sustain drives, if you do that, you keep your d off the field, and keep them fresh. And we have to do better on turning those turnovers into points. We were handed a bunch of gifts and we could only kick field goals. That may get you victory against MSU or Ole Miss, it won't against Florida and Bama. We have to put the ball in the endzone.
he didn't say we didnt need offense, he said we didn't need a prolific offense, and i would agree. we just need to score more than the other team. if our defense continues to play lights-out, we don't need to score more than a TD or two a game and a couple FGs. i would rather be safe than sorry, but i don't totally disagree with what was said.
If that had been working better Saturday night, it would have been a complete blowout. Posted it elsewhere but Tolliver and Shep each missed one in the endzone, can't put that on JJ. His stats would have looked much better with two more completions and touchdowns.
i'd like to see LSU get out there and score four or five TDs a game, but do you really think that is going to happen? i'm not so sure. it's not that i don't have confidence in the offense, i just don't have that much confidence. i think it's more realistic to expect that our defense and special teams will carry the team. if we continue to start with short field position because of our D and ST then the offense doesn't really get a chance to go on long drives. ending with a field goal is better than punting. btw, what happened to multi-quote? i'd rather completely revert back to the old style "tigerforums" than this new "tigerfan" if it meant the multi-quote feature would return. :redface:
I disagree, stats do tell a lot if you look at them in the right perspective. LaSalle is dead on. Our defense looks incredible but if the offense doesn't put drives together and give the defense a rest, you end up with games like UNC. In the 4th quarter UNC had 14 points on 4 drives. LSU had the ball twice, one three and out and one 3 play then fumble. This is what allowed UNC to be one play from winning the game. You want to talk about "IFs", then if we move the ball, UNC doesn't get an opportunity to win it on the last play of the game.
Well, if they keep getting the ball in AWESOME field position, then yes - instead of 5 field goals and two touchdowns, I think 2 field goals and 5 touchdowns are achievable. In that scenario. Certainly not every game. Not asking for long drives, JayB. I'm asking for a passing game that keeps even a short drive going. And I'll take the FG, but I'll risk a punt for a legitimate chance at a touchdown - especially with my defense playing well. I think I just established that it can still be done...:grin: See. Brett's bringing it back but we must remain patient...:lol:
Ridley had the first down, if he falls down, we go into the Victory Formation. Game over. In every game its "Ifs."The "Mustang" Defense, with the 3-2-6 alignment (Ron Brooks and Tyrann Mathieu as blitzers from the outside), did what it is suppose to do. Worked well. Chief has adapted well with the changing SEC offenses. I saw very few RB"s out of the backfield going uncovered. To take Bumphis out of the game was a major key also.
