LSU game take aways

OUBubba said:
I can say that I was impressed by both teams. My wife ruined the DVR for me telling me that Texas got beat in the car on the way home from Hamilton. I watched it anyway and came away not looking forward to October as much.
Click to expand...

My girlfriend was raving about Burrow. She kept saying, "amazing."
 
ProdigalHorn said:
I guess I'm in the minority, but I don't think putting the QB under center does anything, and in fact I think it makes it worse. Sam is effective because he hits the line, not because he pushes into it or tries to crawl over it. Taking the sneak under center takes away all forward momentum, and it only adds about a second to the play - which also removes the time for your blocker to push forward. If he can score by pushing forward from a standstill, he can score rushing straight ahead a half-second later.

If your o-line does the job, there is no advantage to lining up under center, and if it doesn't do the job, there's the disadvantage of a QB who has nowhere to go if the line gets pushed back and no forward momentum.

The fact is, we didn't execute it in the first half. We came right back to it in the third quarter and punched it in. Formation was not the issue. Poor execution along with a dropped pass and a fresh and fired up LSU front was the issue.

If you noticed the primary difference between Sam scoring in the third quarter and not scoring when his knee hit in the first quarter, that the second time, Sam turned his back to the play and pushed with his legs, knees pointed up. He wasn't going to let his knee accidentally hit the ground that time around, and he drove himself into the end zone.
Click to expand...

The only way I would put Sam under center is if we added a true fullback in the backfield. In other words, if we ran a power I formation then I'm good with Sam under center.

Personally I'd think it's a waste of Sam's talent, maybe if we still had Buschele putting him under center would be a good thing in a power I but not Sam, he is a fullback already.
 
What difference does the fullback make? If Sam is under center and his only job is to fall forward, all a FB is doing is pushing him. Decide if you want a pusher, thus bringing another defender into the box, or another WR causing said defender to be 10-15 yards outside. Shack is either the man or he isn't.

It's one block for one yard.
 
SabreHorn said:
What difference does the fullback make? If Sam is under center and his only job is to fall forward, all a FB is doing is pushing him. Decide if you want a pusher, thus bringing another defender into the box, or another WR causing said defender to be 10-15 yards outside. Shack is either the man or he isn't.

It's one block for one yard.
Click to expand...

I think you miss understand my point. I'm saying putting Sam under center is not good, but if he had a full back and was handing off to the I back then it makes sense to put him under center. That is the only reason to do so.
 
I don't believe anyone has ever suggested putting Sam under center except to run a QB sneak for a yard.

There are coaches who want a QB under center for one reason only. QB in the gun, has to take his eye off the defense to catch the snap. That's the reason Stoops, et al rotated their safeties at the last second.

A QB dropping back from under center has his eyes downfield before he sets up.
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind, any offense, with the right personnel can be a champion level offense. USC ran a pro style offense with their QB under center and they beat the crap out of stoops and blOwU. The type of Offense is less important than the athletes and the execution.

Offenses like the spread and run and gun were designed in part because they had inferior athletes and needed to maximize what they did have.
 
Mentioned this on another post. This is my thought:

LSU's win over Texas means nothing to LSU if they lose to Alabama later in the season.

Texas' loss to LSU means nothing to Texas if they beat Oklahoma later in the season.

Moral of the story: WIN THE CONFERENCE! Conference Championships matter.
 
SabreHorn said:
Send your "thank you note" to Bowelsby with a gift for his secretary so she will read and explain it to him.

:deadhorse:
Click to expand...

My regularly scheduled rant that combining a round-robin conference schedule with a 1 v. 2 championship game is the single dumbest idea that this conference has ever concocted, unless we're all in on the idea that making more TV money trumps playing in a playoff.

If the Big XII gets back to Texas and OU regularly being the top two teams in the league and playing in the conference championship, there will be almost no shot at a playoff berth. Having to beat an evenly matched team twice in a season is going to rule out the Big XII champion 9 times out of 10.
 
Didn't some LSU poster say that this is the best defense they've ever had? Does that mean we have a really awesome offense? Or could it be that any Big XII team could score on them like that. Hell, it was like watching Okla State vs T. Tech or Baylor, a game I always historically preferred watching to LSU-Alabama, which I always thought was like watching grass grow.
 
Oh but there are many in SEC that are critical of B12 teams cause they only play offense.....last I checked it really doesn't matter how you perform of O or D as long as you win. SEC must fess up; they have a hard time defending B12 offenses and last years bowl records speaks well for B12. What were the results of each conference bowl games? Did any B12 team play any D?
 
ProdigalHorn said:
My regularly scheduled rant that combining a round-robin conference schedule with a 1 v. 2 championship game is the single dumbest idea that this conference has ever concocted, unless we're all in on the idea that making more TV money trumps playing in a playoff.

If the Big XII gets back to Texas and OU regularly being the top two teams in the league and playing in the conference championship, there will be almost no shot at a playoff berth. Having to beat an evenly matched team twice in a season is going to rule out the Big XII champion 9 times out of 10.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. However, there is an easy fix. As long as the Committee gives the Domers a pass for not being in a conference, have the Big XII Champion play the Domers as each's 13th game. The almost certain Big XII victory will look good to the Committee, and keeping the Domers out of the CFP regularly will be a blessing.

Of course, expanding the CFP to 8 teams [5 Conference Champions plus 3 others (unfortunately guaranteeing a second and maybe a third $EC team).
 
ViperHorn said:
Totally agree. However, there is an easy fix. As long as the Committee gives the Domers a pass for not being in a conference, have the Big XII Champion play the Domers as each's 13th game. The almost certain Big XII victory will look good to the Committee, and keeping the Domers out of the CFP regularly will be a blessing.

Of course, expanding the CFP to 8 teams [5 Conference Champions plus 3 others (unfortunately guaranteeing a second and maybe a third $EC team).
Click to expand...
ND or just top team outside of P5 conf
 
WorsterMan said:
Just more $$$ for the conference is ALL it is about.
Click to expand...

Worster,

Sorry, but I agree that is Bowelsby perception, but he is too ******* stupid to analyze the economic impact of having one or two teams in the final four as opposed to him kissing Jerry Jones *** to get a meaningless game played at Jerry World.

Bowelsby's decisions on this and many other areas is proving him to be far beyond incompetent and ignorant.

$3 million a year and bring in Oliver Luck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top