A very telling stat about our 2012 offense

#1
KnoxRealtorVOL

KnoxRealtorVOL

First of his name
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
18,026
Likes
31,944
#1
12-1 Oregon averaged 40 points per game. We saw what they did to K-State last night. They are beast of an offense. And ESPN has been praising their "stellar offense" all morning.

Meanwhile. 5-7 Tennessee averaged 36.2 points per game against a tougher schedule in the toughest conference in football. I have no problem saying our offense was just as good, if not better than Oregon's.

Beating a dead horse I know but it's extremely frustrating to think about what this team could have been with a semi-competent DC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#3
#3
chatt-townVOL said:
12-1 Oregon averaged 40 points per game. We saw what they did to K-State last night. They are beast of an offense. And ESPN has been praising their "stellar offense" all morning.

Meanwhile. 5-7 Tennessee averaged 36.2 points per game against a tougher schedule in the toughest conference in football. I have no problem saying our offense was just as good, if not better than Oregon's.

Beating a dead horse I know but it's extremely frustrating to think about what this team could have been with a semi-competent DC.
Click to expand...

A semi competent DC would have had UT in a decent bowl game last season. A semi competent HC with motivational ability would have had UT in a pretty good bowl game last season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4
#4
chatt-townVOL said:
12-1 Oregon averaged 40 points per game. We saw what they did to K-State last night. They are beast of an offense. And ESPN has been praising their "stellar offense" all morning.

Meanwhile. 5-7 Tennessee averaged 36.2 points per game against a tougher schedule in the toughest conference in football. I have no problem saying our offense was just as good, if not better than Oregon's.

Beating a dead horse I know but it's extremely frustrating to think about what this team could have been with a semi-competent DC.
Click to expand...

There is some truth to this, but stats are often deceiving.

When the game was on the line, that offense failed to produce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#5
#5
Oregon averaged just under 51 points per game. It was K State that averaged 40.
 
#6
#6
Agreed, plenty of points for a very good season but at some point the defense has to occasionally make a stop. The same players, that were ranked in the top 30 in defense the year before, were run so far out of the stadium, they had to buy a ticket to get back in the game.
 
#7
#7
The moral of the story is if you are on the hot seat, don't bring in a coach to completely change up your offense or defense(Clawson & Sal). It does sicken me to think how many more games we would have won if we had brought in an experienced DC.Like the OP said, averaging over 36 PPG should translate into a 10 win season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8
#8
99gator said:
There is some truth to this, but stats are often deceiving.

When the game was on the line, that offense failed to produce.
Click to expand...

The only way the stats here would be deceiving would be to say Oregon's offense was better because they averaged more ppg. When in all honesty they didn't have the schedule we have.

Granted we had plenty of last minute chokes, but when your offense is carrying 95% of the weight of the teams success they were probably "failing to produce" because they were exhausted.

So yes I agree that they failed to produce when the game was on the line but I think it's stupid to say it was the offense's fault. Blame the defense for constantly keeping them in those positions. And no those stats are not deceiving, at least not in an anti-Tennessee way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9
#9
99gator said:
There is some truth to this, but stats are often deceiving.

When the game was on the line, that offense failed to produce.
Click to expand...

The offense had already produced enough to win most of those games with any defense at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
chatt-townVOL said:
The only way the stats here would be deceiving would be to say Oregon's offense was better because they averaged more ppg. When in all honesty they didn't have the schedule we have.

Granted we had plenty of last minute chokes, but when your offense is carrying 95% of the weight of the teams success they were probably "failing to produce" because they were exhausted.

So yes I agree that they failed to produce when the game was on the line but I think it's stupid to say it was the offense's fault. Blame the defense for constantly keeping them in those positions. And no those stats are not deceiving, at least not in an anti-Tennessee way.
Click to expand...

Obviously, for most of the season, Tennessee scored enough to win
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#11
#11
chatt-townVOL said:
12-1 Oregon averaged 40 points per game. We saw what they did to K-State last night. They are beast of an offense. And ESPN has been praising their "stellar offense" all morning.

Meanwhile. 5-7 Tennessee averaged 36.2 points per game against a tougher schedule in the toughest conference in football. I have no problem saying our offense was just as good, if not better than Oregon's.

Beating a dead horse I know but it's extremely frustrating to think about what this team could have been with a semi-competent DC.
Click to expand...

Motivation and Chemistry are important parts of any Team.....Those traits were missing the last 3 years...:clapping:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#12
#12
Boca Vol said:
Oregon averaged just under 51 points per game. It was K State that averaged 40.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I've seen 49 ppg through the last game of the regular season. Maybe I misinterpreted ESPN as saying they have averaged 40 ppg in the Chip Kelly era.
 
#13
#13
99gator said:
There is some truth to this, but stats are often deceiving.

When the game was on the line, that offense failed to produce.
Click to expand...

probably because they were worn out trying to keep up scoring with the other team since our D played patty cake all year. :eek:hmy:
 
#14
#14
strongtower said:
probably because they were worn out trying to keep up scoring with the other team since our D played patty cake all year. :eek:hmy:
Click to expand...

There were times in games that our defense made a stop only to watch the offense run 30 seconds off the clock and go 3 and out. While on paper our offense did some damage. They also left our defense hung out to dry. There is a huge difference in OR and UT. Mainly that OR has ran this quick strike offense for years and their D is used to being on the field again quickly. OR is one of the few exceptions in CFB on where a teams offense can strike fast and still manage to play fairly solid D.
 
#15
#15
AndyMizunogolfer said:
There were times in games that our defense made a stop only to watch the offense run 30 seconds off the clock and go 3 and out. While on paper our offense did some damage. They also left our defense hung out to dry. There is a huge difference in OR and UT. Mainly that OR has ran this quick strike offense for years and their D is used to being on the field again quickly. OR is one of the few exceptions in CFB on where a teams offense can strike fast and still manage to play fairly solid D.
Click to expand...

That's football though. Every team deals with that. The number of times the offense made the defense get back on the field in a short time, as opposed to the number of time the defense let the opposing team score immediately after we did and completely nullified what our offense did is probably 5 to 1.
 
#17
#17
chatt-townVOL said:
That's football though. Every team deals with that. The number of times the offense made the defense get back on the field in a short time, as opposed to the number of time the defense let the opposing team score immediately after we did and completely nullified what our offense did is probably 5 to 1.
Click to expand...

No thats not just football. While I agree that our defense was terrible. Our offense ate up 0 clock all year long to help them any whatsoever. The MO game is a perfect example. Our last offensive possesion of regulation we ate up 30 seconds. If our offense runs more time off the clock we win that game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
99gator said:
There is some truth to this, but stats are often deceiving.

When the game was on the line, that offense failed to produce.
Click to expand...

We have a longer winning streak than you do.
 
Last edited:
#19
#19
chatt-townVOL said:
Are you sure? I've seen 49 ppg through the last game of the regular season. Maybe I misinterpreted ESPN as saying they have averaged 40 ppg in the Chip Kelly era.
Click to expand...

They only scored under 43 once this year....until last night with a couple of games over 60.

Regardless, your point is correct. Averaging 36 per game should mean more than 5 wins...9ish at a minimum.
 
#20
#20
bristolbigorangef said:
Motivation and Chemistry are important parts of any Team.....Those trait were missing the last 3 years...:clapping:
Click to expand...

Not really. If Wilcox and Sirmon had stayed and just did as well as '11 then UT would have made a decent bowl and probably been in contention for the East for at least a portion of the season.

UT's O abused UGA. Even a mediocre D performance wins that game. The UF game was lost primarily on defensive breakdowns.

For as much disappointment as they dealt with, the '12 Vols actually held together pretty good until Vandy. By then the players knew the season was lost and the coaches were in all likelihood gone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#21
#21
AndyMizunogolfer said:
No thats not just football. While I agree that our defense was terrible. Our offense ate up 0 clock all year long to help them any whatsoever. The MO game is a perfect example. Our last offensive possesion of regulation we ate up 30 seconds. If our offense runs more time off the clock we win that game.
Click to expand...

BS. If the D gets a punt in 6 plays or less then that game becomes a huge blowout and they don't become tired. Teams didn't run over the D because the O scored too quickly/much. The D got run over primarily because Sal's system and play calling were terrible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
99gator said:
There is some truth to this, but stats are often deceiving.

When the game was on the line, that offense failed to produce.
Click to expand...

Agreed we abandoned the run too often in side the 30 and resulted in not scoring when we needed to
 
#24
#24
sjt18 said:
Not really. If Wilcox and Sirmon had stayed and just did as well as '11 then UT would have made a decent bowl and probably been in contention for the East for at least a portion of the season.

UT's O abused UGA. Even a mediocre D performance wins that game. The UF game was lost primarily on defensive breakdowns.

For as much disappointment as they dealt with, the '12 Vols actually held together pretty good until Vandy. By then the players knew the season was lost and the coaches were in all likelihood gone.
Click to expand...

That and the fact that Dooley said one of their "lower tier goals" was to get to a bowl game. By then I doubt they really saw a 6-6 bowl game as something to play for. They probably just wanted the season to be over. Again.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top