Will our defense help our offense?

U

Uninformed

5,000+ Posts
Muschamp likes to bring bring a lot of pressure and wants players hitting full speed during practice. Will this attitude help our offense? In other words, since Greg Davis will encounter an aggressive defense every day during practice, will this help him learn how to call plays that can expose such defenses? And will our offensive players learn how to better cope with aggressive defenses since they will be playing against one in practice?
 
Let's hope so. I'm watching the Spring game right now and the offense looks like ***. I know it's only spring-ball but it's about to put me back to sleep.
 
Patience, friends. Remember, it's not how you start, it's how you finish. It may take the offense 3 or 4 games to gel, but as I've stated before, I really believe that we could be looking at the beginning of some very special years here for our Longhorns. And yes, the defense and Mushcahmp's style of coaching will defintely help the entire team, not just the offense. My 2 cents.

Hook'em!
 
Yes, we're the only offense in the country that runs a three-yard hitch, and that's the only passing play we call, and Greg Davis is never aggressive in his playcalling, etc....

Honestly sometimes I think some of you guys watch the games with your hand covering your eyes in case you might actually see something to prove yourselves wrong.

I don't think that an OC typically is going to use his own practice to devise schemes, but I could be wrong on that. Seems to me that this is just them implementing what they do and trying to get more proficient at it. They'll scheme for someone else's defense, not their own.

I have a feeling the issues with the offense may have more to do with the changes on defense, but we won't know until the opener.
 
More significantly, the aggressive D will help the O by creating shorter fields for the O during the game. This was a contribution of Bull Reese's that I think is not appreciated by the board. The turnovers and three and outs make a big difference in the long run. Conversely, the "bend but don't break," focus on points allowed needs to be examined in its overall impact of wins and losses.

Consider the loss to A&M in Austin two years ago. Even though the D only allowed 12 points, there was still a sense that somehow the D was partly at fault. Apart from their last drive, I seem to remember that they had a similar time consuming drive to end the first half that did not result in any points, but prevented the offense from the opportunity for another chance to score.
 
I would rather get burned for a few big plays in a game and get some sacks and turnovers then have the other teams O be on the field the whole time because we are playing bend don't break. Whoever invented that crap is an idiot.
 
Dr. Z (of SI fame) wrote many years ago that football coaches should think not in terms of ToP but % of possesions scored. Given that UT typically has better talent on the field, it follows that UT would be expected to score more regularly on its possession. Consequently, if Mack has to choose between a game w/6 possessions for each team vs. a game w/12 possessions for each time, he should choose the later. WIth the "bend" D, the # of possessions may be fewer, and the A&M aberration more likely to happen.
 
Totally agree that the bend but don't break theory is crap. All that says is we are going to play passive and let the O attack us. Football is a game of aggression and if you don't play it that way on D and O, teams that do are going to kick your ***.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top