Defense wins championships

[Cinco de Hogo]

You hear this a lot and of course the 1964 team had a great defense.

Other than that year have we had more or less instances were we had a better year with a great defense vs a great offense.

Obviously we haven't put both together at the same time to the tune of a championship.

I'm just interested in opinions about Arkansas ability to field a great offense vs a great defense.  I understand we would like to have both at the same time.

[azhog10]

You hear this a lot and of course the 1964 team had a great defense.

Other than that year have we had more or less instances were we had a better year with a great defense vs a great offense.

Obviously we haven't put both together at the same time to the tune of a championship.

I'm just interested in opinions about Arkansas ability to field a great offense vs a great defense.  I understand we would like to have both at the same time.

What was it, two years ago, we had a really good defense, but not much offensively. BA was still  finding new ways to lose games at the end but our defense really turned it on about three games in.

[Hardcore Hoggy]

It's pretty clear that in order to win the SEC, you MUST have a defense that is capable of winning the 10-3 type ball game on any given Saturday

But, obviously you can't win if you can't score, so I'd suggest you must excel at both in today's SEC

[Cinco de Hogo]

I would like to see a year where we put it together but it seem like in recent history all of our better years have been accomplished with a great offense.

[rzrbackramsfan]

What was it, two years ago, we had a really good defense, but not much offensively. BA was still  finding new ways to lose games at the end but our defense really turned it on about three games in.

Yes that defense was sick.  Spaight really made that defense go in my opinion.  He was like a great shot blocker.  Even if he didn't blow up a running play he altered the other teams running play.  It was good having tevin Mitchell in the slot too along with flowers and Philon.

[hogsanity]

Yes that defense was sick.  Spaight really made that defense go in my opinion.  He was like a great shot blocker.  Even if he didn't blow up a running play he altered the other teams running play.  It was good having tevin Mitchell in the slot too along with flowers and Philon.

That defense also benefitted greatly from the back half of the schedule being against teams that were not nearly the offensive teams the Hogs faced the 1st part of the year. Auburn put up points and yards in the opener. A&M hit big plays late.

LSU was atrocious offensively, old misses had its hear ripped out and lost their best playmaker the week or so before and played a totally uninspired game against the Hogs. Mizzu wore down the Hog D late.

That D was good, but people tend to look at the end of the season and it looks better than it was.

They have not had the db's or overall depth to field anything close to a championship D in quite a while. 

[Pig in the Pokey]

BALANCE wins championships...

[The Kig]

Defensive dominance is becoming a much more difficult proposition than in the past.  Primarily because of the diversity of Offensive schemes being run require different personnel sets in addition to the designed fatigue goal of HUNH. 

It's hard to build your core philosophy around stopping power run oriented teams (bigger LB's & Safeties) like Arkansas, LSU and Bama... while also still being completely proficient with stopping the spread/HUNH (smaller LBs, different primary packages like Nickel/Dime) teams like A&M, MSU, Old Mrs and Barn.  All of that is just to run the gauntlet of the SEC-West. 

Offensive production is definitely up and more teams seem to be trying to hit the quick homerun.  A good clock-churning offense IS a good defense, which I believe favors teams with balance. But having said that, winning championships still comes down to being able to make critical stops in games.   For as high a scoring game as the Bama/Clemson game was, I still remember some remarkable defensive plays (mostly by Clemson) on both sides of the ball.

[Hardcore Hoggy]

Defensive dominance is becoming a much more difficult proposition than in the past.  Primarily because of the diversity of Offensive schemes being run require different personnel sets in addition to the designed fatigue goal of HUNH. 

It's hard to build your core philosophy around stopping power run oriented teams (bigger LB's & Safeties) like Arkansas, LSU and Bama... while also still being completely proficient with stopping the spread/HUNH (smaller LBs, different primary packages like Nickel/Dime) teams like A&M, MSU, Old Mrs and Barn.  All of that is just to run the gauntlet of the SEC-West. 

Offensive production is definitely up and more teams seem to be trying to hit the quick homerun.  A good clock-churning offense IS a good defense, which I believe favors teams with balance. But having said that, winning championships still comes down to being able to make critical stops in games.   For as high a scoring game as the Bama/Clemson game was, I still remember some remarkable defensive plays (mostly by Clemson) on both sides of the ball.

e
Even Nick Saban recognizes that fact, and said as much in a preseason press conference last year.

[Pig in the Pokey]

e
Even Nick Saban recognizes that fact, and said as much in a preseason press conference last year.

the defense is still a factor in a shoot-out , too.

[wildturkey8]

Most championship teams are pretty good at both. 

[hoghevn]

Defensive dominance is becoming a much more difficult proposition than in the past.  Primarily because of the diversity of Offensive schemes being run require different personnel sets in addition to the designed fatigue goal of HUNH. 

It's hard to build your core philosophy around stopping power run oriented teams (bigger LB's & Safeties) like Arkansas, LSU and Bama... while also still being completely proficient with stopping the spread/HUNH (smaller LBs, different primary packages like Nickel/Dime) teams like A&M, MSU, Old Mrs and Barn.  All of that is just to run the gauntlet of the SEC-West. 

Offensive production is definitely up and more teams seem to be trying to hit the quick homerun.  A good clock-churning offense IS a good defense, which I believe favors teams with balance. But having said that, winning championships still comes down to being able to make critical stops in games.   For as high a scoring game as the Bama/Clemson game was, I still remember some remarkable defensive plays (mostly by Clemson) on both sides of the ball.

Great analysis.

I just remember being so FRUSTRATED under Broyles and most of the others, especially Nutt.  Having a great or really good defense and NEVER being able to score touchdowns when we really needed them.  We would get close and have to kick field-goals; even against mediocre teams.  The times we won games were when we could score.  A great "D" is NECESSSARY.  HOWEVER, in our past all we've EVER talked about or focused on from a coaching perspective was having a great "D" and let the offense just do what it can.  IT TAKES BOTH, IT TAKES BOTH I tell ya!!!! - That's why I LOVE Coach "B's" balanced approach.  Our run game was weak last year and he didn't hesitate to air it out.  He seems to do what he needs to at that moment to win.  I wasn't a huge fan, but Petrino won more than Nutt or any other coach we've had besides Broyles back in the 60's....  I really believe coach "B" will get us there, FINALLY, we're actually striving for being balanced.

This  "It takes Defense to win championships" comment is used to take attention off of our horrible or lack of offense and horrible record.

[Hardcore Hoggy]

Great analysis.

I just remember being so FRUSTRATED under Broyles and most of the others, especially Nutt.  Having a great or really good defense and NEVER being able to score touchdowns when we really needed them.  We would get close and have to kick field-goals; even against mediocre teams.  The times we won games were when we could score.  A great "D" is NECESSSARY.  HOWEVER, in our past all we've EVER talked about or focused on from a coaching perspective was having a great "D" and let the offense just do what it can.  IT TAKES BOTH, IT TAKES BOTH I tell ya!!!! - That's why I LOVE Coach "B's" balanced approach.  Our run game was weak last year and he didn't hesitate to air it out.  He seems to do what he needs to at that moment to win.  I wasn't a huge fan, but Petrino won more than Nutt or any other coach we've had besides Broyles back in the 60's....  I really believe coach "B" will get us there, FINALLY, we're actually striving for being balanced.

This  "It takes Defense to win championships" comment is used to take attention off of our horrible or lack of offense and horrible record.

To me it hasn't seemed to matter offense or defense, it seems like we've seen it on both sides,  big game with a lot on the line and we have seen where we haven't been able to score AND we've seen times where our defense just couldn't stop anyone.

Even if we never win an SECCG I just want one season where I can look back and say, we may not have won them all, but the ones we lost were simply b/c the other team won, not b/c we imploded on offense OR defense, OR ST for that matter.

[12247]

I think we implode when our abilities start getting stretched out to the point of our talent and depth limits.  When players and coaches start trying to do things they are just not capable of doing, we usually screw up.  I do not believe we have had a championship D or O maybe since the 80s if then.  2006 was close but the coaching fell far short.

[ChitownHawg]

What was it, two years ago, we had a really good defense, but not much offensively. BA was still  finding new ways to lose games at the end but our defense really turned it on about three games in.

Yep how dare he have an injury. Blame the coaches for playing an injured QB, but that wasn't BA's fault. Earlier in the season and you have a point.

[nwahogfan1]

You hear this a lot and of course the 1964 team had a great defense.

Other than that year have we had more or less instances were we had a better year with a great defense vs a great offense.

Obviously we haven't put both together at the same time to the tune of a championship.

I'm just interested in opinions about Arkansas ability to field a great offense vs a great defense.  I understand we would like to have both at the same time.

I agree.   We hold everyone under 20 PPG and I bet we win 10 games next year. 

[Cinco de Hogo]

A lot of good input but not what I was looking for exactly.

Over the years have we won more because we had a good to great offense

Or

Have we won more games because we had a good to great defense

You can explain why you think that is.

[Cinco de Hogo]

I agree.   We hold everyone under 20 PPG and I bet we win 10 games next year.

Because you are pretty sure our offense can score more than that on ten teams right? 😊

[MuskogeeHogFan]

A lot of good input but not what I was looking for exactly.

Over the years have we won more because we had a good to great offense

Or

Have we won more games because we had a good to great defense

You can explain why you think that is.

Do you mean "ever" or just since Bobby Petrino was hired? Yes, this is a loaded question for those who still cling to the thought process that the "high powered, throw it all over the field type of offense" is the only way to go.

[Cinco de Hogo]

Do you mean "ever" or just since Bobby Petrino was hired? Yes, this is a loaded question for those who still cling to the thought process that the "high powered, throw it all over the field type of offense" is the only way to go.

"Ever"

Four year isn't a big enough sample.

This isn't about a coach or even a system, you can score with any offense and you can stop any offense with a great defense.  It's about the combination Arkansas can or has put on the field.

[Hardcore Hoggy]

"Ever"

Four year isn't a big enough sample.

This isn't about a coach or even a system, you can score with any offense and you can stop any offense with a great defense.  It's about the combination Arkansas can or has put on the field.

The answer is defense. Specifically the DL. Have we had a decent season in which we didn't have a particularly good defensive line? That is usually the difference between us and whomever wins the SECW. They have a better, deeper DL.

[Biggus Piggus]

A lot of good input but not what I was looking for exactly.

Over the years have we won more because we had a good to great offense

Or

Have we won more games because we had a good to great defense

You can explain why you think that is.

Points allowed per game in seasons when Arkansas won at least 10 games:

1964 - 5.8 ppg
1965 - 10.7 ppg
1968 - 17.2 ppg
1975 - 10.3 ppg
1977 - 8.4 ppg
1979 - 11.0 ppg
1988 - 15.8 ppg
1989 - 19.2 ppg
2006 - 18.3 ppg
2011 - 22.2 ppg

The 2014 defense allowed 19.2 ppg. Had that defense been present in 2015, Arkansas would have been an SEC title contender.

[azhog10]

Yep how dare he have an injury. Blame the coaches for playing an injured QB, but that wasn't BA's fault. Earlier in the season and you have a point.

BA's injury was for one or two games. Agree he should have never played the Mizzou game, but that's about it.

[Iwastherein1969]

yes, that and a QB who can run a 4.5 forty...hmm, let me see, who could that guy be ?

[ricepig]

yes, that and a QB who can run a 4.5 forty...hmm, let me see, who could that guy be ?

Deshaun Watson.

[Iwastherein1969]

Deshaun Watson.

the guy I had in mind is a bit more challenged as far as amount of pigment in his skin and is on the current roster at the University of Arkansas...but great try, Ricepig, great try.....sorta reminded me of the way Bryson DeChambeaux played the 18th today at The Masters