Started By
Message

re: Has Ensminger’s $50k bonus been discussed yet?

Posted on 1/10/19 at 7:59 am to
Posted by Mr Meeseeks
In the Meeseek's box
Member since Sep 2017
199 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 7:59 am to
LSU won that despite a terrible redzone offense. But once again you are avoiding the topic at hand. We are discussing SE's bonus for redzone offense. The numbers don't lie. Ensminger's TD percentage in the redzone was terrible. All year long LSU settled for field goals. All year long LSU couldn't punch in TD's.
Posted by bencoleman
RIP 7/19
Member since Feb 2009
37887 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 8:32 am to
LSU scored 88% of the time in the red zone.

53 out of 60 trips to the redzone.

31 of those trips they scored TDs. For 52%

Joe passed for 2900 yards and 16 touchdowns with 5 interceptions.

He did this in spite of getting sack 34 times. Only one QB in the SEC was sacked more and he was sacked 35 times.

Joe'e performance was good for 4th best in LSU history if I'm not mistaken.

I could point to positions all over the field that struggled but everybody knows or should know that.

With the personnel on the field Steve didn't do a terrible job.

His worst game was the bama game where his gameplan failed and he couldn't find anything that worked. The playcalling was horrible.



Posted by nola000
Lacombe, LA
Member since Dec 2014
13139 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 9:24 am to
quote:

LSU won that despite a terrible redzone offense. But once again you are avoiding the topic at hand. We are discussing SE's bonus for redzone offense


This is what's wrong with these people.

The critical thinking skills are very low and they can't head off problems or pick out trends. They just look at the final score or the final record, much the same way an administrator would or, I don't know, maybe an athletic director, and base their opinions off of that alone.

Real winners are always looking to improve and are detail oriented. They are perfectionists. They are always sweating the small stuff, self scouting and let no stone go unturned.

The mediocre focus on the end result and adjust accordingly. The problem with that is you're always behind the curve because you're adjusting after the fact.

The excellent focus on the process leading up to the end result. They know that if they incrementally achieve excellence in all the small things it'll add up to the results they're looking for. This puts them ahead of the curve as they're attacking problems and fine-tuning before the end results occur.
This post was edited on 1/10/19 at 9:26 am
Posted by Spotswoode
Mount Rushmore
Member since Aug 2018
1594 posts
Posted on 1/11/19 at 7:08 am to
quote:

The numbers don't lie. Ensminger's TD percentage in the redzone was terrible. All year long LSU settled for field goals. All year long LSU couldn't punch in TD's.

This is the problem with giving bonuses for metrics. Bonuses should be given for team goals, and for personal goals that directly contribute to victory. It's hard to think of examples of the latter in football.

In our company some executives give "metric" bonuses to salesmen. Like how many requests for bids they brought in. Who gives a shite? How much money did you make? That's what matters.

LSU football should give bonuses for winning. Other than that I would give discretionary bonuses because I think they did good jobs. Maybe Aranda's defense was great but gave up a lot of points because we had lots of turnovers in our own territory. I would not care what the metrics show; I'd give him that bonus. And if Ensminger had a great scoring percentage in the red zone, but nary a touchdown, frick that!
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram