12 coaches have produced consecutive seasons of 6 yards per

[skyman]

Do any of ya'll know what you're looking at before you post?

This year, those schools averaged an 8-4 record.
Last year, those schools averaged a 10-3 record with some ridiculous high end talent running those offenses. Oklahoma State had first round QB and WR. Baylor had a first round QB and perhaps two wide receivers, one of which (the QB) was the Heisman winner. Houston had one of the greatest statistical QBs in the history of college football. USC was playing with three first round skill position players. WVU is playing with a first round QB and two of college football's best WRs. And all of them lost important games that kept them from winning big games. When you are telling me you had that much talent, and you went 9-3 with a bowl game win...that's a disappointment.

You can't have a super offense that is predicated on winning football games and then blame the defense when they give up 50. Your team is predicated on the other team scoring 50, hence why you developed an offense that could score 51.

There is kid-tested, mother-approved, time honored and successful formula to win football games at the highest level. Effective run game. Front seven defense and by proxy, stingy DB play. Anything else is window dressing and an effort to make up for a talent disparity because you can't make a team that does the aforementioned things.

****, Al Golden said as much in his final presser of the season. He knew his team couldn't stop anyone and would struggle on defense, so, he had Jedd Fisch go full ****** on offense. Cool story, bro, but that just tells me you know your team isn't built to win, so, you try and close the margin by doing what you can do on offense. That'll get you to a bowl game, but it won't bring you to a National Title.

See this is what I dont get, if jedd was told to do this, and then went out and accomplished what he was told to do, while replacing 95% of the production from the previous team while also being hamstrung by a terrible defense, why does Fisch get soo much hate?

Mind you I dont think Fisch is perfect or even close, but the way some talk its like dude isnt getting the job done. Yes he needs to improve in the redzone, yes he needs to be a little consistent with the run, yes he needs to chill with some funky play calls that he draws up but when he was hired and what was on his resume, I would say he has been a pleasant surprise for a young coordinator and he actually has miami offense exciting again. I am more encouraged by what I see because I feel he will continue to get better and learn as he grows. I liked what we did in '11 and seemed more adept to balance the run and this year he seemed to adjust and try to pass more. this is also with all new skill players. With the guys who have come thru the door the last 10 years at OC I am willing to take what Fisch has done and watch him grow. I cant sit here and blame him when its 3rd and two and our Defense is playing 8 yards off and say its the offense fault because they should hold the ball. Its the defense job to get of the field no matter how long we hold the ball.

Sky, that's where I think some of you are misrepresenting what is being said. It's not "so much hate" to acknowledge that we have to adjust. It's not "so much hate" to hope he adjusts. It's not "so much hate" to say "yes, Fisch is a talented play designer, and now we hope he puts it all together into an identity."

I can understand that then, I guess I just dont see how we could of done more, by running the ball then leaning on the defense. I guess we couldve tried the UF approach but I dont think we have the guys on defense anyways. We could run every down but at the end of the day the same jags our trotting on the field after we score or punt. But I respect what you guys are saying I just seem a little bit more bullish at the moment, Its been a looong time since recruits actually say they like our offense and I am just excited to see how it will grow as it matures and better players enter the system, heck we are a few pieces (collins, sandland, etc) from being redic next year.

 

[Larry]

Now you're arguing red-zone offense and philosophy. The argument is over the affect that fast-paced offenses have on your defense and the cases I presented above, dispute that they are mutually exclusive. There's no reason that you can't have a top of the line defense, with a fast paced offense. If Oregon had Alabama's defensive coaching staff, and defensive personnel, are you telling me that they don't win National Championships, because they are too fast paced for the defense to be successful?

- 2007 Patriots were the anomaly that got burned down when they faced a serious DLine. That's the type of problem Chip Kelly's team faced in the NC game.
- 2010 Packers are a poor example. They actually won off of defense at the end, were 10-6 in the regular season, and scored 10, 21, 21 (Super Bowl) in 3 of their last 5 games. When **** got tough, they adjusted. That's my entire point! That's how we need Fisch to evolve.
- 2001 Miami team is an incredibly poor example. That offense is not what I consider a high-paced offense and had minimal similarities to the styles referenced above. In their tough games, as I noted, they grinded it out.
- 2007 Colts? Seriously? They scored 24 points and lost their first game in the playoffs.

Outside of the anomaly that was that nearly undefeated Pats team (which they later clearly adjusted away from and began to rely on the run a bit more inside the 20s), I don't see examples of offenses (that reflect the names on the original post) that have had the success we're looking for without evolving their style for the big games.

Packers won the Super Bowl 31-25
Patriots weren't an anamoly...they just so happened to run into three of the best pass rushers in this generation on their best day...and it STILL took a hail mary to beat them.
'01 Canes didn't grind out a **** thing. They scored quickly and scored often. In the BC game, they didn't score at all, but guess what, the defense was there to bail them out why? Because the defense was an All-Time defense and their being an All-Time defense had NOTHING to do with what the offense did on the other side.

Once again, I'll ask you, if you the 2001 Miami Hurricane defense, and match them with the 2012 Miami Hurricane offense...are you seriously telling me that they couldn't be as effective?

I'm going to be real with you here: you were how old during the 2001 Miami Hurricanes season? Are you sure you want to comment about their style of offensive play?

To answer your question, if you put the 2001 defense and match them with the 2012 Hurricane offense, the result you'd get is that defense allowing a lot more points and yards than they should. It'd also probably get us a loss or two (VTech and BC).

13...and are you being for serious right now? The Offense scored TWELVE points against Boston College and ran 81 plays in 30 minutes, and threw the ball 41 times. BC ran 70 plays and scored one touchdown.

As a reference point, in a game that has been hotly debated for Jedd's playcalling

We ran 65 plays in a little over 28 minutes against Duke and only threw the ball 25 times...Duke however, ran NINETY FIVE PLAYS...you're blaming that on the offense? **** No. We can't get off the field on 3rd down and that's why the opposition runs so many plays. I would actually submit to you that our defensive shortcomings prohibited our offense from being as good as it could have been.

The offense had 15 possessions and 10 of them lasted under 2m.

 

[CyberCane]

If we are going to focus on the number six (6.0), then we need to focus on getting our Rush Yards/Attempt and getting as close to that number as possible. If we do that, our offense will take care of its self and that will help our defense out tremendously.

 

[bbcane]

anyone got the top for the 2001 team I remember something similar. scoring drives were averaging under 2 min

 

[Dingaan1828]

You can't have a meaningful discussion about whether or not we score too fast until we get a defense that can stop somebody. The defense is not on the field too long because of the offense. They are on the field too long because they can't stop anyone. Our defense is bad from kickoff to final gun, not because they get worn down. Slowing down the offense will improve the defensive stats by limiting possessions, but it will not change the results of games.

Improve on defense.

 

[bbcane]

LOL at scoring to fast. and being a problem.

 

[Larry]

Packers won the Super Bowl 31-25
Patriots weren't an anamoly...they just so happened to run into three of the best pass rushers in this generation on their best day...and it STILL took a hail mary to beat them.
'01 Canes didn't grind out a **** thing. They scored quickly and scored often. In the BC game, they didn't score at all, but guess what, the defense was there to bail them out why? Because the defense was an All-Time defense and their being an All-Time defense had NOTHING to do with what the offense did on the other side.

Once again, I'll ask you, if you the 2001 Miami Hurricane defense, and match them with the 2012 Miami Hurricane offense...are you seriously telling me that they couldn't be as effective?

I'm going to be real with you here: you were how old during the 2001 Miami Hurricanes season? Are you sure you want to comment about their style of offensive play?

To answer your question, if you put the 2001 defense and match them with the 2012 Hurricane offense, the result you'd get is that defense allowing a lot more points and yards than they should. It'd also probably get us a loss or two (VTech and BC).

13...and are you being for serious right now? The Offense scored TWELVE points against Boston College and ran 81 plays in 30 minutes, and threw the ball 41 times. BC ran 70 plays and scored one touchdown.

As a reference point, in a game that has been hotly debated for Jedd's playcalling

We ran 65 plays in a little over 28 minutes against Duke and only threw the ball 25 times...Duke however, ran NINETY FIVE PLAYS...you're blaming that on the offense? **** No. We can't get off the field on 3rd down and that's why the opposition runs so many plays. I would actually submit to you that our defensive shortcomings prohibited our offense from being as good as it could have been.

The offense had 15 possessions and 10 of them lasted under 2m.

So you're blaming the man for big plays and short fields? 3 60 yard scores

Self-fulfilling, friendo...then don't act surprised when the defense gives up 45 with ease. This team left the worst defense Miami has ever seen on the field for 35m per game. You are putting your defense in no win positions. For every Duke or NC State game where we won the game with big scores because our defense couldn't stop anyone (because we left'em on the field for 35m per game), we would stumble against UVa in the same kind of environment or, the few times our defense actually gave us a great effort, the offense didn't know what to do with it and continued to put them on the field when they couldn't convert (see: FSU and UNC games). This same mentality left our defense on the field for 37 and 39 minutes respectively against the lone quality opponents we played this year (K-State and Notre Dame) and we got raped without lube.

All I'm saying is, what we did this year, isn't sustainable and not a winning formula for success that Miami is aiming toward.

 

[Larry]

LOL at scoring to fast. and being a problem.

Football is a team game. Not a game of units.

You can't put an offense out there for 25m per game, drop 40 on a mediocre opponent and then cry poor mouth and foul when the defense lets up 41. What the offense does directly impacts defense and special teams. What the defense does directly impacts offense and special teams. What the special teams does directly impacts offense and defense.

You can score as fast as you want, but it does you no good when the defense comes back on the field 2 minutes later and the opposing offense drives on'em for another 4m for a score. Sooner or later, to use a chess analogy, you end up in a stalemate when you sacrifice a piece for a piece.

 

[bbcane]

LOL at scoring to fast. and being a problem.

Football is a team game. Not a game of units.

You can't put an offense out there for 25m per game, drop 40 on a mediocre opponent and then cry poor mouth and foul when the defense lets up 41. What the offense does directly impacts defense and special teams. What the defense does directly impacts offense and special teams. What the special teams does directly impacts offense and defense.

You can score as fast as you want, but it does you no good when the defense comes back on the field 2 minutes later and the opposing offense drives on'em for another 4m for a score. Sooner or later, to use a chess analogy, you end up in a stalemate when you sacrifice a piece for a piece.

DEFENSE. what was 2001 TOP . just curios or maybe not TOP but average TOP for scoring drives I bet under 2:30

 

[weownfsu]

The 2001 team scored very, very, fast. Part of that was due to the fact that they always had great field position unlike this years team. But the 2001 team could grind games out, convert short yardage, hold the ball for a long time if they needed to, etc.

 

[LuCane]

LOL at scoring to fast. and being a problem.

Football is a team game. Not a game of units.

You can't put an offense out there for 25m per game, drop 40 on a mediocre opponent and then cry poor mouth and foul when the defense lets up 41. What the offense does directly impacts defense and special teams. What the defense does directly impacts offense and special teams. What the special teams does directly impacts offense and defense.

You can score as fast as you want, but it does you no good when the defense comes back on the field 2 minutes later and the opposing offense drives on'em for another 4m for a score. Sooner or later, to use a chess analogy, you end up in a stalemate when you sacrifice a piece for a piece.

DEFENSE. what was 2001 TOP . just curios or maybe not TOP but average TOP for scoring drives I bet under 2:30

Are you guys really arguing that the 2001 team did not have multiple gears? The tougher the game, the more they downshifted. Against VTech to end the season, we ran the ball TWO times as much as we passed the ball. We ran the ball 41x that game. We held the ball for 34+ minutes or 57% of the game.

Sorry, it sounds like some of you were either too young or weren't playing close enough attention. That team does not fit in with the offensive styles listed in the original post.

 

[McGahee2TheHouse]

Unless he transitions the way New England has tried to, you are the same people who will **** when we can't win big games because tough defenses keep us from converting red zone opportunities. It's nice to have great stats and fly the ball up and down the field between the 20s. That's going to get Andy Reid fired this year. That has led Scott Linehan's Lions to a 4-7 record despite extremely good talent.

No one is saying he isn't a talented play designer. Most people are saying he needs to evolve and focus so that his style is as effective in the tough games.

No one is going to question that the names on there have a common denominator? Just how many crucial games have been won overall?

Funny that someone like Al Borges is on there, as this is a description of him:

"Al Borges has spent the vast majority of this year running an offense that was never sure of what it was or what it had." http://www.freep.com/article/201211...rdinator-Al-Borges-dropped-ball-vs-Ohio-State

The bottom line is that Fisch is talented. Fisch needs to evolve because it's fun to put 52 points on Duke, but most of us prefer to see 31 points and effectiveness inside the 20 against FSU.

If we're going to have a discussion about this, please don't reduce this to a "you people think Fisch sucks" vs "Fisch is amazing" thread.

The reasons for those teams losing has nothing to do with the offense and everything to do with defense.

That's not how football works. Identity affects the entire football team. Here's a challenge: let's name wide open attacks (that reflect the names above) that also had outstanding defenses. Feel free to use the NFL also. Feel free to go back an entire decade.

LOL at scoring to fast. and being a problem.

Football is a team game. Not a game of units.

You can't put an offense out there for 25m per game, drop 40 on a mediocre opponent and then cry poor mouth and foul when the defense lets up 41. What the offense does directly impacts defense and special teams. What the defense does directly impacts offense and special teams. What the special teams does directly impacts offense and defense.

You can score as fast as you want, but it does you no good when the defense comes back on the field 2 minutes later and the opposing offense drives on'em for another 4m for a score. Sooner or later, to use a chess analogy, you end up in a stalemate when you sacrifice a piece for a piece.

This is exactly what I was trying to get across in one of the many threads on this subject. People are looking at the offense in WAY too focused of a light. i.e. strictly looking at stats. What is troubling on the offensive side goes beyond that crap. The bigger picture is so much more important. A lot of solid points throughout the thread.

 

[Larry]

LOL at scoring to fast. and being a problem.

Football is a team game. Not a game of units.

You can't put an offense out there for 25m per game, drop 40 on a mediocre opponent and then cry poor mouth and foul when the defense lets up 41. What the offense does directly impacts defense and special teams. What the defense does directly impacts offense and special teams. What the special teams does directly impacts offense and defense.

You can score as fast as you want, but it does you no good when the defense comes back on the field 2 minutes later and the opposing offense drives on'em for another 4m for a score. Sooner or later, to use a chess analogy, you end up in a stalemate when you sacrifice a piece for a piece.

DEFENSE. what was 2001 TOP . just curios or maybe not TOP but average TOP for scoring drives I bet under 2:30

29m per game.

 

[Larry]

LOL at scoring to fast. and being a problem.

Football is a team game. Not a game of units.

You can't put an offense out there for 25m per game, drop 40 on a mediocre opponent and then cry poor mouth and foul when the defense lets up 41. What the offense does directly impacts defense and special teams. What the defense does directly impacts offense and special teams. What the special teams does directly impacts offense and defense.

You can score as fast as you want, but it does you no good when the defense comes back on the field 2 minutes later and the opposing offense drives on'em for another 4m for a score. Sooner or later, to use a chess analogy, you end up in a stalemate when you sacrifice a piece for a piece.

Baseball is a team game...not a game of individual players...right...

We talking about football.

 

[bbcane]

2001 ship. first three scoring drives TOP 18 sec. , .33 sec. , 3:04 min

 

[McGahee2TheHouse]

2001 ship. first three scoring drives TOP 18 sec. , .33 sec. , 3:04 min

Is this guy for real right now?

 

[bbcane]

2001 ship. first three scoring drives TOP 18 sec. , .33 sec. , 3:04 min

Is this guy for real right now?

have not read nothing but last page. I will assume this has been discussed multiple times.





exits back door

 

[mydas77]

The 2001 team scored fast but could RUN the football when they WANTED and HAD to. This team and offense could not run when needed because we never committed to establishing a physical style of play.

It is not about pace as much as it is about being able to be to dominate (and having the commitment from your OC to play a dominant style of football) when the field shrinks in the redzone. Another area a good running game comes in handy is when Notre Dame and Kstate keep their safteys so deep that you can't get over the top. The corners are the force players on the perimeter and you have to be able to take advantage of there only being 7 in the box with the safteys bailing. We did not have a talent gap against kstates front 7 and compared decently to Notre dames 7. We just had no commitment to the run and it got us blown out. No TOP and a crappy defense don't go together well.

 

[canecountry3]

Can someone explain why Miami can't have the same offensive scheme next year, and have an improved defense?

 

[bbcane]

Chicken or egg IMO Al said it himself score as many points as you can, our defense stinks. So running or commitment to run helps against nd or kstate. No. Maybe it could have other games but if you cant play defense what does it matter. So Virginia game could have been 21-20 with more commitment to run. Gt 24-20 us.