forums

Projections for Off & Def stats in 2020.

Advertisement
Well, that's certainly encouraging.

To be totally realistic, this is a 10-11 win team if the offense just makes the jump from terrible to respectable. (I'm using the original version of our 2020 schedule)

I would expect passing yards allowed to regress slightly, not because they will play worse but because opponents will be throwing the ball a lot more if we can actually get leads. Rushing defense might actually improve because sacks count against rushing offense in college football. I'm completely OK if the defense gives up a couple more points as long as the offense is lighting it up.
 
OrangeBowlMagic said:
We'll benefit from no fans at Lane, but it's still not going to be easy to win there.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but I don't see them as a challenge for the entire division like UNC. Who knows, maybe they'll be better than expected, but I doubt it. Fuente has made too many mistakes like looking for another job and losing a bunch of transfers.
 
Advertisement
JD08 said:
Agreed, but I don't see them as a challenge for the entire division like UNC. Who knows, maybe they'll be better than expected, but I doubt it. Fuente has made too many mistakes like looking for another job and losing a bunch of transfers.
Click to expand...
Lane is over hyped. When we've gone in there prepared vt is no competition.
 
We finally have an offense that can score so I see them cranking up the aggressiveness on D. Manny is an aggressive DC to begin with but when you can’t score for **** it’s hard to go for broke on D. If I was Manny I’d be trying to get Lashlee as many extra possessions as possible. You get that man the ball an extra 2-3 times a game you won’t be losing many games.
 
JgDaCane said:
We finally have an offense that can score so I see them cranking up the aggressiveness on D. Manny is an aggressive DC to begin with but when you can’t score for **** it’s hard to go for broke on D. If I was Manny I’d be trying to get Lashlee as many extra possessions as possible. You get that man the ball an extra 2-3 times a game you won’t be losing many games.
Click to expand...
I can see our D stats suffering a bit due to being extra aggressive. I can also see us winning more games and forcing more turnovers in the process, and that is what it's all about. IF our O is as good as we think it can be, our D will feast. Yeah, I can see us giving up more yards and points, but I can see us getting more turnovers, and points off turnovers. More than enough to make up the difference.

It's just different when you are playing with a lead, and I expect us to have leads. Large ones, at times.
 
Playing with the lead is paramount. Everything changes if you’re up 10 points. Look what we did to FSU last season.
 
Idk if it’s coincidence or just teams already had a bad defense or maybe it’s a psychological component.
But these higher tempo offenses always have defenses that give up a lot of points. Maybe it’s fatigue, maybe it’s personnel, or maybe it’s just not being as aggressive when your up by 21. But it’s the only thing that worries me about offenses like this.
 
pacusmc said:
Idk if it’s coincidence or just teams already had a bad defense or maybe it’s a psychological component.
But these higher tempo offenses always have defenses that give up a lot of points. Maybe it’s fatigue, maybe it’s personnel, or maybe it’s just not being as aggressive when your up by 21. But it’s the only thing that worries me about offenses like this.
Click to expand...
Often teams try to score a lot of points because they know their D is going to give up a lot of points. I know that sounds simplistic, but it's true. It's easier to field a good O than a good D. You can scheme your way to points, but it's darn hard to scheme yourself to a good D when you don't have the talent to do so.

We might, finally, have the best of both worlds. Yes, our D stats may suffer a bit, but our D as a whole will be just fine. Would you rather win a game 10-7, or 42-14? Sure, you're giving up twice as many points a game, but which would we all rather have? It's just that simple to me. Score points and let your D attack. Stats be damned. If you know your D is talented, let them go out there and force the issue. Most teams with an uptempo O don't have that ability. We will.
 
Advertisement
I'm surprised that OU's point differential was only 11.7 ppg

EDIT:
Scratch that.
They got geat by LSU by 35.
 
pacusmc said:
Idk if it’s coincidence or just teams already had a bad defense or maybe it’s a psychological component.
But these higher tempo offenses always have defenses that give up a lot of points. Maybe it’s fatigue, maybe it’s personnel, or maybe it’s just not being as aggressive when your up by 21. But it’s the only thing that worries me about offenses like this.
Click to expand...
In college football, offensive innovation often comes from the teams that don’t have the man power to beat you in traditional ways. The original spread, run and shoot, air raid offenses were developed by guys at small schools. They didn’t have the horses to line up and run the ball straight at their opponents so they had to get creative just to be competitive. The same thing with the no huddle. At first the “big” programs laughed and called it gimmicky. “You’ll tire out your defense. You need to control the clock”. Until those small schools running gimmicky offenses started scoring a ton of points and beating a lot of the traditional powers. We saw what schools like Auburn and Clemson were able to do against all powerful Alabama when they switched tempos. Now most of the top schools run some type of hurry up. Maybe not everyone is lightning fast but most of the best teams are running around 75 plays a game. A team like Wake Forrest rarely had big leads so they were forced to keep their foot to the floor. Same for Lashlee’s SMU squad. They had to run 80+ plays to give themselves a chance to win. LSU also operated at a break neck pace but they often had huge leads so they could slow thing down in the 4th quarter. I mean if you’re already up 30, you don’t need to operate at maximum efficiency on offense anymore. Go out there, kill some time and if you pick up a first down or two, great. Clemson, LSU and Ohio State were all top ten in plays per game and I don’t think any of them had weak defenses.
 
DTP said:
In college football, offensive innovation often comes from the teams that don’t have the man power to beat you in traditional ways. The original spread, run and shoot, air raid offenses were developed by guys at small schools. They didn’t have the horses to line up and run the ball straight at their opponents so they had to get creative just to be competitive. The same thing with the no huddle. At first the “big” programs laughed and called it gimmicky. “You’ll tire out your defense. You need to control the clock”. Until those small schools running gimmicky offenses started scoring a ton of points and beating a lot of the traditional powers. We saw what schools like Auburn and Clemson were able to do against all powerful Alabama when they switched tempos. Now most of the top schools run some type of hurry up. Maybe not everyone is lightning fast but most of the best teams are running around 75 plays a game. A team like Wake Forrest rarely had big leads so they were forced to keep their foot to the floor. Same for Lashlee’s SMU squad. They had to run 80+ plays to give themselves a chance to win. LSU also operated at a break neck pace but they often had huge leads so they could slow thing down in the 4th quarter. I mean if you’re already up 30, you don’t need to operate at maximum efficiency on offense anymore. Go out there, kill some time and if you pick up a first down or two, great. Clemson, LSU and Ohio State were all top ten in plays per game and I don’t think any of them had weak defenses.
Click to expand...
Awesome. Thanks for the clarity.
 
Back
Top