If it’s true, it cannot be remarkably stupid. If what he said is remarkably stupid, it cannot be true. I think facts demand one of those two conclusions.
We're 102nd in the country in total offense.
- Thread starter Flipflopsandsocks
- Start date
If it’s true, it cannot be remarkably stupid. If what he said is remarkably stupid, it cannot be true. I think facts demand one of those two conclusions.
Just try a little reading comprehension next time. I never said anything about our record or results. One thing is for sure, we are a potent offense away from Stoops being offered by quite a few tier 1 schools.
When you have the 102 rated offense year in and year out, yeah, I believe it’s a cause for concern. Thank goodness we’ve had some great defenses to counter it.
Oh I’m not defensive. You are. You’re always on here doing this. Defend the offense at all costs. That’s fine, just keep doing you. Just don’t get it twisted.
I think people get too caught up in the stats sometimes. They absolutely have their place, but when you're letting it cloud your ability to see the bigger picture then it becomes a problem. Like last yr.....we went 10-3.....and our offense didn't set stats on fire. I guarantee you that if we could've mustered more we would've.
Stoops has said again and again and again and again that the desired offense is flexible and balanced.
And we've seen this. When Barker started out healthy, the offense was more balanced. When he got hurt and we didn't have the personnel in place to throw it a lot, we leaned more on the run game. This yr when the offense was under Smith, we threw the ball a lot more.......when Smith got hurt, the offense changed to lean on it's strengths. We've seen this again and again and again.
We are not Bama. Our recruiting likely won't create an environment of cookie cutter offensive stats from yr to yr to yr. Our personnel is going to change......and so will our offense to match.
-If the defense is crap, expect the offense to be more ball control to mask the weakness and keep the defense off the field.
-If we have a good passing QB coupled with WR/TE's, we will more of a balanced attack.
-If we lack passing ability, we'll lean on the ground game.
-If the staff feels we can win more by going with a faster tempo....they'll do it.
-If the staff feels we can win more by going with a slow tempo.....they'll do it.
Stoops has said again and again and again and again that the desired offense is flexible and balanced.
And we've seen this. When Barker started out healthy, the offense was more balanced. When he got hurt and we didn't have the personnel in place to throw it a lot, we leaned more on the run game. This yr when the offense was under Smith, we threw the ball a lot more.......when Smith got hurt, the offense changed to lean on it's strengths. We've seen this again and again and again.
We are not Bama. Our recruiting likely won't create an environment of cookie cutter offensive stats from yr to yr to yr. Our personnel is going to change......and so will our offense to match.
-If the defense is crap, expect the offense to be more ball control to mask the weakness and keep the defense off the field.
-If we have a good passing QB coupled with WR/TE's, we will more of a balanced attack.
-If we lack passing ability, we'll lean on the ground game.
-If the staff feels we can win more by going with a faster tempo....they'll do it.
-If the staff feels we can win more by going with a slow tempo.....they'll do it.
A lot of people just want to counter every criticism with 10-3. That's fine if you think last year went as good as it possibly could have. Some think it would have been better with some kind of quality offense being run. We realistically could have been 11-1 and playing for the SEC Championship. We also were only a handful of plays away from finishing with 7 regular season wins.
The style we play leaves very little room for error. It would just be nice if we could get with the times and run a much more effective and exciting offense. Unless Beau Allen really impresses, we likely will still be mediocre on offense with Wilson or possibly Gatewood back there running the offense for the next few years. We are not going to get many quality WR's wanting to play what we have been running. Going to have to keep relying on the defense.
The style we play leaves very little room for error. It would just be nice if we could get with the times and run a much more effective and exciting offense. Unless Beau Allen really impresses, we likely will still be mediocre on offense with Wilson or possibly Gatewood back there running the offense for the next few years. We are not going to get many quality WR's wanting to play what we have been running. Going to have to keep relying on the defense.
A lot of people also, for some reason, want to keep 10-3 out of the discussion. Despite an argument that it could have gone better, Stoops and his philosophy on and off the field got UK to 10-3. No poster here can reject that fact. And, no coach who has a remarkably stupid approach to offense is going to achieve 10-3. 40 years under various coaches supports that conclusion.
I don't think this is an unreasonable take but:
- It doesn't take into account how injuries have impacted the offense (i.e. UK was throwing the ball 35 times per game after the SCAR game)
- Wilson > FR Allen in 2020 and it's not even close.
Any focus on our offensive numbers this season is simply misplaced. There is some legitimacy to the critique that the offense was too generic and less than impressive in the passing game even prior to TW going down. However, I don't think either Gran or CMS really want to run a horse and buggy show as a first option. We are obviously analyzing all of this without the benefit of seeing what TW might have accomplished this year.
I know everyone feels like enough patience with the situation has been demonstrated, but I still feel like circumstances have driven things in one direction, and we simply must wait to see what can and will be done about making the offense more effective in the passing game, truly balanced, and productive against even the best competition.
I'm good for now. The whole thing can turn on a dime. Look at LSU.
I'm certainly not expecting any miracles the remainder of this season. Face it. We caught a bad hand this season.
I'm certainly tired of the camp that wants to label our staff stupid, obstinate, or both.
I know everyone feels like enough patience with the situation has been demonstrated, but I still feel like circumstances have driven things in one direction, and we simply must wait to see what can and will be done about making the offense more effective in the passing game, truly balanced, and productive against even the best competition.
I'm good for now. The whole thing can turn on a dime. Look at LSU.
I'm certainly not expecting any miracles the remainder of this season. Face it. We caught a bad hand this season.
I'm certainly tired of the camp that wants to label our staff stupid, obstinate, or both.
LSU decided to change. They hired a passing game coordinator that had experience with the New Orleans Saints. They just didn't wake up one day and the staff change their whole persona. They brought in outside help..
This is pretty much where I am at. This year has had several factors weighing the scales down against our offense. We have played all but 2.5 games without a healthy passing QB. We have also played 3 games in poor weather.
I think it's fair to say that a healthy Terry Wilson probably adds about 75-100 ypg back on to our totals. Which would move us up to the top 15-40 range.
In my opinion, even without Terry our season should be much better if we had a quality PK. We lost the Florida game clearly due to poor kicking. The Tennessee game we could have at least had the option to go for a tie at the end with even a slightly-below-average kicker. And the Mississppi State game kicking cost us several scoring drives. We could very easily be sitting on 7 wins with 2 more games to play with just average kickers.
Let me start by saying I would like to see us pass more, not necessarily LB passing more, but having a quarterback that is a threat to throw the ball. That being said, how do you know playing a more open style of offense would have resulted in a better record. Perhaps the style we played is why we were able to win 10 games. Perhaps with a more high risk offense, we lose a game or two we won with a ball control offense. I think it's a stretch to assume we automatically win more games last year with a more open offense.
Also, I'm sure this has been brought up, but can't we also focus on the remarkable defensive job this staff has done?
They replaced a defense that ended up 21st total defense and 6th in scoring defense. That defense lost a generational talent, and a loaded secondary. And they replaced that and still have a team that is 30th in total defense and 22nd in scoring defense.
While the offense does tend to struggle.... we do play in the SEC afterall... the Defense has been a definite bright spot. And it's relatively young and should get better over the next few years. Definitely a reason for optimism if one were inclined to be optimistic.
They replaced a defense that ended up 21st total defense and 6th in scoring defense. That defense lost a generational talent, and a loaded secondary. And they replaced that and still have a team that is 30th in total defense and 22nd in scoring defense.
While the offense does tend to struggle.... we do play in the SEC afterall... the Defense has been a definite bright spot. And it's relatively young and should get better over the next few years. Definitely a reason for optimism if one were inclined to be optimistic.
I go way back in Cats history when we could score 50 and give up 52. Telling my age. NoDef was for the lack of defense we had back in the day. That doesn't hold true today.
My only argument about sustained success is that something like 24 of the top 25 average 30+ ppg. How long can you survive winning 17-14? The other thing is style points. Voters love margin of victory. You actually get punished for beating an average team by less than a score. If we beat more teams like we did Vandy in our 10-3 year I bet you we would of considered for pre-season top 25.
This is what I have noticed too. I remember seeing a behind the scenes episode on SEC Network, and he kept saying that over and over... “Run-it”...”Run-it”...”Run-it”. And this is what we keep seeing game after game... :-(
Ive pointed out our offensive woes are a theme Stoops entire tenure. I don't care about how we get more points, but its clear we need to do so.
I understand the philosophy of controlling the clock v superior talent. Helps even the field and keep us in it. But against similar or less talented teams it has kept them in games against us when we had the ability to put our foot on their throat by being aggressive for 4 quarters.
I understand the philosophy of controlling the clock v superior talent. Helps even the field and keep us in it. But against similar or less talented teams it has kept them in games against us when we had the ability to put our foot on their throat by being aggressive for 4 quarters.
You’ve always been a kid in poverty and get told you’re going to say Kings Island, does it matter if you go in a Ford Pinto?
Now imagine pouting and complaining about the car that’ll get you there, you’d be a little unappreciative douche that deserves the yo-yo toy you’ve always had instead.
I’d like a slinging, flinging, high octane, razzle dazzle, pimped out, 8 receiver set with 2 qb’s, score board touchin’ offense too. But winning is my priority and I can overlook how it’s being done because I appreciate what I never had before.
Now imagine pouting and complaining about the car that’ll get you there, you’d be a little unappreciative douche that deserves the yo-yo toy you’ve always had instead.
I’d like a slinging, flinging, high octane, razzle dazzle, pimped out, 8 receiver set with 2 qb’s, score board touchin’ offense too. But winning is my priority and I can overlook how it’s being done because I appreciate what I never had before.
Kentucky finished the season averaging 26.33, a little over a field goal short of 30 which seems to be a point of separation between good offenses and not so good. They gave up 18.44 per game which is definitely a good defense. Keep the defense and score an extra touchdown on average and Kentucky looks good for next year.
That is literally 98% of all football teams. Take the UT game, 2 more yards and we could have won it. UT 2 more yards and they would have lost it, works both ways.
Anyone questioning this is a troll or less than 20 years old, and likely chewing a Tide Pod full of fake rage on many subjects!
hell yea
some people don’t appreciate what coach stoops and co are doing right now that’s for sure
I think part of the issue is realistically the SEC has been WAY WAY down the last 3 or 4 years, and once it recovers I fear Stoops wont be able to keep winning, running an offense that's 102nd in the country.
The fact is teams with elite talent are GOING to score and if you can't keep up or take risks and be innovative on offense to some degree your simply not going to keep your head above water.
I think last year will solidify (in Stoops mind anyway) that the whole ball control and time of possession thing is the way to go and it'll eventually bite him in the ass.
That sort of "line up and go blow for blow" type of approach rarely works unless you have elite talent and once the SEC recovers.....i have serious doubts that style of play will be maintainable at a place like Kentucky due to the talent (and more importantly) depth gap between us and the rest of the SEC (minus vandy)
TOP is a flawed stat for success. You naturally are going to be a little better with ToP just because you run ball with the lead to kill time later in the games, but it's not sign of guaranteed success.
Only three teams in the top 10 are in the top 30 for TOP (Utah, Georgia, Wisconsin). Clemson and OSU are 30+. LSU and Florida 70+, Penn St. 100+, Baylor 90+, and Oklahoma 50+.
It all comes down to putting it in the end zone the most times regardless of how it is done.
Well, duh. Just like overall offense rating........etc, etc. Any single piece of the picture doesn't tell the tale.
But when you're a one dimensional offense that can only rush........and are pinning your hopes to a converted WR turned QB and a ball control offense.......it carries a lot of weight.
True . I'm not arguing that. Just that TOP and most rushing yards are just as much a product of teams playing with leads as it is on the field success. Scoring points regardless of how it's done is far more important than TOP.
Honestly I'm giving them a pass this season.
We had a WR............as QB.
I actually think we did a good job on offense playing to the strengths that we had.
We had a WR............as QB.
I actually think we did a good job on offense playing to the strengths that we had.
Well, kinda. If a team is ultra-efficient.....let's say monopolizes the TOP and scores TD's on nearly every possession......they could average only 24 pts a game which isn't a lot and still have a killer season. Or on the flip side, let's say you have someone that has a wicked scoring offense but is not good at TOP......it's possible that a team could average 35 pts/game and have a poor season.
It all matters......quite a bit.
So what you are saying is that the Coaches are not idiots about football and don't need us? Nah, can't be true
Similar threads
