PDA

View Full Version : Let's set some goals for the offense and defense



Todd4State
08-30-2019, 01:09 AM
Goals are good to have.

So, I'm curious to see what our fans think our reasonable goals for our football program should be on both sides of the ball. I'm tired of "the offense sucked"- let's actually quantify what we expect rather than but we scored 0 points against Alabama in day games so we suck.

So my IDEAL goal for our offense against upper tier SEC teams (Bluebloods) would range from 21-28 points per game. If we do that we should have a chance to beat them. We won't always beat them but we should have at the very least a respectable day at the office. This year if we average 21 points against bluebloods that would be a significant jump. Last year we averaged 12 PPG against these types of teams (excluding an atypical UK team).

IDEAL goal for P5 OOC and non-blueblood SEC (Vanderbilt's, Mizzou's, Ole Miss's) would be I would say 35 points per game on offense. Last year we averaged 29.6 PPG per these types of teams- that includes Iowa and Kentucky. So, pretty close and if you take out Kentucky since they were an exception to a typical UK team- it's right at 35 including Iowa still. So, close however you choose to look at it.

IDEAL goal for G5 and FCS OOC- 42-56 PPG average on offense. We averaged 54.67 PPG against these types of teams last year so we're good here.

I split it up because there is an obvious difference between Alabama's defense and La Tech's. Even if we're good offensively- I don't think it's reasonable for us to think that we could hang 40+ on an Alabama typically. And because we aren't able to that doesn't necessarily mean that we're bad on offense.

Defensively last year we averaged 13 PPG allowed. I would have to believe that is our ceiling or pretty close to it. So 13 PPG allowed is going to be my IDEAL goal for defense. Last year if we allowed 21 PPG that would have been good for seventh in the SEC. I can't believe that we are better this year than last- so my goal for this year is going to be 20 PPG.

To break down our defense PPG for those that are curious or care.

SEC Bluebloods- 15.6 (excluding UK) 17.6 (including UK)

SEC Non- Blueblood plus P5- 6.3 (excluding UK/Iowa) 11.75 (including UK but excluding Iowa) 14.8 (including UK and Iowa) I forgot about Iowa for a minute which is why the weird exclusions.

G5 and FCS - 6.3

So- if we can manage to keep the averages around that we should be in really good shape. Of course it's not likely that we will- but if we can manage to keep the averages around say 25 PPG per blueblood, and 10 PPG per non-blueblood and P5 and 10 per G5 and FCS I think that's a fairly reasonable goal to have. That probably gets us under the 20 PPG goal though.

So, thoughts?

Pollodawg
08-30-2019, 07:50 AM
Goal for offense: Not score less than 14 pts in 3 games combined.....

ShotgunDawg
08-30-2019, 07:53 AM
Does A&M count as a blue blood?

If so, why?

Tbonewannabe
08-30-2019, 08:46 AM
Goal for offense: Not score less than 14 pts in 3 games combined.....

If you count the TD that the Bama ref literally stole from us then we exceeded these expectations. Nothing any coach can do about Bama refs unless you are Nick Saban.

Todd4State
08-30-2019, 10:13 AM
Does A&M count as a blue blood?

If so, why?

Yes. Resources and history.

AROB44
08-30-2019, 01:15 PM
Yes. Resources and history.

I wouldn't say that A&M has a great history.....at least not in the modern era. Except for JWS, they really haven't been that good. Resources....yes. Potential..yes. But history....I don't think so.

BrunswickDawg
08-30-2019, 01:25 PM
I wouldn't say that A&M has a great history.....at least not in the modern era. Except for JWS, they really haven't been that good. Resources....yes. Potential..yes. But history....I don't think so.

A&M hasn't done much since the demise of the SWC. It amazes me how much cred A&M has gotten for their time in the SEC based off of what appears to have been a fluke season in 2012.

R2Dawg
08-30-2019, 01:32 PM
I wouldn't say that A&M has a great history.....at least not in the modern era. Except for JWS, they really haven't been that good. Resources....yes. Potential..yes. But history....I don't think so.

I agree but last night the announcers really tried pumping up TAMU. They really want them to be the next Clemson or Alabama. They spoke of all their tradition including 3 NC. Who knew? Hey, we have one NC but too scared to claim it.

BB30
08-30-2019, 02:50 PM
I agree but last night the announcers really tried pumping up TAMU. They really want them to be the next Clemson or Alabama. They spoke of all their tradition including 3 NC. Who knew? Hey, we have one NC but too scared to claim it.

Mond looked pretty good despite the poor competition. A good many of his throws were dimes under some pressure. If I were A&M I would be worried about that OL though. Texas State was able to get a decent push most of the night. They just didn't have the athletes on the back end to keep up.

At some point having a ton of potential as a program should actually show up in the results and up to this point it hasn't. If Jimbo can't get it done I am not sure it will happen. Now, that being said, I do believe A&M is trending in the right direction.

They just look better coached than they did at any point under Sumlin. All that is needed is a coach that will get out of his own way and let the resources work for them and Jimbo may be that guy.

Johnson85
08-30-2019, 03:14 PM
I can make this a lot easier. For each SEC team, score more than their season average points given up. If Bama gives up 15 pts a game in conference and we score 17, that won't be great, but it would show me that we are not uniquely bad against good defenses. And it will show a decent amount of improvement, because last year I think we scored less than every season's in conference points allowed while having a defense that allows us a lot of slack. If our defense goes backwards and our offense still improves enough to score more than average against each team, then that will be a good sign.