As if I needed more evidence...
...that FSU's defense sucks balls:
(via Tomahawk Nation)
Every single Division I-A opponent FSU has played this year had their best offensive game of the season against FSU. (Well, until USF bested its 6.3 yards per play against FSU with 6.4 yards per play against WVU last weekend. But those are pretty close, and WVU also lost that game.)
But remember, I'm crazy or stupid for blaming much of our disastrous season on the completely porous defense. Right. At least I'm not alone.
Also, if you read the linked post above, it is frightening and sad how completely out of touch Bowden is with the particulars of the game he just coached. The man has checked out.
(Though, I do not agree with the suggestion in the linked post that Bobby is going to start accidentally talking racist anytime soon. That's just silly, the man has coached hundreds of players of all races for decades.)
17 comments:
"Every single Division I-A opponent FSU has played this year had their best offensive game of the season against FSU. Every single one."
I question that metric. GT put up 56 points against Vandy and only 49 against FSU.
By yards per play, Tech had a better game against FSU.
Yes. I question that "yards per play" is as good a metric as "points per game."
Points per game is going to be necessarily dependent on the strength of the opponent's offense, so it is not as pure a measurement of defensive quality. If they other side's offense is eating up the clock with long drives, they will give you fewer possessions and thus fewer opportunities to score. Meanwhile if they are giving up a lot of 4 and outs, as I am guessing Vandy did, they are going to give you more possessions and opportunities to score. As you may recall, FSU had a solid offense against Tech and ate up a good chunk of clock with its drives, so Tech had fewer possessions than it probably did against Vandy. That says nothing about the quality of FSU's defense vs. Vandy's, though. It says much more about the quality of the 2 offenses.
I just checked the box scores and Tech's time of possession against Vandy was 7 minutes longer than against FSU.
Let's see. Nowhere did I call you crazy or stupid. What I did point out was you were incorrect in calling a 17-7 loss a "shootout" and saying that it was our defenses fault.
I think I even remember agreeing that I was wrong about the defense and they were definitely a primary cause of this disastrous season.
If you are going to put words in my mouth, at least try to get them close to accurate.
And Tech finished with a 5 minutes more time of possession against FSU.
Okay, maybe I did say what you said was insane. But it was.
I was paraphrasing with what I thought was obvious hyperbole. But yes, you blamed it on me not being able to see certain plays at the other end of the field, and called it insane, and just plain wrong, and whatever else you said...so I figured that could be lumped together as stupid or crazy. And it might be informed as well about discussions we've had about the team in person where you've gone a little farther than what you said here. (Don't know what I'm talking about, too negative, etc.)
So forgive me if I put words in your mouth, but I didn't get the impression at any point that you believed what I was saying was valid or reasonable. And I'm happy to see that others agree with my position, even if you don't.
You called 17-7 a shootout.
Fine.
You're crazy.
Shootout was a poor choice of words for that particular game, and one you may have noticed I have not reiterated or defended since. I'd like to think my opinions about the game have been fleshed out fully through our argument about whether the loss was the fault of offensive turnovers, poor defensive play or both, but if you want to focus on one word, go ahead.
Bobby blamed the Clemson loss on turnovers. As the post I linked to demonstrates pretty effectively, it was also the collossal failure of the defense that allowed yet another mediocre offense to play better against us than they have against anyone else. Sure, offensive turnovers at best take away our abilities to score and at worst give the opposition defensive points. But our defense is putting us behind in every single game, and the only question is whether we can pull off an offensive miracle to squeak it our, or if we'll self-destruct and lose. The ONE good defensive game we had, BYU, was also the only one in which we stayed ahead for the duration of the game. Our other wins were all come-from-behind (Jax St, UNC, NC St) where the defense had put us in a hole but the offense made things happen. This is why I think more blame rests with the defense than the offense for our piss poor season. And this is precisely why the selection of next year's Defensive Coordinator is so important and should not be left to a lame duck placeholder or someone picked by Bobby who has only a 1 year contract and will feel no loyalty to the head coach in waiting.
Clemson's "mediocre" offense averaged 40 ppg in the three games prior to ours. And one of those games was against Miami.
And turnovers do more than take away our ability to score or allow defensive touchdowns. They result in our defense being on the field when they shouldn't be. Many times in terrible positions.
I am not excusing the defenses performance Saturday night but it is hard to ignore the face that after being run on to the field five times (four by "Heisman hopeful" Christian Ponder) they were gassed and in the fourth quarter when Clemson started to pull away it showed.
The defense certainly bears some of the blame but so does the offense.
And I'd say we're at a stand still on the other as we are obviously using different metrics.
You say BYU was our only good defensive game because we were ahead the whole game. (So if the defense gives up a TD on the opening drive they've had a bad game?)
I say USF was a good defensive game because we limited them to the lowest points of any game excepting the Jax State game.
Apparently never the twain shall meet.
And a head coach gets to pick his coordinators or he's not a head coach. So what you're really saying is he has to go.
Or retire. Or die.
Yes, he should go. The administration should tell him that they think this needs to be his final year. We're going to miss a bowl game and have a losing season for the first time since I was born. It's ridiculous that he feels the need to hold on for one more year.
I don't want the guy to die. I just want him to stop killing my team.
I'm done responding to the rest of your points because you are deliberately over-reading what I've said. So there is no point in responding if you're going to resort to such tactics. Obviously I don't think the defense is awful if the other team scores first, and you know better. So I'm done.
Tit for tat. You consistently ignore anything that disagrees with your conclusions. But okay. I'm done to. As you said before, you gave up a long time ago anyway.
can we at least all come together and agree we hate the gators?
Of course, though I'm sorry to admit that in the past we have argued over who hates them more. (On account of I grew up in the era when the Hurricanes were the most hated, and this made me a young whippersnapper who didn't know that our true arch rival was and always would be the at-that-time-lousy Gators.)
Post a Comment