went 18 plays. Georgia also had another drive that went 18 plays in the 4th quarter.
Florida:
Florida's opening drive went 13 plays and used 8 minutes off the clock. LSU had 0 three and outs in the 1st quarter and 1 in the second quarter.
Alabama:
Bama's opening drive went 9 plays. LSU's 1st 2 possessions were 3 and outs, but LSU's offense had more yards in the 1st quarter then Bama. LSU's opening drive of the 3rd quarter went 9 plays...Bama's went 8 plays for 81 yards.
La Tech:
La Tech had drives in the first half of 6, 10, 7, 11, and 13 plays. LSU had 2 three and outs in the 1st half.
Ole Miss:
LSU's defense could not stop Ole Miss at all. LSU had 0 three and outs, but did throw an itnterception on their 1st possession.
The reason LSU's offense ran so many fewer plays than their competition is because the defense couldn't get the other team off the field. Perhaps LSU's defense is why the offense looked so bad.
Chavis' bend but don't break defense is leaving the other team on the field too long. Our defense didn't cause 3 and outs very much. In addition to making the defense tired, it takes the offense out of any rhythm they may have had.
I don't care if you don't agree, but the facts are the facts.
19
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:19 am to AUmember
I don't agree with the conclusion that the defense was to blame for why the looked so bad, but I really appreciate that you actually supported your position with information. Amazing!
My conclusion is that the offense could have benefitted from getting a few more chances at the ball if the D could have played better, but the O's poor yards per play (especially rushing) tells me that the O really was that bad.
My conclusion is that the offense could have benefitted from getting a few more chances at the ball if the D could have played better, but the O's poor yards per play (especially rushing) tells me that the O really was that bad.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:22 am to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
but the O's poor yards per play (especially rushing) tells me that the O really was that bad.
I could not agree more. We(myself included) have just been laying the blame all at Crowton's feet, while the defense was just not very good.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:23 am to AUmember
quote:Most people just can't accept the fact that Chavis' defenses allow teams to move the ball AT WILL between the 20's. This puts the opposing team IN SCORING POSITION (similar to a baseball player getting on 2nd base and scoring on a single), on almost EVERY possession. It is not a defense designed to shut down opposing teams. It keeps our offense OFF THE FIELD. But our offense sucked last year, so that was probably a good thing. If we had a good offense, we would be bitching even more than we are now, because our offense would never get a chance to showcase it's talents.
Chavis' bend but don't break defense is leaving the other team on the field too long.
Once opposing teams get to the 20 yard line, their chances of scoring are greatly increased (kick a field goal or take a shot at the endzone with a pass). This is why the bend but don't break philosophy on defense does NOT work.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:25 am to AUmember
quote:
but the facts are the facts
Yes they are, but you seem to be cherry-picking your facts.
You can't ignore the fact that we were 3rd in scoring defense. That was a remarkable improvement from 2008.
You are also ignoring the fact that our offense was 8th in 3rd down efficiency, getting a 1st down only 38% of the time. You can't blame this on the defense.
Our defense had the same problem as our offense, 3rd down efficiency. We were 8th in the SEC in stopping offenses on 3rd down.
It's all about sustaining drives and stopping drives. We did both poorly last year, but our defense did manage to keep them off the scoreboard.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:26 am to AUmember
quote:
but the facts are the facts
The LSU scoring D was 11 in the nation in 09. Not too shabby when you play a Top 20 SOS. imo
Isn't the main function of your D to limit the other teams scoring?
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:32 am to AUmember
quote:
OK, so I started a thread yesterday about how porous our defense was last year, and nearly every response was centered around the idea that our defense was tired because they were on the field too long from lack of offensive production. Well that idea doesn't hold water.
I've written several times that in many games last season, our defense was punctured early on in the game, before fatigue could set in. In a number of games, our d actually improved as the game went on. I cited the most of the same games you did in your post. At the same time, the disparity in number of plays is not good—who wants to give their opponent 20-30 more plays per game? I just hope we don't have a repeat of this in 2010.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:33 am to AUmember
I totally agree with you, and posted this idea last year when the stats for the number of offensive plays were being discussed. The LSU defense simply did not produce enough 3 & outs and could not get off the field in critical situations. The offense got too few chances and could never establish anything. Not defending the offense, they were very bad also, but we have slipped in defense and the bend don't break style has hurt us.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:44 am to JR
Works both ways, doesn't it?
The defense doesn't produce enough three and outs, but the offense fails to reciprocate with drives.
Look at all the three and outs the LSU offense delivers.
Bottom line, 11th in nation in scoring defense ain't bad.
105 th (or so a few spots) in total offense ain't acceptable.
If you casting blame (and you are) this one is not close.
The defense doesn't produce enough three and outs, but the offense fails to reciprocate with drives.
Look at all the three and outs the LSU offense delivers.
Bottom line, 11th in nation in scoring defense ain't bad.
105 th (or so a few spots) in total offense ain't acceptable.
If you casting blame (and you are) this one is not close.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:44 am to JR
quote:
The offense got too few chances and could never establish anything.
So it's the defense's fault that the offense couldn't sustain drives? Is 38% 3rd down conversion rate acceptable?
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:47 am to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:WTF are you talking about!? LSU's scoring defense was number 11 in the nation last season. And that was despite and offense that had little to no productivity which gave the opposing offense not only more snaps to work with but good field position too. Yet the Chavis defense WAS NUMBER 11 IN THE NATION!!!
Once opposing teams get to the 20 yard line, their chances of scoring are greatly increased (kick a field goal or take a shot at the endzone with a pass). This is why the bend but don't break philosophy on defense does NOT work.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:52 am to PacLSU
Okay go back and see how many plays we ran compared to the opposition. Don't look at the 1st quarter only or first half,since football is once again a team sport and actually played for a full 60 minutes.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 9:53 am to JustSmokin
Why do we have to (somewhat) assume that defensive and offensive performance are mutually exclusive. Why can't we think of last years results as being a product of poor performance on both sides of the ball (without trying to associate a degree to it) and leave it at that.
Lets just hope both the units improve this year on its own and then feed-off of each other's improvements to improve some more.
Lets just hope both the units improve this year on its own and then feed-off of each other's improvements to improve some more.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 10:00 am to ewdij
quote:
Why do we have to (somewhat) assume that defensive and offensive performance are mutually exclusive.
Because it's the rant. Some can't understand that TOP, number of plays, etc, are a result of both the offense and defense.
Again, one only has to look at our 3rd down efficiency on both sides to understand why we ran so few plays per game and lost the TOP battle.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 10:01 am to PacLSU
quote:
WTF are you talking about!? LSU's scoring defense was number 11 in the nation last season. And that was despite and offense that had little to no productivity which gave the opposing offense not only more snaps to work with but good field position too. Yet the Chavis defense WAS NUMBER 11 IN THE NATION!!!
I wasn't talking about scoring, I was talking about all the time the defense spent on the field. The more time the defense spends on the field, the less time the offense spends on the field.
I agree completely that it works both ways, but our defense is just as much to blame for our record last year as our offense. We can't put the blame for our offensive troubles solely on the offense. The same way we can't put the blame for our defensive troubles solely on the defense. Chavis did not have a good year last year and that is being over-looked.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 10:02 am to JustSmokin
quote:
Again, one only has to look at our 3rd down efficiency on both sides to understand why we ran so few plays per game and lost the TOP battle.
+1
Posted on 7/1/10 at 10:03 am to JustSmokin
quote:
Again, one only has to look at our 3rd down efficiency on both sides to understand why we ran so few plays per game and lost the TOP battle.
this... says it all
Posted on 7/1/10 at 10:04 am to JustSmokin
quote:
Again, one only has to look at our 3rd down efficiency on both sides to understand why we ran so few plays per game and lost the TOP battle.
+1
This post was edited on 7/1/10 at 10:05 am
Posted on 7/1/10 at 10:05 am to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:
Most people just can't accept the fact that Chavis' defenses allow teams to move the ball AT WILL between the 20's. This puts the opposing team IN SCORING POSITION (similar to a baseball player getting on 2nd base and scoring on a single), on almost EVERY possession.
quote:Then why did opponents only average about 16 points per game against us, and teams like Florida (13 points), Penn State (19 points) and Georgia (13 points), fail to light up the scoreboard? Even the National Champion Tide only managed 24 points against our defense with the benefit of a nullified INT.
Once opposing teams get to the 20 yard line, their chances of scoring are greatly increased (kick a field goal or take a shot at the endzone with a pass).
It would seem that if -- as you contend -- the defense automatically guarantees that the other team reaches the 20 on "almost EVERY possession", and their chances of scoring are "greatly increased", quality teams would be getting at least some points out of at least half their drives. None of Bama, Florida, Georgia or Penn State did that. Looks like you need to find a less obviously absurd excuse to complain about the defense.
Posted on 7/1/10 at 10:08 am to TigerFanNKaty
Here are some key offensive stats.
2009 2008 2007 2006
Total Plays per game 59 68 75 63
Opp plays per game 69 65 65 58
Avg Yds per game 310 368 439 417
Opp yds per game 311 325 289 243
Scoring 25 31 39 34
Opp Scoring 14 24 20 13
Our offense was terrible last year. Many 3 and outs leads to more snaps for the other team. Our defense did not force many 3 and outs either. Look at the avg number of plays we had on offense last year. 59 compared to 2007 when we had 75. Our defense was not outstanding that year.
2009 2008 2007 2006
Total Plays per game 59 68 75 63
Opp plays per game 69 65 65 58
Avg Yds per game 310 368 439 417
Opp yds per game 311 325 289 243
Scoring 25 31 39 34
Opp Scoring 14 24 20 13
Our offense was terrible last year. Many 3 and outs leads to more snaps for the other team. Our defense did not force many 3 and outs either. Look at the avg number of plays we had on offense last year. 59 compared to 2007 when we had 75. Our defense was not outstanding that year.
Page 1 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News