Did an up-tempo spread offense....

[Ursa Major]

His first actual season as head coach he was an interim for the last 7 games.

His second actual season but first full season with the team he went 9-5. His third actual season but SECOND full season he went 6-7 overall.

It wold appear that even good coaches can have early bumps in the road. ...

My point is sometimes coaches need a little bit of time and maybe some people should chill the F out and see how things transpire.

That's quite the spin. As an "interim" head coach, he wasn't an actual head coach, so it doesn't count. Seriously? You mean, he went 6-2 conference his "actual first year" and then the flop 4-4 was his actual second year, right? Then, by manipulating the term "interim coach" that means he had a good year his third year, instead of the bad year.

Have you surveyed how many coaches went in exactly the opposite direction after their first coaching year? Why not? It's not the records, so much, as it is WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED, and the fact that it represented a trend here begun in the first year.

Maybe you should stop spinning what actually happened this year and grow the F up. You know, just to coin a phrase for you. I generally enjoy your posts but when you need to turn asshole just because somebody calls you on a bad set of facts, well, good luck with that strategy.

(i.e. Holy shit, I misread your post. Must "ATTACK" to not lose face. Make up a ridiculous statistical comparison. You're an "asshole").

 

[dupuyer griz]

If anyone thinks that the Clemson offense has much more than 11 players in common with our offense, I think they are mostly incorrect. A vertical passing threat seems to make Clemson a far better offense, but what would I know they only won. Their defense shut down Alabama's offense especially after the running back went out. If he's still in Alabama wins by 10. I hope people are right about our offense, but what you saw last night was not our offense.

 

[BWahlberg]

His first actual season as head coach he was an interim for the last 7 games.

His second actual season but first full season with the team he went 9-5. His third actual season but SECOND full season he went 6-7 overall.

It wold appear that even good coaches can have early bumps in the road. ...

My point is sometimes coaches need a little bit of time and maybe some people should chill the F out and see how things transpire.

That's quite the spin. As an "interim" head coach, he wasn't an actual head coach, so it doesn't count. Seriously? You mean, he went 6-2 conference his "actual first year" and then the flop 4-4 was his actual second year, right? Then, by manipulating the term "interim coach" that means he had a good year his third year, instead of the bad year.

Have you surveyed how many coaches went in exactly the opposite direction after their first coaching year? Why not? It's not the records, so much, as it is WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED, and the fact that it represented a trend here begun in the first year.

Maybe you should stop spinning what actually happened this year and grow the F up. You know, just to coin a phrase for you. I generally enjoy your posts but when you need to turn asshole just because somebody calls you on a bad set of facts, well, good luck with that strategy.

OK 75, you got the table turned on you and you're defensive, I can tell. This is also the main reason why this board is mostly unreadable right now too. I wasn't intending to be an "asshole" to you, in fact my reply was entirely and 100% fact-based and I didn't call you names. Other replies were rude to you but based on what I've been seeing here since mid-fall you've dished out just as much as what's come back to you.

But for once, against better judgement, lets break down your post.

As an "interim" head coach, he wasn't an actual head coach, so it doesn't count. Seriously? You mean, he went 6-2 conference his "actual first year" and then the flop 4-4 was his actual second year, right? Then, by manipulating the term "interim coach" that means he had a good year his third year, instead of the bad year.

No, I never said that, in fact I said over and over His second full year as a head coach and then I pointed out, in fact, that he was an interim his first true year. No spin, no hiding, just the facts. I never said his first year as an interim he wasn't an actual head coach either. However take this into account, his interim year he was given no guarantee that he would return in 2009 as head coach until formally signed on December 1 after the season. That team that year was recruited by, designed by, and had the full install by then head coach Tommy Bowden. Swinney stepped in and did what he could to right the ship with what he had. You've claimed to have been a coach before, you then of all people should know that picking up the head job mid-season is a tough task and virtually impossible to just flip the switch to "your" system.

However that all said I clearly in each post pointed out I was referencing his second full season. I'm not sure why that's upsetting you so much that I'm using a real fact. Furthermore if you want to really hang your hat on his 3rd true season as his down year then that would suggest we should give Stitt until year 4, not year 3, to prove he can take this team back to it's winning ways. So pick your poison here, the facts don't lie.

Have you surveyed how many coaches went in exactly the opposite direction after their first coaching year? Why not? It's not the records, so much, as it is WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED, and the fact that it represented a trend here begun in the first year.

Excellent pivot and attempt to divert the discussion. No I didn't survey other coaches because I wasn't talking about other coaches, I was talking about Dabo Swinney. That's the subject of this thread and the subject of my post. You're seeking a wider and wider generalization until the point gets watered down so you can get your way. If I provided other college coaches comparable to Swinney you'd ask why I only used power 5 schools, if I used all FBS you'd ask why I didn't use FCS coaches. If I included all FBS and FCS you'd ask why I didn't use all college coaches. If I used all college coaches you'd ask why I didn't include NFL coaches. If I used all football coaches ever you'd ask why I didn't include Rugby coaches. I see how that works.

But for the sake of similar reference lets take a look at the last few FBS national title winning coaches beyond Swinney. Nick Saban, Jimbo Fisher, & Urban Meyer.

Saban: 6-7 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 10-3 / 12-1 / 13-1 / 11-2 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 14-1
Fisher: 10-4 / 9-4 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 13-1 / 10-3 / 10-3
Meyer: 12-0 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 12-1 / 11-2

Well gosh, each had little dips early on didn't they? Granted it's not 6-5 and end of the world freakout from fans but it appears that even the best coaches in the game right now show some early struggles in results. No I'm not saying Stitt is the 2nd coming of any of these three. However I'm saying he needs more time and it's pretty easily seen that other coaches have early bumps in the road too.

Maybe you should stop spinning what actually happened this year and grow the F up. You know, just to coin a phrase for you. I generally enjoy your posts but when you need to turn asshole just because somebody calls you on a bad set of facts, well, good luck with that strategy.

Again, I used facts, I clearly stated where they were coming from, and I didn't attack you. You felt the need to go a different direction. And with that, best of luck.

 

[UMGriz75]

Again, I used facts, I clearly stated where they were coming from, and I didn't attack you. You felt the need to go a different direction. And with that, best of luck.

I guess it was your gratuitous "grow the F-up" that was just a miscommunication; like being the interim coach was not being the head coach. Right? If I tell you "grow the F-up," how would you take it? Set the rules, play by the rules.

I'm sorry, but pointing to one guy that had a good "third season" -- in part by carefully manipulating his coaching title -- is statistically useless. It is absolutely meaningless, and you are trying to make something out of it. If I chose a coach, say Larry Donovan, and pointed to the fact that he went in the opposite direction, would I honestly expect you to say "oh, you're right. All coaches do worse the longer they are head coach because you found one that did."?

Seriously?

It's absurd either way.

The fact is, your example got better during seasons with the passage of time.

That is not relevant to UM at the present. Not at all. So, what's the point? "Using facts."

 

[kemajic]

This is also the main reason why this board is mostly unreadable right now too.

This board is perfectly readable unless you only look for convergent thought. It's not difficult to filter out the pissing matches that argue moot points.

 

[BWahlberg]

Again, I used facts, I clearly stated where they were coming from, and I didn't attack you. You felt the need to go a different direction. And with that, best of luck.

I guess it was your gratuitous "grow the F-up" that was just a miscommunication; like being the interim coach was not being the head coach. Right? If I tell you "grow the F-up," how would you take it? Set the rules, play by the rules.

I'm sorry, but pointing to one guy that had a good "third season" -- in part by carefully manipulating his coaching title -- is statistically useless. It is absolutely meaningless, and you are trying to make something out of it. If I chose a coach, say Larry Donovan, and pointed to the fact that he went in the opposite direction, would I honestly expect you to say "oh, you're right. All coaches do worse the longer they are head coach because you found one that did."?

Seriously?

It's absurd either way.

The fact is, your example got better during seasons with the passage of time.

That is not relevant to UM at the present. Not at all. So, what's the point? "Using facts."

Except I didn't say that.

My point is sometimes coaches need a little bit of time and maybe some people should chill the F out and see how things transpire

Are you so blinded by rage that Bob Stitt is this team's coach that you're not actually reading what people are posting?

 

[UMGriz75]

Again, I used facts, I clearly stated where they were coming from, and I didn't attack you. You felt the need to go a different direction. And with that, best of luck.

I guess it was your gratuitous "grow the F-up" that was just a miscommunication; "

Except I didn't say that.

My point is sometimes coaches need a little bit of time and maybe some people should chill the F out and see how things transpire.

You're right, you used the "chill the F-out," a far kinder expression of your personal frustration and certainly not meant to be taken "personally."

You used this example of coaches who needed "more time" and to which we should be comparing Bob Stitt.

But for the sake of similar reference lets take a look at the last few FBS national title winning coaches beyond Swinney. Nick Saban, Jimbo Fisher, & Urban Meyer.
Saban: 6-7 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 10-3 / 12-1 / 13-1 / 11-2 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 14-1
Fisher: 10-4 / 9-4 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 13-1 / 10-3 / 10-3
Meyer: 12-0 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 12-1 / 11-2

I think you and I have different "perspectives" on what "facts" are, unless you are agreeing, by using those examples, that Stitt was actually being "factual" when he claimed we were actually a 10-1 or 9-2 team. Well, OK. I think that one stretches beyond the breaking point, but to me, good coaches prove it quickly, even their first year, and I think I see it in those numbers but you see something different in those numbers.

I also see these numbers:
Conference:
Bob Stitt, 6-2/3-5
Saban: 1-4/ 8-0
Fisher: 6-2/5-3
Meyer: 8-0/ 8-0
Pete Carrol: 5-3/7-1

Add a few more:
Beau Baldwin: 5-3/6-2
Mick Delaney: 3-5/ 6-2
Rob Ash: 4-4/5-3
Don Read: 4-4/5-3
Mick Dennehy: 8-0/6-2
Joe Glenn: 8-0/7-0
Bobby Hauck: 5-2/6-1

I'd guess, with a bit more spot-checking, that a coach that proves to be ultimately successful wins his second season conference games with a 0.625 minimum average 90% of the time. In conference terms, I don't see Bob Stitt remotely comparable with your examples, as a matter of actual "facts." Your set of facts, and as expanded and examined in conference terms, seems to clearly show that success in the second season is a paramount criteria to anticipate continued success.

I'm still not sure what your point is, as it doesn't seem to take you where you apparently want to go.

 

[BWahlberg]

Again, I used facts, I clearly stated where they were coming from, and I didn't attack you. You felt the need to go a different direction. And with that, best of luck.

I guess it was your gratuitous "grow the F-up" that was just a miscommunication; "

Except I didn't say that.

My point is sometimes coaches need a little bit of time and maybe some people should chill the F out and see how things transpire.

You're right, you used the "chill the F-out," a far kinder expression of your personal frustration and certainly not meant to be taken "personally."

You used this example of coaches who needed "more time" and to which we should be comparing Bob Stitt.

But for the sake of similar reference lets take a look at the last few FBS national title winning coaches beyond Swinney. Nick Saban, Jimbo Fisher, & Urban Meyer.
Saban: 6-7 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 10-3 / 12-1 / 13-1 / 11-2 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 14-1
Fisher: 10-4 / 9-4 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 13-1 / 10-3 / 10-3
Meyer: 12-0 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 12-1 / 11-2

I think you and I have different "perspectives" on what "facts" are, unless you are agreeing, by using those examples, that Stitt was actually being "factual" when he claimed we were actually a 10-1 or 9-2 team. Well, OK. I think that one stretches beyond the breaking point, but to me, good coaches prove it quickly, even their first year, and I think I see it in those numbers but you see something different in those numbers.

I also see these numbers:
Conference:
Bob Stitt, 6-2/3-5
Saban: 1-4/ 8-0
Fisher: 6-2/5-3
Meyer: 8-0/ 8-0
Pete Carrol: 5-3/7-1

Add a few more:
Beau Baldwin: 5-3/6-2
Mick Delaney: 3-5/ 6-2
Rob Ash: 4-4/5-3
Don Read: 4-4/5-3
Mick Dennehy: 8-0/6-2
Joe Glenn: 8-0/7-0
Bobby Hauck: 5-2/6-1

I'd guess, with a bit more spot-checking, that a coach that proves to be ultimately successful wins his second season conference games with a 0.625 minimum average 90% of the time. In conference terms, I don't see Bob Stitt remotely comparable with your examples, as a matter of actual "facts." Your set of facts, and as expanded and examined in conference terms, seems to clearly show that success in the second season is a paramount criteria to anticipate continued success.

I'm still not sure what your point is, as it doesn't seem to take you where you apparently want to go.

Delete your account

 

[AZGrizFan]

I guess it was your gratuitous "grow the F-up" that was just a miscommunication; "

Except I didn't say that.

My point is sometimes coaches need a little bit of time and maybe some people should chill the F out and see how things transpire.

You're right, you used the "chill the F-out," a far kinder expression of your personal frustration and certainly not meant to be taken "personally."

You used this example of coaches who needed "more time" and to which we should be comparing Bob Stitt.

But for the sake of similar reference lets take a look at the last few FBS national title winning coaches beyond Swinney. Nick Saban, Jimbo Fisher, & Urban Meyer.
Saban: 6-7 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 10-3 / 12-1 / 13-1 / 11-2 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 14-1
Fisher: 10-4 / 9-4 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 13-1 / 10-3 / 10-3
Meyer: 12-0 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 12-1 / 11-2

I think you and I have different "perspectives" on what "facts" are, unless you are agreeing, by using those examples, that Stitt was actually being "factual" when he claimed we were actually a 10-1 or 9-2 team. Well, OK. I think that one stretches beyond the breaking point, but to me, good coaches prove it quickly, even their first year, and I think I see it in those numbers but you see something different in those numbers.

I also see these numbers:
Conference:
Bob Stitt, 6-2/3-5
Saban: 1-4/ 8-0
Fisher: 6-2/5-3
Meyer: 8-0/ 8-0
Pete Carrol: 5-3/7-1

Add a few more:
Beau Baldwin: 5-3/6-2
Mick Delaney: 3-5/ 6-2
Rob Ash: 4-4/5-3
Don Read: 4-4/5-3
Mick Dennehy: 8-0/6-2
Joe Glenn: 8-0/7-0
Bobby Hauck: 5-2/6-1

I'd guess, with a bit more spot-checking, that a coach that proves to be ultimately successful wins his second season conference games with a 0.625 minimum average 90% of the time. In conference terms, I don't see Bob Stitt remotely comparable with your examples, as a matter of actual "facts." Your set of facts, and as expanded and examined in conference terms, seems to clearly show that success in the second season is a paramount criteria to anticipate continued success.

I'm still not sure what your point is, as it doesn't seem to take you where you apparently want to go.

Delete your account

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :clap: :clap: :thumb: :clap: :clap:

 

[zirge]

This is also the main reason why this board is mostly unreadable right now too.

This board is perfectly readable unless you only look for convergent thought. It's not difficult to filter out the pissing matches that argue moot points.

agree, however, it would be nice if they all got transferred over to a Pissing Match thread. if i am feeling pompous, frisky to call someone out or for just being a dick getting down on someone on a non Pissing Match thread, i could just go over to this thread and work out any issues that i may have with them and not be bothering the rest of us..........who, incidentally, might be looking for something more.

there is too much disruption and ego checking and using your expression above, dialog that results in making/supporting an argument using moot points, has really lost its momentum and becomes uninteresting.

 

[casewinter13]

Without the best player in the college game, that D Watson guy, Clemson's gimmicky offense goes home a loser. How did he not win the trophy this year?

Without the best recruiting class in America, every single year, particularly on defense, that gimmicky Alabama defense would've been sitting at home [emoji57]

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[grizaremoregooder]

If order for the Grizzlies to run the up-tempo spread offense that they want to run they will have to be able to run the football. The Griz need to get better at the running back position and the offensive line. Calhoun, Rey Green, and now James Brown are steps in the right direction. I think the staff has also recruited the O-line very well in the past two classes and this will also pay dividends in the coming years. I love what Stitt and staff are trying to put together I hope they can get it done quick. And yes......An up tempo spread offense team did just win the national championship.

 

[IdaGriz01]

If order for the Grizzlies to run the up-tempo spread offense that they want to run they will have to be able to run the football. The Griz need to get better at the running back position and the offensive line. Calhoun, Rey Green, and now James Brown are steps in the right direction. I think the staff has also recruited the O-line very well in the past two classes and this will also pay dividends in the coming years. I love what Stitt and staff are trying to put together I hope they can get it done quick. And yes......An up tempo spread offense team did just win the national championship.

Exactamundo!

Just watched our record of the game, kind of as our own highlights ... until the last 10 min or so, where we went closer to game speed. 'Bama offense still had plenty of life, as proven by their last score to take the lead. And there's no doubt that the UA defense had plenty of talent out there (several NFL future draftees, for sure). But it seemed to us the up-tempo finally paid off there at the end. Yes, a couple of Clemson players stepped up on offense for their final game-winning drive. But you can probably credit some of that to the fact that key Tide defenders had lost a step (half-step?) of reaction time because of the pounding by the Clemson O-Line and the movement/chasing the Clemson backs made them do earlier in the game. That, I believe, is how that style is supposed to work when the matchup is close. Here's hoping the Griz can get to that point for the FCS level.

 

[GrizLA]

Dabo Swinney gave all credit to God. Saban blamed God for the loss. Both men were correct.

They would be far more correct in giving the credit to the incredibly good high school level football here and in Georgia and Florida. I doubt there is anywhere in the country where football is seen as it is here and it is year round. California produces great players, Texas, also but in sheer numbers, the SE must have the bulk of the best. Around heah, football IS religion.

 

[Alaska Griz]

Except I didn't say that.

My point is sometimes coaches need a little bit of time and maybe some people should chill the F out and see how things transpire.

You're right, you used the "chill the F-out," a far kinder expression of your personal frustration and certainly not meant to be taken "personally."

You used this example of coaches who needed "more time" and to which we should be comparing Bob Stitt.

But for the sake of similar reference lets take a look at the last few FBS national title winning coaches beyond Swinney. Nick Saban, Jimbo Fisher, & Urban Meyer.
Saban: 6-7 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 10-3 / 12-1 / 13-1 / 11-2 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 14-1
Fisher: 10-4 / 9-4 / 12-2 / 14-0 / 13-1 / 10-3 / 10-3
Meyer: 12-0 / 12-2 / 14-1 / 12-1 / 11-2

I think you and I have different "perspectives" on what "facts" are, unless you are agreeing, by using those examples, that Stitt was actually being "factual" when he claimed we were actually a 10-1 or 9-2 team. Well, OK. I think that one stretches beyond the breaking point, but to me, good coaches prove it quickly, even their first year, and I think I see it in those numbers but you see something different in those numbers.

I also see these numbers:
Conference:
Bob Stitt, 6-2/3-5
Saban: 1-4/ 8-0
Fisher: 6-2/5-3
Meyer: 8-0/ 8-0
Pete Carrol: 5-3/7-1

Add a few more:
Beau Baldwin: 5-3/6-2
Mick Delaney: 3-5/ 6-2
Rob Ash: 4-4/5-3
Don Read: 4-4/5-3
Mick Dennehy: 8-0/6-2
Joe Glenn: 8-0/7-0
Bobby Hauck: 5-2/6-1

I'd guess, with a bit more spot-checking, that a coach that proves to be ultimately successful wins his second season conference games with a 0.625 minimum average 90% of the time. In conference terms, I don't see Bob Stitt remotely comparable with your examples, as a matter of actual "facts." Your set of facts, and as expanded and examined in conference terms, seems to clearly show that success in the second season is a paramount criteria to anticipate continued success.

I'm still not sure what your point is, as it doesn't seem to take you where you apparently want to go.

Delete your account

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :clap: :clap: :thumb: :clap: :clap:

Good on ya Brint...not sure what I just read, but that was one of the more bizarre, wordy, nonsensical meltdowns I've witnessed by 75. I don't normally read through his whole posts but you really have to to appreciate the sad derangement and utter collapse witnessed here.

 

[Allezchat]

Great game last night....

Watson and Williams are big time talents no doubt about it. That said, I think the turning point of the game was when Alabama's stud running back went out and the true freshman QB was forced to shoulder more of the load. If Scarborough, who already had 2 TD's and was ripping off runs at 6 ypc doesn't get hurt, Alabama wins the game.

I think you are right. Not sure 'Bama converted another 3rd down after he left the game.

Plus, I wonder how much of an issue it was having Sark call plays and not Kiffen, who had been calling them the past few years. Sark, who has been an O-coordinator in the past, hasn't been calling plays in a few years. And then you bring him in for one game and its for all the marbles with one week to prepare. In an earlier post on this thread, Brint himself said, "picking up the head job mid-season is a tough task". How about o-coordinader with one week?

That's not to take away from what Dabo did. I mean, no matter what he's in the big game. And that's an accomplishment. I think that what you really can take from all this, is that it was all about Clemson and AB this year. The other two playoff games showed that. There was 1 and 2 and then #3 wasn't even close.

What I'd really like to say though, is if we are comparing Dabo to Stitt and why Dabo did so well. It all comes down to motivation at home. Have you seen Dabo's wife? Does Stitt's compare anything like her? I can't find a picture of her. I mean if you really want to get down to the nuts and bolts here and predict what will happen, it might as well get down to the nitty gritty.

 

[Buttegrizzle]

Clemson did manage to get first downs now and then, which is kind of a critical element to the whole strategy. Now with a mobile QB....

 

[Blgs Griz Fan]

If order for the Grizzlies to run the up-tempo spread offense that they want to run they will have to be able to run the football. The Griz need to get better at the running back position and the offensive line. Calhoun, Rey Green, and now James Brown are steps in the right direction. I think the staff has also recruited the O-line very well in the past two classes and this will also pay dividends in the coming years. I love what Stitt and staff are trying to put together I hope they can get it done quick. And yes......An up tempo spread offense team did just win the national championship.

Exactamundo!

Just watched our record of the game, kind of as our own highlights ... until the last 10 min or so, where we went closer to game speed. 'Bama offense still had plenty of life, as proven by their last score to take the lead. And there's no doubt that the UA defense had plenty of talent out there (several NFL future draftees, for sure). But it seemed to us the up-tempo finally paid off there at the end. Yes, a couple of Clemson players stepped up on offense for their final game-winning drive. But you can probably credit some of that to the fact that key Tide defenders had lost a step (half-step?) of reaction time because of the pounding by the Clemson O-Line and the movement/chasing the Clemson backs made them do earlier in the game. That, I believe, is how that style is supposed to work when the matchup is close. Here's hoping the Griz can get to that point for the FCS level.

It's great the up tempo finally took hold at the very end of the game. I personally prefer to see a team come out and take control of the game from the opening kick off then hope the team's offense scheme can produce a win in the final quarter of the game.

 

[horribilisfan8184]

If order for the Grizzlies to run the up-tempo spread offense that they want to run they will have to be able to run the football. The Griz need to get better at the running back position and the offensive line. Calhoun, Rey Green, and now James Brown are steps in the right direction. I think the staff has also recruited the O-line very well in the past two classes and this will also pay dividends in the coming years. I love what Stitt and staff are trying to put together I hope they can get it done quick. And yes......An up tempo spread offense team did just win the national championship.

Exactamundo!

Just watched our record of the game, kind of as our own highlights ... until the last 10 min or so, where we went closer to game speed. 'Bama offense still had plenty of life, as proven by their last score to take the lead. And there's no doubt that the UA defense had plenty of talent out there (several NFL future draftees, for sure). But it seemed to us the up-tempo finally paid off there at the end. Yes, a couple of Clemson players stepped up on offense for their final game-winning drive. But you can probably credit some of that to the fact that key Tide defenders had lost a step (half-step?) of reaction time because of the pounding by the Clemson O-Line and the movement/chasing the Clemson backs made them do earlier in the game. That, I believe, is how that style is supposed to work when the matchup is close. Here's hoping the Griz can get to that point for the FCS level.

It's great the up tempo finally took hold at the very end of the game. I personally prefer to see a team come out and take control of the game from the opening kick off then hope the team's offense scheme can produce a win in the final quarter of the game.

Clemson has 21 points in the 4th qtr. Ran 90+ plays. Not possible with a Delaney type OL or DL. I think we now have the beef.

 

[SoldierGriz]

If order for the Grizzlies to run the up-tempo spread offense that they want to run they will have to be able to run the football. The Griz need to get better at the running back position and the offensive line. Calhoun, Rey Green, and now James Brown are steps in the right direction. I think the staff has also recruited the O-line very well in the past two classes and this will also pay dividends in the coming years. I love what Stitt and staff are trying to put together I hope they can get it done quick. And yes......An up tempo spread offense team did just win the national championship.

Exactamundo!

Just watched our record of the game, kind of as our own highlights ... until the last 10 min or so, where we went closer to game speed. 'Bama offense still had plenty of life, as proven by their last score to take the lead. And there's no doubt that the UA defense had plenty of talent out there (several NFL future draftees, for sure). But it seemed to us the up-tempo finally paid off there at the end. Yes, a couple of Clemson players stepped up on offense for their final game-winning drive. But you can probably credit some of that to the fact that key Tide defenders had lost a step (half-step?) of reaction time because of the pounding by the Clemson O-Line and the movement/chasing the Clemson backs made them do earlier in the game. That, I believe, is how that style is supposed to work when the matchup is close. Here's hoping the Griz can get to that point for the FCS level.

It's great the up tempo finally took hold at the very end of the game. I personally prefer to see a team come out and take control of the game from the opening kick off then hope the team's offense scheme can produce a win in the final quarter of the game.

Clemson has 21 points in the 4th qtr. Ran 90+ plays. Not possible with a Delaney type OL or DL. I think we now have the beef.[/quote]

Based on what? I just don't see how the OL improves adequately this season. But....I want to BELIEVE.