Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Tiger Woods Makes His 2012 PGA Tour Debut

Please no more OCs

I know we all love high flying offense and tons of points, but don't we love winning more.  When we were an up-and-coming program the only way to get relevant was to do something ridiculous, like throw the ball 50 times a game and try to score 50 points every time we went out.  We did it, it worked (see Redman, Chris), and people took notice that we actually fielded a football team around these parts. 

The next evolution of our program was a move away from a pass first to a "balanced attack" where Petrino implemented a power rushing game with our vaunted passing schemes.  The modification proved to be a major factor in our ability to hang with upper tier teams.  The problem was that although it was a change from the previous "pass first" offense we were still basically doing the same thing...trying to outscore you.  On top of that Petrino's teams always seemed to wilt late in games against teams that played hard-nosed D and like to hit you in the mouth (i.e. Rutgers 2006 and Miam 2004)

Mike Leach, Kevin Sumlin, Paul Petrino, Gus Mahlzan, etc. play that same card and will eventually get us the same result.  An offensive based program can win in the short term, but will lose the big games because we're just not tough enough to impose our will.  Long term sucess is just not sustainable and if we go with an "offensive genius" we'll just end up right back where we started.

I look at TCU as a role model for what we are trying to achieve here.  Just a few short years ago we were chief rivals in a very competitive CUSA.  We were the offensive juggernaut and they were the defensive juggernaut.  As the years went by we soared to extreme highs and due to our high octane offense and our TV marketability we became very relevant nationally.  Well, Gary Patterson and TCU stuck to their defensive gameplan and though they didn't experience the highest of highs, like us, but they also never dropped to the low lows like us.  Their defensive mindset kept them competitive all these years even if their offense wasn't lightin up the scoreboard.  Look where it has finally gotten them now.

The same could be said of a program like Virginia Tech.  Our old Metro Conference foe was never much to speak of until Frank Beamer and Bud Foster began their run as a hard hitting (and disciplined) defensive football team.  It is definitely true that they hit their highest of highs when their offense was filled with playmakers like mike Vick and Kevin Smith, but it was the defense that has kept them relevant for all of the years.

I guess what I'm trying to point out is the old saying is that offense may sell tickets but defense is what wins championships.  If we just want a relevant program that gets on national tv and get ranked high every couple of years when we have a star QB they sure, go ahead and hire an offensive guru.  But if we want to build a sustainable sucess then its time we changed our whole mindset and went with a defensive guru. 

We are never going to compete with the bluebloods, the Floridas, Alabama, Texas, USC, etc.  Those teams fill their rosters with studs on both sides of the ball, every freaking year.  But with the right mindset and a coach who is actively involved in crafting a big, strong, fast, hard hitting defense, and can recruit the south to fill his roster with those kind of athletes we can make sure that we never fall off the national landscape for very long. 

With that said, look at how well Charlie Strong has done his job as a DC and compare that to how well anyone else has done in their position over the past 5+ years.  I checked the stats and in those past 5 years Strong's defense has been ranked outside the top 15 only once and it was in the top 6 three times.  Oh yeah, and he's directing the top ranked defense in the country right now by the way.

Check out the stats.

These stats show that defense is the way to go with our next coach.  I don't care if we only score 10 points a game next year, as long as the other team only scores 9.  A HC with a DC background will mean that we will have a fighting chance everytime we walk out on the field.

Comment 16 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Defensive or Offensive guru, I just hope it's the right guy for this program.

That said, I like Strong as much as anyone else on the list.

I hate to assume things like this but I really think Strong will be the next UofL head coach and it will be interesting to see how he builds the staff. Also wondering if he’ll look very hard for a DC or if he’ll call the shots himself.

by UL is my hot hot sex on Nov 30, 2009 1:34 AM EST reply actions  

Everyone talks about Strong, I would rather have Muschamp

He turned around Auburn and Texas. Plus, he has Champ in his name. I disagree about the Miami game by the way. Hester broke huge returns and we dropped a pick. Plus, LeFors got hurt. That team was every bit as good as Miami.

by cardscott5 on Nov 30, 2009 2:34 AM EST reply actions  

Muschamp is Mack Brown's successor at Texas

Like Joker Phillips at UK. He’s not leaving Texas

by Centre24 on Nov 30, 2009 7:42 AM EST up reply actions  

He doesn't have a buy out

and does it seem like Mack is leaving Texas any time soon?

by cardscott5 on Nov 30, 2009 1:58 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

well they usually only do the coach in waiting thing if the coach is relatively close to retirement

So yeah, I would say that Brown will be retiring in the near future. When exactly, I don’t think anybody knows, but it’s close enough to name a coach in waiting

by Centre24 on Nov 30, 2009 8:21 PM EST up reply actions  

miami game

you nailed it. and if the staff had realized LeFors had suffered a concussion sooner the dropped pick wouldn’t have mattered.

by cbcard on Nov 30, 2009 5:49 PM EST up reply actions  

You also have to know your conference.

Brian Kelly has proven that the big east is easily won with high powered offense, year in and year out. Defense will win you bowls (and that’s the ultimate goal), but but offense will win you the big east much more quickly. So I agree with you for the long term, but offense is what will bring this team back to relevance quickly.

by CARD_G6 on Nov 30, 2009 2:46 AM EST via mobile reply actions  

good point

perhaps with Strong and the right OC, Louisville could do both. The change will be very refreshing no matter what.

by UL is my hot hot sex on Nov 30, 2009 3:50 AM EST up reply actions  

but defense and patience will bring the team back to relevance better

Let’s not get too hung up on getting “back to relevance quickly,” let’s just find a coach who will win enough of the RIGHT games to rebuild the program’s profile and win back the fans. Krag’s biggest blunder was alienating everyone: the players, the fanbase, the boosters, and what little football heritage we have (read: Brohms). And in doing so he never won a game he wasn’t supposed to win. His teams never played over their heads, never exceeded their talent, in fact he brought a few players DOWN to their talent when he got here. He probably cost Brian Brohm millions in the draft. As he begged for his job on Friday, did you notice any of his players jumping up to defend him? I did not. So when looking for a new coach, I think we ought to look for the opposite of that, whatever side of the ball we find it on.

by yawnz on Nov 30, 2009 6:40 AM EST up reply actions  

Card football 2010

Ya know what… I’ll be happy if the next coach simply manages to soundly beat Kentucky in his first season!

Grog

"There is no OFF position to the genius switch" - D. Letterman

by GrogInOhio on Nov 30, 2009 11:12 AM EST reply actions  

Remember The Orange Bowl

Louisville’s high-powered offense vs. Wake’s high-powered defense. Remember, that team shut Florida State out (@FSU) 30-0 in Bowden’s only home shutout ever. Whoever says defense wins bowl games is wrong. Remember the 2005 NC Game? Texas and USC combined for ridiculous point and yardage totals. It was like neither team had any defense. The trend has been moving in this direction for years now.

Do we really want a brand of football that features 3 yards and a cloud of dust, then hoping the D comes to play every week and can hold off the other team for 14-10 victories?

Gimme a scary offense and a decent defense. It’s unlikely Louisville will have powerhouses on both sides of the ball except in the odd year here and there when it all comes together.

I’m all for Strong coming on board… don’t get me wrong. His Florida recruiting connections alone warrant giving him a shot. I don’t think he’ll have any trouble putting together a great offensive coaching staff and bringing in some blue chippers on that side of the ball, too.

by CardsFanTX on Nov 30, 2009 11:25 AM EST reply actions  

We got shut out 30-0 @ FSU

And I’m not saying that I want 10 win games 10-9, its just that I’d rather do that than lose 45-44 consistently.

Also, like I said we’re never going to be a blueblood. We need to take our cue from the up-and-comers that have has sustained sucess over the past decade or two. Va Tech is concictently a defensive stalwart, TCU as I mentioned before has a hard hitting D, Boise St. has sustained their prominence because the D has begun matching their epic O (they were 3rd in Total D last year, btw).

by drhustle on Nov 30, 2009 12:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Offense-Defensive

I love scoring a ton of points but be realistic. In football, just like in basketball, there are days when things just don’t click. Great D will keep you in the game when that happens.

by cbcard on Nov 30, 2009 5:54 PM EST reply actions  

Yeah

but why do you assume that only works on one side of the ball? What about when the D is befuddled by an offense they can’t figure out for a half, or the entire game? It’s not like basketball really, because different people are playing the positions on each side of the ball. The problem with great D and average O is when the D takes a half to figure out the opposing O. You might be down a couple TD’s by then, and without firepower on offense, good luck. That’s the way I see it, even though I realize it’s a trade-off either way. I just think it plays a bit more in your favor with the stronger O.

by CardsFanTX on Nov 30, 2009 6:33 PM EST up reply actions  

I agree with this notion

And am for hiring Strong. But our defense is going to take time to rebuild. Being a good defense directly correlates to speed and depth. Our defense is extremely lacking in both of those departments currently. Strong’s defenses at Florida put up impressive numbers, a large part of which may be attributed to crazy talent but it’s his leadership and charisma that makes me want him as a head coach.

On offense, a new coach could have us producing relatively quickly. We have some good running backs, potential in our receiving corps, and an offensive line that will be more experienced. As for quarterback, I still haven’t given up on Zach Stoudt. On offense is where the most immediate improvement will come under the new coach.

by Centre24 on Nov 30, 2009 8:22 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


Managers

Admm_small Mike Rutherford