The SEC Lucky and Unlucky and THE BRET BIELEMA FACTOR

[Earth Hog Fan]

While we wait for August to get here, take a look at this, I think you will find it a very interesting article filled with maybe more facts than opinion.  GO HOGS!!    :razorback:

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/examining-sec-teams-in-close-games/

[jabohog]

Yeah, I read that this morning. "Regression to the mean", but he thinks Arkansas' style of offense may cause us to be one of the rare sub .500 schools that doesn't fall into this. He makes some interesting points, but most of it can be improved on and some already have. I think we are a program that is about to get over being snake bit. My prediction is a good season this year, maybe down a little the next, then getting to where we will be consistently with up and down years in between.

[wholehog92]

Football isn't an even statistical field through the whole game.  That's why straight statistics don't help so much in predicting success/failure.  Arkansas simply wasn't as deep as our competition for front line talent.  In the 4th quarter, we were running out of gas and couldn't finish the job.

That's why BB was "lucky" at Wisconsin with the same style.  He had a more even talent pool to deal with.  If the scheme itself was the problem, you wouldn't seen Wiscy do well in close games as the article pointed out actually happened.

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

My guess is that our style of play will see us on the wrong side of the W-L fence in tight games vs good teams.

Our style is pretty similar to other college and pro teams of the past that would get caught in a nail-biter with a team of similar or slightly lesser talent and lose.

Yes, you wear an opposing team out with our style.

No, you can't manufacture quick strike or long plays worth a crap.

[younghog]

Descent read... Towards the end the article is all about Arkansas i.e. "THE BRET BIELEMA FACTOR"

GO HOGS

[hawgsalot]

My guess is that our style of play will see us on the wrong side of the W-L fence in tight games vs good teams.

Our style is pretty similar to other college and pro teams of the past that would get caught in a nail-biter with a team of similar or slightly lesser talent and lose.

Yes, you wear an opposing team out with our style.

No, you can't manufacture quick strike or long plays worth a crap.

I believe our style will prove to be the opposite of your analysis.  Quick strike teams rarely win the close ones.  If Baylor gets in a tight game it doesn't have the run game to close it out.  We are the perfect example, Petrino always won against lesser teams with Defensive issues, he simply out ran them.  When we played the better teams with above average defenses it was night night and when we went quick strike it lead to blowout losses.  In the magical BCS season we almost could overcome it with Knile but even then Bama blowout, LSU blowout, OSU couldn't quick strike a very average OSU with bigtime controversy enough.  Remember the LSU game, they had no passing and simply ran the same couple run plays over and over and we folded like a cheap suit. 

[Bubba's Bruisers]

I'm still not convinced we've completely seen our style of play yet.  Need to see an uptick in WR talent in particular.  Then we'll know.

[redeye]

Interesting read!

He made a lot of good points, and while I agreed with most of the reasons given for our close-game struggles, I don't think he credited Chaney's decision making enough.  That one thing makes a huge difference, imo.  And there are other factors he understandably failed to mention, such as simple confidence.  That's why I'm not a huge fan of football analytics, because there are too many factors to consider, unlike baseball.

Our lack of a good quick-strike offense does inhibit our ability to score with little time on the game clock, but our ability to run out the clock should be advantageous, so I don't if not having a quick-strike offense is really that harmful.  However, I'd still love to have one and I suspect that's some of the reason Saban's worked on the passing game so much at Alabama since his early years there.

I think the most insightful thing I got from that article was that Bielema did have success in close games at Wisconsin.  I knew he'd struggled some there in his final years, and along with his struggles at Arkansas, it did worry me, but I didn't realize he'd been very good at winning close games before then.

[bigdaddyhawg]

My guess is that our style of play will see us on the wrong side of the W-L fence in tight games vs good teams.

Our style is pretty similar to other college and pro teams of the past that would get caught in a nail-biter with a team of similar or slightly lesser talent and lose.

Yes, you wear an opposing team out with our style.

No, you can't manufacture quick strike or long plays worth a crap.

Man, you really are seeing everything from the most negative way possible.  That's a bad place to be.

Do you remember "in the day" that the axiom that held sway was that "defense wins games"?

But now that we play a ball control, defense minded style, that axiom has gone the way of Hurst shifters?

You're drinking the kool-ade, you're just not drinking Hog kool-ade.  More like you're sipping good ol' Gussie style kool-ade -- you can't win if you don't score 50?

[gmarv]

 ba has matured enough to get lucky this year in close games. a senior qb who has seen it all would most probable be luckier than a qb that hasn,t been thru it all before. (that's my hope anyways)

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

Man, you really are seeing everything from the most negative way possible.  That's a bad place to be.

Do you remember "in the day" that the axiom that held sway was that "defense wins games"?

But now that we play a ball control, defense minded style, that axiom has gone the way of Hurst shifters?

You're drinking the kool-ade, you're just not drinking Hog kool-ade.  More like you're sipping good ol' Gussie style kool-ade -- you can't win if you don't score 50?

I hear what you're saying, but you're putting words into my mouth.

We are full-blown, all in run; exactly like I knew we would be when we hired BB.   That's ok.   Nothing wrong with that per se, and it's dang fun to see the other team get demoralized somewhere in the middle of the 3rd to beginning of the 4th quarter when things go as planned.

However, you can hide weaknesses with a  talented skills players team if you can keep the opposing team's defense honest and can hit a big one every now and then.

I'm just saying, that I doubt we'll EVER have a team with a legit chance of hitting a big one other than a rare "every now and then" occasion.  We simply aren't built that way, and we'll probably not have the time to practice that type of stuff regularly enough to become really, really good at it.

There's a reason that teams that can't recruit with the USCs and Bamas of the world have become more competitive.   There's also a reason that a Stanford type team gives Oregon fits.   There's no panacea in football.  Unless you get a gift from the gods with a couple of miraculous classes you pick your poison.

Our poison will be a team with slightly lesser capabilities on up to equal and better than us that has a good QB, good WRs and TEs and can hit a big one at almost any time.   We'll crush them as long as we can keep about an 8 point lead.   Anything less though.......I don't like the odds.

[Jek Tono Porkins]

I think focusing waaaay too much on offense is something the fans are guilty of.
We're in an era of Razorback football where defense is going to be the thing that wins us games. I know that seems like an alien concept to Hog fans but defense is the future. If you look at the LSU game, it was one of our worst offensive performances of the year. Nobody cares because we won the game. Why? Defense.

You can debate whether or our offensive style is worse than a spread system, hurry-up system, or whatever, but what you have to realize is that Bielema is a defensive-minded coach and Robb Smith is the real deal. So defense is going to come first.

The reason that BB likes to run the ball is because it keeps the clock rolling which shortens the game and limits the other team's offensive possessions. At the same time, the defense is sitting down on the sideline and resting while the DC and defensive position coaches make adjustments and communicate them to the players.

If we had an offensive system where we took a lot of shots downfield and scored quickly, the opposing offense would get more possessions and therefore more chances to score and the defense would get tired more quickly.

Whether or not the style helps us in close games isn't really an issue. You're not going to win every close game no matter what style you have.

[Chuck Beavers]

He summed it up concisely: "The passing game is the biggest concern."

When we need to pass - we can't.
When we need to come from behind - we can't.

Hoping for improvement this year.

[Bubba's Bruisers]

However, you can hide weaknesses with a  talented skills players team if you can keep the opposing team's defense honest and can hit a big one every now and then.

This is the point.  It will be an offense, first and foremost, designed to run behind a big, powerful line.  We just need to have players that also allow us to effectively pass when we want to pass and effectively pass when we need to pass.

[Dwight_K_Shrute]

Yeah well that was all before D**E was hired as OC.  Expect big improvement now that we don't have Honey Boo Boo holding his play card in one hand and a Snickers in the other.

[NLRHog92]

Not sure people are taking Enos as an OC into account as much as they should.

[Dwight_K_Shrute]

Not sure people are taking Enos as an OC into account as much as they should.

Agree.  I see it very much like last year and Robb Smith.  It wasn't just about a new way of doing things, but also a DC that was on the sidelines, could relate to and fire up the players, rally and respond when needed.

They are not just getting an OC on the field.  They are getting the QB coach on the field.  He is a high energy guy with HC experience, meaning he has had to make difficult decisions on the fly under pressure situations.  He also knows a thing or two about mounting big comebacks.

I'm betting Enos, Smith, and Bielema will be quite the formidable trio of coaches and we are in for a very fun year on both sides of the ball.

[flagstaffhog]

This is a good post...

[ZERO]

I believe our style will prove to be the opposite of your analysis.  Quick strike teams rarely win the close ones.

I don't necessarily agree that we will come up short vs. good teams just because of our style, but please note that we've been in seven games during Bielema's tenure where the score was decided by one score, and we're 0-7 in those games. He was 16-14 in one-score games at Wisconsin, so he was about even in close games.

If Baylor gets in a tight game it doesn't have the run game to close it out.

That doesn't really make sense, since the opposite could also be said. A quick-strike offense has the ability to get you out in a pinch. I think this is probably 50/50, as the quick-strike is in your favor when the score is close and you have the last possession. On the other hand, if it's a close one and your opponent has the last possession, then you can probably kiss the game goodbye.

 

Remember the LSU game, they had no passing and simply ran the same couple run plays over and over and we folded like a cheap suit.

I'm trying my hardest not to remember, actually.

ba has matured enough to get lucky this year in close games. a senior qb who has seen it all would most probable be luckier than a qb that hasn,t been thru it all before. (that's my hope anyways)

I don't think luck follows a seniority hierarchy. Although, they say "chance favors the prepared," and a fifth year senior is about as prepared as it gets.

[Lanny]

8-4

[ballz2thewall]

Not sure people are taking Enos as an OC into account as much as they should.

plus, i bet enos could run a mile if he had too.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

He summed it up concisely: "The passing game is the biggest concern."

When we need to pass - we can't.
When we need to come from behind - we can't.

Hoping for improvement this year.

"We can't pass when we need to", there has certainly been some truth in that. But when the play calling telegraphs your intention to pass, you put so much pressure on your receivers and QB that they really don't have as good of a chance to be successful as they should be given.

The 2nd half of the Missouri Game.

3rd Qtr (3 drives) 16 total plays
Ark-14 Miz-6
1st Down-5 runs, 1 Pass
2nd Down-3 runs, 1 Pass
3rd Down-0 Runs, 4 Passes
4th Down -2 Runs, 0 Passes

4th Qtr
Ark-14 Miz-14
1st Drive-12:41 remaining
1st Down-2 runs, 0 Pass
2nd Down-0 runs, 2 Passes
3rd Down-0 Runs, 1 Pass
4th Down -0 Runs, 0 Passes

4th Qtr
Ark-14 Miz-21
2nd Drive-4:38 remaining
1st Down-0 Runs, 4 Passes
2nd Down-1 Run, 3 Passes
3rd Down-0 Runs, 1 Pass
4th Down -0 Runs, 1 Pass

To our credit we did begin the last drive at our 25 and move the ball to their 35 with 2:13 remaining in the game before we fumbled it away.

This game being an example, you obviously can't allow your opponent to out-scheme you in the second half, which Missouri did. They made great halftime adjustments. Us, well not so much. And the real shame was that AC and the Return Team gave us excellent starting field position at our own 40 with a 32 yard return.

You can tell that Chaney didn't panic and go almost solely with the pass until we wasted our first drive and then on our second drive failed to convert on a 3rd and 3 (incomplete pass) and then on 4th and 3 (a run) at the Missouri 31 in the 3rd quarter. But once Missouri scored on their 1st drive in the 4th quarter to even the score, panic seemed to set in.

Now should BA have even been playing late in the game? Probably not and this has been debated repeatedly. A healthy Austin Allen might have given us a better chance than an injured Brandon Allen,  even with less experience. But that is hindsight.

The 4th quarter was nothing but panic on the part of Chaney by his predictable play calling that was forced by the fact that he made nothing out of our drives in the 3rd quarter. So yeah, everyone on the Missouri sideline, those in the stadium and those watching on t.v. knew what we were going to do at that point, and with an injured QB who had only been able to complete 31.6% of his passes in the second half for a total of 56 yards.

It's hard to be successful passing in a conference like the SEC. It becomes harder when everyone knows what you are going to do and even harder when your starting QB is hurt.

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

I think focusing waaaay too much on offense is something the fans are guilty of.
We're in an era of Razorback football where defense is going to be the thing that wins us games. I know that seems like an alien concept to Hog fans but defense is the future. If you look at the LSU game, it was one of our worst offensive performances of the year. Nobody cares because we won the game. Why? Defense.

You can debate whether or our offensive style is worse than a spread system, hurry-up system, or whatever, but what you have to realize is that Bielema is a defensive-minded coach and Robb Smith is the real deal. So defense is going to come first.

The reason that BB likes to run the ball is because it keeps the clock rolling which shortens the game and limits the other team's offensive possessions. At the same time, the defense is sitting down on the sideline and resting while the DC and defensive position coaches make adjustments and communicate them to the players.

If we had an offensive system where we took a lot of shots downfield and scored quickly, the opposing offense would get more possessions and therefore more chances to score and the defense would get tired more quickly.

Whether or not the style helps us in close games isn't really an issue. You're not going to win every close game no matter what style you have.

I really like this post because this is what we're trying to build, and you have concisely articulated our philosophy.

My posts were much more general in nature though, discussing "in general" the scenarios of close games with teams of slightly lesser to equal or greater talent and our style of how to score.

Just sayin'.

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

plus, i bet enos could run a mile if he had too.

I think we're putting WAY too much chicken counting before the hatching.

Everything you are saying about his being a former QB, a QB coach, being on the sideline, being a fiery coach, etc. is true.

What we don't know is how good of a COACH he actually is.    In a different thread, I copy-pasted a portion of an article that details his coaching stops and there's simply not much pro or con to hang your hat on.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I think focusing waaaay too much on offense is something the fans are guilty of.
We're in an era of Razorback football where defense is going to be the thing that wins us games. I know that seems like an alien concept to Hog fans but defense is the future. If you look at the LSU game, it was one of our worst offensive performances of the year. Nobody cares because we won the game. Why? Defense.

You can debate whether or our offensive style is worse than a spread system, hurry-up system, or whatever, but what you have to realize is that Bielema is a defensive-minded coach and Robb Smith is the real deal. So defense is going to come first.

The reason that BB likes to run the ball is because it keeps the clock rolling which shortens the game and limits the other team's offensive possessions. At the same time, the defense is sitting down on the sideline and resting while the DC and defensive position coaches make adjustments and communicate them to the players.

If we had an offensive system where we took a lot of shots downfield and scored quickly, the opposing offense would get more possessions and therefore more chances to score and the defense would get tired more quickly.

Whether or not the style helps us in close games isn't really an issue. You're not going to win every close game no matter what style you have.

That sounds good and by all rights, should be the right answer, but what happens when your offense wastes possessions? Look above at what I discussed about the Missouri game. I love our defense and I think Robb Smith has done a great job and will continue to do so, but we need Enos to step up and call better games than Chaney did so we can extend our offensive drives to achieve that which you suggest. Just look back at the second half of that Missouri game above. We had our chances and blew it, along with an 8 point lead at the half. We allowed them to score 15 points in the second half while we scored 0. That isn't helping your defense.

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

That sounds good and by all rights, should be the right answer, but what happens when your offense wastes possessions? Look above at what I discussed about the Missouri game. I love our defense and I think Robb Smith has done a great job and will continue to do so, but we need Enos to step up and call better games than Chaney did so we can extend our offensive drives to achieve that which you suggest. Just look back at the second half of that Missouri game above. We had our chances and blew it, along with an 8 point lead at the half. We allowed them to score 15 points in the second half while we scored 0. That isn't helping your defense.

Wow.   You're sounding like you almost see some of my concerns.

Should I stay inside, away from the windows, buy some life insurance, and say some "Hail Mary's"?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Wow.   You're sounding like you almost see some of my concerns.

Should I stay inside, away from the windows, buy some life insurance, and say some "Hail Mary's"?

My opinion on this isn't anything new. I didn't have a sudden epiphany.

[LRRandy]

8-4

with a chance to win the 9th in a bowl game. That's kind of where I'm sitting right now.

[870hogfan]

8-4

10-2

[Cinco de Hogo]

Sobering, or at least it should be, for the blind that didn't already know this.  He didn't just invent that 0-7 when he wrote the piece and all these problem have been discussed and argued about over and over. 

Every time the optimist say the same things and the pessimist say the same things and still 0-7 is 0-7.

So,

Lanny predicted 8-4, my guess is the four losses will be fourth quarter one possession losses. 

[hoglady]

We'll find out this year whether the 4th quarter problems were truly Bret Beliema problems or Jim Chaney problems.
If there's no improvement in that area this year then I'll be concerned.

[Cinco de Hogo]

We'll find out this year whether the 4th quarter problems were truly Bret Beliema problems or Jim Chaney problems.
If there's no improvement in that area this year then I'll be concerned.

Well said,

But then most will just blame Enos.

[Theolesnort]

People look at the last two years and think Arkansas is locked in to a kind of rut. What they seem to forget is the talent deficit that Bielema inherited and in year two he came a long way. Year three may be more revealing for what the future holds and a much better predictor. It is getting better and they will look much better getting off the bus this season than you might, could believe. Bielema could very well be building something special and these pundits have no idea what may be in store.

[bigbadhog]

The article outlines many of my concerns since Beliema was hired.  A good defense will keep us in games but a potent offense will win them.  Gary Patterson figured that out.  I doubt Beliema ever does...

[hoglady]

Well said,

But then most will just blame Enos.

Well, I just hope we're much improved in that area.
That way we aren't blaming anyone.

[HogBreath]

I believe our style will prove to be the opposite of your analysis.  Quick strike teams rarely win the close ones.  If Baylor gets in a tight game it doesn't have the run game to close it out.  We are the perfect example, Petrino always won against lesser teams with Defensive issues, he simply out ran them.  When we played the better teams with above average defenses it was night night and when we went quick strike it lead to blowout losses.  In the magical BCS season we almost could overcome it with Knile but even then Bama blowout, LSU blowout, OSU couldn't quick strike a very average OSU with bigtime controversy enough.  Remember the LSU game, they had no passing and simply ran the same couple run plays over and over and we folded like a cheap suit. 

Try to get your facts straight there big guy...we beat LSU in the magical BCS year.

[Cinco de Hogo]

Well, I just hope we're much improved in that area.
That way we aren't blaming anyone.

[Cinco de Hogo]

Well, I just hope we're much improved in that area.
That way we aren't blaming anyone.

Agreed,

Specially since the staff changes BB made were ones I thought needed to be made.  I would hate to have been wrong...

[Hogfaniam]

15-0

[Arkansas Fan]

The article outlines many of my concerns since Beliema was hired.  A good defense will keep us in games but a potent offense will win them.  Gary Patterson figured that out.  I doubt Beliema ever does...

I recall us getting destroyed by teams with good defenses that shut down our "potent" Petrino offense.

[Deep Shoat]

Same old haters saying the same old darn...

[hoglady]

Agreed,

Specially since the staff changes BB made were ones I thought needed to be made.  I would hate to have been wrong...

I think most were glad to see the change. And I think Chaney's interviews after he got to Pitt pretty much confirmed that he and Beliema just weren't on the page.

[DLUXHOG]

He summed it up concisely: "The passing game is the biggest concern."

When we need to pass - we can't.
When we need to come from behind - we can't.

Hoping for improvement this year.

CBB is building a team that won't need to come from behind..... please be patient....

[Hoggish1]

I think focusing waaaay too much on offense is something the fans are guilty of.
We're in an era of Razorback football where defense is going to be the thing that wins us games. I know that seems like an alien concept to Hog fans but defense is the future. If you look at the LSU game, it was one of our worst offensive performances of the year. Nobody cares because we won the game. Why? Defense.

You can debate whether or our offensive style is worse than a spread system, hurry-up system, or whatever, but what you have to realize is that Bielema is a defensive-minded coach and Robb Smith is the real deal. So defense is going to come first.

The reason that BB likes to run the ball is because it keeps the clock rolling which shortens the game and limits the other team's offensive possessions. At the same time, the defense is sitting down on the sideline and resting while the DC and defensive position coaches make adjustments and communicate them to the players.

If we had an offensive system where we took a lot of shots downfield and scored quickly, the opposing offense would get more possessions and therefore more chances to score and the defense would get tired more quickly.

Whether or not the style helps us in close games isn't really an issue. You're not going to win every close game no matter what style you have.

Good post!

I would add that Jamel Singleton, who is known for ball security, will improve us in that category, which is very important late, especially in close games.

The mention of Collins' "fumble" late in the Mizzou game is interesting because it included the ref factor that has bitten us in the butt too often in the recent past.

Let's hope the officials stay out of out games' outcomes for a change and we are treated more fairly going forward...

[MuskogeeHogFan]

The article outlines many of my concerns since Beliema was hired.  A good defense will keep us in games but a potent offense will win them.  Gary Patterson figured that out.  I doubt Beliema ever does...

All depends on your particular definition of a "potent" offense.

If it is more of a wide open offense with less defense, that can be stopped as well, and has been.

Personally, I think a "potent" offense is one that throws effectively and efficiently without having to throw 3 out of every 4 downs and has a strong run offense that grinds out yardage, eats up the clock and keeps the sticks moving down field. That certainly helps a defense a great deal more than a "quick strike" offense.

[Hoggish1]

All depends on your particular definition of a "potent" offense.

Personally, I think a "potent" offense is one that throws effectively and efficiently without having to throw 3 out of every 4 downs and has a strong run offense that grinds out yardage, eats up the clock and keeps the sticks moving down field. That certainly helps a defense a great deal more than a "quick strike" offense.

Spot on!

A potent offense is one that controls the ball, by whatever means, not letting the other team's O on the field, while resting your own very good D.

I'm excited about Enos using the backs in the passing game and us having (finally!) the ability to stretch the field—making our running game even better!

[Cinco de Hogo]

Seem some still don't and never will understand that Petrino wanted a potent run game.  His backs at WKU and Louisville last year were very important to his scheme.  In fact the WKU back toward the end of the season was second in the NCAA in rushing yardage.  Petrino's problem at Arkansas was that he couldn't keep a back healthy to save his life.

Now CBB is the exact opposite, he wants a potent passing game but hasn't been able to put it together yet. 

The faithful believe it's coming, I believe changes were made to get there but as they say proof is in the pudding.  As much as I liked Petrino's offense, he only had his way for about one half of one season.  I hope CBB does better than that and at least equals 21-5 over the next couple seasons.

I just don't get why people have to put Petrino down as a way of proving CBB can do something he hasn't done yet.

What I see I call ignorance.

[Arkansas Fan]

Seem some still don't and never will understand that Petrino wanted a potent run game.  His backs at WKU and Louisville last year were very important to his scheme.  In fact the WKU back toward the end of the season was second in the NCAA in rushing yardage.  Petrino's problem at Arkansas was that he couldn't keep a back healthy to save his life.

Now CBB is the exact opposite, he wants a potent passing game but hasn't been able to put it together yet. 

The faithful believe it's coming, I believe changes were made to get there but as they say proof is in the pudding.  As much as I liked Petrino's offense, he only had his way for about one half of one season.  I hope CBB does better than that and at least equals 21-5 over the next couple seasons.

I just don't get why people have to put Petrino down as a way of proving CBB can do something he hasn't done yet.

What I see I call ignorance.

I just don't get why people slobber over Petrino's nuts, even to this day, knowing how much harm and destruction that man did to our beloved football program.

[mhsbc59]

I just don't get why people slobber over Petrino's nuts, even to this day, knowing how much harm and destruction that man did to our beloved football program.

BOOM!!! 

[Cinco de Hogo]

I just don't get why people slobber over Petrino's nuts, even to this day, knowing how much harm and destruction that man did to our beloved football program.

So your saying your in favor of fostering lies and outright false information to make another situation look better?

I don't see the need to do that.  I thought you people considered it a big deal that Long claimed Petrino lied to him.