- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Do you consider Miles aggressive? Unorthodox?
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:43 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:43 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Well, since the conversation has drifted away from the qualifier "good" and instead to the qualifier "SEC", we have several under Miles. Any of the wins over Miss. State would qualify, as would the '06 shellacking of Kentucky (who was also a "good" team). We distanced ourselves pretty well from Ole Miss in '07 and Alabama in '06. And we definitely distanced ourselves from Vandy and Ole Miss in '05.
but we have none in miles' era i don't think
1
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:45 am to lsu xman
quote:
Not sure if this was miles or crowton, but telling JL to go for the deep TD pass to Lafell vs BAMA in OT when it was 3rd and 6 on the 21yd line?
i would say thats pretty aggressive when your QB has already thrown 3INT's.
That's interesting.
Because, I think Saban had gone deep on the first play in overtime with Davey against Tennessee in 2000. He said after the game that it was a percentage play -- that you're more likely to score by going deep on a team right away.
That's of course, exactly what Bama did on their first play last year (JJ vs PP).
You could have called it from your living room.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:47 am to SlowFlowPro
Saban does start off aggressive on offense to build a lead, and then he goes into conservative mode. That way other teams have to throw the ball and he can use his exotic blitzes.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:47 am to King Joey
quote:
To say that a call is not aggressive because it is calculated is to say that aggression and calculation are two distinctive characteristics.
they are 2 distinct characteristics
you can calculate an aggressive or conservative call as the correct one, so they have to be separate things
quote:
Then you should not have agreed with Baloo's comment,
where he said that the moves were calculated and not aggressive? that denotes 2 separate concepts
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:49 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Well, first of all, by virtue of being in the modern SEC rather than the classic Big 10, such a philosophy would inevitably be unorthodox. Secondly, adopting such a philosophy (even assuming he has) and yet utilizing playcalls inconsistent with those who typify that philosophy would be unorthodox. It seems you might need to look up the word "unorthodox". It doesn't mean a pass-happy spread option, or the A11, or a 6 DB blitzkrieg camoflauge defense. It means outside the orthodoxy. And unless you believe the orthodoxy of the modern SEC is identical to the orthodoxy of the classic Big 10, then a classic Big 10 philosophy would absolutely be unorthodox in the modern SEC.
how is a base philosophy of classic big10 football unorthodox?
Of course, that is assuming he actually does utilize a classic Big 10 football philosophy.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:49 am to ForeLSU
quote:
hardly unorthodox.
playing with the media is quite common also
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:50 am to King Joey
quote:
Any of the wins over Miss. State would qualify
was miss st. a "good" team?
quote:
as would the '06 shellacking of Kentucky (who was also a "good" team).
they went 8-4 in the regular season that year...
quote:
We distanced ourselves pretty well from Ole Miss in '07 and Alabama in '06.
ole miss in 07? they were RIGHT there with LSU until the last few minutes
quote:
And we definitely distanced ourselves from Vandy and Ole Miss in '05.
who were not good teams.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:53 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Yes, but I said that to say that a call is not aggressive because it is calculated is to say that they are two distinctIVE characteristics, as in differing identifiers.
they are 2 distinct characteristics
quote:Yes, and you agreed with it.
where he said that the moves were calculated and not aggressive? that denotes 2 separate concepts
Posted on 8/26/09 at 9:57 am to King Joey
quote:
Well, first of all, by virtue of being in the modern SEC rather than the classic Big 10, such a philosophy would inevitably be unorthodox.
eh
the SEC has grown up in this manner while miles has been here. remember all the "meyer's offense won't work in the SEC" stuff the year miles was hired?
and i think of unorthodox as a stimulus you interject into a situation. i don't think b/c miles has been somewhat resistant to change, he's unorthodox. it's more stubborn in my mind
if you want to call it unorthodox, then fine
as far as offenses go...
UGA runs pro-style
UTenn has, and will be pro style
Bama is pro-style
Arky is pro-style
Ole Miss with snead is pretty traditional
USC is pretty pro-style. certainly more pro-style than anything else
Vandy is spread option
UK is kind of a hybrid
UF is spread option
AU is spread
MSU ran pro-style until this year. don't know what they'll run this year
so it's half and half about now. we're not the only team running mainly pro style
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:00 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Ole Miss with snead is pretty traditional
they run the wildcat too, keep that in mind.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:00 am to TheDoc
quote:No, but as you read clearly in the opening of my post, the conversation had drifted from the qualifier "good" to the qualifier "SEC." Thus, my inclusion of Mississippi State. The question now is, why did you deliberately choose to pretend that I was including Miss. State as a good team when you knew that I clearly was not?
was miss st. a "good" team?
quote:Yes, and won their bowl game. That is a good team.
they went 8-4 in the regular season that year...
quote:We were up by 14 less than 5 minutes into the 2nd half, they never came within double digits the rest of the game, we led by over 2 TDs 3 times and won the game by 17. That is far from being "RIGHT there with" us.
ole miss in 07? they were RIGHT there with LSU until the last few minutes
quote:Which, as you well know, was not germaine to the portion of the discussion to which I was responding, and thus was never claimed to be so.
who were not good teams
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:01 am to TheDoc
quote:
they run the wildcat too, keep that in mind.
yeah but that's not usually more than 10 times a game
snead was a thrower
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:But you didn't say, "mainly pro style." You said, "classic Big10 philosophy." How many teams in the SEC would you describe as embracing a "classic Big10 philosophy"?
we're not the only team running mainly pro style
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:04 am to King Joey
quote:
the conversation had drifted from the qualifier "good" to the qualifier "SEC."
well i meant good, but i just forgot about VT
VT wasn't that good that year, but the ACC was horrible. but i'll sasy they were good enough to be in the conversation (and we beat the living frick out of them, as i expected)
and then the reason it "shifted" to SEC was b/c i don't know if we've played any good OOC teams during the regular season other than VT
quote:
Yes, and won their bowl game.
are we talking about kentucky?
the team who barely scraped out a win against a team without like 20 players?
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:06 am to King Joey
quote:
But you didn't say, "mainly pro style." You said, "classic Big10 philosophy."
yeah
pro-style offense, trying to grind it out
quote:
How many teams in the SEC would you describe as embracing a "classic Big10 philosophy"?
the ones i listed who run pro style offenses other than USC likely
UGA is conservative like LSU
Bama is conservative on offense. moreso than LSU (they weren't left with much talent at QB/WR though. however i doubt saban opens it up)
UTenn has a new offense, which is pro-style, but their old offense was conservative as hell and based around rushing
etc
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:07 am to SlowFlowPro
What's this thread all about?
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:08 am to BBATiger
quote:
Seriously, why do you care what other idiots around here think about this particular subject?
Because like minds think alike?
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:08 am to DBG
it's not that bad
i don't think one "I TRUST THE COACH" or "WHERE DO YOU COACH?" comment has popped up
i don't think one "I TRUST THE COACH" or "WHERE DO YOU COACH?" comment has popped up
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:10 am to SlowFlowPro
I think Miles is aggressive on offense. 2005 and 2006 LSU kept Jimbo and had veteran players who knew Jimbo's offense, which IMO was too conservative. Once Miles got Crowton the offense was more inventive and productive than any LSU offense I had seen. Last year the offense had to revert more to I formation due to poor QB play. Had to run the ball more. But with a decent QB, LSU's offense will be aggressive.
Posted on 8/26/09 at 10:12 am to DBG
I don’t know what this thread is about either, though I seem to be holding my own in the argument despite not participating in it.
For the record, I think Miles takes calculated gambles that seem riskier than they are, but he is in fact playing the percentages. This helps craft the image the Mad Hatter, but he’s really not that “crazy” of a coach. But it helps to have such a reputation. BTW – Leach really isn’t that much of a “crazy” guy either, but he has carefully crafted the image of the Mad Scientist. They both are classic gamblers in the sense they only take a risk when the odds are on their side.
Honestly, Miles and Leach are good comps for each other. Neither quite lives up to their “Mad” reputations, but the image itself helps them so they encourage the image. And also a slightly risky coach is going to seem “crazy” in an industry as risk adverse as coaching.
For the record, I think Miles takes calculated gambles that seem riskier than they are, but he is in fact playing the percentages. This helps craft the image the Mad Hatter, but he’s really not that “crazy” of a coach. But it helps to have such a reputation. BTW – Leach really isn’t that much of a “crazy” guy either, but he has carefully crafted the image of the Mad Scientist. They both are classic gamblers in the sense they only take a risk when the odds are on their side.
Honestly, Miles and Leach are good comps for each other. Neither quite lives up to their “Mad” reputations, but the image itself helps them so they encourage the image. And also a slightly risky coach is going to seem “crazy” in an industry as risk adverse as coaching.
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News