it doesn't need to happen to win if your offense is offsetting the difference. And again, LSU's defense isn't gonna go from top 10 to terrible w/ the way things are set up on that side

quote:
In the SEC, defense and the running game win championships. See LSU 2003, 2007. See Florida even with Tebow. See Alabama last year.

there's more than one way to win, and just bc it's something different doesn't mean it won't work. When's the last time a passing guru that also had a stable of RBs like LSU's was teamed w/ a group as talented and well coached as LSU is on defense?

quote:
And by the way, where do you get that we had terrible T.O.P for the entire season? We average over 29 minutes of possession for the year. Not very good, but defintely not terrible.

no. 70 out of 112 is pretty damn bad

All this said, Holgerson would probably be my top choice b/c he is more balanced, but I'd be excited ab Leach as well if that's what happened.

This post was edited on 11/29/10 at 2:18 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by MOT

Member since Jul 2006

27991 posts

Posted on 11/29/10 at 3:04 pm to Books

Without even getting into a TOP debate I think teams with an offensive system like that suffer on defense because the entire mindset of the program changes. There is no physicality. IMO the defense gets soft because they never have to practice against any kind of physical play. The scout team can't even give them a good look because you hardly have any TEs or FBs on the roster. You need a ton of depth at WR, those scholarships come at the expense of other positions, could it affect the depth on defense?

I already know some of the responses. Yes he ran the ball 20 times a game or whatever. But running 15 draw plays is not being physical. Yes Auburn runs the ball a lot, but it is a power running game with their QB (and their defense still sucks). The argument that he didn't care about defense holds no water. Do you honestly think a head coach would neglect it like that? Don't you believe at some point he thought "hey, I seem to be scoring a bunch of points, if we had a defense we might actually get to play for a championship"?

Sure, he could adapt his style, but that is part of our problem now. We have too much of a mix and do not have a style we can depend.

Overall I am just of the opinion that this type of system changes the mindset and culture of the program entirely. You'll get no argument from me that we would score more and have a better offense. But I think overall we would resort to having to beat people in shootouts more often than not.

Sorry for any typos, posted from iPhone.

This post was edited on 11/29/10 at 6:15 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Chicot

Baton Rouge, LA

Member since Aug 2007

1279 posts

Posted on 11/29/10 at 3:09 pm to Books

quote:
it doesn't need to happen to win if your offense is offsetting the difference. And again, LSU's defense isn't gonna go from top 10 to terrible w/ the way things are set up on that side

By that logic then, our offense doesn't need to improve at all because our defense is already offsetting the difference. See the problem with that line of thinking?

quote:
When's the last time a passing guru that also had a stable of RBs like LSU's was teamed w/ a group as talented and well coached as LSU is on defense?

You know why a passing guru doesn't typically have a stable of RBs like LSU's? Because they either leave due to lack of playing time/not being involved in the offense or they never go to said passing guru's team in the first place.

quote:
All this said, Holgerson would probably be my top choice b/c he is more balanced,

Then why the frick are you arguing with me! So you would prefer Holgerson because he is more balanced, but I am an idiot because I would prefer someone that is more balanced than Leach?
And you say I am fricking stupid? Thanks for arguing against me all the while being of the same opinion dipshite.

1 ...

Report Post

Coaching Changes - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board