Penn State 19 - LSU 17: It Started Out Like the Florida Game, Ended Up Like the Ole Miss Game
by Richard Pittman on Jan 2, 2010 6:31 AM CST
in Football
221 comments
Say goodbye to the 2009 season for LSU. It is over, and I feel like it never really began.
It just seems like this team never rounded into mid-season form. It looked like we were playing the college equivalent of NFL preseason exhibition games all season. By this I mean we seemed to be forever trying to figure out how to get lined up properly, how to get playcalls in, how to get the snap off, how to get our personnel to mesh, etc.
I hate to use this term pejoratively, but the 2009 LSU football team looked amateurish. I don't mean this as a knock against the players, and in particular I do not mean it as a knock against the seniors. If there is one man who looked nothing like an amateur all season, it was Brandon Lafell. Yesterday he again did not look like an amateur, and he will make a fine pro.
Yesterday's game was a microcosm of the season. The offense spent long stretches being completely ineffective. At one point I commented that the LSU offensive yardage when Brandon Lafell made a great play was 54 yards, and when he did not make a great play, it was 15 yards. That was 15 yards in about 15 plays. The offensive line reverted back to its mid-season form of completely failing to open up holes for the running backs. Jordan Jefferson's throws were not bad, but were just off-target enough to be difficult for receivers to handle on slick turf with a wet ball. And when Jefferson delivered a long strike to Terrance Toliver and a second to Rueben Randle, they dropped sure touchdown passes.
An offense I was hoping would be able to show competence in something (anything) did nothing right in the first half. Meanwhile the defense was doing pretty much the same thing it did all season: allow several long drives that consume time but only end up with field goals, keeping the team in the game. It was the Florida game all over again.
The second half was a different story. After a couple of wasted possessions, including a nearly disastrous turnover that would have clinched the game for Penn State had they been able to convert it to a touchdown from the LSU 22 yard line (but were fortunately held to a field goal), the LSU offense suddenly came alive. On two straight possessions, we scored touchdowns on impressive looking drives and took the lead 17-16.
Again, the defense gave up a long, time-consuming drive towards the end of the game, allowing Penn State to convert two 3rd downs of 3 and 4 yards and eating up about 6 minutes of the play clock, but again holding Penn State to a field goal. But this time it was a field goal to take the lead, giving us less than a minute to get into field goal territory to try a game-winner.
Like I said, it became the Ole Miss game. Our final possession started out promisingly, with Trindon Holliday giving us a nice return to the 41 yard line with 48 seconds remaining. Having used two timeouts to save time on Penn State's final possession, and having wasted a timeout to challenge Stevan Ridley's fumble that was obviously called correctly, we were left with no timeouts. Had we been able to use all 3 of our timeouts on Penn State's last possession, we would have had about 1:25 or so. Still, 48 seconds is time enough for about 7 plays if you hurry. With the extremely sloppy field conditions, I estimate we would have needed to get to about the 20 yard line to have a real shot at a field goal, meaning we needed to get about 40 yards.
On the first play, Jefferson scrambled out of pressure and got 10 yards and out of bounds, taking off 9 seconds. It took more time than we would have liked, but it was a positive result.
Then the time-management issues reared their heads again as Jefferson was called upon to throw an inside slip-screen to Brandon Lafell. This play had worked well twice earlier in the game, each time netting a nice gain. This time, Lafell found the middle of the field very crowded and was tackled in-bounds after a 4 yard gain, not close to a 1st down needed to stop the clock, and he never had a prayer of getting out of bounds. Enough electrons have given their lives on the internet to describe the sheer folly of this play call, and there is no need to rehash it here.
From that point, the disaster continued as offensive guard Lyle Hitt was called for a personal foul while trying to get a Penn State player off the pile so the refs could get the ball reset and we could continue the game. The clock was running, and the Penn State player had wisely decided to take his time clearing the pile so the refs could re-set. After the penalty was stepped off, putting us right back where the drive started, the clock started running again and our players were not in position to run the next play. Several more seconds ran off the clock while our players got into proper formation and Jefferson waited several more after that to call for the snap. The slip-screen started with 39 seconds on the clock, and we did not get the next snap off until the clock read :08. Thirty-one seconds had run. Jefferson threw an incomplete pass and we were left with 2 seconds on the clock and time to run one more play, needing 60 yards to get to the end zone. A desperation hook and ladder to Rueben Randle did not succeed and the game ended. 48 seconds, 4 plays.
And Russell Shepard does not appear in the box score.
So, that game had it all: incompetent offense, incomprehensible play calling, problems getting a play into the game at a crucial time, formation issues, long drives by the opposing team, dynamic players resting on the bench, and no blocking. There's your 2009 LSU football team in a nutshell.
The only things different were the shamefully bad field and the Big 10 opponent.
To be precise, the end of the game was actually fundamentally different from the Ole Miss game in the details. Against Ole Miss, the end of the game was marred by a combination of abysmal execution by the execution (poor blocking on the screen to Ridley leading to a 10 yard loss and a poor decision by Jefferson to scramble rather than throw the ball away, leading to another 10 yard loss) combined with an inexplicable passage of time before calling our final timeout ended the game without us running all the plays we could have. This time, it was purely bad coaching decisions that robbed us of opportunities at the end of the game. Whoever decided to call an inside screen simply set our team up for disaster. If the play had worked, it would have been fine, but unlike a play to the sidelines or a play down the field (which would result in a stopped clock if they are unsuccessful), an inside screen in that situation is a catastophe if it fails.
But in the sense that both games were marred by coaches and players being unable to get out of each other's way and the game ending with us having wasted precious time on poor coaching decisions, it was similar to the Ole Miss game.
0 recs |
221 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Excellent post Richard
Completely agree.
The bowl game last season appeared to show me that with a QB that didn’t hand the opposing team 7 pts directly due to pic 6’s plus an unknowable amount of pts indirectly due to other costly pics we actually had a good team.
This year there was no saving grace. The team showed zero improvement over the course of the year.
Let’s throw records out the window. If 2008 LSU plays 2009 LSU, who wins? I think the 2008 team wins.
For all the praise this staff has or will receive for the turn around in the record, I think there I a solid argument to be made that this team didn’t actually improve on an absolute scale at all.
by LSU Jonno on Jan 2, 2010 9:11 AM CST via mobile reply actions
I think you're being a bit disingenuous
- Randle didn’t just flat out drop a touchdown. He barely got his hands on a pass that was tipped by PSU defenders. Now Tolliver. Toilliver looked like he didn’t even care to play with all the passes dropped and lack of concentration exhibited. Not only could you blame him for a dropped touchdown, you can pretty much blame him for the easy pass he missed that went right to the PSU corner for the interception (and 3 points if I remember correctly).
-Lay off of the defense with the “Again, the defense gave up a long, time-consuming drive towards the end of the game”. We both watched the game. Even if you hadn’t and looked at the box score where one would find PSU time of possession totalling over 38 minutes, it’s obvious that the defense was gassed at the very end. Don’t try to blame them one bit. That’s completely unfair considering they were the only ones playing hard. The only reason the Tigers were in the game was because they managed multiple times to hold PSU to field goals instead of touchdowns after PSU was given very short fields.
Point being, you don’t need to throw this stuff in to convince me or anyone else, LSU played terribly. And you certainly don’t need to hedge to address the main points you make, playcalling and time management were abysmal, pathetic and embarrassing.
You're probably right about Randle
I remembered it incorrectly. It was a tip drill moment and Randle just could not come down with it. He got his hands on it, but that’s not an easy play. Had he gotten it, he was streaking to the end zone and no one would have caught him.
Toliver blew that catch, which also would have been a sure touchdown had he gotten it, but I can’t say he looked disinterested. He had a tough time early in the game with low throws. Lafell was able to get those low throws, but with the poor footing and the wet ball, anything not right on the numbers was going to be a problem for all but the best receivers. The one he tipped to the opponent for the interception was a drop, but the result was just a freak occurrence.
I think it may be time to assign at least some responsibility for the season to the defense. Sure, the offense did it no favors, except that our reluctance to take chances usually meant we put the opposing offenses in manageable field position for our defense. Our lack of playmaking ability on the defensive line consistently allowed teams to get into 3rd and Short situations and consequently teams were able to have long drives on us.
I am not a believer in the “3rd and Chavis” mentality, but it is a fact that our defense finished the season 10th in the conference in 3rd down defense. I think, again, the problem is primarily the defensive line, which did not get much pressure without blitzing.
Father. Husband. Lawyer. Nerd.
by Richard Pittman on Jan 2, 2010 9:35 AM CST up reply actions
Agreed
The defense didn’t do us any favors dropping how many passes? four? I’m not sure but I’ve never seen that many hit our guys in the hands or the chest without one pick off. So yeah, no favours done there.
-oh yes if Randle had managed to come down with it somehow, it was six points.
-I’m sticking with my critique of Tolliver. Yes, Jefferson was inaccurate but several times he hit Tolliver in the hands and Tolliver couldn’t make the catch. Yes, the tip to the defender was kind of freak, but that’s routine catch if there ever was one, the ball was on target, Tolliver had his hands up and his eyes on it, his knee was down so he had no concern of y.a.c.. He just didn’t reel it in and it cost LSU dearly.
But yeah, the defense didn’t do themselves any favours with the missed ints and short 3rds/converted 3rds, I gree with you there.
Good article, but blaming any part of this season's failures on the defense is beyond absurd.
When we scored 3 points against Florida, was it the defenses’ fault we lost — if only they had held the Gators to 2?
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 2, 2010 9:56 AM CST up reply actions
Think back to that game though..
Sure, our offense was abysmal, but they had only 8 possessions the entire game. Eight! Why? Because Florida ran the ball up the middle at will.
Here are the # of plays that Florida had on each of its possessions in that game: 13, 7, 8, 1 (kneel-down before half), 13, 5, 11, 2, 6. Here is the yardage on each of those possessions: 82, 44, 80, -1 (half), 76, 15, 44, 3, 12 (end of game). Yes, we held down their point total, but Florida’s offense was on the field the whole game. They got 44 yards or more on every REAL possession they had except 2, and had 3 drives of 76 yards or more, out of really only 7 possessions that mattered.
The defense kept us in the Florida game, and in the Penn State game, but in neither game were they in any way dominant. Between the two games, our defense forced a total of one turnover, and gave up about 6 or 7 yards per play on average.
Father. Husband. Lawyer. Nerd.
by Richard Pittman on Jan 2, 2010 10:10 AM CST up reply actions
Yeah..
I’m not sure why people are calling your critiques of the defense absurd. They performed better than last year’s standard, but by no means were they the game changers that they are being made out to be.
Basically our offensive and defensive units are set up to fail each other. They both warrant criticism. Maybe not equally, but the defense is still culpable to a degree.
What's up Ryan? ARGHHHHHH!!! oops. ~ Patrick Chewing
To be fair, I didn't call his critique 'absurd'
I called it ‘beyond absurd.’
Look, the offense had eight possessions, which you claim wasn’t enough. In those eight possessions they scored three points. At that rate they’d have needed 37 possessions to get to 14 points. That’s not happening.
Show me an offense that comes up with one field goal in eight tries, and I’ll show you a losing team. No matter how good the defense is.
And Pittman’s argument that UF got 44 yards on every “real possession” is the height of statistical shamery and, yes, intellectual dishonesty.* That only works if you assume that the possessions where Florida didn’t gain 44 yards weren’t “real.” Victory by definition!
He also shoots his own argument in the foot by pointing out that UF only had eight possessions (not counting the one play kneeldown to end the half). 8 possessions apparently isn’t enough for the LSU offense to so much as sniff the end zone, but is more than enough for the Florida offense to do its damage.
*This is the only football blog I know of where “inellectual dishonesty” is the worst insult one can imagine. Truly throwing down the gauntlet
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 9:23 AM CST up reply actions
While I mostly agree with your points
The fact that the worst insult on this blog is ‘intellectual dishonesty’ is why this is the BEST LSU blog on the net.
On the other hand, you must have missed the post-Ole Miss festivities, the children were put to bed early!
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
I was on the road for the Ole Miss game
Thank God. The only LSU game in my life I have been happy to miss. I probably would have broken something. Or things.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 9:36 AM CST up reply actions
To be fair
Pittman did not define 44 yards as a “real possession”. He was throwing out kneel down possessions, which I think is perfectly fair. Florida wasn’t trying to advance the football on two drives, and the defense gets no credit for being present while the other team takes a knee.
Florida really only had 7 possessions in which they were running the offense. and on all of them save one, they got tons of yards and ran lots of plays. Just because the offense was worse, it doesn’t absolve the defense of responsibility.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
Then why do you say it is a "success" below?
I think Richard articulates my thoughts very well above. You seem to agree w/ them. So why do you think Chavis’s system was a “success” again?
Because it was a top 20 defense for a 9 win team with little help from the offense
Short of being 1939 Tennessee I don’t know what else you could ask for.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 9:49 AM CST up reply actions
Also - Not that it proves anything
But why do you think Georgia offered Chavis $800K to come be their DC?
They have had to go up against his D forever and do you think they noticed a difference in our D this year verses last?
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
You are half right....
It doesn’t prove anything. This is the same coaching staff that thought keeping Willie Martinez another year was a good idea.
Some people (that's right coaches are people)
Believe in giving other people (particularly ones that have been successful and earned it) a chance to turn things around if they have a rough patch, but that’s Martinez…
The thing is; I don’t see where Chavis has had a rough patch.
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
You misunderstand me...
Poseur seems to make contrary statements. I was simply looking for further explanation. I was not trying to imply that Chavis is no good all around.
But how can you seriously say “what else could I ask for?” I assume that is a jab rather than an actual position.
I could ask for a lot of things…more pressure on the qb for one. We have 21 sacks on the season. 4 of those in the La Tech game. That puts us at number 81 in the country in this category.
Don’t you think this is a problem?
By itself, no
You could lead the league in sacks by blitzing 8 every down. You’d give up 60 points a game on numerous 80 yard touchdown passes, but you’d lead the league in sacks.
I mean, sacks are nice. But fans overrate them – your defense isn’t on the field to get sacks. It’s on the field to stop the other team from scoring. I judge a defense by two stats – points against, and to a lesser extent total yards against. Everything else is window dressing.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 10:30 AM CST up reply actions
straw man...
you set up a straw man w/ the blitzing 8 nonsense. No one is saying that. But I disagree w/ you that it isn’t an important stat.
Technically it's not a straw man
It’s a reductio ad absurdium. :P
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:25 PM CST up reply actions
The defense was a success
If you go through the archives, I was highly critical of the defense after the Florida game. A unit can have a good season and be a success and still have a bad game. I think the unit was good, but that doesn’t mean it was immune from criticism. Success does not equal perfect.
The defense can certainly improve, but I also think it had a good season. Those are not incompatible beliefs.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
wasn't trying to rip you....
Just was confused. Thanks for the explanation.
Didn't think you were...
… not a problem. I have no problem clarifying. We’re all on the same team here.
To reply to something downthread… comparing ANY defense to 2003 is a bad idea. That defense was historically great, and using that as a measuring stick is grossly unfair. I think the 2003 defense is one of the best college defenses ever.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
Success does not equal perfect.
+100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
Well put
The 2009 defense was not as good as the 2003 defense, which is what most LSU fans seem to use as the benchmark. Maybe it wasn’t a great defense. But it was a good defense, and it was definately a better defense.
I just think directing the defensive vim towards to UF game is misguided. If you want to blame a loss on the D, blame them for Ole Miss loss where they gave up 200 rushing yards. Or their poor performance against Miss State, where they got pushed around but came up big on that one goal line stand.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 10:34 AM CST up reply actions
I'm OK with that but
Truth be told, the defense only gave up six points to the most potent offense in the country.
The Touchdown was a sham and we all know it.
I don’t care howmany yards you give up, you can’t ask any more from your defense than to hold the no.1 offense to two field goals.
That loss was strictly on the offense (and SEC Officials to a lesser degree)
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
About the defense...
I’m not a fan. I’m used to seeing a defense that you can count on to go out and win the game for you. We don’t have that kin if defense. Further, I have major doubts that a Chavis coached defense will ever be that kind of defense.
However there aren’t many defensive coaches who can produce a defense like that. Chavis is solid, he’s a known quantity. His defenses will rarely take control of the game and win it, buy rarely will they lose it. If we are going to win a championship with Chavis as the DC we absolutely need a competant offense that can control the clock and help the defense out, because our defense doesn’t help the offense.
I just don’t think that Crowton’s style is compatible with Chavis’ style, they hurt each other instead of complement each other. This speaks to Miles’ lack of direction at the top in my opinion. People say he is too involved and I don’t think he is involved enough.
by LSU Jonno on Jan 2, 2010 10:10 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
I don't have a problem with Chavis..
I just think we did not have the playmakers on the defensive line. Get some All-SEC calibre players on the front 4 and I think everything is different. More turnovers. More runs stuffed. More third and long. More of everything that’s good.
Father. Husband. Lawyer. Nerd.
by Richard Pittman on Jan 2, 2010 10:12 AM CST up reply actions
"Get some All-SEC calibre players on the front 4 and I think everything is different"
This.
That’s the key I’ve seen. We don’t have it this year. If LSU gets some monsters on the dline again, it’s a whole new defense.
So..
what if we don’t get that kind of production from our defense next season? I believe we will next season, because there is a great deal of talent on the bench, but if we don’t, Chavis has already shown his reluctance to make adjustments. That’ a big concern for me.
What's up Ryan? ARGHHHHHH!!! oops. ~ Patrick Chewing
I agree here
I absolutely agree w/ everyone who says our D line is a big reason for our defensive struggles this year. However, I think it is totally valid to point out that Chavis doesn’t seem to alter his scheme at all to compensate for our weaker D line.
I blame the OL for the DL
Remember Hitt and Barksdale both were supposed to be defensive linemen. But Miles forgot to recruit any offensive linement for a couple years, so they got moved to the other side of the ball out of necessity. Thereby weakening both the defense and the offense.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 9:35 AM CST up reply actions
I don't think you will find any argument there
That is one reason why our D line stunk this year. But the problem I have, and others it seems, is that our coaching staff didn’t seem to adjust to the fact that our D line was weak. We just kept running coverages that assumed out D line would get pressure on the qb.
I haven’t looked up the stats, but where did we finish in the SEC w/ sacks. I think I saw 13 sacks on the year w/ 4 of those against La Tech. Is that true?
Eh..
Both were projected to and being recruited as O-lineman IIRC. So the conversion for them was expected.
Thereby weakening both the defense and the offense.
Forgive me if I missed something, but how would that have weakened the O-line?
What's up Ryan? ARGHHHHHH!!! oops. ~ Patrick Chewing
Because they were playing out of position
As opposed to playing offensive linmen who had been recruited to play OL, and presumably would be better suited for it.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:26 PM CST up reply actions
Of course if they were recruited to play OL it's a different story
But I definitely recall both Hitt and Barksdale being defensive linemen when they showed up on campus
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:27 PM CST up reply actions
Well..
that’s just it, they were projects on the d-line at best and they projected better to the o-line.
We are in agreement that attrition and lack of recruitment overall has hurt both lines to a degree though.
What's up Ryan? ARGHHHHHH!!! oops. ~ Patrick Chewing
And I forgot the most damning word
Worse than abysmal, pathetic and embarrassing….. Predictable.
Good to read a write up by you again Richard.
I just wish it were under better circumstances.
This season, for whatever reason, was more disappointing than last year imo. Some good things happened (the rise of Peterson, JJ becoming a solid qb, flashes of Sheppard), but overall this season is going to leave a long, eight month bad taste in my mouth. I hope there is some good recruiting news or something.
I know it’s been said, but I’m not sure you can say it enough: the screen call was abysmally and inexcusably bad.
If the play had worked, it would have been fine, but unlike a play to the sidelines or a play down the field (which would result in a stopped clock if they are unsuccessful), an inside screen in that situation is a catastophe if it fails.
Even if it works, it’s a stupid call. Just because you double down on a 16 and get a 5 doesn’t make it a good move. This demonstrates something worse than simply the results of a single game, something much deeper and more problematic: systematically poor decision making in the offensive play calling. Seriously, the AI on my NCAA Football 2010 game for Xbox 360 isn’t stupid enough to do this dumb shit.
Hope spring eternal though. Looks like the Tigers are going to have another top tier recruiting class. Jordan Jefferson is pretty good, and I think might break out next year. Russell Sheppard has hopefully payed his dues and will (again, hopefully) see the playing time he deserves. Michael Ford will be eligible to play, TT, and of course RIDLEY will be a year better. The defense is returning a lot of starters. Crowton will hopefully be gone.
Gah, whatever. I’m still discouraged.
Gregatron is not responsible for any of the crap he just wrote.
St. Louis vegetarian blog
Agree with almost everything Richard said
I won’t pile on the postgame posts, I’ll just add on here. I think the my first takeaway from the game was that the field was atrocious. I mean, it was a travesty and I’m happy that no one got hurt.
I do disagree with Richard that the end game was all on the coaching. It was a pretty horrific call that made absolutely no sense, but it was followed up by an even worse call by the officials. It was not a “smart play” by the PSU player who refused to even move for 5 seconds. It was an illegal one. To continue with the cards analogy, it’s not a smart play to deal off the bottom of the deck. It’s cheating. The refs absolutely, 100% blew that call. Which, if we’re going with the microcosm of the season theme, is no great surprise.
That said, I’m so fed up with Crowton I can hardly speak. How does Shepard not even get on the field? Why on earh is he running a reverse on a sloppy field from the 10 yard line? What the hell was that 2-minute drill? This offense grossly underperformed all season, and Crowton seemingly has no idea how to call a game. I hope he gets canned.
Finally, the biggest reason LSU lost was the difference in line play. LSU’s offensive line couldn’t open up a hole to save their lives and the defensive line couldn’t get pressure at all. If it wasn’t for PSU calling some inexplicable screen passes, we never would have gotten any pressure. Our lines were thoroughly dominated. Which was par for the course this year.
Oh, one last point. Since those who have bashed Miles have always thrown out Miles’ bowl record, I do not want to hear this game used as a datapoint against him. If only the SEC record counts, that cuts both ways. This game was an exhibition on in awful conditions. Let’s not read to much into it.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
Yeah this is the worst OL play we've seen in years
The next dude to argue to me that “offensive guards are the least important position on the football field” gets punched in the nads.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 9:25 AM CST up reply actions
Did someone actually try to make that point?
I thought it was generally understood that you win in the trenches!
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
This is a commonly held belief in the NFL, at least
That you have to have good tackles but you can pick up warm bodies to play guard. It’s why guards are basically never chosen in the first round. Thing is, I think Black and Barksdale are good – although maybe not quite as good as the press clippings suggest. But there was just no push in the interior.
Hell before the game Studrawa was asked “what does T Bob need to do for next year” and he answered, without even 1/8 second hesitation, “he needs to get stronger.” I think that was repeatedly made evident over the course of the season.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 9:42 AM CST up reply actions
one more thing
I’m largely on the same page with Pittman and Poseur on this game, but one thing needs to be said while we’re analyzing the game. Peterson probably had his worst game as an LSU player. He got played; there’s not denying it. Maybe PSU’s strategy was to use his aggression against him since the field was terrible. Or maybe he had to much fun on New Year’s Eve. In any event, he got burned repeatedly.
I don’t want to down him, though. He had one bad game the whole season. He’s still awesome. But I presume he’s such a good player he’ll know he played like crap.
Yeah, Peterson had his worst game..
I was thinking it, but it didn’t really fit into the column. It’s a correct observation though.
Father. Husband. Lawyer. Nerd.
by Richard Pittman on Jan 2, 2010 5:15 PM CST up reply actions
Couple points
-Randle should’ve made that catch. He goes to school to catch the ball, and after it was tipped, it hit both of his hands. He had 2 hands underneath the ball, and nothing but green (and brown, and black) in front of him, and he didn’t catch it.
-Toliver blew it. He played like crap. Did anyone see what he did on the hook and ladder play? Go back and watch it. It is unbelievable. He was definitely disinterested.
-It would have been great if we’d decided to catch the ball before halfway through the 3rd quarter. Especially all of the picks we dropped.
-Our offensive line sucks. Flat out sucks. You can blame Crowton all you want, and he has had his fair share of stupid play calls, especially at the end of games, but what can he do? He can’t call runs, they get stuffed. He can’t call deep balls, JJ gets sacked. He can’t call short passes too much either, because inexplicably Jefferson cannot get the ball to the receiver in a position for them to make a play with it. He throws screen passes where they have to jump 3 feet in the air to catch it, and it screws the play over.
-This team had a lot of heart, especially the defense. Even the offense though, for the most part we seemed to move the ball when we had to this year. Against Ole Miss, against Arkansas, against PSU, against MSU.
I have lots of thoughts on the offensive line..
but I will summarize here. I saw a lot of occasions this season where an offensive lineman went downfield to block, only to see the spot he vacated get filled by a defensive back coming in behind him. That’s not a personnel issue. It’s a coaching issue. The lineman was supposed to block one person and ended up going downfield to find someone else, only to see the play made in the spot he vacated.
Father. Husband. Lawyer. Nerd.
by Richard Pittman on Jan 2, 2010 5:15 PM CST up reply actions
Either way it is a coaching problem.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, in fact, I hope you are right.
But if our players just suck, gues who recruited them? The coaches. Guess who prepared them? The coaches.
Gotta be pretty embarrassing for Miles that the O-line is probably the weakest area of the team.
When is it not the Coaches' Fault?
Oh, win he wins a National Championship, I forgot that was all the players and somebody else’s at that.
We need to give the new offensive coaches a chance and we need to remember, despite the fact that we had some talent on the line it was basically inexperienced and undersized for the SEC, or at least by our standards. We have recruited well and we got a lot of guys some reps.
There will be some great competition in the spring and we will be better. Honestly, we should have a really good shot at the SEC next year.
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
I can't comment any further on this game...
…because Mrs. Purpletiger says that she will forbid me to watch or attend any more LSU football games on the fear of giving myself a heart attack. I was absolutely livid yesterday. Not at the officials, but at the abysmal coaching and execution displayed on that field.
After my wife chewed me a new one for raising my blood pressure a couple of notches, I realized that this year’s team and coaches have brought me to a level that I never thought I would be. All season long I was consistantly angry while watching the games. I attended LSU during the Hallman era and I can tell you all that I NEVER reacted to plays and coaching like I have this year.
At the onset of the 4th quarter I found myself just laughing at all of the missed opportunities. I am as big a fan as you guys, but I am not enjoying the games like I have in the past. It’s pretty bad when I am enjoying other games on TV more than watching my beloved Tigers on the field. There is something inherently wrong with that scenario. I just hope we can get our stuff together and provide a better product on the field next year. I will be waiting and watching our team during the course of the year. I will NOT become as emotionally involved as I had become this year. This current coaching staff has changed the way that I watch LSU football. I don’t know, right now, if it will be a good or bad thing.
Sorry about the rant, but I had to vent somehow. I really enjoy all of you guys. This is one of the few places that I can come and read some pretty rational and logical assessments of the Tigers’ athletic teams. Keep up the great work guys. I truly enjoy this site.
Purple Tiger,
I hope you will not be offended but I’d like to respond to your quote as I think you are not the only one that feels this way.
My first question is what has changed since the Hallman era?
My second, did you really enjoy the Hallman era more than the Miles era?
The answer I think lies in expectations. During the Hallman era, indeed pretty much ever since we ‘helped Mac Pack’, we expected to be bad and so we enjoyed and celebrated any victory and just endured the losses.
That is why you could go to Tiger stadium on a Saturday Night and find the Tiger faithful packing the stands, screaming their lungs out as if unaware that we were losing and often near or at the bottom of the SEC.
I grew up thinking you support the Tigers, win or lose, period. I just thought that’s what we do.
So Curly Hallman NEVER had a winning season and is by definition (.365%) the WORST coach we have EVER had and yet you (and you are not alone) enjoyed cheering for the Tigers then more than you do now….!?!
Is that Coach Miles’ fault or is that maybe more a personal issue?
Consider that Les Miles won 17 games in the last two years, Curly Hallman only won 16 in four years and some of his highlights include the Interception Game (which by far is still the most painful game I have ever watched), getting worked by a pretty bad Arkansas team for their first game in the Mighty SEC and just too many (28 in fact) beatings for me to want to rehash. Yet, we all happily supported the Tigers.
What is more, many Tiger fans HATE a man that is by definition (.776) the best coach we’ve ever had because he hasn’t met THEIR lofty expectations for two years now.
Again, is that really Miles’ issue?
No coach is perfect and despite some remembering Saban as being undefeated his record is startlingly similar to Miles over the same period but Miles is actually a little bit better.
Again the difference? Expectations.
10 years ago we expected to suck and knew how to take disappointment. When Saban was hired we had our normal hope and optimism for a new coach but we didn’t expect much more out of him than we had gotten from all of his predecessors; when he delivered we were elated but he wasn’t perfect either.
I remember people wanting to show him the door after losing to UAB and getting pounded by Auburn and Florida, but we endured. He then delivered and brought us all the way to a National Championship!!!
Then he up and leaves us, we finally had a guy that could take and keep LSU at an elite status and he up a freaking leaves us!
We then replace him with this somewhat strange guy that most of us had never heard of and poof, a lot of people became terrified that we would return to the 90’s……..
So many have NEVER excepted Miles because of this and they allowed themselves to believe that his success was just because of what Saban left behind, which is really a stupid theory. I’m not going to rehash it but Les Miles won the Title in 2007, not Nick Saban.
We have gone through a rebuilding cycle and the truth is that we will have one of the most talented teams in the country next year due to the fact that our last three recruiting classes have been top five (including last year’s no.1) and I truly believe Jordan Jefferson will be one of the (if not the) best QBs in the SEC.
We have some problems to be sure and Coach Miles deserves his share of the criticism but the sky really has not fallen and the future of this team is bright indeed!
The real issue is that if you enjoyed 16-28 with no bowl appearances and never a winning record more than 51-15 with a 4-1 Bowl record and a National Title then you need to reassess you, Miles is not the problem!
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
SouthernMan
I by no means am offended by any of the points you have made. You are right about the fact that expectations have changed since I attended school. In my past career I was a assistant football coach for a small high school and I know how difficult the coaching profession is. At the D1 level(or whatever it is called these days) it has to be absolutely grueling.
I believe I am really frustrated at the lack of identity that the team had this year. Miles did make some blunders this year, but by the same token, Mack Brown was very close to losing a shot at the National Title in the same manner. He actually had timeouts left, too. My problem is not necessarily all about Miles. I have problems with the coaching of the talent and the execution on the field. There has to be a reason that we looked very sloppy and unprepared at times this year. I think that the players and the coaches, equally, share the blame for this. Hopefully, the 2010 version of our football team can use the past two seasons as learning opportunities.
My post was an examination of myself as a Tiger Fan. I have become more emotionally involved with this program since it is something that my entire family enjoys. It’s difficult for me to watch something that is substandard that I know can be so much better. I like to pride myself on the fact that I am a pretty pragmatic and logical fan. I haven’t jumped on the “Fire Miles” ship because I really don’t believe that it will put us in a better position right now. We have at least two more years with Miles. Maybe they can all get on the same page and put a decent product on the field.
If we just flat out get beat, it’s one thing. If we lose because of being unprepared or lazy it is just downright inexcusable.
by Purpletiger006 on Jan 3, 2010 5:22 PM CST up reply actions
It's Not Difficult
LSU’s problem is not very complicated, and I say that with this one clarification – Few teams have as much raw talent as LSU. Four or five maybe, but not many. And if you accept that, then the problem is this. Football is a “smash mouth”! Always has been, always will be. And it is primarily the coach’s job to teach the players how this works out on the field. I understand that you folks in Louisiana don’t like Nick Saben, but he understands totally what this means. And Joe Paterno looks like a nice guy on the sidelines? You should see him in practice.
Now, your coach, what message does he send from the sidelines? “Happy to be here”? You won’t make it back to the top until you wake up to just what it takes to get there and then make that happen. It’s clear the players are ready. It’s the other group who is not.
So now Miles is soft?
Hahahahahahahahaha.
Les Miles doesn’t understand that football is ‘smash mouth’..
Hahahahahahahahaha
It’s not that Difficult to figure out that you don’t have a clue.
Have a Great Day!
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
I do think it's a fair point
to say that the 2009 LSU team seemed less aggressive, more hesitant. But I doubt this has much to do with Miles lack of “smash mouth” football chi as “Done That” seems to believe.
I do think it has more to do with Poseur’s and Richard’s observation that too many Tigers look like they’re not quite sure what they’re doing. It’s hard to play with conviction when you’re not sure what you’re doing. That’s on the coaches, too, but in a different way.
Blackledge mentioned during the telecast that Gonzalez had already changed some on the nomenclature in the passing game, which, if true, probably accounted for some of the problems in the first half. My feeling at the time, however, was that Jefferson — again — wasn’t giving his receivers much to work with, throwing everything into the dirt. He improved in the 2nd half, but I’m still not excited about him as starting QB — despite his relative youth and potential. But he may surprise us yet.
People, please. We're all frightened and horny, but we can't let some killer dolphins keep us from living and scoring
by Man Mountain on Jan 3, 2010 11:24 AM CST up reply actions
Agree...
Like I posted on another thread. I just don’t think Jefferson is the guy. At best he is average and has shown zero as far as leadership qualities go. Just my opinion and you know what they say about opinions.
You may be right
I am not completely set on Jefferson yet. However, I do think he improved throughout the year and was certainly our best option all year.
What the fuck does this even mean?
and has shown zero as far as leadership qualities go.
Seriously. This is complete nonsense.
Gregatron is not responsible for any of the crap he just wrote.
St. Louis vegetarian blog
I thought I was clear
Evidently you see a quality in him that I do not. Perhaps you can share a thought or two that would convince me otherwise. Living in Georgia I’m only privy to what I see on TV and through the internet. Do you think he “commands” the team on the field or just runs the plays that are sent in from the sidelines?
Most college QBs (and Pros for that matter)
Run the plays that come in from the sidelines, that’s why every team has a coach (usually the head coach or offensive coordinator) called the ‘play caller’.
Jefferson is true sophomore who is well respected on the team, he works hard and gives it his all so yes, I’d say he has leadership qualities.
Does he have room to grow, yes but I’d say he was actually pretty decent this year and at times showed us how good he can/will be.
Outside of Mallet and McElroy I can’t imagine who’s got a better QB in the SEC going into next year.
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
Well, I'm not saying that Jefferson is the guy or that he is a great leader...
But I am 100% confident saying he was our best option (no pun intended) this year. I think we can all agree on that.
So if you want to bash a true sophomore QB, go ahead, just remember the staff that put us in this position.
Yes the Staff PUT us in this position
by kicking Perilloux off the team, who would have been a fifth year senior (and coincidentally was statistically the best QB in all of CFB this year) and JLee / JJefferson would not have had to burn their red shirts and gain experience in a trial by fire manner.
This is my biggest beef with all of the ‘sky is falling’ folks, nobody acknowledges the impact of this or just brushes it off as well they should have had someone else ready.
It’s not that simple, SEC caliber QBs do not grow on trees.
Miles knew full well that booting RP was going to impact the team for at least a year or two (turns out it was two) but he had the Lesticular fortitude to do the right thing.
We should applaud him for that and be patient as he rebuilds, which I think essentially is complete.
We may not win it all next year but I think we will be a much better team and honestly if it wasn’t for our schedule I’d be predicting an SEC/National Championship.
Look at it this way:
Last year, with a three true freshmen under center 7-5 (being blown out several times)
This year with an improving, yet inexperienced true sophomore 9-3 (losing three close ones)
Next year? I’ll take the natural progression of 11-1 in the regular season and see where that gets us!
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
Not Bashing...
It’s just an opinion. I’m not bashing the guy. Yes, I know he had to learn on the job. Yes, I know he’s a sophomore. All I was saying is that he does not seem to be a charismatic force on the field. OK, hold on now don’t rip me for using the word charismatic. I’m trying to find the right words. I’m looking for someone Favre like in leadership and enthusiasm (I didn’t say ability). I know he’s only 19 but I wish can’t I? If he’s the best we have then he’s the best we have and I will pull for him and the team to be successful.
Interesting you use Favre as a comparison for leadership
May not be the best example considering that he’s publicly fought with his last two coaches and apparently demanded his own private dressing room so that he didn’t have to change in the locker room with the hoi polloi.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 11:26 AM CST up reply actions
Good Point
But not the one I was trying to make. I love Favre’s ON FIELD presence. There’s no mistaking who’s in charge out there when he’s playing. It’s just a personal preference. I’d just like to see more enthusiasm out of our guy. Maybe he’s just not a rah rah guy. Neither is Miles, so be it.
You are entitled to your opinion
But again, JJ is the best option. Lee has the leadership skills of my garage door.
I have my doubts about JJ, as we all do, but I haven’t lost confidence in him. I expect he will be very good next year.
No, what is "leadership"
It strikes me as the most useless sports cliche of all time. Like when people said the 08 Rays “didn’t have the veterans to pull it out down the stretch.”
Talking about “leadership” is basically meaningless. What IS leadership?
Gregatron is not responsible for any of the crap he just wrote.
St. Louis vegetarian blog
Our problems
First, a Sophomore QB. The last team to win the SEC with a Sophomore QB was UGa in 2002. He played like an inexperienced QB. He didn’t find open receivers. He didn’t show good pocket presence. He dropped back too far. But he also called that audible in the penn state game and hit an open receiver. I saw him look to second and third options at times. He has the tools. He needs more experience. Junior season jump? Problem should be solved
Second problme, the offensive line. We lost a good 70 pounds going from Herman Johnson to Josh D. We went from a 3 year starter at Center to a sophomore coming off of knee surgery. Lyle Hitt shouldn’t have been a starter (more on that in a second). Next year, I expect Chris Faulk, Greg Shaw, Alex Hurst, Stavion Lowe, and Will Blackwell to all push for significant PT. Due to my lack of faith in Coach Stud, I will say the line will improve but won’t say the problem will be solved entirely.
Third, from everything I know and the people I have spoken close to the situation, Larry Porter was not a good RB coach. The entire practice, he’d instruct them to hit the hole, hit the hole. No cutting back ever. A guy like Jakhari Gore would be useless with him. He rotates people in an out without keeping with the hot hand. You fumble once, you’re done. He made the personnel decisions, and it handicapped Crowton because Porter would make these last second changes, switching out RBs, and Crowton would have to change the play. It was a poorly organized operation and I question why that problem wasn’t recognized early in the season, but I trust the people I have spoken to that have said it’s an issue. Frank Wilson – Problem solved.
Fourth, McCarthey. It’s clear that he phoned it in on recruiting during the season and that bothers me. I feel he costed us Trovon Reed, but I’m not very high on him, so whatever. More importantly, Billy G came in and immediately corrects a problem with our WRs footwork. Excuse me, but why are we still having problems with footwork at this point in the season. Anyway, we’ll see big improvement, IMO, in our passing game as a result of this hire.
In the Penn State game, we had dropped balls. I think the field conditions and the rain got to them. Who knows. Tolliver played very poorly. Harry Coleman dropped at least 2 int’s. Randle had a tough one that was catchable and would’ve been a touchdown. We can’t blame the coaches for dropped balls or for Ridley’s fumble. I think this was a big reason we lost, and not one that will continue to be a problem.
Another point, Alex Hurst had significant PT in place of Hitt in the second half but was taken out for the last drive so that the senior could come in. I feel like this is a clear case of playing seniority over talent. Next year, we have 8 seniors on our projected two deep. I don’t feel Pep Livingston is a starting DE and I expect that he won’t be. Other than that, all deserve to start, IMO. I hope Brandon Taylor and Ron Brooks get moved to CB and Loston takes over SS. Rewarding seniority over talent needs to stop.
3rd and Chavis. I feel like we gave way too much space to the PSU WR on several occassions, but don’t recall the down. Maybe this was a reaction to PP biting on the double move. Regardless if we had gotten any pressure from our DL at all this season, it wouldn’t have beena big issue. It was an issue, especially in the second half against Arkansas, but with a better D Line, it probably wouldn’t have been very noticable.
D Line pressuring the QB. Here are the final figures. Alem – 4.5 sacks, Nevis – 4, Pep Livingston – 0, Charles Alexander – 1, Al Woods, – 1, Lavar Edwards – 2.5, Aghayere – 1. That’s 13 sacks before the PSU game by our D-line. 4 of the 13 came against La. Tech. Against Florida, Georgia, Ole Miss, Miss State and Alabama, they accounted for a grand total of 1 sack. Plus, Alem’s 4.5 sacks came at the expense of his Run D. Bottom line, our front 4 couldn’t get worst. It has to improve. Josh Downs, Davenport, Brockers, etc. need to step up and produce big time. Pep needs to lose a lot of PT!
Red zone D! I keep seeing people saying, if it wasn’t for so and so’s dismal red zone offense, LSU wouldn’t have won that game. They got lucky. Guess what. Opponents scored a touchdown only 36% of the time they were in the redzone. That’s not luck, it’s buckling down. Just wanted to say something positive.
And finally, I doubted Les after the Ole Miss game, but I fully support him and believe he is the man for the job. I feel getting rid of Crowton could harm JJ’s development and hurt our offense. I believe Billy Gonzales was a homerun of a hire and that he can help fix some problems with the offense. I hope that we can fix our problems in the trenches. I know for damn sure it couldn’t get any worse. Sorry if that was long winded, but I feel like we need to realistically look at the last two years and give Les a break. It took me a while to accept that as I was as hard on him as any, but I was wrong. OK, Peace out.
by Big McLargeHuge on Jan 3, 2010 11:20 PM CST reply actions
And to clarify
I wasn’t saying Loston is already a better SS than Taylor or Brooks. That was more of me thinking about our CB depth when we lose Jai and possibly PP after next year. Anyway, excuse the scattered thoughts. I’ve said my peace on Les and the 2009 season. I predict 10 wins next year and an SEC West championship in ’11.
by Big McLargeHuge on Jan 3, 2010 11:23 PM CST up reply actions
Couple of comments
Fourth, McCarthey. It’s clear that he phoned it in on recruiting during the season and that bothers me. I feel he costed us Trovon Reed, but I’m not very high on him, so whatever.
I’ve heard he wasn’t allowed to recruit. At the time we heard this, we wondered why. With the scandal that eventually broke I think it makes sense. We didn’t want DJ recruiting any players if he was tainted and a dead man walking.
Another point, Alex Hurst had significant PT in place of Hitt in the second half but was taken out for the last drive so that the senior could come in. I feel like this is a clear case of playing seniority over talent.Miles needs to quit this crap. He is digging his own grave.
if we had gotten any pressure from our DL at all this season, it wouldn’t have beena big issue.Big, how long did it take you to figure out we had a crappy D-line? How long did it take you to figure out that our back 7 was the strongest part of our D? Everyone knows the problems with our D was the Dline, but nobody is asking the coaches why we continued to run a scheme that relies heavily on pressure from the front 4 to be succesful. I mean, when you can’t put pressure on ULM you have a problem. Chavis needs to be more flexible to work with the talent he has, not try to fit a square peg into a round hole.
Guess what. Opponents scored a touchdown only 36% of the time they were in the redzone. That’s not luck, it’s buckling down.Guess what, we also played tighter coverage in the red zone. If only we’d have played this way the entire game…
Experience over talent
While I do think Miles is getting a bad rep for playing seniors over mote talented undercalssmen just because they are a seniors, I really don’t think letting a senior play the final drive of an exhibition game which will be his last college game is all that big of a deal.
And since our defense was ranked in the top 20 of scoring defenses, I’m not really sure where your criticisms of Chavis are going. The system WAS successful, so maybe he crammed an oval peg into that round hole.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
People are fond of saying
That “they’d be ok” with freshmen making mistakes but that’s a crock…the freshman versus more experienced players argument is a “damned if you do/don’t” one because the point is that if they don’t play well nobody really cares what year they are.
And people always think that if one guy isn’t playing well, the other guy has to be better, even if they’ve never seen him.
^^^^ This
I was somewhat critical of not getting more reps for Shep for two reasons.
1. We saw what he could do.
2. Coach Miles said repeatedly that he WANTED to see him get more reps
I actually do understand Miles’ answer to why we didn’t see him more against Florida and PSU, we really didn’t get that many opportunities so the situation was not there.
Thankfully no one got injured in the Mud Bowl but what if we had tried to get a running game going – Was Shep our ‘power’ back? What kind of criticism would we see if Shep came in trying to make something happen and blow out a knee or something?
All that was to say, other than questioning Shep’s play time, I don’t see why any of the other second guessing is valid.
Good example: Everyone was screaming for JLee to get another shot when JJefferson was not playing like Joe Montana, how’d that work out?
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
"2. Coach Miles said repeatedly that he WANTED to see him get more reps"
This is the sticky question. He also said after this game that Shepard didn’t play because “#8” was doing so well that he couldn’t take him out. But Holliday only had FOUR CARRIES. So that’s not a valid reason either.
In my opinion all this about “I wanted to play Shepard but couldn’t” is a smokescreen. I think Crowton and Miles see something in Shepard that suggests that he shouldn’t be on the field, but he’s not going to come out and say to the press “hey guys Shepard fumbles and can’t line up right” or whatever. And of course he shouldn’t throw his player under the bus like that. Miles isn’t as dumb or guileless as most LSU (and other teams) fans seem to think.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 9:33 AM CST up reply actions
I think that's an Excellent point
I’ve wondered that myself and you are right about the way Miles deals with such things.
And that brings me to this: The reason I try not to be so critical of this or that is because I (like 99.9% of the critics) simply don’t know all the facts.
I have confidence in this coach and until he shows a true inability to win or adjust when we don’t then I am 100% behind the Hat.
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
Billy makes great points
I do think there is a huge element of “the backup is always more popular” syndrome to the Miles Hates Underclassmen thing. And also, it’s just people overrating recruiting. We fall in love with these 18 year old kids and suddenly think they are all ready to come out and dominate when really, that’s rare at any program.
OTOH, the offensive line was so bad this year, it’s hard to imagine the backups were worse. And I’m hardly one of those guys thinking Shep should be getting 20 snaps, but he does need to see the field.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
I call it "new toy syndrome"
And it’s a direct side-effect to all the coverage recruiting gets.
In general, all the recruiting coverage had led to people believing that “player X” is a great talent to the point that, if he doesn’t do well it HAS to be the coach’s fault, it can’t just be that he’s not that good (*cough*KeilandWilliams*cough*).
But this point could be its own story.
by Billy Gomila on Jan 4, 2010 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
Also every recruit has a stunning highlight video out there
Each of which shows the recruit running over, around and through the whole defense and looking like a football god. People don’t stop to think that he’s doing this against 15 year olds who weigh 145 pounds and play linebacker, and that it won’t be quite the same at the IA level.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 11:29 AM CST up reply actions
Nobody ever considers that
Johnny 5-star just might not be as good as you think he is.
There are a ton of examples. Now, in general, a higher precentage of the 4 and 5-star guys DO in fact make it, but the thing is people believe in those rankings to the point of gospel, even over what they see with their own eyes.
That’s my issue.
by Billy Gomila on Jan 4, 2010 11:48 AM CST up reply actions
Offensive line experience over (perceived) talent
Chris Faulk or Greg Shaw? Josh Dworaczyk/Alex Hurst or Will Blackwell/Stavion Lowe. The difference in the perceived talent when these guys signed is immense. Blackwell will be a junior I think. Lowe and Faulk are RS Freshman and couldn’t be expected to play in their True Freshman years, but they are two of our most highly recruited lineman. I think some of this year was not wanting to burn a redshirt on Brockers, Davenport, Lowe and Faulk. I think we need to wait and see who wins out next year. Big battles are shaping up at DE for Pep’s spot, RG for Hitt’s spot, LG as Lowe pushes Dworaczyk, LT between Faulk and Shaw. Maybe this is stupid, but I really want to see those highly recruited RS Freshman win out and give us a bigtime upgrade. Just thinking out loud on that.
by Big McLargeHuge on Jan 4, 2010 10:31 AM CST up reply actions
Chavis' system was successful if your goal is to not get blown out.
Chavis’ system is not dominant though. Our defense doesn’t get stops when they need them, they give up field goals.
YPG allowed stats for LSU’s defenses: (We’ll leave out 2003 since they were “historically good”)
2004 – 257
2005 – 248
2006 – 243
2007 – 289
2008 – 326
2009 – 328
So in total defense, we actually didn’t improve at all from last year. In PPG yes we improved but not as much as you would think. You can check out that discussion here. http://www.andthevalleyshook.com/2009/11/30/1179476/the-season-in-statistics
But basically we didn’t stop anyone from driving the ball on us this year, we just were able to tighten up in the redzone a little better by a tune of about 4 PPG. So basically our defense is exactly the same as last year, except that we trade one TD out for a FG once per game. For all of the crap that Malleveto took last year, Chavis is not that much better statistically.
A four point swing in PPG is huge
I don’t know how you could argue otherwise. LSU had 4 games decided by 4 points or less.
I am literally dumbfounded by people insulting this years’ defense. I think some UT fan said “3rd and Chavis” and it became a thing. So now every time an opponent converts third down everyone yells “3rd and Chavis!” because they read it on the rant.
Is Chavis’ defense as good as Saban’s? Not even close. Is it as good as Pelini’s? Again, no. There’s room for improvement. But our defensive problems are a one alarm fire, and the offensive problems are a five alarm fire.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 1:46 PM CST up reply actions
Mostly agree.
I agree the offense is a bigger problem. It is a MUCH MUCH bigger problem. I also think it is unfair to judge Chavis solely on this year’s performance because the offense was so bad that the defense didn’t get to rest.
My only point is that Chavis needs an incomplete next to his name, not an A or even a B. Some on this board are ready to say that Chavis is the answer to our defensive struggles, and statistically I just don’t see it. I see Malleveto minus one TD plus one FG.
Chavis’ D doesn’t have to be better than Saban’s D as long as our offense is much better than Bama’s offense. Since bama is returning 8 starters on offense next year including their QB and Heisman trophy winning RB, I find it hard to believe that we’ll be favored in that game.
Actually
I don’t think the defense is a fire at all.
Chavis is respected (and desired) as a Defensive Coordinator because he has proven over the years that he IS one of the best in the business.
was the 09’ defense as good as 03’, no but neither was the 04’ version.(remember how we lost that capone bowl!)
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
Well..
I think that is the gripe. That the offense did the defense no favors and conversely neither did the defense. 3rd down wasn’t money for either unit.
The defense struggled at times to get off of the field until they reached the redzone resulting in teams sustaining excruciatingly long drives, and the offense failed to sustain (going 3 and out a staggering number of times) drives.
In the simplest of terms; the defenses job is to get off of the field and the offenses job is to stay on the field. Neither excelled in doing that. The offense was just flat-out inept.
What's up Ryan? ARGHHHHHH!!! oops. ~ Patrick Chewing
Disagree
In the simplest of terms; the defenses job is to get off of the field and the offenses job is to stay on the field.
No. A thousand times no.
The goal of an offense is TO SCORE POINTS. The goal of a defense is to PREVENT POINTS FROM BEING SCORED. Everything else is a function to how a unit accomplishes that goal. But games are not won by time of possession, they are won who has the most points.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
I think a first order analysis is warranted
People are getting hung up on things like # of sacks and third down conversion percentage and not seeing the forest for the trees. The “forest” here is points per game, scored and given up. Everything else is by definition secondary
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:32 PM CST up reply actions
How do you go about that both ways?
By getting off of the field on defense and staying on the field on offense. It’s really quite simple.
That is the mindset. Converting on 3rd down for both units leads to this.
Unless conceding the redzone on defense is your idea of PREVENTING POINTS FROM BEING SCORED and hitting on a long strike on offense is your idea of SCORING POINTS.
If you are getting off of the field on defense you are limiting points, and if you are staying on the field on offense you are moving the ball and getting points.
What's up Ryan? ARGHHHHHH!!! oops. ~ Patrick Chewing
There are many ways "How"
If you are getting off of the field on defense you are limiting points, and if you are staying on the field on offense you are moving the ball and getting points.
Once again, no. To use the obvious example, the Air Raid offense doesn’t dominate time of possession, but it scores lots of points. And while the LSU defense allows too many long drives, a point I totally agree with, it makes up for it with the fact it forces lots of turnovers. Once again, it’s about preventing scoring. Everything else is just a function of how you do that. But no defense is trying to win time of possession, they are trying to prevent scoring. This is a point so basic and fundamental, I can’t believe we’re even arguing it.
The point of a defense is to prevent scoring. Period. Other metrics are important because they make up how a defense prevents scoring, but at the end of the day, this is what matters: points. Games are won and lost based on who scores more. This is the fundamental principle of all statistical analysis of sports: how does this impact scoring (ie – winning).
Is time of possession important? Sure. It’s a little overrated, but it still matters. But only as a function of scoring points. I judge defenses and offenses on scoring. Yards and TOP tell us how likely the trend is to continue but the season is now over. It is what it is: LSU is 12th in the nation in defense. Any analysis must start from that point: it did a good job at the most important job a defense has.
I don’t have an "idea" of preventing scoring. It is or it isn’t. They scored or they didn’t. This defense prevented scoring better than almost anyone. Was it done with mirrors? A bit. But they excelled at turnovers and red zone defense, which explains it a bit. I don’t subscribe to any one theory of defense as better. I don’t care that much – all I care is that it works. Stop them from scoring. You do that, I’m happy. You don’t, I’m not.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
"And while the LSU defense allows too many long drives, a point I totally agree with"
^This^
And if LSU had been able to take advantage of the 10+ opportuities for turnover—something the normally do—then LSU would have crushed PSU and we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
"it makes up for it with the fact it forces lots of turnovers."
^^This should have been included above
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
12th in Scoring Defense
LSU is 12th in Scoring Defense. At the end of the day, the goal of a defense is to prevent scoring. Only 11 defenses were better at that than LSU this season.
Chavis is MUCH better statistically. 12th in scoring defense. Maybe the yardage stats turn that from an “A” to a “B”. Fine. But this has been a successful defense at preventing scoring.
LSU’s defense is not great, but no one is arguing it is. But it is certainly good. How good is open for debate, but to pretend Chavis has not done a good job strains the evidence to their breaking point
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
People's expectations
Were definitely out of whack on that side of the ball. You’re just not going to go from being terrible to amazing overnight, especially on defense.
I thought Chavis did a good job and that as some of the front seven talent improves, so will the defenses. LSU’s defense gave it a chance in every game it played.
Of course, there were times that it could have been better. Would somebody like to tell me when that isn’t the case with any defense?
We're going to have to agree to disagree
I’m going to illustrate my point with a ridiculous example. So try to follow the logic instead of bashing the concept.
What if LSU’s defense gave up one 80 play drive that lasted 60 minutes and ended in a FG every game? Our PPG would be 1st in the country at 3 PPG, but our record would be 0-12 because the offense never got on the field.
This is in a sense how I feel about Chavis’ D. He gives up long time eating drives to defenses that usually end in a FG. Teams don’t score much on us because they don’t have many opportunities to score. But they are successful in those opportunities. I’d like to chart out offensive success rates of opposing teams against LSU. An offensive success for them would defined as getting pts, either a FG or a TD. My theory is that teams have a higher success rate vs. LSU than their season average. The reason LSU is successful is that they limit those opportunities. But that hurts both offenses (LSU and the opponnent) evenly. Like I said, it is just a theory, I’ll be happy to eat crow if I have time to compile the data and it is wrong.
This statement refutes your own point
Teams don’t score much on us because they don’t have many opportunities to score. But they are successful in those opportunities.
If you’re giving teams less opportunities, you’re still limiting them from scoring — just in a different fashion.
You seem to be operating under the premise that LSU’s defense actually hurt LSU’s offense, which is the exact opposite of the case when you consider the team’s low scoring output and time of possession.
If LSU had an offense that was high scoring and scored very quickly, then your theory would work — because in that scenario you want a defense that ends drives quickly and gives your offense as many possessions as possible, in order to lower variance. Chavis’ 2009 defense would have been perfect for a team with a dominant running game, such as Alabama (or the better Tennessee teams Chavis worked with). That, of course, wasn’t the case for LSU this season.
Nevermind the issues with defensive line talent/experience, which was simply lacking.
Completely disagree...
In fact I don’t even think you understand what my point is. Because what you just said doesn’t refute my point.
Your point
Was that the defense didn’t stop teams from scoring on possessions, it just allowed them to score less on those possessions — which is still related to efficiency.
I think you’re missing MY point. With a capable offense, this style is quite effective. You still have to account for the fact that LSU’s offense allowed teams more possessions than they would have typically had.
Yes, that was my point.
Your point is caveated with “with a capable offense”. Which we do not have. Which means this style is not effective at all for our team.
Further, please let me know how a defense that allows 16 ppg and 320 ypg is ever better than a defense that gives up 16 ppg and 220 ypg?
The latter gives your offense more TOP, and more possessions, thereby helping your offense much more. It also gives the opposing team more posessions but since both defenses give up the same number of pts, the latter defense is obviously better.
I'm saying the two are linked
Had LSU’s offense been on the field LONGER, it would have helped lead to the defense giving up LESS points by even further limiting opposing offensive opportunities.
My argument is not what is responsible for what.
I’m not saying that the defense sucked because the offense sucked OR the offense sucked because the defense sucked. It is a circular argument and the two are obviously linked.
My argument is diametrically against Poseur’s argument that the Defenses only responsibility is to keep the other team from scoring. That is not true.
No, but it is its ultimate function
And when the defense was crap just a year earlier, its not going to wake up and turn into the 2000 Ravens.
Red-zone improvement is still improvement.
Red-zone improvement is still improvement.
Agreed, as long as we agree that was the only improvement.
Never said "ONLY"
Sure, other stuff matters, just not as much as scoring. You win by scoring more than the other team. Any analysis that means that a defense that is 12th out of 120 in preventing the other team from scoring is not good is wrong.
You can argue the margins, but the essential function of defense is preventing scoring and the essential function of offense is to score points.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
question...
If you’re giving teams less opportunities, you’re still limiting them from scoring — just in a different fashion.
read his quote again.
LSU Jonno – But they are successful in those opportunities.
You seem to be operating under the premise that LSU’s defense actually hurt LSU’s offense, which is the exact opposite of the case when you consider the team’s low scoring output and time of possession.
Billy, to clarify, you are saying that LSU had poor time of possession and low scoring right?
I may be thinking myself in circles here, but doesn’t the D operate independent of the offense to some degree? It isn’t as if the D is only giving up long drives at the end of games b/c they are tired from being on the field all game. If the D held teams to shorter drives, then how could that not help the offense w/ time of possession by giving them more opportunities w/ the ball?
Again, just trying to understand.
Billy, I think this is the real issue
Teams scored more points on us in the 4th quarter than any other. (SEC teams more than doubled their first half scoring in the second quarter.) It’s admittedly a chicken and the egg question, but it seems to me a defense that hold teams to 10 points for three quarters and then lets them score 6 in the 4th is a tired defense.
I’m like most people here, I’m willing to give the defense a pass this year, because I think the offense hung them out to dry. Jonno is right that the improvement in total D isn’t much (27th this year vs. 33rd last year.) The biggest difference is that the offense went from killing them quickly with pick 6s last year, to killing them slowly by leaving them on the field too long.
CHAD JONES! WOOOO!!!!
That's my point
John Chavis’ defensive style is extremely effective if you have a good offense. LSU had a terrible one this season.
Chavis did about as good a job in the situation as anybody could have.
And for the record
There is no superior “style.”
Otherwise everybody would just run the same defensive style. Chavis’ is different from Bob Stoops’, which is different from Saban’s, which is different from Pelini’s, which is different from Pete Carroll’s, which is different from Charlie Strong’s.
If your “style” works for your players and your team, its the right style.
Whoa, another point for me!
If your "style" works for your players and your team, its the right style.– Billy
I just don’t think that Crowton’s style is compatible with Chavis’ style
- LSU Jonno further up this thread.
You're right, it's miles' fault.
Again from earlier in this thread.
I just don’t think that Crowton’s style is compatible with Chavis’ style, they hurt each other instead of complement each other. This speaks to Miles’ lack of direction at the top in my opinion. People say he is too involved and I don’t think he is involved enough.
This is my basic thought on the team.
I imagine
If Miles could go back in time and tell himself that his offense was going to be horrifically bad, he’d tell himself to do things different.
I’ll go talk to the physics department about that time travel thing.
I bet if Miles could go back in time he'd hire a DC that could adjust his strategy to the team.
You know like a good DC should be able to do.
If your "style" works for your players and your team, its the right style.
Those are your words. How could we not see this in fall ball? Or after game 2 or after game 6…
There was a post on smart football about a coach who installed a new D at halftime
They had given up 30 points in the first half and he pulled out a chalkboard at the break and started from square one.
Needless to say, they gave up 30 points in the second half too.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:46 PM CST up reply actions
Billy
You are missing the point, it is Miles FAULT because he is supposed to win every game and statistical category, like Saban did.
Period.
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
Better?
For the record, here are the PPG of each defense by season:
SABAN
19.58
23.23
18.31
11.00
17.08
MILES w/ PELINI
14.23
12.62
19.93
MILES w/o PELINI
24.15
16.23
OK, the 2003 defense is historically great, but that is the ONLY time Saban’s defense was better at preventing points than Chavis was this season. I hate the idea that one system is better than another, I tend to prefer pragmatic and flexible coaches who aren’t wedded to one scheme. But looking strictly at results, Chavis’ defense looks just as good, if not better, than Saban’s.
And that’s without a pass rush.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
Ok
So why doesn’t everybody in College football run that type of defense? USC doesn’t. Neither does Oklahoma and neither did Florida.
Do you have any, you know, evidence of this?
Or are you completely making it up at this point? Because I get the feeling you’re making it up because you ‘feel’ that Saban’s defense style gives the offense more chances to score.
Actually, let’s back up. Explain what you think you mean by Saban’s “style” versus Chavis’ “style.”
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:37 PM CST up reply actions
I already told you that this was a theory.
I plan to back it up. Which is why I said this.
This is in a sense how I feel about Chavis’ D. He gives up long time eating drives to [offenses] that usually end in a FG. Teams don’t score much on us because they don’t have many opportunities to score. But they are successful in those opportunities. I’d like to chart out offensive success rates of opposing teams against LSU. An offensive success for them would [be] defined as getting pts, either a FG or a TD. My theory is that teams have a higher success rate vs. LSU than their season average. The reason LSU is successful is that they limit those opportunities. But that hurts both offenses (LSU and the opponnent) evenly. Like I said, it is just a theory, I’ll be happy to eat crow if I have time to compile the data and it is wrong.
You're talking results
That’s not the style. Unless you think Chavis’ scheme is to purposefully give up long drives.
I mean what do you think that Saban did differently, schematically or in terms of personnel, than Chavis? Play more zone? Less zone? Blitz more? Use bigger d linemen? quicker linemen?
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:44 PM CST up reply actions
Ding Ding
You’re talking results
That’s not the style. Unless you think Chavis’ scheme is to purposefully give up long drives.
We have a winner.
Blitzing more does not automatically translate to a superior defense.
Most fans have two knee jerk responses to bad football teams
If the offense isn’t playing well, it’s “they need to throw more bombs!”
If the defense isn’t playing well, it’s “they need to blitz more!”
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:54 PM CST up reply actions
don't you agree that Chavis seems to play more coverage...
I have read before where Saban’s assumption is that most college qbs can’t make the hot read if they are pressured. If they make that read, then they can burn the D.
Chavis seems to think that most college qbs can’t read coverages w/ lots of guys in the secondary and will likely throw an INT or not find an open reciever.
This is totally anecdotal, but I think these two philosophies are diametrically opposed and work differently w/ different levels of talent. I think we have the talent in the secondary to “leave our cb’s on an island” more than most schools. Thus I would say that we are better suited for the more “risky” philosophy.
Guys, you are starting new discussions and comfusing my previous answers on new topics.
1) My initial point about results was to Posuer. I think YPG is very important. PPG is not the only thing that matters. YPG is very important.
2) I don’t think Chavis’ style is compatible with Crowton’s style. Chavis’ syle is different then Saban’s and Pelini’s and I happen to like Saban’s and Pelini’s better.
I don't think you understand Pelini's style
Because its closer to Chavis’ then it is to Saban’s.
He’s not a blitz-a-minute, pressure-from-all-angles guy.
At least
It seems like that (meaning a pressure style) is what you’re saying you prefer.
Pelini got good results at times with his style here, but it wasn’t a big pressure defense. It was more about confusing the quarterback in coverage and sending the timely blitz.
Billy is right
Both Pelini and Chavis defenses depend on positioning and not giving up big plays. There’s a hell of a lot to be said about being fundamentally sound and making quality tackles.
Saban on the other hand blitzes like mad, which he can do because he’s one of (if not the) best defensive back coaches in the country. At any level of football. If you run that scheme without A+ defensive backs you will get burned.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions
A+ backs like Peterson maybe?
Do you think Bama has better corners than us?
Do I think they are coached better?
Yes.
On what turned out to be the biggest play of the game, Patrick Peterson got horribly, horribly burned on a simple stutter step. This is precisely what can happen when you leave CBs in one on one coverage.
Plus, Peterson aside, do you really want to rely on a scheme that leaves Chad Jones and Danny McCray one on one with slot receivers too often? I do not.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 4:31 PM CST up reply actions
I'd rather play a 3rd corner.
Why dont’ we do that anymore? Because it isn’t Chavis’ (or Pelini’s) “style”. At least we can agree on that.
Getting a little snippy there dooder.
So you think we should put in three cornerbacks, put them in one on one man coverage, and blitz the linebackers.
Exactly how good do you think 5’8" Jai Eugene is in run support?
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 4:35 PM CST up reply actions
did Jai shrink?
5’10 185 lbs. I get your point, but he isn’t that small.
Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't
You seem to be under the impression that his defenses always force tons of turnovers and sacks — not the case at all. His better ones did that, but guess what — so did Chavis’.
Turnovers or producing punts
Either way, its not like Nick Saban waves a magic wand and makes either one happen.
He’s had some defenses that were nothing special too.
Hell, we won a Sugar Bowl with a below avg Saban D
Of course, Rohan Davey-to-Josh Reed will overcome a lot of defensive flaws. 44-34 wins count as much as 17-14 wins.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:57 PM CST up reply actions
Do people not remember
Pelini’s defense giving up 30 ppg in SEC competition in 2007?
DO NOT get me started on his style.
That was one year with 2 triple OT games with tons of injuries
Why dont’ you look up his numebers in regulation.
Yeah it had nothing to do
With his stubborn refusal to blitz on third downs or cover slot receivers with anybody but Ali Highsmith or Danny McCray.
Get out of here with that weak shit. Bo Pelini’s the most overrated “genius” coordinator I’ve ever seen.
Weak $hit?
2005 – 248 YPG 14.2 PPG
2006 – 243 YPG 12.6 PPG
2007 – 289 YPG 19.9 PPG
2009 – 328 YPG 16.2 PPG
I am giving Pelini the benefit of the doubt because he had one year that wasn’t excellent. You are giving Chavis the benefit of the doubt because he wasn’t quite as pathetic as Malleveto? Weak $hit? Are you kidding me?
You really feel like reliving his failures
Against any QB having a good day? I’d rather not go look up all the numbers but I know Sam Kellar, D.J. Shockley, Casey Dick, Jonathan Crompton, Andre Woodson, Brandon Cox, Tim Tebow and John Parker Wilson didn’t have a lot of problems finding open receivers against Ol’ Bo.
Having some pretty nice offenses
Played a role.
If you don’t know the difference between Pelini and Saban’s “style,” dude, give it up.
If you can't follow the argument between Chavis and Pelini give it up.
Why are you making this Saban vs. Pelini?
Dude
I know they aren’t similar. They are different styles. Isn’t that what this whole argument is about? Comparing styles?
One is great (Pelini) one is above average (Chavis)
Billy,no offense but you are the one who started hurling "get out of here with the weak $hit"
Yet you haven’t yet given me any hard analyis yourself.
I don’t mind going back in forth with you but your going to have to do better than generalities if you are going to start claiming that I’m being general.
See my above post
On Pelini’s style. Its very very different from Saban’s and its closer to what Chavis does actually.
If you prefer a high-pressure outfit, that’s not Bo’s style. And either style is effective.
I never said I want a high pressure style. I don't care what style we have.
I want results. I’ll share my analysis when it is finished. Until then, you’re just going to have to wait.
Um...
Saban and Pelini’s styles are extremely different
read: better
So do you want to talk style or results? Because it seemed earlier you wanted to talk style.
If you want to talk results, sure Saban’s was better this year but Chavis has HAD better years than this.
And again, there are other factors contributing to those results.
So consistently being in the top 5
In the SEC and top 20 nationally in the major defensive categories is above average?
One minor point...
Jonno is right that the improvement in total D isn’t much (27th this year vs. 33rd last year.)
On an absolute scale we didn’t improve at all.
2008 – 326
2009 – 328
But we did improve slightly relative to the rest of the league.
Which is what matters of course
Because offensive production nationwide ebbs and flows. In 1950 a defense giving up 300 ypg would be the worst defense in the country. In 2000 it would be the best.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:39 PM CST up reply actions
The ultimate point goes to show
That, in college football, if you’re strategically unsound on either side of the ball it effects the efficacy of the other.
ATVS is FIRED UP today
I enjoy seeing a great deal of want in these comments.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:42 PM CST reply actions
I just have a want
for Crowton and Studrawa to have the opportunity to compete somewhere else.
CHAD JONES! WOOOO!!!!
Common ground...
… we may disagree about Chavis and the defense, but there is something all of the ATVS community can agree on:
Crowton sucks.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
I think Crowton is good at what he does
What he does is not develop quarterbacks. Matt Flynn had the advantage of four years under someone who – no matter how much LSU fans hate him – is bar none, one of the best quarterback coaches in the country. Jimbo Fisher.
Crowton is just not in Fisher’s league as a QB coach. Yet his schemes demand an extremely well-coached quarterback. It’s a catch 22.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions
Now if you want to talk track records
Crowton’s is the most troubling…offensive decline everywhere he’s stayed. Ugh…
Is that the proof of his inability to develop quarterbacks?
His schemes succeed with players who have been coached by other coaches. But he seems unable to develop players into his scheme. Which is kind of weird
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 4:23 PM CST up reply actions
I think the 'pattern' is a bit overblown too
Oregon for instance, his All World QB (Dixon) got injured and the offensive production fell.
Crowton got hired by LSU.
The next year, QB was back, with basically the same offense and the Ducks were unstoppable.
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
I'm closer to accepting this than I was before
But I’m not sure I’m sold on that.
I’ll make my judgement in the first half of next season on him.
UNC
Vandy
MSU
WVU
UT
UF
If we wind up 6-0 no way we would not be no.1 in the country and there are a few good defensive test so we’ll see what everybody is made of!
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
I think UNC will be very good
With their returning senior starters at offensive skill positions and a very good defense returning several senior starters.
by Gas_House_Gorillas on Jan 5, 2010 9:22 AM CST up reply actions
And Studrawa
90th in rushing, 105th in sacks allowed.
If Miles lets that kind of performance stand, he’s just as accountable as the assistant coaches. One of the things that I liked was that he fixed his Malveto mistake the next year. If he leaves Crowton and Malveto in place and the same problems are there next year, it’s not their issue, it’s his.
CHAD JONES! WOOOO!!!!
I actually blame Studrawa moreso than Crowton
The inability to consistently execute a pulling guard power run for three yards is not a schematic issue. It’s an OL issue; either technique or conditioning.
Of course, it also has something to do with having a 4th string tailback. Charles Scott was born to play in that Mud Bowl last week. I honestly think he could’ve been a difference maker.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 4, 2010 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, it's hard to blame Crowton when everything he tries to do is blown up at the line.
Hard to know who to blame really.
I blame Studrawa for the disappearance of the power running game
and Crowton for pretty much everything else. He’s the one calling short side options and middle screens on a muddy field with no timeouts.
CHAD JONES! WOOOO!!!!
The right playcalling
Could have mitigated some of the limitations of LSU’s offensive line and quarterback. Crowton consistently showed the inability to make such playcalls in 2009.
Short side options are not bad
It depends on the personnel you’re using.
In fact
I think it might’ve been the smart call for us this year.
No, but they are bad if you do not have an option quarterback
Which, Jordan Jefferson is not. Simply being athletic does not make you an option quarterback.
I'm not arguing against that
But running it to the wide side would not have helped. I just am not a big fan of all of the critics coming out right now and saying how stupid the short side option is. I didn’t see many complaints of it when KW took it 70 yards for a touchdown against Va-Tech. However, now it is all of a sudden popular to criticize Crowton, and so now people are criticizing everything, even if they have no clue. With our personnel, especially our power personnel (KW, CS, SR), the short side option is going to be much more effective than going to the wide side. Plus, if we ran every play to the wide side, then fans would be complaining about predictability.
No, nothing is wrong with the option in general
But to continue to run it when its painfully ineffective is wrong. Running it in games 12 and 13 when it clearly hasn’t worked in games 1-11 is, well, the definition of insanity.
Matt Flynn was an option QB in high school. Jordan Jefferson wasn’t. The option is a timing and repetition play. You can’t just pick it up off the cuff.
Yes, and I know what you mean
I am just saying that it’s not the short side option that’s a bad play call then, just the option in general.
I do think that with Jefferson the short side is peculiarly bad
Because he moves the option laterally. All options require the QB to attack the line of scrimmage, but this is especially important on the boundary where there just isn’t room to string it out.
This is what I want to know. In one early game (UW maybe) we ran this cool option to Lafell coming across in motion. It looked well run and gained positive yards. then we never saw it again, even once, for the entire rest of the year (unless we ran it against the webbies, which game I didn’t watch).
by 4.0 Point Stance on Jan 5, 2010 9:07 AM CST up reply actions
Exactly
Jefferson’s NOT an option QB. He never ran it in high school. Its not the kind of thing you just pick up, its a discipline play that requires a lot of practice reps — and there’s no way he’s getting that many reps of it at practice.
Unless you have a guy who comes in already knowing how to run it (such as Matt Flynn did), its the kind of play either you have to really commit to running, as in us it do it regularly, or just not do it at all.
Summary - blah blah blah
This has ultimately turned out to be a very disappointing season. We entered the season with several “ifs” that if answered in the positive we would challenge for a national title. We came up short, and then now as fans we have the bad taste of losing to Penn State in a bowl game. I’m not a silver lining guy at all, but that field was horrible. It negated the clear advantage we had over PSU. Even with the poor field, we played poorly, and to me, it seemed we weren’t too excited about playing in this game. More than any year before, I’m seeing teams go and lay an egg in their bowl games. I’m thinking that having a BCS Championship game makes the other bowl games even less significant than in years past, especially teams with expectations like LSU.
Randon weigh-ins:
Jordan Jefferson is not an answer. I use the caveat that he could ultimately prove me wrong, but from what I’ve observed, he’s lacking. I really hope Les Miles opens the door to a QB competition in the Spring and someone steps up and shines. If JJ is our best answer (and he was this year imo), then we will still be squawking about QB play next season.
Defense – gutsy group, but we aren’t dynamic. Championship teams have calling cards, and some of our best teams in the past have been because of a dynamic defense. I get a feeling that the DC and maybe Miles kept waiting for our DL to be a force. By and large, without a blitz package, the DL generated little push.
Les Miles – I get the feeling that it wouldn’t be the worst planning if Les didn’t start pulling his bags out of storage. With the pressure and high expectations of Tiger Land we are witnessing troubling direction of the program. It still is good – maybe very good, but we are definitely regressed from our title team. He deserves more time, he’s earned it imo. But I don’t think it’s beyond a 2010 season that looks a lot like this 2009 season.
And some of you guys that are posting like mavens right now – do you guys even have jobs? WTF?
2009 season vs 2008
In 08 we won some games, but not all of the ones we should have. In 09 we won all of the games we should’ve (and it doesn’t matter one bit how ugly they were), but not the toss up games that make a difference between a good season and great one. I personally think we’ll be better next year, and expect for us to compete for the SEC Championship, which in turn means the BCS Championship.
Time of possession
Since the comments were getting crowded up there, I’m restarting the debate down here. Jonno, to summarize, claimed our defense wasn’t very good because of time of possession and I argued that it was very good because of the lack of scoring.
Continuing that, LSU ranked 12th in scoring defense and 107th in TOP. Now, TOP obviously is on the offense as well, but are we really judging defenses on TOP? That’s a consistent measurment? Clemson ranked 105 and Miami 106. SDSU was 108th and the worst TOP was Mizzou. Clemson, Miami, and Mizzou were all pretty good. GT, Wisconsin, Navy, and K-State are the top four. Take that for what it’s worth.
About yardage, I’ll make this comparison. who would you rather be? LSU, ranked 12th in scoring and 27th in yards or Arizona St, ranked 13th in yards and 26th in scoring? By the way, ASU finished 4-8.
I just think Jonno’s analysis comes from the place of “Chavis isn’t good, so I’m going to grab numbers which support that contention” instead of starting from “how should I evaluate a defense and then see how Chavis performed”.
Besides, criticizing a guy for having the #27 defense would still be odd, as that would be the top quartile of defenses. So even if you grant the premise, which I don’t, to rank teams by yards, LSU still had a top tier defense, even if it wasn’t great.
Jonno also added the criticism that we ned to look at more than 1st order statistics. That’s fine, but Iwould counter with this question: how is LSU managing to be the #12 scoring defense? Don’t just look at the negatives, but all the stats. Besides, spinning the yardage as a negative is just not accurate. 27th isn’t great, but it is still good. But let’s look at the defensive numbers (rank and per game):
SCORING – 12th (16.23)
YARDS – 27th (327.62)
RUSHING – 46th (133.38)
PASS EFFICIENCY – 19th (108.45)
PASS – 29th (194.23)
SACKS – 87th (1.62)
TFL – 41st (6.23)
TO MARGIN – 37th (.31)
RED ZONE – 44th (80%)
So, what we have is a good pass defense despite no pass rush and a decent rush defense. So, the defense ends up giving up yards, though not at a huge rate, but does a great job of shutting down scoring. This team excels at forcing field goals.
I don’t think that’s the picture of a dominant defense, but it does show a good defense. And it does show that Chavis was able to hide the team’s obvious deficeincy on the line and still have an effective unit.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
Exactly
I’ve been parroting this point, but people need to realize this outfit was not going to suddenly become a dominant group after a year of some major struggles.
Did Bo Pelini have better defenses at LSU? Sure. He also had Glenn Dorsey, Ali Highsmith, Chevis Jackson, Craig Steltz, LaRon Landry and Tyson Jackson. Had some of those guys been on the defense in 2009, I imagine it would have been better.
Now, if you want to attack the defensive recruiting, well that’s a horse of a different color. But, for the record, Pelini’s more to blame for that than Chavis is.
I thought Chavis didn't recruit....
Hence he will never have any say on the what players we have on D.
He still has A say
He may not be the main guy on the road shakin’ hands and kissin’ babies, but he plays a role in identifying the prospects he wants for his defense of course.
Pelini was the same way.
"And it does show that Chavis was able to hide the team’s obvious deficeincy on the line and still have an effective unit."
That’s a key point. Everyone is criticizing Chavis for not “adjusting” to our deficiencies. If we don’t have a good d-line, we don’t have a good d-line. People are still asking for the same amount of sacks. They think we can blitz more and automatically get more sacks. Yet if we blitzed more, we would have given up more big plays and touchdowns…you have to take what you can get. We’re not going to get the production of a dominant line when we don’t HAVE one. And we can’t overcompensate in one area and get burned in another.
A few comments...
I don’t think anyone is saying that our scoring D is not good. I don’t think anyone is disagreeing w/ your point that holding teams to low scores is most important. I think one general assertion that you are seeing expressed many different ways is whether or not our methods are sustainable. Can we rely on our team to have this good of a red zone D next year as well? Can we rely on Chad Jones making the goal line play at MSU? I know it goes both ways, but my impression is that we didn’t look like a 9-3 team much of this year.
TOP, yardage, and all these other stats that people are throwing out come back to how our D has looked throughout the year.
Also, you completely dismiss the fact that we have better players than most of the teams in the country. How many other teams have the talent we have on D around the country? How many other teams have recruited as well as we have over the past 5 years? We can expect a certain level of defensive success regardless of who coaches b/c of our talent alone. Even the most undisciplined Miami teams had decent defenses b/c of all the good recruits they had.
Sustainable...
… the thing is, next year is a different team and a different animal. The issue is that the defense WAS sustained throughout the year. And people bring up yardage, once again, was not a negative stat for the Tigers. 27th in total defense is good. That’s a positive number, not a negative.
And it’s not lime LSU had a great red zone defense. People think we did, but LSU ranked 44th in the nation in red zone defense. Are you honestly suggesting that is not sustainable? Chad Jones made one great play, so yes, I think we can count on our best defensive players to occassionally make great plays.
I dimiss the fact we had more talent because this is the first time it’s been brought up. It’s also not really a fact. Every SEC team, except Vandy and maybe Kentucky, has loads of talent. There is not some giant talent gap between LSU and Auburn. LSU has recruited very well in the past five years. So has the rest of the SEC, which dominate the recruiting rankings. And just because we had a lot of highly touted classes doesn’t mean we had more talent. Recruiting gurus can be, and often are, wrong. Finally, all of the rated classes in the world doesn’t make up for the fact LSU had a paper thin defensive line. We didn’t have much d-line talent, and it was the least productive defensive unit.
And, actually, for all of the crap Coker takes… he always had good defenses. Miami may have had a bunch of thugs, but comparing a defense to Miami, until Shannon took over, was a compliment.
Fake Pundit. Real Fan.
http://www.andthevalleyshook.com
One comment
I think we are oversimplifying our criteria for determining whether a defense is good. Holding down scoring is great, but the ultimate goal is to win the game. That includes not just keeping the other team from scoring, but also putting your offense in a position to score. I will submit that the long, sustained drives that the defense gave up, even when they did not result in points or only resulted in 3 points, failed to give the offense its best chance to score. 3-and-outs greatly help your field position, which enhances your chances of scoring. Allowing 2 or 3 first downs drains the clock and moves your offensive starting field position back.
I am not very concerned about Time of Possession, except in how the long drives affect the points/possession stat and how they put our offense in bad positions at times. It had a lot to do, as we have correctly (I believe) diagnosed, with problems on the defensive line, where our personnel was mediocre this year. A weak defensive line means lots of 3rd and Short and no pass rush, and that’s pretty much what we had this year. When we did not blitz, we got very little rush.
I don’t blame Chavis at all. This defense did not, IMO, have any kind of a scheming problem. It had a personnel problem. Not enough talent on the defensive line. That affected both our defense AND our offense.
Father. Husband. Lawyer. Nerd.
by Richard Pittman on Jan 5, 2010 8:17 AM CST up reply actions
Amateurish
I thought college players were amateurs . . .
POSITIVE ATTITUDE
Like many Tiger fans, I was extremely upset with some things that happened this season with the football team. I thought the team should’ve done better, and maybe it would have with better coaching. However, I’ve now had time to sit and reflect on the season. And, I’ve made a 180 degree change in my thinking. A 9-4 record and an appearance in the best bowl, other than BCS Bowls, is something to be proud of as most teams would give anything to do as well. Further, a top 10 recruiting class in the making and the addition of two very good coaches to the coaching staff gives me hope for the future. Finally, I’ve put aside my anger towards Les Miles and Gary Crowton. One thing that helped change my mind was watching Nick Saban at a press conference before the National Championship Game. A reporter asked Saban if he was having “fun”, and Saban looked at him as if to say “you’ve got to be crazy.” The message Saban conveyed to me through his body language was that coaching an SEC team is one of the most demanding jobs on this planet. It was at that point that I realized just how much pressure these coaches are under 24/7/365. Sure, they make a lot of money, but I think they earn it (just having to put up with fans like me).
I guess what I’m trying to say is that all the negativity being generated by the fans regarding the LSU football team is not going to do any good. In fact, it could be very harmful to recruiting and keeping coaches, who have given us a great football program the last few years. So, I say at this point let all true Tiger fans make a resolution to support the administration, the coaches, and the players. As LSU fans, we have a lot to do with making the football program a great one and that’s what we ought to strive for all the time. I’ve never known negativity to achieve anything great, but positive attitudes can accomplish anything.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on And The Valley Shook
Related FanShots on And The Valley Shook
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Twitter: Coach Miles
Next Game
LSU Tigers
@
North Carolina Tar Heels
Saturday, Sep 4, 2010, 7:00 PM CDT
Georgia Dome - Atlanta, GA
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
