re: Dispelling the myth of "3rd and Chavis"

quote:

---

You can't just change the conversation to fit your argument, pop. An Ag fan introduced the idea that Chavis's defenses struggle on third downs late in close games because they're too exhausted to play man coverage on pass plays.

I pointed out that his defenses are plenty rested compared to their Ag counterparts.

---

This isn't a new part of the conversation. The Miles TOP advantage myth was one of the earliest anti-Chavis talking points on this board.

You were the one who claimed LSU is consistently among the conference TOP leaders. I showed that was incorrect. Unless you are actually arguing that an average rank of 6 is "consistently"?

And aside from that, I demonstrated that LSU's TOP is mediocre on the national scale. Chavis has elite defenses DESPITE LSU's mediocre TOP.

Nah, I just know how to use Chrome to navigate to the info that proves/disproves the claims made about Chavis. It's easy, just go here:

LINK

I'm talking about the conversation that has happened here in this thread. Bulldozing into the concersation isn't going to change its substance.
Ok, I misspoke when I said the consistently leading the SEC. But that doesn't detract from the meat of the discussion.

I'll outline the arguments being made in THIS discussion to make it easy for you:

Most people acknowledge that Chavis's defenses do well in the first 3 quarters. The thing that people complain about (the issue that is at the heart of "3rd and Chavis") is that late in close games his defenses give up big chunks of yardage on 3rd down.

An Ag poster posited that a possible reason for this phenomenon is that Chavis's defenses were so "exhausted" at the end of games.

However, during Chavis's tenure, LSU's offense (which had an average TOP of roughly 31 minutes) was on the field nearly twice as long as the defense (17 minutes on average).

Furthermore, I pointed out that on Sumlin's teams over the same stretch of time the TOP (27 minutes) is lower by an average of four minutes. Thus, if the argument that Chavis's defenses were the exhausted masses they were supposed to be were true (and if "3rd and Chavis" is caused by tired defenses) the problem would not soon correct itself in a Sumlin scheme.



Up to speed?

I'm not sure why you went through all that. You made a claim, one which, in some variation, has been made ad nauseum on this board. I merely pointed out that the claim is not true. That was the extent of my participation.

We just need to drop this.

We will get to compare the performance of the poor defense Chavis is taking over to the performance of the elite defense that Chavis left behind for Steele.

The answer as to how effective a DC Chavis is will be shown soon on the field.

We will have a bear market in corndogs by the end of this season.

I didn't distract from anything. You made a claim, presumably relevant to your argument. The claim was wrong; and I pointed that out. If the erroneous claim was irrelevant to your argument, then no skin off your nose. If, however, it WAS relevant, then discovering your error might prompt a re-evaluation.

I have not weighed in on either side of the rest of your issue.

I'm growing fond of Guava, he has FB knowledge and makes thoughtful arguments without flaming



We should let him in the Ark

quote:

---

We should let him in the Ark

---

Thanks, bruh.

And if the river-trash nutria corndog, Justin-Wilson-talkin' Bouderoux swamp kitties would admit that frickLSU® we could all get along.

Myth or not.. LSU will still win more games than aTm in 2015.