C-USA Talent And SEC Talent

[HogSophist]

If you're going to play no huddle you're going to add up more yards and points. 
If you play in a conference where the team speed isn't as good as it is in the SEC, there will be more space in the secondary, it will be even more effective.  If your receivers are better than their defensive backs, than it's almost indefensible.
All of this is part of the philosophy, and that's fine. 

But you have to add it all together and see what effect it has on your defense as well.  If you add the defense to the mix and you look at Tulsa's production versus 2006:
They have produced 156.1 more yards per game than in 2006.
They have allowed 154.2 more yards than in '06.  The net gain versus '06 is 1.9 yards.

They have scored 12.3 more points per game than in 2006
They have allowed 13.7 more than a year ago.  They have a net loss in scoring margin of 1.4 points per game.

Basically, they're the same as they were a year ago.  They just run more plays and are 1 win better.

next argument please.  here is time of possession all season.  if you dont trust me  use this

http://tulsahurricane.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/sched/tuls-m-footbl-sched.html   and go to the box scores

against
ulm  33;44
byu 35:04
ou    30:01
uab  33:08
utep 28:13
marshal 30:41
ucf 27:08
smu 35:35
tulane 32:57
houston 28:53
army 27:14


and those times were pretty even in all 4 quarters for the most part, so i dont want to here about how his offence is hard on a defence.

I have never mentioned time of possession.  Would you please give more explanations as to why Tulsa is giving up 154 yards a game more than they did a year ago?  The offense is a factor in the defense.  When you sell out to the philosophy, you know it going in.  You're choosing to try to win 41-38.

so all teams that put in this type of philosophy (like the spurrier/florida teams) give up tons of points?

Spurrier/Florida don't run the HUNH.  They run the spread offense.

agreed. Sort of my question, the philosphy of the HUNH has nothing to do with throwing or passing the ball...so i guess i was missing the point of the previous poster....just dont see how "selling out to the philosophy" equates to a bad defense.

[Darren DeLoach]

I'm sick of hearing all the huggers

if you're opine is whether gus would be a viable option as arkansas' head coach, it would not necessarily be a matter of hugger or hater.

i want houston gone, but i really would not prefer gus as our new head coach.

if he would want to come on board as an offensive coordinator, that would be great.

it is not the wisest move to hand over a southeast conference school to a man with only 2 years of college coaching experience.

i believe he is a man of great inventiveness and integrity, but he is not ready for the head coaching spot at this university.

i love the spread offense and it's many motion formats, but i think going exclusively with a no huddle puts too much of a strain on your defense.

of course, all of the above is only my opinion, and if anyone has more convincing evidence for gus and the no huddle, i am subject to alter said opine.

[razorbacker231]

he will not do hunh if defence cannot handle it.  and his time of possession is actually more than the opposition. 

as far as the others, i think he would do fine, but those opinions or concerns are understandable

[Sao Ming]

Screw it. I'm willing to make a wager with anyone her that if AR. meets Tulsa in the Lib bowl I'll put my money on Tulsa. PM me if interested.

I'm in.  Name your price but make it a price you are willing to actually part with.

I did not PM you because I want this in MMQB archives.

[Gus the head hog]

What is MMQB archives?

[Sao Ming]

What is MMQB archives?

You are posting in it. 

How much?

[Hogginitall]

If you're going to play no huddle you're going to add up more yards and points. 
If you play in a conference where the team speed isn't as good as it is in the SEC, there will be more space in the secondary, it will be even more effective.  If your receivers are better than their defensive backs, than it's almost indefensible.
All of this is part of the philosophy, and that's fine. 

But you have to add it all together and see what effect it has on your defense as well.  If you add the defense to the mix and you look at Tulsa's production versus 2006:
They have produced 156.1 more yards per game than in 2006.
They have allowed 154.2 more yards than in '06.  The net gain versus '06 is 1.9 yards.

They have scored 12.3 more points per game than in 2006
They have allowed 13.7 more than a year ago.  They have a net loss in scoring margin of 1.4 points per game.

Basically, they're the same as they were a year ago.  They just run more plays and are 1 win better.

next argument please.  here is time of possession all season.  if you dont trust me  use this

http://tulsahurricane.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/sched/tuls-m-footbl-sched.html   and go to the box scores

against
ulm  33;44
byu 35:04
ou    30:01
uab  33:08
utep 28:13
marshal 30:41
ucf 27:08
smu 35:35
tulane 32:57
houston 28:53
army 27:14


and those times were pretty even in all 4 quarters for the most part, so i dont want to here about how his offence is hard on a defence.

I have never mentioned time of possession.  Would you please give more explanations as to why Tulsa is giving up 154 yards a game more than they did a year ago?  The offense is a factor in the defense.  When you sell out to the philosophy, you know it going in.  You're choosing to try to win 41-38.

so all teams that put in this type of philosophy (like the spurrier/florida teams) give up tons of points?

Spurrier/Florida don't run the HUNH.  They run the spread offense.

agreed. Sort of my question, the philosphy of the HUNH has nothing to do with throwing or passing the ball...so i guess i was missing the point of the previous poster....just dont see how "selling out to the philosophy" equates to a bad defense.

I think his point is that even though this philosophy allows for more possessions on offense, it also allows more possessions on defense as well.  This can cause a defense to become worn down by the 3rd and 4th quarters, even though your offense is scoring a lot (hopefully).  If your team plays a defense that is worth a crap, they can slow your offense down (with a bunch of 3-and-outs), yet your defense is still playing more possessions than they normally would with a non-HUNH offensive philosophy.

It ONLY works if your offense is successful most of the time.  They're never going to win a defensive struggle-type game.  They're either going to get outscored or outscore a team in a high scoring game (UTEP (L) 47-48, BYU (W) 55-47) or get killed when their offense isn't as successful as normal (23-33 (L) UCF, 21-62 (L) Oklahoma).

[ThrillaHog]

Quit hating on Malzahn. The man has been doing good everywhere. Springdale, Arkansas,Now at Tulsa. Im no hugger from the north either, Im a darksider from little rock who really believes gus could win big here. The mans mind is just to creative. Just my Opinion

[MuskogeeHogFan]

he is tromping c usa teams with c usa talent.

if he were in sunbelt, he would be tromping sunbelt teams with sunbelt talent.

if he were in SEC he would be tromping SEC teams with SEC talent.

if he were......aww you get it by now, if not there is no hope for you

And if he were here, stomping SEC talent with SEC talent(which could have been this year by the way), all the Huggers would be saying it was because of HDN.

[djgaffer]

tulsa offence actually averaged more time on the clock then their defence.  i am sure you did not watch him in highschool.

here is another stat for you if interested look up how many times he runs the ball at tulsa as opposed to pass.  i bet you would be impressed.

I watched many games of his in high school.  Even when he first got to Springdale and ran it most downs. 

I've also never mentioned run/pass ratio.  I'm guessing you are lumping me in with other arguments because you're arguing points I'm not making.

ok my bad, i had some of those posted before i read your repies, i ws rollin

i dont have those answers, but to blame gus is unreasonable.  i did like lchog's responce on something along the lines of

how many d startes graduated? did they change their d scheme? has there been a coaching change on that side of the ball?

I don't know how many starters they lost.  I do know that most here don't give David Lee any slack because he's missing a QB and 3 of the top 4 receivers from a year ago.  Colleges have players graduate.  It's part of this business.

I don't blame Gus for a bad defense.  The coach gave him the system and that's how they want to play.  But they will never have a dominant defense as long as that's how they choose to play.  They have a better chance in that league than they would here, but they will always give up yards and points. 

Don't get me wrong, I think Gus is doing a good job.  People just act like he invented football.  That is unreasonable.

The most relevant thing you've said in this post, djgaffer, is "I don't know."

You make the ridiculous assumption that the style of offense determines the productivity of the defense. You make another riduculous assumption that this year's Tulsa team is the "same team" as last year. When you have NO idea what personnel shanges took place on either side of the ball.

And then of course, you make NO attempt to compare strength-of-schedule between the 2 seasons. But based on all these ridiculous assumptions and lack of research---you want to compare stats from 2 different teams and draw conclusions about the effect of Gus's offense on the Tulsa D. A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME.

If you think the premise that an offensive style has no effect on the defense, go find teams with Hurry up, Spread type offenses that have been among the nation's leaders in statistical defense.  Add in Run and Shoot teams all the way up the NFL if you prefer.  I gave stats.  Give more the your drivel. 

If you look at yardage differential, Tulsa is the same as a year ago.  That is just a stat.  It is independent of personnel, coaching staffs, style of play, schedule strength, and thoughts of Internet posters.  For scoring differential, they are worse off than a year ago.  I don't know their strenght of schedule from a year ago, but was it really much worse than #104?  My post may be a waste of time, but you've added nothing of substance to the discussion.

[djgaffer]

If you're going to play no huddle you're going to add up more yards and points. 
If you play in a conference where the team speed isn't as good as it is in the SEC, there will be more space in the secondary, it will be even more effective.  If your receivers are better than their defensive backs, than it's almost indefensible.
All of this is part of the philosophy, and that's fine. 

But you have to add it all together and see what effect it has on your defense as well.  If you add the defense to the mix and you look at Tulsa's production versus 2006:
They have produced 156.1 more yards per game than in 2006.
They have allowed 154.2 more yards than in '06.  The net gain versus '06 is 1.9 yards.

They have scored 12.3 more points per game than in 2006
They have allowed 13.7 more than a year ago.  They have a net loss in scoring margin of 1.4 points per game.

Basically, they're the same as they were a year ago.  They just run more plays and are 1 win better.

next argument please.  here is time of possession all season.  if you dont trust me  use this

http://tulsahurricane.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/sched/tuls-m-footbl-sched.html   and go to the box scores

against
ulm  33;44
byu 35:04
ou    30:01
uab  33:08
utep 28:13
marshal 30:41
ucf 27:08
smu 35:35
tulane 32:57
houston 28:53
army 27:14


and those times were pretty even in all 4 quarters for the most part, so i dont want to here about how his offence is hard on a defence.

I have never mentioned time of possession.  Would you please give more explanations as to why Tulsa is giving up 154 yards a game more than they did a year ago?  The offense is a factor in the defense.  When you sell out to the philosophy, you know it going in.  You're choosing to try to win 41-38.

so all teams that put in this type of philosophy (like the spurrier/florida teams) give up tons of points?

Spurrier/Florida don't run the HUNH.  They run the spread offense.

agreed. Sort of my question, the philosphy of the HUNH has nothing to do with throwing or passing the ball...so i guess i was missing the point of the previous poster....just dont see how "selling out to the philosophy" equates to a bad defense.

I think his point is that even though this philosophy allows for more possessions on offense, it also allows more possessions on defense as well.  This can cause a defense to become worn down by the 3rd and 4th quarters, even though your offense is scoring a lot (hopefully).  If your team plays a defense that is worth a crap, they can slow your offense down (with a bunch of 3-and-outs), yet your defense is still playing more possessions than they normally would with a non-HUNH offensive philosophy.

It ONLY works if your offense is successful most of the time.  They're never going to win a defensive struggle-type game.  They're either going to get outscored or outscore a team in a high scoring game (UTEP (L) 47-48, BYU (W) 55-47) or get killed when their offense isn't as successful as normal (23-33 (L) UCF, 21-62 (L) Oklahoma).

Thank you for getting my point and restating for the masses.

[Sao Ming]

What is MMQB archives?

You are posting in it. 

How much?

Are you rolling nickels?  How much?

[tech81]

this has become the biggest wasted thread. it's real simple, offensive philosophy better be to score as many points as possible. defensive philosophy should be to go 3 and out as often as possible. anything else and you've missed the point. whether coaches prefer to run or pass, their goal better be to score. therein lies the problem though. i believe hdn calls plays for purposes other than scoring...playing not to lose. gus' philosophy revolves around scoring (the right goal)