Started By
Message
re: Is Alabama's offense really that Boom or Bust?
Posted on 9/25/24 at 9:10 pm to Teague
Posted on 9/25/24 at 9:10 pm to Teague
I’ve never seen such an importance placed on “sustaining drives” like I’ve seen on here. No one likes three and outs but the idea that long methodical drives against a top defense will work compared to being capable of hitting explosive plays is comical. Kirby’s defense can still be exposed by taking the top off the defense, I’d expect quite a few on Saturday.
3
Posted on 9/25/24 at 9:44 pm to TheNameIsDalton
quote:
I’ve never seen such an importance placed on “sustaining drives” like I’ve seen on here. No one likes three and outs but the idea that long methodical drives against a top defense will work compared to being capable of hitting explosive plays is comical.
It's kind of baffling. The drawbacks to those long sustained drives are just how little room for error we have. Take Ty's drive against Wisky. Everything was going well until he overthrew Odom on 1st down and put us behind the chains. Then 2 yard run, sack, and punt. Drives that are all short to intermediate passing like everyone seems to want are one holding call, overthrown ball or dropped pass, or fumbled/bad snap from imploding.
Posted on 9/25/24 at 9:50 pm to TheNameIsDalton
I've never seen so many people pretending that they don't understand deep down that not being able to sustain drives will be a problem when a good defense takes away the shot plays.
Posted on 9/25/24 at 9:54 pm to RollTide33
quote:
It's kind of baffling. The drawbacks to those long sustained drives are just how little room for error we have. Take Ty's drive against Wisky. Everything was going well until he overthrew Odom on 1st down and put us behind the chains. Then 2 yard run, sack, and punt. Drives that are all short to intermediate passing like everyone seems to want are one holding call, overthrown ball or dropped pass, or fumbled/bad snap from imploding.
If you're counting on 4 big plays a game to score, sooner or later you're going to have a game where you only have 1. Explosive plays are fantastic IF you don't have to rely on them THAT'S the issue we've had so far.
Posted on 9/25/24 at 10:15 pm to Teague
Yeah the best offenses can do both. They can put together long sustained drives if the long plays aren’t there. This includes being able to dominate in the RZ. They are also capable of hitting the big plays if possible. They aren’t limited to one thing or another.
Posted on 9/25/24 at 11:22 pm to 1BamaRTR
So interestingly looking back at UGAs run the teams that usually score 27 or more points on them, typically scored their TDs in 3-6 plays - the one really big outlier being Bama and Milroe last year. Usually if you are running more than that in a drive against UGA you are kicking a FG at best. Since we don't have many sustained drives it also makes sense why we don't have any FGs.
My fear against UGA is not being able to execute a 12 play 75 yard TD drive although, as said before good teams need to be explosive and sustain drives.
My bigger concern is in a game like this, the field position and being able to get 3 or 4 first downs before punting to flip the field or get in FG range. 3 and outs gives UGA typically a shorter field to work with which makes them more dangerous and puts more stress on the D. The good part is Burnip can be an equalizer but this factor I think will weigh just as much if not more than explosive versus sustained drives.
My fear against UGA is not being able to execute a 12 play 75 yard TD drive although, as said before good teams need to be explosive and sustain drives.
My bigger concern is in a game like this, the field position and being able to get 3 or 4 first downs before punting to flip the field or get in FG range. 3 and outs gives UGA typically a shorter field to work with which makes them more dangerous and puts more stress on the D. The good part is Burnip can be an equalizer but this factor I think will weigh just as much if not more than explosive versus sustained drives.
This post was edited on 9/25/24 at 11:25 pm
Posted on 9/26/24 at 6:26 am to 1BamaRTR
Well you should be happy then because Alabama has scored TDs on 9 of 11 RZ trips. That’s 3 RZ TDs per game, 1 fumbled snap at the 1 foot line (likely won’t happen again with a snap from under center) and I don’t remember the other possession.
Anyway, score TDs on explosive plays (which coaches love) - check, high TD scoring % on RZ invasions - check. Of course the opposition is about to be upgraded. We will see.
Anyway, score TDs on explosive plays (which coaches love) - check, high TD scoring % on RZ invasions - check. Of course the opposition is about to be upgraded. We will see.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:10 am to TheNameIsDalton
quote:
I’ve never seen such an importance placed on “sustaining drives” like I’ve seen on here. No one likes three and outs but the idea that long methodical drives against a top defense will work compared to being capable of hitting explosive plays is comical. Kirby’s defense can still be exposed by taking the top off the defense, I’d expect quite a few on Saturday.
I actually think being explosive is how you score against good defenses. Look at the SEC title game in 2021. We hit them on multiple big ones. That's the only way you score 30+ on a really good defense.
However, being able to move the chains for one or two first downs, even if you don't score, is also important when it comes to making the other defense expend energy and preserving your own. Nobody is suggesting we slide at the 1-yard line so we can run more clock, but having 30% of drives be 3-and-out (especially considering the competition thus far) is not good.
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 10:13 am
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:34 am to Bham Bammer
quote:
I actually think being explosive is how you score against good defenses. Look at the SEC title game in 2021. We hit them on multiple big ones. That's the only way you score 30+ on a really good defense.
However, being able to move the chains for one or two first downs, even if you don't score, is also important when it comes to making the other defense expend energy and preserving your own.
Yep. Balance. We actually weren't that balanced in that 2021 SECCG. Run game was kept in check besides Bryce's 3 big runs, but we were efficient enough before the game got out of hand and we started trying to to run clock. We had just 1 negative rush before we went up multiple scores.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:41 am to Funky Tide 8
One thing I'd be interested to see is what percent of Alabama drives aren't 3 and outs but also aren't TDs/turnovers. It seems that if Bama gets a 1st down they usually score a TD. I'm not sure how common that is, but it does seem that Bama usually scores if they get a 1st down.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:43 am to 1BamaRTR
There are a few key metrics that coaches hammer on from an analytical standpoint. A few of them ladder up to an outcome of having long drives, but none of them by themselves have a distinct goal to deliver long drives.
Got this from an interview with and analyst from the Steelers, but it probably makes sense from a college standpoint as well. The factors they defined that deliver wins are below.
- Create 4 or more splash plays a game (20+ yards)
- Less than 2 turnovers a game (you can survive 1 turnover, if the differential is two or above you're immediately below a 50% win rate)
- 60% or better on 3rd down conversions
- 2 minute and 4 minute offense success (not really sure the actual metrics they follow to define success)
- 4+ yards on first down
If a team does those things, their win rate is something around 95% (If I remember correctly). I thought it was interesting there was no mention of number of first downs and the only mention of sustaining drives came through the 3rd down conversion rate. No mention of time of possession either, just having a high drive conversion rate.
Personally, I think it would be great if we could see some consistency. But it seems like in the professional circles it may not be as important to them.
Got this from an interview with and analyst from the Steelers, but it probably makes sense from a college standpoint as well. The factors they defined that deliver wins are below.
- Create 4 or more splash plays a game (20+ yards)
- Less than 2 turnovers a game (you can survive 1 turnover, if the differential is two or above you're immediately below a 50% win rate)
- 60% or better on 3rd down conversions
- 2 minute and 4 minute offense success (not really sure the actual metrics they follow to define success)
- 4+ yards on first down
If a team does those things, their win rate is something around 95% (If I remember correctly). I thought it was interesting there was no mention of number of first downs and the only mention of sustaining drives came through the 3rd down conversion rate. No mention of time of possession either, just having a high drive conversion rate.
Personally, I think it would be great if we could see some consistency. But it seems like in the professional circles it may not be as important to them.
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 11:17 am
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:07 am to Glorious
quote:
I know very little about scheming, but can you really dial up an attempt at a big running play? A lot of our quick drives have been our runningbacks being studs and the line blocking well. Is there a chance that those 70 yard runs simply become 20 yarders against good defenses
I believe you can scheme 2nd half success running the football particularly against teams with questionable depth on the DL by sustaining long physical drives in the first half, even more so if you force the DL to run and play in space by various means.
You basically pound them into submission. The 4-5 yard runs in the first half turn into explosive plays in the second half because they get physically and mentally defeated over time.
But thats one of the reasons playing UGA is difficult. Its not just that they have elite guys starting. Its that they have unique quality guys in their two deep that makes it next to impossible to break them that way like you might be able to do against teams with top end talent but little depth like perhaps Ole Miss.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:40 am to Bham Bammer
quote:
actually think being explosive is how you score against good defenses.
Let's simplify this for everyone:
If you go 3 and out, you get 3 chances to make an explosive play.
If you get 2 first downs, you get 9 chances to make an explosive play (or just drive down the field and score).
This ain't rocket surgery.
Yes, it can get slightly more complex based on number of possessions, due to quick punts. But, you're giving the opponent more chances too, so the premise holds true.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:46 am to Teague
quote:
Let's simplify this for everyone:
If you go 3 and out, you get 3 chances to make an explosive play.
If you get 2 first downs, you get 9 chances to make an explosive play (or just drive down the field and score).
This ain't rocket surgery.
Yes, it can get slightly more complex based on number of possessions, due to quick punts. But, you're giving the opponent more chances too, so the premise holds true.
Not to bed pedantic, but getting 2 first downs doesn't mean you get 9 chances to get a first down. Alabama has 63 first downs and 21 3rd down conversions. Most of their 1st downs were earned on 1st or 2nd down, not on 3rd down. You could get 2 1st downs and only run 5 plays.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 12:43 pm to JIB
quote:
Not to bed pedantic, but getting 2 first downs doesn't mean you get 9 chances to get a first dow
For the love of God.
OK, if you go 3 and out, you had 3 chances to make an explosive play.
If you stay on the field for 9, non-explosive plays, you had 9 chances to make an explosive play.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 3:22 pm to JIB
quote:
One thing I'd be interested to see is what percent of Alabama drives aren't 3 and outs but also aren't TDs/turnovers. It seems that if Bama gets a 1st down they usually score a TD. I'm not sure how common that is, but it does seem that Bama usually scores if they get a 1st down.
So far this year, unless I missed something, Alabama has only had 5 drives where they got a first down but not a touchdown (excluding meaningless possessions at the end of the game or half.)
1. Against USF, 5 plays, converted a 2nd and 17, then penalties and sacks happened.
2. Against USF, 11 plays, 51 yards, Milroe fumbled at the 2.
3. Against Wisconsin, 10 play, 48 yard drive ended with a missed field goal.
4. Against Wisconsin, 5 plays, converted a 2nd and 3, then a false start on 2nd down followed by 2 incomplete passes.
5. Against Wisconsin, Ty Simpson at QB in the 4th quarter, 11 plays, converted two 3rd downs, ran 6:32 off the clock.
So the other 35 drives have either been touchdowns, 3 and outs, or turnovers. It might be the very definition of "Boom or Bust."
EDIT: Sorry, I missed where you said touchdowns OR turnovers and included the fumble against USF.
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 3:25 pm
Posted on 9/26/24 at 4:02 pm to Goombaw
How many of the 3 and outs included a penalty or sack?
ETA: Looked at it, think only like 2 or 3
ETA: Looked at it, think only like 2 or 3
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 5:08 pm
Posted on 9/26/24 at 9:50 pm to Carlton
3 with penalties, 3 with sacks, none on the same drive. One holding call that brought back the long TD run by Milroe against USF, then two other false starts. There was a fourth penalty, but it was on the punt, so I don't really count it.
Dying by these 3 and outs worries me way more than living by the by the big plays. The amount of times Bama has just handed the ball right back to the other team after a few ineffective plays is too high.
Half of the 3 and outs (6/12) were run-pass-pass sequences.
Dying by these 3 and outs worries me way more than living by the by the big plays. The amount of times Bama has just handed the ball right back to the other team after a few ineffective plays is too high.
Half of the 3 and outs (6/12) were run-pass-pass sequences.
Posted on 9/27/24 at 10:48 am to Carlton
Bama's TDs against UGA last year were on drives of 10 plays, 9 plays, and 9 plays.
Posted on 9/27/24 at 11:02 am to JIB
I know, that is why I said this in the post.
It can happen again but based on history one might posit it is likely that most scores will come on shorter drives with explosive plays.
It also speaks to the fact that Milroe has shown he is capable of doing both.
quote:
typically scored their TDs in 3-6 plays - the one really big outlier being Bama and Milroe last year.
It can happen again but based on history one might posit it is likely that most scores will come on shorter drives with explosive plays.
It also speaks to the fact that Milroe has shown he is capable of doing both.
This post was edited on 9/27/24 at 1:35 pm
Page 2 of 3
Latest Alabama News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News