People are praising Lebby for slowing the game down….

[OG Goat Holder]

…..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.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

I'm trying not to grasp straws yet. We have a lot of work to do.

 

[AT4 Dawg]

Baby steps.

 

[Howiefeltersnstch]

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]

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.

 

[aTotal360]

Knowing the quality of our defensive play, I'd rather have 90s 3-and-outs vs 45s 3-and-outs.

 

[Chesusdog]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Howiefeltersnstch]

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.

 

[GloryDawg]

They didn't score 70 and they were trying. So kudo to him.

 

[Podgy]

After watch Ariz State through Florida I didn't know he had it in him to slow the game down. Well done.

 

[patdog]

I think the game plan, both offensively & defensively was good. Running pace with a true FR QB at the #1 team in the country would be suicidal.

 

[ZombieKissinger]

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”

 

[85Bears]

Decreasing possessions adds variance. Has nothing to do with “fooling the defense”

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 ?

 

[ZombieKissinger]

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

 

[ZombieKissinger]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[85Bears]

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]

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]

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

 

[The Cooterpoot]

He was simply protecting a FR QB who isn't ready yet

 

[Lawdawg.sixpack]

If he thought we were going to beat Texas, no matter the variance, he’s an idiot.

 

[paindonthurt17]

…..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.

Truly don’t understand why you aren’t making minimum $250,000 plus as smart as you are.

 

[bulldoghair]

The advantage that this very fast pace up tempo offense is played out. In fact now with lesser talent, I’d say in big college football it’s counter intuitive now. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Up tempo defenses have become the norm.

 

[ETK99]

The advantage that this very fast pace up tempo offense is played out. In fact now with lesser talent, I’d say in big college football it’s counter intuitive now. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Up tempo defenses have become the norm.

You aren't watching much college football then.

 

[Tall Dawg]

…..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.

Goat holder….we best hope we have this same game plan against GA in 2 weeks.
If not, they’ll drop 50 on us.

Great game plan and effort against the Shorthorns.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

The advantage that this very fast pace up tempo offense is played out. In fact now with lesser talent, I’d say in big college football it’s counter intuitive now. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Up tempo defenses have become the norm.

I agree......that's why I continue to wonder why we went this route. I prefer a game-shortening approach.

 

[The Cooterpoot]

I agree......that's why I continue to wonder why we went this route. I prefer a game-shortening approach.

You're so full of **** you stink lol. You're the one literally bitching about "RUN DA BAWL"
Troll better or give it up lol

 

[OG Goat Holder]

You're so full of **** you stink lol. You're the one literally bitching about "RUN DA BAWL"

"RuN dA bAwL" is a reaction to the Leach-haters (you know that, dubmass). And what all you morons didn't understand, is that Leach actually did a great job of draining the clock. He already had modified his offense quite a bit.

 

[bulldoghair]

I agree......that's why I continue to wonder why we went this route. I prefer a game-shortening approach.

With an emphasis on having a great defense, and being tough strong and physical. Throughout our history, when we’ve been good, that has been a common thread here at State.

 

[bulldoghair]

You aren't watching much college football then.

Give examples. Who are you referring too?

 

[OG Goat Holder]

With an emphasis on having a great defense, and being tough strong and physical. Throughout our history, when we’ve been good, that has been a common thread here at State.

You said it, can't put it any better. Even Danny, an offensive guy, realized this and knew he had to make sure the defense was good year in year out.
This is why I got so pissed at Arnett, because he had a chance to really do things the right way. Had he just kept his damned ego and fingerprints off the offense for one year, no telling what could have happened. And if it didn't work, go find another niche OC who runs the ball like he likes, and leave him alone. Instead, he had to do it his way and get Barbay who, well, who really knows what his offense was. And it wasn't all Arnett, it was partially enabled by Keenum, and partially enabled by all the morons in our fanbase who have 'connections' and hated Leach.

I will say that Salmons wasn't really connected to all that, so he did the right thing in getting rid of Arnett, free of pressure. But he didn't know what he was doing either, made an easy hire due to mUh ShOwTiMe and mUh ExCiTeMeNt, and simply is carrying out Keenum's vision for the program, which is to copy Ole Miss (like SO MANY of our fans).

I like Keenum, he does many things well and is great for MSU.....but we need a strong AD to handle that part of it. And that's our overwhelming problem right now....we have a weak athletic program as a whole. Even the damned &tate logo bears that out. It's why Jans wants out. It really sucks, to be honest.

 

[Drebin]

…..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.

The key difference between Lebby and Croom here is that we actually had some sustained drives with Lebby's approach.

 

[HuntDawg]

congrats on Lebby finally figuring out that going super fast on offense. Just gives the other team more chances with the ball against our amazing defense... which is a recipe for disaster.

Im not sure it gives us a better chance to win or not... but it'll sure make for spreads that arent 38.5 anymore.

What it does tell me is to be able to play the way lebby wants to play, is farther away than we want it to be. So he's got to continue to adapt, guess we'll see if that happens or not.

 

[bulldoghair]

congrats on Lebby finally figuring out that going super fast on offense. Just gives the other team more chances with the ball against our amazing defense... which is a recipe for disaster.

Im not sure it gives us a better chance to win or not... but it'll sure make for spreads that arent 38.5 anymore.

What it does tell me is to be able to play the way lebby wants to play, is farther away than we want it to be. So he's got to continue to adapt, guess we'll see if that happens or not.

Did he just now find out or figure out how bad our defense was? I think he’s just trying not to get beat by 40-50 points is all it is.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

The key difference between Lebby and Croom here is that we actually had some sustained drives with Lebby's approach.

I agree.....when I made that analogy, I was speaking more to the fact that even Croom, as bad as he was, made a good adaptation once in a while (like Florida 2004 when he let Woody run Conner). Then he went right back to doing it his own way.

My bigger issue is, why do we keep hiring coaches and then immediately start complaining about them adapting? Sounds like we're hiring the wrong coaches. I realize that if you're changing something in a major way, you need some adaptations, but I still have not heard what we're actually trying to do with the football program, from the AD or anybody else. Now it appears Lebby doesn't even know.....but hey at least he's smart enough to realize if he goes 1-11, it better not be all blowouts.