Started By
Message
Offensive or Defensive Coach?
Posted on 11/30/17 at 1:12 pm
Posted on 11/30/17 at 1:12 pm
I'm gonna try not to make this about particular candidates, and maybe hone in the focus on philosophy when it comes to building a roster and ask the question which is the best option for Arkansas.
Offensive philosophy has gained us our best success probably since joining the SEC and our latest disaster hire was a defensive guy. It's not hard to see why so many people seem to favor the offensive guy. But I think it's more complicated than that.
Our team's failures over the last two years can mostly be attributed to the defensive side of the ball. Our offensive production two years ago now was one of the top in the SEC. It has been our defense that causes us to lose so many games. Scoring 31 points against Alabama is a good example of this. That offense was good enough to win most of our games.
Would it not behoove us to overload our talent on the defensive side of the ball to the best of our ability, and move to more of a quick strike offense, increasing talent incrementally over a period of years as your defense slowly gains more talented depth? This seems like the logical approach to me.
This is essentially the same approach they took at Clemson.
Offensive philosophy has gained us our best success probably since joining the SEC and our latest disaster hire was a defensive guy. It's not hard to see why so many people seem to favor the offensive guy. But I think it's more complicated than that.
Our team's failures over the last two years can mostly be attributed to the defensive side of the ball. Our offensive production two years ago now was one of the top in the SEC. It has been our defense that causes us to lose so many games. Scoring 31 points against Alabama is a good example of this. That offense was good enough to win most of our games.
Would it not behoove us to overload our talent on the defensive side of the ball to the best of our ability, and move to more of a quick strike offense, increasing talent incrementally over a period of years as your defense slowly gains more talented depth? This seems like the logical approach to me.
This is essentially the same approach they took at Clemson.
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 1:14 pm
8
Posted on 11/30/17 at 1:14 pm to BoarEd
Did not read but solid thread. Would not read again.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 1:18 pm to STLhog
Right on, man. More power to ya. Thanks for contributing.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 1:34 pm to BoarEd
I think we need to go tell Perrin route. Load up the talent on offense and then slowly build the defense up. After BP was fired Bert inherited some real talent on defense those first 2 years.
We just need an average defense and a loaded offense. That would probably put us on a path to win 10 games a season consistently.
We just need an average defense and a loaded offense. That would probably put us on a path to win 10 games a season consistently.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 1:36 pm to Maytheporkbewithyou
Do we not already have a pretty loaded offense?
Posted on 11/30/17 at 1:37 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Offensive
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:08 pm to BoarEd
This is not that difficult. Defense.
Since 2000, exactly 3 teams have won national championships with a lower rated total defense than total offense. 2005 Texas, 2010 Auburn, and 2014 Ohio State.
Since 2000, the average total offense rank for the national champion is 22.59, with only 5 teams, 2001 Miami, 2005 Texas, 2010 Auburn, 2013 Florida State, and 2014 Ohio State having top 10 total offenses.
Since 2000, the average total defense rank for the national champion in 10.53, with only 3 teams not having a top 10 ranked defense, 2002 Ohio State, 2010 Auburn, and 2014 Ohio State.
Success in college football means having a top 10 total defense. It's not even debatable.
Since 2000, exactly 3 teams have won national championships with a lower rated total defense than total offense. 2005 Texas, 2010 Auburn, and 2014 Ohio State.
Since 2000, the average total offense rank for the national champion is 22.59, with only 5 teams, 2001 Miami, 2005 Texas, 2010 Auburn, 2013 Florida State, and 2014 Ohio State having top 10 total offenses.
Since 2000, the average total defense rank for the national champion in 10.53, with only 3 teams not having a top 10 ranked defense, 2002 Ohio State, 2010 Auburn, and 2014 Ohio State.
Success in college football means having a top 10 total defense. It's not even debatable.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:10 pm to BoarEd
I thought you already knew who we were hiring?
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:13 pm to troyt37
Why are you talking about national championships?
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:15 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Do we not already have a pretty loaded offense?
No. Our offense was only good against teams with bad defenses. We have question marks everywhere going in to next season.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:18 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Do we not already have a pretty loaded offense?
Better than our defense but not close to loaded
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:21 pm to Porcine Human
quote:
Why are you talking about national championships?
Because that is the objective.
If I'm building a car, I look at what Mercedes does, not DeLorean. If I'm building a business, I look at what Microsoft does, not Commodore.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:24 pm to troyt37
No point in trying to copy what Mercedes does if you don't have the resources for it.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:27 pm to rockiee
OK. So I look at the offense and I see good talent at every skill position on the field. We tried to build an offensive line that can maul the opponent with a down hill running game. We failed. So again, logic would seem to dictate that you instead develop an offense more reliant on misdirection. A more quick strike approach.
As user Troy37 (I think) pointed out, if you want to compete at the highest levels of football, it is a statistical requirement that you develop a defense at least on par with your offense. If our last coach was a defensive guy and couldn't get that done (numbers should bear out that our offense has been more productive than our defense during Bielema's entire tenure), doesn't that mean we need to hire an even BETTER defensive coach than the last one?
Wonder if there are more coaches out there that can run a quick strike offense than there are defensive coaches who can improve Arkansas's defense to an acceptable level relative to our competitors in the SEC West?
As user Troy37 (I think) pointed out, if you want to compete at the highest levels of football, it is a statistical requirement that you develop a defense at least on par with your offense. If our last coach was a defensive guy and couldn't get that done (numbers should bear out that our offense has been more productive than our defense during Bielema's entire tenure), doesn't that mean we need to hire an even BETTER defensive coach than the last one?
Wonder if there are more coaches out there that can run a quick strike offense than there are defensive coaches who can improve Arkansas's defense to an acceptable level relative to our competitors in the SEC West?
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 2:30 pm
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:28 pm to Porcine Human
quote:
No point in trying to copy what Mercedes does if you don't have the resources for it.
Tell me the college football program Arkansas simply doesn't have the resources to compete with.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:32 pm to troyt37
All of the ones you listed in your earlier post
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:33 pm to BoarEd
quote:
OK. So I look at the offense and I see good talent at every skill position on the field. We tried to build an offensive line that can maul the opponent with a down hill running game. We failed. So again, logic would seem to dictate that you instead develop an offense more reliant on misdirection. A more quick strike approach.
I see this happening no matter who the coach is
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:34 pm to Porcine Human
quote:
Why are you talking about national championships?
You see, THIS is the very definition of a loser's mentality (no offense porcine. Nothing personal). If we say we have no interest in competing for National Titles then we are also saying we have no interest in competing for our own conference title. Because if you compete for the SEC, you compete for the whole thing. So you may as well do it right. Or just stay home.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:36 pm to BoarEd
Dude, of course I want to win a national championship. I also realize what our inherent disadvantages are. If you want to bang your head against a wall and be perpetually disappointed be my guest. I'm more interested in trying to work within our means and picking the coach that can best win here, instead of delusionally trying to copy what the big boys do.
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 2:37 pm
Posted on 11/30/17 at 2:36 pm to BoarEd
If there are more coaches in your "could get" range of candidates that can run an acceptable offense for your needs than there are defensive coaches who can create an acceptable defense, you better go for the defensive guy.
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 2:43 pm
Page 1 of 7
Latest Arkansas News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News