People are praising Lebby for slowing the game down….

OG Goat Holder

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2022
7,571
7,152
113
…..and grinding the clock. Shortening the game in other words. And in saying that, saying he’s “adapting”. I would agree that it was a good decision in the short term. But anybody could have made this decision.

But what worries me…..Croom also did this from time to time (Florida 2004). And when I say “did this”, I mean, adapted from what they do. Even Sloppy Joe did it (Auburn and aTm 2018).

Will Lebby do it when we have a legit shot to win? Not when we’ve already mailed in the loss like yesterday, and just don’t want it to be too bad.

And in another vein….why not try and develop the team the way you think it should be developed? Take the lumps now, for a payoff later.

I’m truly on the fence with this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bullldawg78
Dec 28, 2019
416
489
48
Establishing a running game is the first step. Repeated 3 and outs are killing what defense we have. We have to establish the run to be able to add in the extended passing attack. If you can't or won't run the ball they pin their ears back and blitz every play. We did throw the ball deep a few times. We have a true freshman qb. You are overthinking it
 

Maroon13

Well-known member
Sep 29, 2022
1,743
1,735
113
What is funny is Out of Leftfield, mentioned last week, that years ago, Switzer conceded a game before it even kicked off by deciding to run FB dive every play.

I would say that is a terrible strategy. However we actually didn't go 3 and out to start the game and had a couple of first downs. .....with a freshman QB at the #1 team in the nation. I say genius.
 
  • Like
Reactions: patdog

aTotal360

Well-known member
Nov 12, 2009
18,697
7,439
113
Knowing the quality of our defensive play, I'd rather have 90s 3-and-outs vs 45s 3-and-outs.
 

Chesusdog

Well-known member
May 2, 2006
3,606
1,993
113
It worked to a degree, in that we didn't get our team crushed by 40 and built some confidence within the team. We still get our asses kicked, but we did stand up to them much better than anyone could realistically expect.
 

ZombieKissinger

Well-known member
May 29, 2013
3,228
3,931
113
Volume cures variance, and if we’re going to beat a good team at this point, we need as much variance as possible. I think that’s why he did what he did (plus the new QB). Will be interesting to see if he does the same against UGA
 

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,327
1,195
108
Volume cures variance, and if we’re going to beat a good team at this point, we need as much variance as possible. I think that’s why he did what he did (plus the new QB). Will be interesting to see if he does the same against UGA
So running fewer plays fools the defense more or adds variance ? I don’t think the anology holds for football. catching a team off balance or making adjustment to their adjustment or finding a mismatch wouldn’t be lessened by running more plays.
 

GloryDawg

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2005
14,392
5,180
113
I was happy with our QB play considering the circumstances he was thrown into. That was a big moment. He did not choke. Made a few mistakes. I hope we can keep him out of the portal.
 
Dec 28, 2019
416
489
48
Hopefully we can iron out some of our mistakes and missed opportunities particularly timing on the long ball. Maybe get a few injured players back. I promise you he will establish the run and lean on it heavily all game. When you suck the D up close to the line that's when you go over the top. That is how his offense works. It is run heavy. It ain't the Air Raid. OM was run heavy when he was there.
 

Podgy

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2022
2,307
2,572
113
After watch Ariz State through Florida I didn't know he had it in him to slow the game down. Well done.
 

ZombieKissinger

Well-known member
May 29, 2013
3,228
3,931
113
So running fewer plays fools the defense more or adds variance ? I don’t think the anology holds for football. catching a team off balance or making adjustment to their adjustment or finding a mismatch wouldn’t be lessened by running more plays.
Decreasing possessions adds variance. Has nothing to do with “fooling the defense”
 

ZombieKissinger

Well-known member
May 29, 2013
3,228
3,931
113
I’m assuming you mean variance in the type of play run with a smaller statistical sample And that there is some advantage to this ?
All I mean is that if Texas and State had infinite possessions, maybe Texas would average outscoring State 3 points per possession. If each team had a hundred possessions, there’s a good chance Texas would win by 300. If each team had one possession, Texas still probably wins, but maybe that one possession is one of the few in which State scores and Texas doesn’t. That’s the variance, which goes away with possession volume
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85Bears

ZombieKissinger

Well-known member
May 29, 2013
3,228
3,931
113
All I mean is that if Texas and State had infinite possessions, maybe Texas would average outscoring State 3 points per possession. If each team had a hundred possessions, there’s a good chance Texas would win by 300. If each team had one possession, Texas still probably wins, but maybe that one possession is one of the few in which State scores and Texas doesn’t. That’s the variance, which goes away with possession volume
But you admittedly can sacrifice some of your offensive efficiency if that doesn’t fit your style. All things being equal, though, favored teams want more possessions per game and underdogs want fewer
 

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,327
1,195
108
All I mean is that if Texas and State had infinite possessions, maybe Texas would average outscoring State 3 points per possession. If each team had a hundred possessions, there’s a good chance Texas would win by 300. If each team had one possession, Texas still probably wins, but maybe that one possession is one of the few in which State scores and Texas doesn’t. That’s the variance, which goes away with possession volume
i wasn’t sure what you meant by variance, yes slowing the game down so you don’t get blown out any worse definitely makes sense.
 

OG Goat Holder

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2022
7,571
7,152
113
All I mean is that if Texas and State had infinite possessions, maybe Texas would average outscoring State 3 points per possession. If each team had a hundred possessions, there’s a good chance Texas would win by 300. If each team had one possession, Texas still probably wins, but maybe that one possession is one of the few in which State scores and Texas doesn’t. That’s the variance, which goes away with possession volume
If he thought we were going to beat Texas, no matter the variance, he’s an idiot. At best, he wasted one of our ‘up’ games against an unbeatable opponent.

Our down game will probably be against Arkansas or UMass.

That sort of thing is what defines a good coach, even though you obviously can’t tell a team that. Message to the team is always max effort, every play, every game, etc. But as a real human coach, you have to know you’ll get 3-4 emotion games, and employ this knowledge in a smart way.
 

patdog

Well-known member
May 28, 2007
48,266
11,879
113
I’m assuming you mean variance in the type of play run with a smaller statistical sample And that there is some advantage to this ?
When you’re the underdog, you want to control the clock as you can without limiting your offense. Your chances of pulling off an upset are much better in a 10-possession game than in a 15-possession game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85Bears

85Bears

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2020
1,327
1,195
108
But you admittedly can sacrifice some of your offensive efficiency if that doesn’t fit your style. All things being equal, though, favored teams want more possessions per game and underdogs want fewer
yes, I was thinking plays run, tempo.
 

ZombieKissinger

Well-known member
May 29, 2013
3,228
3,931
113
If he thought we were going to beat Texas, no matter the variance, he’s an idiot. At best, he wasted one of our ‘up’ games against an unbeatable opponent.

Our down game will probably be against Arkansas or UMass.

That sort of thing is what defines a good coach, even though you obviously can’t tell a team that. Message to the team is always max effort, every play, every game, etc. But as a real human coach, you have to employ this knowledge in a smart way.
We needed an up game, even if it wasn’t going to be a win. Hopefully we can get another against Arkansas
 

ZombieKissinger

Well-known member
May 29, 2013
3,228
3,931
113
assuming You are trying to win and not avoid a blowout, more possessions give you more opportunities to score and keep their offense off the field.
Possessions go back and forth. Possessions are equal. Texas would’ve had more chances to score too, and they’re better at scoring, so more possessions are better for them.

If there was the option to give both State and Texas one possession for the entire game, that gives State a better chance to win than two possessions each, two possessions each is more favorable than three possessions each, etc
 
Get unlimited access today.

Pick the right plan for you.

Already a member? Login