Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Slow Hand wrote:I hear you...but on the same hand does it make sense to build a new house every 5 years? When Bohl retires it isn't going to matter what he builds unless we hire another coach that believes in his system.
The spread wasn't successful here, why stick with it? Just because that's what the coach you just fired ran?
Bohl was hired because he was successful running his system. Why expect him to run someone else's system? Yeah we might have five wins at this point instead of four, but it also compromises the development and the transition to Bohl's system.
1. I would say that components of the spread were very successful here. Our point output was better than average, we just couldn't stop anyone.
2. Bohl shouldn't be expected to run a style that isn't his. I am not advocating that. All I am suggesting is maybe we should have went after a successful spread coach that could have used components of what we already had and perhaps made the defense better.
However now that we have Bohl, let him build what he wants. I am not advocating getting rid of the guy I am just offering a few counter points.
Slow Hand wrote:1. I would say that components of the spread were very successful here. Our point output was better than average, we just couldn't stop anyone.
Part of the reason the defense couldn't stop anyone is that they had hardly any time to recover on the sidelines between drives. That's where the time of possession comes into play.
Slow Hand wrote:1. I would say that components of the spread were very successful here. Our point output was better than average, we just couldn't stop anyone.
Part of the reason the defense couldn't stop anyone is that they had hardly any time to recover on the sidelines between drives. That's where the time of possession comes into play.
And so what about this year? They had considerably more time to rest and gave up roughly the same amount of points. Yes I know we played Oregon, Mich. St. Etc...but what about the other teams? They put up as many or more than they ever have?
Slow Hand wrote:And so what about this year? They had considerably more time to rest and gave up roughly the same amount of points. Yes I know we played Oregon, Mich. St. Etc...but what about the other teams? They put up as many or more than they ever have?
Depth plays a big part, especially when you lose half your starters to injury over the course of the season. And while there was a big jump in TOP (123rd to 27th), it still wasn't as much as it could've been, considering we also finished 82nd in 3rd down percentage (38.1%), down from 30th (45.2%) the year before. Our 3rd down defense also got worse, from 83rd (41.5%) to 110th (45.1%).
