- 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
“Secure Victory” – Time for a Paradigm Shift?
Posted on 10/22/13 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 10/22/13 at 2:12 pm
When times are good it seems as if no criticism of the staff is accepted (‘the coaches know football better than us laymen’). When we lose like this, criticism becomes unhinged (fire Les, fire Chavis, fire Stud, fire Raymond).
IMO, there are legitimate concerns that are as evident in winning as in losing. For example, when USCe and A&M scored on their last possessions last year no big deal. They were two score games and we recovered the onside kicks. We won. When Bama scored just before and the half and at the end, and Clemson, and UGA, and OM and we lose, it becomes loudly obvious that Chief’s approach has some glaring flaws. That warrants (legitimate) criticism. He’s an outstanding DC (he is) but this is a fault that transcends talent (should it take NFL caliber talent all-overt the field before we can stop someone with the game on the line on their last possession?), experience (BTW, we are no longer young – this game #8), etc. It’s inherent in his scheme.
But an even greater concern is Les’s “secure victory first” approach to each game. If I understand, this is his guiding light of football philosophy. I assume he inherited this from Bo. And it shapes everything we do in football. This explains why starters play well into blowouts (some were asking why AJ10 didn’t see the field in the 4th vs MSU or why Mett got very little playing time in ’11 – because if there is any doubt that we have secured victory then starters play on), why our gameplans are repeatedly vanilla, why we seemingly play down to the competition (ex. AU and Arky in ’12).
Does it work? I would say it’s worked quite well during his tenure. We rarely lose to bad teams. Into his 9th season there have been three (UTenn in ’05, Arky, ’08, and OM ’13 – maybe Arky in ’07?). While we’re lickin’ wounds, we do it a lot less than just about everyone else.
But coaches are always assessed on not only what they accomplish, but what they reasonably could have accomplished, e.g., it wasn’t unreasonable to expect us to beat OM last week. So could Les be even more successful (within reason)?
His approach has its flaws: it atomizes games, precludes much needed in-game experience, is less aggressive, and often has us play down to the competition.
While it’s been successful, another approach would be even more successful and Les needs to shift his guiding light from “secure victory first” to “excellence and dominance.” It’s simply a better approach.
IMO, there are legitimate concerns that are as evident in winning as in losing. For example, when USCe and A&M scored on their last possessions last year no big deal. They were two score games and we recovered the onside kicks. We won. When Bama scored just before and the half and at the end, and Clemson, and UGA, and OM and we lose, it becomes loudly obvious that Chief’s approach has some glaring flaws. That warrants (legitimate) criticism. He’s an outstanding DC (he is) but this is a fault that transcends talent (should it take NFL caliber talent all-overt the field before we can stop someone with the game on the line on their last possession?), experience (BTW, we are no longer young – this game #8), etc. It’s inherent in his scheme.
But an even greater concern is Les’s “secure victory first” approach to each game. If I understand, this is his guiding light of football philosophy. I assume he inherited this from Bo. And it shapes everything we do in football. This explains why starters play well into blowouts (some were asking why AJ10 didn’t see the field in the 4th vs MSU or why Mett got very little playing time in ’11 – because if there is any doubt that we have secured victory then starters play on), why our gameplans are repeatedly vanilla, why we seemingly play down to the competition (ex. AU and Arky in ’12).
Does it work? I would say it’s worked quite well during his tenure. We rarely lose to bad teams. Into his 9th season there have been three (UTenn in ’05, Arky, ’08, and OM ’13 – maybe Arky in ’07?). While we’re lickin’ wounds, we do it a lot less than just about everyone else.
But coaches are always assessed on not only what they accomplish, but what they reasonably could have accomplished, e.g., it wasn’t unreasonable to expect us to beat OM last week. So could Les be even more successful (within reason)?
His approach has its flaws: it atomizes games, precludes much needed in-game experience, is less aggressive, and often has us play down to the competition.
While it’s been successful, another approach would be even more successful and Les needs to shift his guiding light from “secure victory first” to “excellence and dominance.” It’s simply a better approach.
Posted on 10/22/13 at 2:15 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:
another approach would be even more successful and Les needs to shift his guiding light from “secure victory first” to “excellence and dominance.” It’s simply a better approach.
See Bama
Posted on 10/22/13 at 2:16 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:Well don't hold your breath.
Les needs to shift his guiding light from “secure victory first” to “excellence and dominance.” It’s simply a better approach.
Posted on 10/22/13 at 2:17 pm to AlwysATgr
You a professional writer bro? Seriously though, good read and great perspective.
Posted on 10/22/13 at 2:18 pm to AlwysATgr
You asked and answered a lot of your own questions there.
What do you really want to know?
Oh, and TL;DR
What do you really want to know?
Oh, and TL;DR
Posted on 10/22/13 at 2:21 pm to Shenanigans
It's simple. LSU doesn't have much of a killer instinct. Some teams have it, others don't. Unfortunately, LSU is one of those who don't
Posted on 10/22/13 at 2:24 pm to Shenanigans
quote:
You asked and answered a lot of your own questions there.
They're called rhetorical. He's making a good point respectfully in the form of conversation.
I agree with the OP 100%. Unfortunately, that type of approach isn't in Les' DNA.
Posted on 10/22/13 at 9:48 pm to jeaux_bleaux
quote:
You a professional writer bro?
Nope - just a nut case Tiger fan working through some issues.
Posted on 10/22/13 at 10:17 pm to guttata
quote:
It's simple. Les Miles doesn't have much of a killer instinct. Some teams have it, others don't. Unfortunately, Les Miles is one of those who don't
FIFY
Posted on 10/22/13 at 10:20 pm to Jwho77
Speaking of a bad arse killer instinct, Les needs to take a lesson from Jimbo at Florida State. They kicked a field goal on their arch rival Clemson at the very end of the game just so they could hang 50+ on their asses. That's killer instinct!
Posted on 10/22/13 at 10:21 pm to AlwysATgr
it's interesting...certainly there was a strong want to interpret your capable, quality post but, uh, it was not interpreted due to the superstructure of the context, i promise you.
Posted on 10/22/13 at 10:30 pm to guttata
quote:
LSU doesn't have much of a killer instinct.
IMHO, years of observing LSU football leads me to conclude that LSU, as a university, is not totally and completely committed to winning national championships in football.
The most telling evidence of this is the LSU AD's own words.
Posted on 10/23/13 at 12:12 am to S
We could've used some "want" Sat night.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News