True!! but as a GOOD head coach do you continue to recruit football players to fit your system, are you happy with winning 9 maybe 10 wins a season or do you try to switch to more of a pro style offense and solid defense to be the best in the sec? You don't see many spread type offenses being the best football teams to win the sec and compete nationally.
I still don't understand why you can't have a "system" offense that scores a bunch of points AND a killer defense that doesn't allow the other team to. Just a for-instance...would we be defeated, and would we still be dogs Saturday, if we completely swapped offenses with A&M (players, staff, philosophy, approach, everything)?
It's still a double edged sword because you score quick and your defense gets worn out all the same. I guess the upside to that though is that you scored some points. I like our offensive philosophy we just have to execute.
What happens most of the time is that alot of these teams defense actually look worse than they really are because they typically stay on the feld to long.....alot of times the great spread offenses usually score quickly, so when the other team mounts scoring drives their longer in time of posession even whe a team gets a stop, their offense may score in under 3 minutes than the defense is right back on the field causing them to wear down.
It becomes a mentality. Prolific offenses become the team identity when so and the defenses don't have a mindset like say an lsus defense. Where they know one score could be enough to beat you. That's why bamas offense is what we need and that will happen when mett lights it up tomorrow.
Would you then argue that LSU's defense is its identity? I would like a crisply-executed, efficient, ball-control offense (i.e.--what Bama has), and I know we don't have it. But I wouldn't trade our elite defense for it.
Of course and always will be under les. And the latter will happen once he finds a confessional. It's stupid to talk about trading. Even the second most conservative coach in Saban has adapted.
For the record, I would like a better offense. The "trading" part is just a talking point, as teams almost always lean offensively or defensively. Bama looks very balanced on both sides of the ball this year; we'll have to see for ourselves on Saturday if this is true or if this is because of their level of competition to this point.
But the other side to that is that quick-strike offenses develop a serious achilles heel when they get accustomed to the fast scores. If they become forced to assemble actual sustained drives, they lose their way and often can't produce. This is exactly what we did the WV last year. We gave them the short plays, but that knocked them out of their rhythm. odd as it seems, we let them chew time off the clock because we knew that we could keep scoring, and that's their weakness. They need the ball like 40 times a game to amass enough points to come out on top. That being said, Oregon seems to be finding a pretty happy medium with their offense this year. They are still running the razzle-dazzle, but they are driving down the field pretty methodically, and their defense seems to be benefitting from the added time off the field.
They are really good. We just need to create adversity and upset the process. Zachary needs to have a passing hand in that.
