-
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
Yes, but scheme issues don't go from working to zero. The SEC competition should make a scheme that has worked for 20 year "less effective" rather than "ineffective"
Other conferences don't have players on peg legs.
Oklahoma ran the triple option for years - until it simply didn't work anymore, the athletes were too good, and people knew how to beat it. So yeah schemes that have worked for 20 years, go from worked for years to ineffective.
Teams didn't adopt the 3-8 defense the way we have seen the last 3 weeks. Go back and watch 2018 Wazzu games on youtube, teams still attacked Wazzu and Leach ate them up. Also, the one on one tackling is a joke.
Can we still score against the 3-8, sure - we can occasionally still score. The problem is that teams know what we are running and they know what to do to stop it. We have to adapt. Every great coach does adapt. Hell Saban ran hurry up less than 3 seasons after saying the hurry up was a damn safety issue for players.
Now, maybe Leach is the one exception to the rule and he can bend the SEC to his will, I sure hope he is right and we are wrong.
-
Originally Posted by
HancockCountyDog
Oklahoma ran the triple option for years - until it simply didn't work anymore, the athletes were too good, and people knew how to beat it. So yeah schemes that have worked for 20 years, go from worked for years to ineffective.
Teams didn't adopt the 3-8 defense the way we have seen the last 3 weeks. Go back and watch 2018 Wazzu games on youtube, teams still attacked Wazzu and Leach ate them up. Also, the one on one tackling is a joke.
Can we still score against the 3-8, sure - we can occasionally still score. The problem is that teams know what we are running and they know what to do to stop it. We have to adapt. Every great coach does adapt. Hell Saban ran hurry up less than 3 seasons after saying the hurry up was a damn safety issue for players.
Now, maybe Leach is the one exception to the rule and he can bend the SEC to his will, I sure hope he is right and we are wrong.
We'll see.
I'm not saying your wrong and to reach our ceiling under Leach we will probably have to evolve and make adjustments, but I just refuse to believe at this point in time that the majority of our problem is scheme.
That explanation just doesn't make any sense when looking at Leach's track record. Oh, and the triple option has always worked and still works. Has nothing to do with Oklahoma moving on from it. Oklahoma likely moved on from the triple option due to the inability to recruit to it, not because it didn't work.
I just believe it's extremely faulty logic and a terrible bet to believe that Leach's offense all the sudden doesn't work anymore. In my mind, that just doesn't make a bit of sense
Good offenses don't stop working. The wishbone, triple option, I formation, etc would all work today if properly taught, but coaches much choose an offense that they can recruit to that also works.
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Originally Posted by
HoopsDawg
We will score a few points vs Vandy and Ole Miss. Then you can come on the board and tell everyone how great the scheme is and that we are turning the corner.
And I'm sure when we do start clicking on offense you'll tell that Leach made some obscure minor adjustment that accounts for the reason the offense started working
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
Good offenses don't stop working. The wishbone, triple option, I formation, etc would all work today if properly taught, but coaches much choose an offense that they can recruit to that also works.
The problem is that the evidence we have says differently. Defenses are too well coached and players are too damn athletic for these offenses to work effectively long term. Now some coaches like Paul Johnson simply refused to make any changes, and he lost at Ga Tech to a coach like Cutcliffe who was your classic I formation coach. Cutcliffe adapted and changed his entire offense to fit an athletic QB.
I was surprised he adapted, but good for him.
Good coaching can't overcome a scheme that the other team has figured out. There have been plenty of good coaches that didn't stop being good coaches who offensive schemes were figured out. It happens - just ask Nebraska.
-
Originally Posted by
HancockCountyDog
The problem is that the evidence we have says differently. Defenses are too well coached and players are too damn athletic for these offenses to work effectively long term. Now some coaches like Paul Johnson simply refused to make any changes, and he lost at Ga Tech to a coach like Cutcliffe who was your classic I formation coach. Cutcliffe adapted and changed his entire offense to fit an athletic QB.
I was surprised he adapted, but good for him.
Good coaching can't overcome a scheme that the other team has figured out. There have been plenty of good coaches that didn't stop being good coaches who offensive schemes were figured out. It happens - just ask Nebraska.
I don't agree with this. Paul Johnson was really good at GT for a long time. Just struggled to recruit to that system.
Good schemes don't get figured out. Not sure there is an example of that.
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Unless Leach gets a Qb that can and will gain yards with their legs this offense is middle tier at best.
-
People keep mentioning Saban changing his offensive philosophy- and he's a defensive coach. And his defensive philosophy has changed about as much as Leach's offense has the past 20 years.
Maybe our fans will be happy with a CEO coach that will constantly change coordinators to "fit" our personnel. Doesn't seem very sustainable to me.
Or maybe we can find fans that realize that sometimes things take a year or two to adapt. Very unlikely.
-
Originally Posted by
Brahmabull
Saban's system or scheme is on the defensive side of the ball. He has not really adapted or changed much there. Still loves zone coverage in the backend.
He completely changed his offense - even started recruiting different types of players to fit a more passing attack. He also had to adjust the type of defensive players he was recruiting to better defend the passing offenses.
-
Originally Posted by
bulldawg28
Unless Leach gets a Qb that can and will gain yards with their legs this offense is middle tier at best.
This is correct. This is the reason the Arizona is having success right now with Kyle Murray who is an average passer.
-
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
I don't agree with this. Paul Johnson was really good at GT for a long time. Just struggled to recruit to that system.
Good schemes don't get figured out. Not sure there is an example of that.
Yep. Lots of teams would still run the wishbone and triple option if they could recruit the right players.***
-
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
And I'm sure when we do start clicking on offense you'll tell that Leach made some obscure minor adjustment that accounts for the reason the offense started working
He will have to make adjustments to consistently win.
-
Originally Posted by
Todd4State
People keep mentioning Saban changing his offensive philosophy- and he's a defensive coach. And his defensive philosophy has changed about as much as Leach's offense has the past 20 years.
Maybe our fans will be happy with a CEO coach that will constantly change coordinators to "fit" our personnel. Doesn't seem very sustainable to me.
Or maybe we can find fans that realize that sometimes things take a year or two to adapt. Very unlikely.
This!!!
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
Originally Posted by
Cowbell
He completely changed his offense - even started recruiting different types of players to fit a more passing attack. He also had to adjust the type of defensive players he was recruiting to better defend the passing offenses.
Saban was quoted in a sports article this/last week saying that college football is changing and he does not like it. Saban likes a team with a dominating defense, that way his offense does not have to be perfect. This is the type of teams he has built in his HC tenure. Today, the change is to have high powered offenses that score tons of points and mediocre defenses. I "think" Leach is in the high powered offense mindset, assuming we can get it off of the ground, and out defense I think is better than average - not bad!
-
Originally Posted by
Extendedcab
Saban was quoted in a sports article this/last week saying that college football is changing and he does not like it. Saban likes a team with a dominating defense, that way his offense does not have to be perfect. This is the type of teams he has built in his HC tenure. Today, the change is to have high powered offenses that score tons of points and mediocre defenses. I "think" Leach is in the high powered offense mindset, assuming we can get it off of the ground, and out defense I think is better than average - not bad!
Exactly my point. Saban makes subtle changes to his defense and always will.
-
Originally Posted by
Cowbell
He will have to make adjustments to consistently win.
Ok.
CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG
Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More
-
All things being equal a “scheme” doesn’t win or lose a game. Coaching and athletes win games. As an offensive coach if I have good athletes and can coach them to where they know their assignments and execute I will win games regardless of scheme. Same thing goes for defense. When two equally well coached teams meet then the one with better athletes, better luck, or a combination of the two will win. It’s really that simple. Regardless of scheme or philosophy.
Right now we don’t have the athletes that can be execute their assignments so we are losing.
-
Originally Posted by
Dawgology
All things being equal a “scheme” doesn’t win or lose a game. Coaching and athletes win games. As an offensive coach if I have good athletes and can coach them to where they know their assignments and execute I will win games regardless of scheme. Same thing goes for defense. When two equally well coached teams meet then the one with better athletes, better luck, or a combination of the two will win. It’s really that simple. Regardless of scheme or philosophy.
Right now we don’t have the athletes that can be execute their assignments so we are losing.
What do you do when your starting and backup QBs throw 6 INTs?? Seriously... is that on Leach? KT? I mean CML can stress not to throw it to offending players, but there's so much he can do.
My biggest concern is that after 3 HORRENDOUS games, Leach is gonna trot KJ back out there. THAT is on the head coach!
Last edited by Turfdawg67; 10-27-2020 at 06:49 PM.
-
Originally Posted by
Dawgology
All things being equal a “scheme” doesn’t win or lose a game. Coaching and athletes win games. As an offensive coach if I have good athletes and can coach them to where they know their assignments and execute I will win games regardless of scheme. Same thing goes for defense. When two equally well coached teams meet then the one with better athletes, better luck, or a combination of the two will win. It’s really that simple. Regardless of scheme or philosophy.
Right now we don’t have the athletes that can be execute their assignments so we are losing.
A lot you guys still don't get it. Don't worry, that puts you in the same boat as Mike Leach. And he's making 5 million a year.
Jackie used to say it best, coaches put players in position to win games. Then it's up to the players. Mike Leach is not putting our offense in position to be successful vs the 3-8. Period, end of story, no other narratives matter or are correct.
-
There is another one coming who has not been mentioned..also, you cannot hire mike leach then blatantly question mike leach. The 3-8 is not his death sentence if it was he would have been done in 98. He has found his trigger man, and once he finds his trigger man he wins.
I wil say this as well, we may not win a game but we will be in shape and we won?t have me guys on the team
-
10-27-2020, 07:10 PM
#100
Originally Posted by
ShotgunDawg
This!!!
Saban changed from an odd front 2 gap scheme with big LBs to an even front quarters match scheme to match the offenses. He has adapted so has Kirby. You will see them in odd some he calls it his base defense but it?s not nearly as much as it was in 2007 -2010
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.