re: Does Chavis need a ball control offense, with elite Time of Possession?

quote:

---

You do realize that time of possession is a team thing, and not just an offense thing. If defense can get off the field on 3rd down, this would give the ball back to the offense. If Chavis can't get off the field on 3rd down, this hurts time of possession.

---

Of course I realize that. But TOP isn't the goal of the defense. The goal of a defense is to prevent others from scoring. The claim has been that Chavis' defenses depend on the LSU ball control offense. But LSU TOP hasn't been anywhere close to being as elite as the LSU Defense.

So maybe that means that the LSU offense is doing it's job, but the LSU defense can't get off the field. Well, last year LSU was #30 in 3rd down defense. The offense? #69

2012 3rd down defense - 12, offense - 60
2011 3rd down defense - 19, offense - 31
2010 3rd down defense - 16, offense - 75
2009 3rd down defense - 38, offense - 71

2013 was the ONLY year LSU's offense did a better job on 3rd down than Chavis's defense:

2013 3rd down defense - 53, offense - 1

And yet, that was the WORST defense for Chavis, by far.

The evidence could hardly be more clear that Chavis doesn't depend on what his team's offense is doing.

quote:

---

You're getting ridiculous now. Third down is always trouble for a rushing team.

---

Holy shite! You could not be more wrong. The top 4 3rd down conversion teams last year were as follows:

1. Georgia Tech
2. Auburn
3. Ohio State
4. Alabama

Please tell me which of those teams is not a "rushing team".

quote:

---

The "evidence" is you continuing to get more and more obscure out of stubborness. I could just as easily argue 2013's #1 offensive third down ranking caused Chavis to nosedive. The 2013 defense didn't lack for talent.

---

I'm using the evidence that the original poster to whom I am responding used. They were the one who brought up 3rd down conversion rates. I was demonstrating that USING THE CRITERIA HE SELECTED, his argument was disproven.

And I have no idea how you could argue that the 2013 defense was bad BECAUSE LSU's offense finally started doing a good job of staying on the field and holding the ball. That's just insane. The 2013 defense had talent, but was deficient in development and experience.

quote:

---

Literally none of those teams ran a traditional power run game last year.

---

This is known as "moving the goal posts". First you just said "rushing team" NOW it's "team that runs a traditional power run game".

I'll be nice and allow you to cherry-pick-out GT and Auburn, so let's just look at OSU and Bama.

Bama passed the ball 451 times, and rushed the ball 567 times.

Ohio State passed the ball 409 times and rushed the ball 690 times.

And yet these two teams who combined to rush over 300 more times than they passed are not traditional power running teams?

Derp indeed.

quote:

---

I never argued that. I actually alluded to it being retarded, just like using split situational stats to try and prove an argument.

---

I KNOW you didn't argue that. The fact that you think that "retarded" argument is close to as reasonable as anything I posted is laughable. Or sad. Or both.

But then you're the guy who called OSU "one of the most balanced offenses in the country." Did you know that they're even more of a RUN team than A&M is a PASS team?

A&M 514 passes, 421 rushes.
OSU 409 passes, 690 rushes.

smh

quote:

---

This is known as "moving the goal posts". First you just said "rushing team" NOW it's "team that runs a traditional power run game".

---

Likewise, what you're doing is called "splitting hairs." Both Bama and OSU gained more yards passing than they did rushing. That hardly qualifies them as rushing teams. Once again, you're shifting the focus towards another statistic, attempts, to support your argument when the clear takeaway is both those teams had the ability to convert third downs in the air. Likewise, Auburn and GT's third down stats are skewed because of the high-risk high-reward nature of misdirection. They get three cracks at a large conversion versus grinding it out for average on first and second down. I know its tempting to throw out rational thought in an internet argument and play "gotcha" with specific wording, but if you're truly objective about it you understand that point.

quote:

---

A&M 514 passes, 421 rushes.

OSU 409 passes, 690 rushes.

---

A&M - 3971 passing yards, 1949 rushing yards

Ohio State - 3707 passing yards, 3967 rushing yards

A&M is a passing team, and Ohio State is balanced. See how easy that was?

quote:

---

Balanced attacks are based on plays ran

---

Jesus, yall are stupid. Are you even trying to insinuate that Texas A&M was more balanced than OSU because yall ran close the the same amount of run and pass......

quote:

---

Likewise, what you're doing is called "splitting hairs." Both Bama and OSU gained more yards passing than they did rushing. That hardly qualifies them as rushing teams. Once again, you're shifting the focus towards another statistic, attempts, to support your argument when the clear takeaway is both those teams had the ability to convert third downs in the air. Likewise, Auburn and GT's third down stats are skewed because of the high-risk high-reward nature of misdirection. They get three cracks at a large conversion versus grinding it out for average on first and second down. I know its tempting to throw out rational thought in an internet argument and play "gotcha" with specific wording, but if you're truly objective about it you understand that point.

---

It's not "splitting hairs" at all. If anyone is splitting hairs, it's you because you're trying to suggest that GT and Auburn don't count.

You are claiming that "balanced attack" means roughly equal passing and rushing production in yardage. You are literally the FIRST person I've ever encountered who didn't refer to Run/Pass plays called when discussing offensive balance.

2014 Bama and especially OSU were run-first teams who were ALSO effective passing the ball. If you don't agree with that, then I sincerely doubt that we fundamentally have enough common ground to discuss this.

Dave Christensen is to a running game as Miles is to a QB coach.

quote:

---

Jesus, yall are stupid.

---

Balanced ATTACK - roughly equal number of passes/rushes

Balanced RESULTS - roughly equal yardage produced from those passes/rushes

quote:

---

That is what a balanced attack is you fricking moron...........if you run 50 plays for 1 yard per play and 50 pass plays for 300 yards.....YOU AREN'T BALANCED.

---

I am quoting this so we can all see it before he edits it.

Say GT who runs the triple option gets absolutely stuffed. I am talking 40 rushes for 7 yards. Then once said game is in hand and GT is going to lose they attempt 1 pass to the RB who breaks it for about 35 yards. You're saying GT was an unbalanced pass attack that game?

quote:

---

I am quoting this so we can all see it before he edits it.

---

And he edited it. I fricking knew it.