Started By
Message
re: 270 yards passing is why A&M lost!
Posted on 10/24/12 at 8:07 am to PepaSpray
Posted on 10/24/12 at 8:07 am to PepaSpray
It doesn't matter how many yards you throw for in this league. If you can't play defense you don't have a chance in hell of ever winning expect for the year Auburn won. If you go back and look at the Florida teams that won it wasn't because of their offense it was their freaking NFL talent laden defense. Bama and LSU just grind you down and pounce in the 4th quarter.
1
Posted on 10/24/12 at 8:08 am to Tigerfan613
quote:
It doesn't matter how many yards you throw for in this league. If you can't play defense you don't have a chance in hell of ever winning expect for the year Auburn won. If you go back and look at the Florida teams that won it wasn't because of their offense it was their freaking NFL talent laden defense. Bama and LSU just grind you down and pounce in the 4th quarter.
Yep, D is where it's at. Without it, you're done. With it, and no matter what your offense is, you have a chance.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 8:18 am to A&M's Slush Fund
exactly. Also, running the ball more usually keeps your defense rested
Posted on 10/24/12 at 8:21 am to PortCityTiger82
Honestly, we performed much better on D (LaTech aside) than I ever would have expected. There is no way to really blame the D for the losses vs UF and LSU. I thought our guys played their asses off, especially given the lack of talent we have.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 9:01 am to A&M's Slush Fund
Those are the only A&M games I've seen and I agree D played hard. Don't know the inner workings of your team but it looked to me the talent level was good.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 9:06 am to A&M's Slush Fund
quote:
I thought our guys played their asses off, especially given the lack of talent we have.
That's probably overstated (aTm's talent) - your defensive front 7 played well, overall. Fortunately for ya'll, we were unable to consistently exploit your DBs (probably your weak link, defensively, right now) in the passing game, and that very well could have tipped the balance in aTm's favor. We had to pound it on the ground for tough yardage, but our team is built to do just that.
I give our guys some credit - the defense definitely adjusted after the initial shock of dealing with your offense, and our offense was just productive and opportunistic enough to get the job done. Really, most competitive football games hinge on the outcome of 5 to 7 out of 120+ plays. We had lots of penalties and ya'll had lots of turnovers. We were able to overcome the penalties and ya'll could not overcome those turnovers. We were poor on 3rd down, but made up for it with big runs on 1st and 2nd down. Ya'll were able to move the ball through the air, but unable to score consistently. Manziel extended plays and showed us why he was so highly regarded - but also demonstrated why freshmen are sometimes liabilities in games like this.
At this level, "talent" advantages really mean one or two additional superstars. aTm's starters looked to be the quality of teams we play every week in the SEC. The real advantage teams like LSU have is depth - the luxury of having the 2nd or 3rd guy go in and not be much of a drop. We have this on the Dline, secondary, (for the first time in a while LB corps), WRs and RBs. We had depth like that on the Oline, but injury bug quashed that early this year. This shows in close, late-game struggles such as ours.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 10:08 am to PortCityTiger82
You pansies act like it's against the rules to pass. I imagine this is what it sounded like way back when teams only ran the triple option and such. "Wait, ur gunna put TWO dem receivers out wide?!! How dey gunna block for da run wayyyy out dere??"
The spread offense is coming. Enjoy beating it this year if you can. Saban doesn't like it, and I don't blame him. It's a massive headache for defenses. And in this case, it's almost completely run by RS or FR playmakers.
The spread offense is coming. Enjoy beating it this year if you can. Saban doesn't like it, and I don't blame him. It's a massive headache for defenses. And in this case, it's almost completely run by RS or FR playmakers.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 10:12 am to NoMoreShortcuts
The point is that pass yardage doesn't equal points. If you look at teams that throw it around the field all day - they usually don't win the big games. See WVU the last two weeks for evidence of that.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 10:42 am to Katy Tiger
A&M is still 2nd in the SEC in rushing though and has the highest YPG still as well as the highest average yards per rush. We still run the ball.
I still haven't heard a good counterpoint to these facts from the game. A&M got inside the 10 twice and power rushed for TD's both times by RB's. A&M had only 1 3 and out.
Would it be nice for A&M to run the ball more with their RB's? Probably, but that wasn't what cost us this game. What cost us this game was turnovers and execution. You could argue that the most costly turnover was actually the Malena fumble as well which allowed LSU to take the lead before the half. The offensive scheme itself is fine, the problem is it has to be executed with precision and minimal mistakes if you expect to beat a team with a defense like LSU. The same would be true if we ran it in the I Formation 45 times a game, if the plays aren't executed properly you won't be successful.
An offense like A&M's also wears down a defense just as a power running team does. The pace is very fast and the stress on the defense is constant. It is also no easy task to keep up with a guy like Manziel. You better be in shape and have depth. I question the logic that if A&M simply ran "3 yards and a cloud of dust" with their big RB's that it would have worn down a defense as deep and talented as LSU's, the only team that has done that in recent years was Bama but that had more to do with Bama's defense stopping LSU's offense than anything.
SEC teams have won being pass heavy, especially with mobile QB's, in the past. If you look outside the SEC the best team is almost certainly Oregon which runs a very similar offense to A&M. The key for both instances is having the defense.
WVU is a bad example because they have absolutely no defense and they also turned the ball over too much in that game. You have to make stops and you have to protect the football, it doesn't matter if you pass the ball 5 times or 50.
In the end the answer to this question won't be resolved this year. A&M doesn't have the level of defense necessary nor are they executing the offense well enough to get a real answer to the question yet as the big test left is Bama and unless Bama has a terrible game and A&M is flawless Bama should win that game easily because the talent edge is simply too much regardless of how many times they run or pass. Bama has also been running their defensive system for a very long time whereas A&M has 7 games running their O. Next year will be a much better comparison point.
In the meantime, props to LSU for a much deserved win.
I still haven't heard a good counterpoint to these facts from the game. A&M got inside the 10 twice and power rushed for TD's both times by RB's. A&M had only 1 3 and out.
Would it be nice for A&M to run the ball more with their RB's? Probably, but that wasn't what cost us this game. What cost us this game was turnovers and execution. You could argue that the most costly turnover was actually the Malena fumble as well which allowed LSU to take the lead before the half. The offensive scheme itself is fine, the problem is it has to be executed with precision and minimal mistakes if you expect to beat a team with a defense like LSU. The same would be true if we ran it in the I Formation 45 times a game, if the plays aren't executed properly you won't be successful.
An offense like A&M's also wears down a defense just as a power running team does. The pace is very fast and the stress on the defense is constant. It is also no easy task to keep up with a guy like Manziel. You better be in shape and have depth. I question the logic that if A&M simply ran "3 yards and a cloud of dust" with their big RB's that it would have worn down a defense as deep and talented as LSU's, the only team that has done that in recent years was Bama but that had more to do with Bama's defense stopping LSU's offense than anything.
SEC teams have won being pass heavy, especially with mobile QB's, in the past. If you look outside the SEC the best team is almost certainly Oregon which runs a very similar offense to A&M. The key for both instances is having the defense.
WVU is a bad example because they have absolutely no defense and they also turned the ball over too much in that game. You have to make stops and you have to protect the football, it doesn't matter if you pass the ball 5 times or 50.
In the end the answer to this question won't be resolved this year. A&M doesn't have the level of defense necessary nor are they executing the offense well enough to get a real answer to the question yet as the big test left is Bama and unless Bama has a terrible game and A&M is flawless Bama should win that game easily because the talent edge is simply too much regardless of how many times they run or pass. Bama has also been running their defensive system for a very long time whereas A&M has 7 games running their O. Next year will be a much better comparison point.
In the meantime, props to LSU for a much deserved win.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 10:45 am to aggressor
quote:
aggressor
Knows his shite. Read and heed, all.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 10:59 am to Katy Tiger
quote:
The point is that pass yardage doesn't equal points. If you look at teams that throw it around the field all day - they usually don't win the big games. See WVU the last two weeks for evidence of that.
I agree, but why do spread offenses fail?
RED ZONE PROBLEMS. Any version of the spread offense is going to rack up a ton of yards, but that only translates into points if the offense can switch to a power running attack in the red zone, or strike from outside the red zone.
In the Spread Offense the point is to spread out the defense and make them defend a huge chunk of the field. When the back of the endzone gets closer, the defense has less field to cover. THUS, red zone problems. The spread will work, but not as the exclusive offensive style. See what the NE Patriots do.
Also, the spread works much better in ZONE DEFENSES than man coverage. A team with good DBs an fast LBs can get into man coverage and SHUT THAT BITCH DOWN. That's what LSU did to Jizz Jar Jesus.
The response to a good defense in man coverage? All we could do is hope to get LB v. WR matchups, but ultimately, the receivers have to run perfect routs and and JJJ has to be NFL-dead-to-rites accurate. We couldn't take effective advantage of any of those matchups and JJJ got happy feet, so the offense was much less productive.
Another response (the response I wanted) is to work out of the spread set and get the defense in man coverage in a nickle or dime package. That set is much less effective at stopping the run. LSU was in man coverage, in nickle a lot...WHICH IS WHY WE SHOULD HAVE RUN THE frickING BALL MORE!!!!
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:03 am to NoMoreShortcuts
We'll see about that when you're calling for a new head coach with a new philosophy in a few years.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:08 am to t - cam
Johnny Interception does not approve of this thread.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:12 am to aggressor
It doesnt matter if you have Brady or Brees running the offense, when you throw that much then there will be more mistakes. I agree that the philosophy can win games and put up big numbers, but in college football, you really cant afford to have that one bad game that is likely to happen with that style of offense.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:12 am to The Mick
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:15 am to aggressor
quote:
A&M got inside the 10 twice and power rushed for TD's both times by RB's. A&M had only 1 3 and out.
What about when we got inside the 12? Getting a first and goal from the 6 is a different animal than 1st and 10 from the 12.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:18 am to Bose Ikard
quote:
had easy catches for long gains bounce off of our shoulder pads and into the air for an interception,
It was one pass, and the pass was like a 7 yard slant route....
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:20 am to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Agreed. 3 picks will kill your chances of winning a game.
In fairness to Jizz Jar Jesus, one of the picks was a bounce off the hip of a receiver, another was on the last play of the game when we were trying for the Stanford/Cal win.
What??? that was a fumble and the ball bounced off the receivers chest. Did you watch the game?
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:20 am to PortCityTiger82
quote:
We'll see about that when you're calling for a new head coach with a new philosophy in a few years.
Rich coming from a fanbase who goes apeshit for days after an ugly win or loss (see Auburn, Towson, Florida...) about how they need a new coach that can score points.
Posted on 10/24/12 at 11:22 am to aggressor
quote:
A&M is still 2nd in the SEC in rushing though and has the highest YPG still as well as the highest average yards per rush. We still run the ball.
I still haven't heard a good counterpoint to these facts from the game. A&M got inside the 10 twice and power rushed for TD's both times by RB's. A&M had only 1 3 and out.
Would it be nice for A&M to run the ball more with their RB's? Probably, but that wasn't what cost us this game. What cost us this game was turnovers and execution. You could argue that the most costly turnover was actually the Malena fumble as well which allowed LSU to take the lead before the half. The offensive scheme itself is fine, the problem is it has to be executed with precision and minimal mistakes if you expect to beat a team with a defense like LSU. The same would be true if we ran it in the I Formation 45 times a game, if the plays aren't executed properly you won't be successful.
An offense like A&M's also wears down a defense just as a power running team does. The pace is very fast and the stress on the defense is constant. It is also no easy task to keep up with a guy like Manziel. You better be in shape and have depth. I question the logic that if A&M simply ran "3 yards and a cloud of dust" with their big RB's that it would have worn down a defense as deep and talented as LSU's, the only team that has done that in recent years was Bama but that had more to do with Bama's defense stopping LSU's offense than anything.
SEC teams have won being pass heavy, especially with mobile QB's, in the past. If you look outside the SEC the best team is almost certainly Oregon which runs a very similar offense to A&M. The key for both instances is having the defense.
WVU is a bad example because they have absolutely no defense and they also turned the ball over too much in that game. You have to make stops and you have to protect the football, it doesn't matter if you pass the ball 5 times or 50.
In the end the answer to this question won't be resolved this year. A&M doesn't have the level of defense necessary nor are they executing the offense well enough to get a real answer to the question yet as the big test left is Bama and unless Bama has a terrible game and A&M is flawless Bama should win that game easily because the talent edge is simply too much regardless of how many times they run or pass. Bama has also been running their defensive system for a very long time whereas A&M has 7 games running their O. Next year will be a much better comparison point.
In the meantime, props to LSU for a much deserved win.
Post of the year.
Page 5 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News