Monday Night Crew Bashes Big 12 Defense

S

stanhin

5,000+ Posts
Anybody else watching this? In the middle of the fourth quarter of the Texans/Titans game, the Monday Night crew (Joe Tessitore, Jason Witten, and Booger McFarland) just triple piled on Big 12 defenses. Tassitore started it by saying he had never seen anything like the lack of defense in the OU WVa game. Then, Witten chimed in by dumping on those defenses (nobody knowing where to line up, runners and receivers running completely uncovered) and on the Big12 generally. Finally, Booger indicted the entire conference, saying that the conference was not interested in defense and that you can't get in the national championship conversation without a good defense. The Monday night game was a blow out so I guess they were looking for something to talk about.
 
Can't say they are wrong. Sometimes the truth hurts.

Texas is the only team in the Big 12 this year that plays any form of defense. I know TCU and ISU both attempt to put emphasis on defense, but ISU is playing with a bunch of 2 and 3 Star players, and TCU is very down this year.

No one else had a defense worth a flying frogs fat butt.
 
When WVU had a receiver go for a 75 yd TD, he literally just ran upfield, was never checked, never broke stride, never made a move. Just ran straight up field, caught the pass and ran to the end zone. Not sure what else to say except they are pretty much right. Our D is nowhere close to last year and it's still one of the best in the conference. Oh, and OU sucks.
 
Austin_Bill said:
Texas is the only team in the Big 12 this year that plays any form of defense.
Click to expand...
Actually, ISU's defense was better, in all statistical measures, than Texas's defense. TCU's defense is not too bad. I would say that These three teams play very decent defense. And all are physical.

Baylor, if it gets any players, will play physical defense. Their new coach plays defense, coaches physical football.

What is clear, is that the B 12 plays incredible offense.

I say F the Monday night football crew.
 
Well, it's true that one way or another, the Big XII defenses cannot keep up with the Big XII offenses--whatever exactly that proves. For one thing, no defense in any league looks good after defending about the first 75 plays. The next 25 plays after that are usually going to produce 28-35 points. What the announcers said that was bogus was that the Chiefs/Rams game was somehow not the same thing. It was the same thing, just at the pro level. (And yes, the A&M/LSU game was the same thing, in the SEC.)
 
No big deal, it's what I've been saying for years. Some say the defenses just look bad because the offenses are so good. I call BS on that, just look at the last bowl season. However, I recall seeing a 74-72 game recently between two teams from another notable conference.
 
Vol Horn 4 Life said:
No big deal, it's what I've been saying for years. Some say the defenses just look bad because the offenses are so good. I call BS on that, just look at the last bowl season. However, I recall seeing a 74-72 game recently between two teams from another notable conference.
Click to expand...
At the end of regulation it was 31 all. An outlier makes for a weak argument.
 
"I guess they have already forgotten LA Rams 54, KC Chiefs 51."

They did mention that game and explained (with what sounded to me like a rationalization) that the difference was that that those two pro offenses were actually good enough to overwhelm decent defenses, whereas there was no defense in the Big 12.
 
Last edited:
"74 boogers to 72 boogers. STFU"

It took seven overtimes to get to 74 so I'm not sure that's the best game to use to make the point.
 
It goes in cycles. Big XII defenses were pretty damn incredible from about 2000-05, with notable exceptions of Mike Leach or whomever.

Hell, A&M scored 52 in their bowl game last year and still lost.

Sometimes it's short possessions that lead to higher scores, too. When OU has a 4-play, 80-yard drive, it looks like bad defense but it's typically one play that might have been well-defended. When LSU has a 15-play, 80-yard drive that takes 8 minutes off the clock, it prevents both teams from piling up points. But I wouldn't chalk up the number of plays to "good defense" from LSU's opponent... it's more on their OC for calling it that way instead of throwing bombs like Lincoln Riley would.
 
Just because you don't like what they were saying doesn't make it untrue, the Big XII has been awful on defense for almost a decade which is not coincidentally the last time the Big XII had team in the NC game. That WVU/OU game was a joke and it should be criticized.
 
stanhin said:
Tassitore started it by saying he had never seen anything like the lack of defense in the OU WVa game. Then, Witten chimed in by dumping on those defenses (nobody knowing where to line up, runners and receivers running completely uncovered) and on the Big12 generally.
Click to expand...

This is an apt description of what happened in that game. Booger's just an idiot, and lapsed into fan speak by talking about what coaches do and don't care about.

However, it's easy for Witten to talk about players knowing where to line up when he comes from systems where they got to stand around for 10 seconds during a huddle, watch their guy trot to the line, and then spend five seconds digging into the turf before the play gets snapped.
 
I think what the announcers overlooked is that the NFL has gradually been influenced by, and moving toward, college style spread offenses because those offenses put more pressure on the defense. No huddle (or short huddle) plays, shotgun snaps, the read option, the run/pass option, spread offense--we are seeing more of these type plays each year in the NFL. Other NFL announcers in other games this year have explicitly acknowledged that they are seeing more of these types of plays in the NFL as a result of the influence of conferences like the Big 12. It is certainly true that defenses need to catch up to the offenses in the Big 12, but I don't believe it's because the Big 12 has no interest in defense. Those types of offense, when run well, are just damned hard to defend. Tweet quoted in another thread on this Board--
 
Last edited:
I_Dont_Exist said:
At the end of regulation it was 31 all. An outlier makes for a weak argument.
Click to expand...

62 point in regulation is still pretty high. So defense isn't measured in OT? Most of those TD's in OT only took from 1 to 3 plays. The reason it went 7 OT's and is the highest scoring game in NCAA history isn't because the defenses were stellar.
 
stanhin said:
"74 boogers to 72 boogers. STFU"

It took seven overtimes to get to 74 so I'm not sure that's the best game to use to make the point.
Click to expand...

Tell me again why almost all OT games only go to one or two OT's? Ok, it's because one defense makes a stop. I believe a TD was scored by both teams in every OT. That's pretty craptastic defense.
 
"I believe a TD was scored by both teams in every OT."

Then you believe wrong. ;)

Plus (although I admit I have not researched it), I think I'm safe in saying that a team is more likely to score a TD when it begins a drive on its opponent's 25 than when it begins on its own 25. ;)
 
Last edited:
62 point in regulation is still pretty high.
Click to expand...

31-31 isn't all that high-scoring. The median teams are scoring around 28.5 points/game. Attaining 31 per game this season would put you 40th in the nation in scoring offense.
 
Statalyzer said:
31-31 isn't all that high-scoring. The median teams are scoring around 28.5 points/game. Attaining 31 per game this season would put you 40th in the nation in scoring offense.
Click to expand...

So we're talking defense not offense and median is a pretty bad reference to try to measure rank. As you know it doesnt tell true ranking or average, just the middle between highest and lowest points and doesnt account for how many are higher and how many are lower.

Where would a defense giving up 31 ppg rank? That would be 86th at best and 94th at worst. Thats not good.
 
Last edited:
stanhin said:
"I believe a TD was scored by both teams in every OT."

Then you believe wrong. ;)

Plus (although I admit I have not researched it), I think I'm safe in saying that a team is more likely to score a TD when it begins a drive on its opponent's 25 than when it begins on its own 25. ;)
Click to expand...

I stand corrected, each team kicked two field goals. :smile1:

Of course statistics would show a higher chance of scoring a TD from that starting point, but almost every other OT game in history has ended in a defensive stop preventing 7 OT's being needed. Not here.
 
but almost every other OT game in history has ended in a defensive stop preventing 7 OT's being needed.
Click to expand...

There were defensive stops, they just happened to come at the same time.

If either of the teams had only been able to score a TD when the other had got a FG, the lack of a defensive stop would have made the games much less high-scoring.
 
I don't know what I did to get Vol Horn 4 Life so juiced up. :smile1:The original post mentioned the 74-72 score without mentioning how they got there. I just pointed out that it took seven overtimes and then made what I thought at the time was the very modest suggestion that that "might not be the best" example. I did not claim it was an irrelevant example or even a bad example. He writes that 62 points in regulation is still "pretty high." So, how about using the South Carolina (48) versus Ole Miss (44) result? That's 92 points in regulation. Or the Alabama 65 Arkansas 31 result, which is 96 poionts in regulation. I have a definite feeling this post isn't going to please him either, although I have no idea why. :)

btw, speaking of high scoring games (non-SEC), Pittsburgh beat Syracuse 76-61 in 2016, and North Texas beat Navy 74-62 in 2007 (both games decided in regulation).
 
Last edited:
stanhin said:
He writes that 62 points in regulation is still "pretty high." So, how about using the South Carolina (48) versus Ole Miss (44) result? That's 92 points in regulation. Or the Alabama 65 Arkansas 31 result, which is 96 poionts in regulation
Click to expand...

Not sure why attempting to argue a point means I'm upset, because I'm not. Was just trying to prove that there was no defense in that game which happens to be in another conference. Some how with over 140 points being scored with 62 in regulation multiple people disagreed. That's the most points ever given up in a college game.

You are correct that there are many other examples of crappy defenses in that same conference. My point is that it doesn't mean all of the offenses are just making the defenses look bad. Same as the Big 12. Terrible defenses.
 
stanhin said:
Knew he still would not be pleased. :)
Click to expand...

WTF are you talking about not pleased? I specifically said I'm not upset, but I disagree with you. I even agreed with you there are other crappy defensive performances that could be pointed to. Does being "pleased" mean giving you a :beertoast: or a :smile1: or a :clap:?

Well here ya go....:headbang:. Better?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top