Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#2018846 - 07/12/17 04:44 PM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: dgless21]
KUCO_VOC Offline
KU1980

Registered: 05/22/08
Loc: Denver, CO
Originally Posted By: dgless21
Originally Posted By: KUCO_VOC
My point exactly A.H. Let go of MM stats that were from a different era. Use today's stats from today's teams to get the direction needed to improve on the dumpster fire. It's different today, hence CW is no longer coach...


Today's team hasn't played a game yet, so I don't understand how we'd use those stats.

Or are you pulling pace numbers from the spring game? If so, please share.
"today's" can mean modern era (2015-6) vs MM (2007-8). You decide which definition you prefer before spouting off unsupported "facts". Got a link on your rankings AH?
_________________________
Kansas football will rise again (Coach Don Fambrough style)

Top
#2018849 - 07/12/17 05:04 PM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: pizzanbeer]
dgless21 Online   mad
Local Deity

Registered: 03/27/05
Loc: Fuzzy's Taco Shop
I don't know which rankings you're requesting, so no, I cannot provide a link.

I do appreciate that you idolize me so much that you have continued using my insult. You even got lazy and abbreviated it. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I suppose.
_________________________


Hail to thee our Alma Mater, hail to old KU!

Top
#2018851 - 07/12/17 05:19 PM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: KUCO_VOC]
58hawk Offline
Wilt Chamberlain

Registered: 12/16/09
Loc: KCMO
Originally Posted By: KUCO_VOC
Originally Posted By: dgless21
Is that why we won games with Mangino? We ranked ~34th in time per play in 2007 (Orange Bowl), ~25th in 2008 (Insight Bowl), and ~25th in 2009.

We didn't slow it down then. We weren't more athletic than everyone. We didn't have more depth.

What happened when Gill and Weis slowed it down?
I'm sure the BG12 was all the same during MM's era in football at Kansas. All the same teams being ranked, etc. Right?
actually it was easier because there were two divisions so you didn't play everyone.
_________________________
KU Coach Naismith invented the game so you get to play it.

Top
#2018856 - 07/12/17 05:59 PM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: dgless21]
vmlb Offline
Wilt Chamberlain

Registered: 11/25/06
Originally Posted By: dgless21
Is that why we won games with Mangino? We ranked ~34th in time per play in 2007 (Orange Bowl), ~25th in 2008 (Insight Bowl), and ~25th in 2009.

We didn't slow it down then. We weren't more athletic than everyone. We didn't have more depth.

What happened when Gill and Weis slowed it down?


Do you believe we had inferior talent when MM won? Also less depth?
Who did we beat the OB year that had more talent and depth? Other then VT, probably none.

Top
#2018857 - 07/12/17 06:43 PM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: pizzanbeer]
dgless21 Online   mad
Local Deity

Registered: 03/27/05
Loc: Fuzzy's Taco Shop
I don't think we were more talented or deeper than the majority of the teams we played. I certainly don't think I would've thought that in the offseason leading up to 2007.
_________________________


Hail to thee our Alma Mater, hail to old KU!

Top
#2018861 - 07/12/17 09:53 PM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: vmlb]
KUCO_VOC Offline
KU1980

Registered: 05/22/08
Loc: Denver, CO
Originally Posted By: vmlb
Originally Posted By: dgless21
Is that why we won games with Mangino? We ranked ~34th in time per play in 2007 (Orange Bowl), ~25th in 2008 (Insight Bowl), and ~25th in 2009.

We didn't slow it down then. We weren't more athletic than everyone. We didn't have more depth.

What happened when Gill and Weis slowed it down?


Do you believe we had inferior talent when MM won? Also less depth?
Who did we beat the OB year that had more talent and depth? Other then VT, probably none.
I agree. AH can't produce any supports or links. We should just accept
_________________________
Kansas football will rise again (Coach Don Fambrough style)

Top
#2018864 - 07/12/17 10:24 PM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: pizzanbeer]
dgless21 Online   mad
Local Deity

Registered: 03/27/05
Loc: Fuzzy's Taco Shop
Top
#2018868 - 07/13/17 01:00 AM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: dgless21]
pizzanbeer Online   content
Max Falkenstien

Registered: 07/03/09
Originally Posted By: dgless21
I don't disagree that the defense improves with rest. The question becomes what is gained and lost in those extra 3.5 seconds that the offense delays and opposing defense prepares. It ultimately becomes a cost benefit analysis.

With the stats from last year for our offense and Meacham's TCU offense, I just don't see it changing much.



You agree that there is benefit in resting the defense. Then you say it becomes a cost benefit analysis but you don't provide any analysis. What is your point?

Then you say well Beaty and Meacham ran high tempo offenses last year so that means they won't change. However once again you don't provide any analysis of the offensive and defensive personnel they had last year compared to what they have this year. The position you are taking is too superficial to take it seriously.

I am not saying we never use high tempo offense. We should use it when it is to our benefit but not so much that it wears out our thin defensive secondary.


Edited by pizzanbeer (07/13/17 01:04 AM)

Top
#2018875 - 07/13/17 09:11 AM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: pizzanbeer]
dgless21 Online   mad
Local Deity

Registered: 03/27/05
Loc: Fuzzy's Taco Shop
The explanation, from my understanding, is that we are less talented than many of the teams we play. If that's the case, by slowing down the offense, it would seem we are taking away the offense's advantage by allowing opposing defenses more time to call plays and get in position. Considering how bad our offense was last year, it needed every advantage it could get--including those 3.5 seconds.

There is no clear right answer that you can identify from the stats that I've seen. You have to pick your poison. Give your offense an advantage and defense a disadvantage, or give your defense an advantage and take an advantage from your offense. There should be a pace that maximizes the overall output for both. It is above my pay-grade to determine what pace that is, but nothing that has been posted suggests a slower pace helps us win games anymore than a fast pace.

My belief about us not changing the offense is not an absolute, and I wasn't intending for it to be one. However, my thought process was this: Meacham has had success with his offense at TCU. He continually has a high ranked passing offense (see Keegan's article), and he does it with a fast pace. Why would we bring in a new, successful OC and ask him to change his pace/play style?

I think your last comment is fairly obvious. We should use the offense that's most to our benefit. Considering your criticism of my lack of analysis, where is the analysis that suggests when it is and isn't beneficial? How do you determine that?
_________________________


Hail to thee our Alma Mater, hail to old KU!

Top
#2018885 - 07/13/17 11:58 AM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: dgless21]
KUCO_VOC Offline
KU1980

Registered: 05/22/08
Loc: Denver, CO
Originally Posted By: dgless21
The explanation, from my understanding, is that we are less talented than many of the teams we play. If that's the case, by slowing down the offense, it would seem we are taking away the offense's advantage by allowing opposing defenses more time to call plays and get in position. Considering how bad our offense was last year, it needed every advantage it could get--including those 3.5 seconds.

There is no clear right answer that you can identify from the stats that I've seen. You have to pick your poison. Give your offense an advantage and defense a disadvantage, or give your defense an advantage and take an advantage from your offense. There should be a pace that maximizes the overall output for both. It is above my pay-grade to determine what pace that is, but nothing that has been posted suggests a slower pace helps us win games anymore than a fast pace.

My belief about us not changing the offense is not an absolute, and I wasn't intending for it to be one. However, my thought process was this: Meacham has had success with his offense at TCU. He continually has a high ranked passing offense (see Keegan's article), and he does it with a fast pace. Why would we bring in a new, successful OC and ask him to change his pace/play style?

I think your last comment is fairly obvious. We should use the offense that's most to our benefit. Considering your criticism of my lack of analysis, where is the analysis that suggests when it is and isn't beneficial? How do you determine that?
I have pointed to the slower pace as better, based upon the win/loss records of two pretty decent schools already.
_________________________
Kansas football will rise again (Coach Don Fambrough style)

Top
#2018889 - 07/13/17 01:54 PM Re: Offensive Tempo [Re: pizzanbeer]
Kman_blue Offline
Wilt Chamberlain

Registered: 08/31/08
Loc: Kansas
Pace isn't as important as getting at least a couple of 1st downs per possession IMHO.

I think we all know the advantages and disadvantages of each style of play, i.e. fast pace vs. slow pace. But if you go 3 and out taking the entire 40 second play clock per down you still only used up a little less than 3 minutes of game clock and potentially put your D on their heals. If you go fast and take about 20.5 seconds per down, but you also get 2 or 3 1st downs you get better field position as well as taking up at a minimum of 2 1/2 minutes or nearly the same amount of time as if you went slow and went 3 and out.

I think the KU O will have a lot less 3 and outs this year which will be the biggest benefit to our D and I suspect Meacham will have the O going at a quick pace. It may not be at a TTech or Baylor or OkieSt.(from a few years ago) fast, but I bet it'll still be near the top 1/4 of the country in pace.
_________________________
"If I went West, I think I would go to Kansas." -Abraham Lincoln

Top
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3

Preview