The Official "We Gonna Get Our Asses Kicked by OU" thread

OL coach.

 

If they got down to walk ons on the DL Id feel better.

 

My thoughts regarding the culture of this board and negativity:

As many have pointed out, VN is one hell of a sunshine pumping hive of scum. Many VN posters come off as uninformed, misguided, or just plain stupid. Almost everyone here was a VN poster at some point, and chose to leave because of this. This forms a kind of hive mind not unique to 8thmaxim. It's a circlejerk where you and the community around you defines itself, at least in part, on being smarter and better informed than another large community on a certain issue. Now, this is not necessarily a bad thing. We should all, after all, want to become better informed and smarter on issues we care about.

With this in mind, it's only natural that the rhetoric gets extremely negative. However, my experience here has been nothing but positive. When I disagree with posters I find that it's remarkably easier to have enjoyable discussions about it than in other corners of the internet. On VN, if you make a good point, you run a good chance of having a random idiot read your post the wrong way and then launch a handful of virtual feces at you for about 2 pages. Here, as long as you word your opinions carefully and back up your points, the chances of that happening are much smaller.

We have quite a few posters who have a very pessimistic outlook on our staff. They have reasons for that. To be quite honest, there aren't any tangible things you can take to argue the polar opposite of this point - that our staff is awesome and definitely capable of competing in the SEC. Because no one can argue this point, the discussion can become somewhat lopsided. But an honest debate doesn't have to be between polar opposites. Take this thread for example. On VN, you might see the "pro-Worley" posters trying to pump him up into something he's not. Here, the "pro-Worley" camp is simply arguing that he looks ok or good through the first few games, with cautious optimism about the future. Meanwhile, we have several posters who are very negative on Worley. In a different forum, this might attract someone to take the exact opposite of this view, mistakenly attempting to debate by running a mile in the opposite direction. Because reality tends to be just that - reality - there are rarely ever situations where such debates can be based on facts. You're not usually going to find sets of facts that can simultaneously support insanely opposite opinions.

Which means one or both sides won't have sound reasons to base their arguments on.

Which means the discussion will deteriorate in short order to name-calling.

My 2 cents.

 

Defense is very different.

 

No it's not.

 

I told you this last season. They were a smash mouth football team last year. Haven't watched this year.

 

It means your main method of moving the ball on offense is by running it down your opponent's throat,

 

But he was hardly a D1 QB last year, and this year he at least looks like he fits that part. It's better than nothing.

 

If I were you, I would never voluntarily mention that thread.

 

Why have defensive coaches?

 

Jancek has proven me wrong so far this season. I fully expected him to flop and he looked bad at times last year. I still can't understand why JRM wasn't getting more reps on defense, but this year the D has looked completely different. I'll eat crow.

There appears to be no rhyme or reason to the playcalling on offense.

Butch has been exactly what Tennessee needs as far as a face for the program.

This season is going be extremely aggravating. Tennessee's youth will show in both good and bad ways and until a QB gets here that can make all the throws, it's going to look ugly at times.

 

A team full of young talent is going to have inconsistency issues, which is going to haunt us all year. I like the pass pattern designs of the offense, but believe that we don't have a QB that the other teams fears enough to open up the run game for this offense.

Speed cures a lot of sins on defense, and we're finally looking to have SEC talent at positions. I've thought they've looked well coach and in position so far this year.

 

- description of Malzahn's spread formations http://www.collegeandmagnolia.com/2014/7/31/5947109/auburn-gus-malzahn-offense-formations-personnel

Chad Morris/Gus Malzahn Run-Oriented Spread Offense:

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/6/10/5782566/clemson-offense-chad-morris

*Some bold italics and underlines are my emphasis

The Chad Morris article also answers the question of whether or not the running spread is a smash mouth or not. Rather emphatically, I might add.

 

The only thing that still gives me an outside glimmer of hope for OC is that he turned the USU and ASU games into what amounts to a practice with interior runs and deep passes being called.

The bad thing is we can't open up interior lanes against Arkansas State and Worley can't hit a single deep pass. I'd wager he's tried 10 deep passes so far this year and either completely airmails them or underthows them.

Those underthrows are picks against any good quality Defense.

 

http://www.sportinglifearkansas.com/with-gus-malzahn-and-auburn-whats-old-is-new-again/

 

From the man himself:

http://grantland.com/features/gus-malzahn-offensive-evolution/

 

Malzahn's does have wing t elements- misdirection. Never claimed otherwise. The option/reads are all wishbone.

 

Because it originated from the Delaware Wing T, wouldn't it be more appropriate to call it a modern Delaware Wing T?

I mean, every offense has elements of some other offense*, but in this particular case it seems to me like the Delaware Wing T is his meat and potatoes, and the other influences are all the fixings, so to speak.

_____________________
*And maybe Indy can come back on here and make asinine arguments based thereon that there isn't an offense in the world that's innovative. I'd love to read another 17 page instruction manual on self-contradiction and sandy vaginalism.

 

Why is this again your response? Would me saying that defense is very different from offense -- which it is -- normally be a statement that leads to a conclusion that coaches aren't needed?

 

Unless I am mistaken, you are asserting that defenses have nothing to do with scheme. It's only reliant upon players especially players with speed.

Are those your assertions?