This is a piece about Big 12 offenses scoring being down but it would seem to apply more towards whether Big 12 D's are any good. http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/9040532/Sooners-offense-must-prove-its-worth?MSNHPHMA Sooners offense must prove its worth by Mark Kriegel MIAMI SHORES, Fla. - Coach Bob Stoops, whose reputation as "Big Game Bob" is in some peril, didn't appreciate my question. This was Tuesday afternoon, after his Oklahoma Sooners had finished practicing at a place called Barry University. The Big 12 schools, I began, aren't scoring nearly as much in these bowl games as they did during the regular season. Why do you think that is? Stoops paused — a disdainful pause, I might add — before issuing a deadpan answer. "They haven't scored as many points," he said. "That's up to you guys to decide why." Guy's a little sensitive, huh? Then again, maybe he's got reason to be. "I guess, to answer your question, what about other teams?" he said. "I don't know whether they scored more points or not. I'm just wondering what the averages are for the other conferences, and if they're up or down. My guess is they're probably down, too. But again, that would be for you guys to research." That was his way of calling me a lazy SOB sportswriter. And that I may be, but I also have the benefit of the geniuses who work at STATS INC. and take my calls and make me look much smarter than I am. According to STATS INC., the average Division I football team scored 27.2 points a game. In bowl games, the number dropped to 25.2. So, technically, Stoops guessed right. Scoring is down — if only just a tiny bit. But you have to wonder if the Big 12 schools are bringing the average down all by themselves. Consider some of these scores: Texas Tech, fifth in the country at 44.6 points a game during the regular season, lost 47-34 to Ole Miss in the Cotton Bowl. Oklahoma State, ninth in the country — averaging 41.6 — lost to Oregon 42-31 in the Holiday Bowl. Missouri, which beat Northwestern at the Alamo Bowl in overtime, scored 30 points — more than 13 points below its season average. Even Texas's dramatic win over Ohio State in the Fiesta Bowl, obscures the fact that the Longhorns were lucky to finish with 24 points, which was still 20 fewer than they usually put up. By my calculations, going into the BCS championship, Big 12 scoring is down by an average of more than nine points in the bowl games. So there you go, Mr. Bob. Those are the facts. And none of them do much to bolster faith in the caliber of defense played in your conference. Of course, that's the whole subtext here. That's what had "Big Game Bob" feeling, well, not so big. This has been a banner year for offense in his conference. Of the top ten scoring teams in college football, five hail from the Big 12: Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, Missouri and Oklahoma State. Member institutions regularly posted scores that belonged in the Arena Football League. But even among the Big 12, the Sooners — good for 54 points a game — generated numbers previously unimagined, becoming the first team to score more than 700 points in a season. Even as they did, though, Big 12 defenses came under suspicion. The bowl season has only intensified these misgivings. Basically, the agenda for Thursday's BCS championship game between Oklahoma and Florida was set weeks ago, when Tim Tebow was quoted as saying: "I'd really like to throw against some of those defenses in the Big 12." Now Tebow can run from the quote if he wants. But his point, well taken then, seems even more relevant now. The burden of proof is on Oklahoma, which allowed 359 yards and more than 24 points a game. Like their coach, the Sooners have been a little testy in response to the remark that Tebow now says was (what else?) taken out of context. First, cornerback Dominique Franks said that Tebow would be no better than the fourth-best quarterback in the Big 12. Then Florida linebacker Brandon Spikes said that the Big 12 defenses are "a joke." Next, Oklahoma safety Nic Harris issued his assessment of Florida's offense: "Pretty much what I thought ... one dimensional." This is all very good for lazy sportswriters. But it misses the point. This "one-dimensional" offense belongs to an SEC team that scored 45 points a game. Now I understand why Stoops was in such a testy mood. Maybe I would've been better off asking him about his record in BCS games.
You mean in bowl season, where teams generally play ranked opponents (like Ohio State, Oregon, Northwestern, etc.), teams might score lower than their average over the regular season, when teams generally play a ranked team 20-25% of the time?!? What a concept!!!!! It's not an indictment of the defenses in the Big 12 — it's common sense. The media nonsense seriously has me on the verge of cheering for OU. I can't believe this.
You know where I stand. High schools offenses should not put up massive numbers. Its bad D. Mwuahahah. And thats that.
Let's see if I can get this right: USC gives up 24 to Penn State and is said to have a killer defense. UT gives up 21 to tOSU and it's said to be indicative of the bad defenses in the Big XII? tOSU was able to play keep away which kept Colt and Co. off the field for a large part of the game.
Other conferences don't seem to have this problem though. That said, I'd be interested in seeing how the B12 teams scoring was compared to what those opposing defenses give up on average. That would be a more useful stat - if they consistently scored well above what those teams surrender, that would suggest the B12 offenses did fine.
Does this mean the SEC has bad D too? Because Florida is the one team in that conference that runs the spread also and they've put up similar (but worse) offensive numbers as the top teams in the B12.
I think the Big 12 has poor defense. I also think Muschamp has worked wonders and had his defense overachieving. Texas is a great defense. But the Big 12 is watered down, Leach has changed the complexion for the worse. It isn't about numbers. Its about watching the game, looking the personnel, examining the gameplans, and simply understanding that the Big 12 has taken it down a couple of notches on the defense side of the ball. No more black shirts, no more wrecking crews, nothing. Its watered down. Hopefully Nebraska and Texas can remind the rest of the league what defense is about in the coming years...
Spread run with world class athletes and the best quarterback of all time. SEC obviously has better defenses than the Big 12 overall.
Best quarterback of all time? You have just lost all posting privileges regarding college football. Also, here are the amount of points given up by those vaunted SEC defenses: Bama - 31 points to Utah Ole Miss - 34 points to Tech Kentucky - 19 to ECU South Carolina - 31 to Iowa Georgia - 12 to MSU LSU - 3 to GA Tech Vandy - 14 to BC Not bad at all but not anything near the way you are describing it. It should be noted that the best SEC teams are the ones who gave up the most so far (Miss and Bama).
There's a much simpler answer. Big 12 bowl teams, by and large, are not power running teams. They're spread offenses. And spread offenses feed off timing. When you haven't played a real game in a month, your timing is off. That's why it took half a game for Texas to get going. That's why Tech had such an off game.
The problem with that theory is that Tech looked a lot like it did in its previous two games against Oklahoma and Baylor. So it seems to rule out the timing issue - though it also rules out the SEC defense issue.
Personally I do think the Big 12 defenses by and large are bad, but I think it is a cyclical thing--not a philosophy thing. Texas was decent, the best of the lot. But nor do I think Texas's is anywhere near elite. Just look at the points given up by Tech, Okie State, Mizzou & Texas versus their opponents. Now see what SC, PSU, OSU and Bama did to those opponents (Ore, Miss, NW and OSU). Even Florida versus Ole Miss is a but misleading, because Florida handed them 14 points on TOs--they only gave up 10 1st downs and 325 total yards. Take that game away and the most they have up was 21. And if someone wants to tell me Georgia, LSU, Ole Miss and Florida State are shy on offensive talent, I seriously doubt it. Do any of you think Georgia wouldn't have averaged 40+ playing in the Big 12--I don't.
In the case of the 2 losses, it had more to do with missing receivers. Okie State relies on Dez Bryant. He accounted for 47% of their receiving yards! That team's offense relied on forcing coverage onto Bryant to open up everything else. They controlled the first half with him healthy, but then fell apart without him. Same story with Tech -- they've been a potent offense for the last few years, but they jumped up a notch when they put a receiver who will become a first round pick into it. Losing key playmakers in the middle of a game can shell shock a team. Texas was completely out of whack for an entire half when we lost Quan (aka, bigtexxx's daddy) against Tech. Oklahoma fans will point to the loss of Ryan Reynolds as the reason they lost against Texas. I think if Bryant and Crabtree didn't get hurt, the Big XII would be 6-0 right now. We'll never know.
Outside a QB, one player doesn't mean that much. Next is line is a super stud RB. Good defenses can usually scheme out a WR, even a dominant one. One could also argue Ohio State lost its best offensive player vs Texas, so you can say the Big 12 could easily be 3-3 despite being favored in I believe all of them. Further taking a WR out of the offense doesn't cause a team to give up 30+ points, as Texas did in their loss, Tech in their losses, Okie State 3 times, etc. That shows bad defensive teams, or a bad defensive effort in Texas case versus Tech. (for some reason Texas didn't blitz enough, as OU did to crush Tech). If fact Crabtree was healthier in the 1st half versus OU than he had been versus Texas/Okie State, but Tech was already out of the ball game by the 2nd quarter. OU did show how you have to play the chuck and duck, where Harrell would have needed to be flawless to sustain drives (though you need some good coverage athletes to go after them like that). Unless the Big 12 South truly had four versions of USC 04 caliber Olines and skill players (who did put up 30+ legitimately versus an excellent Texas defense)--which I don't think is the case, there was a lot of bad defense played by lots of teams.
It really depends on the teams doesn't it. When a receiver accounts for the amount of offense production as the two receivers for Tech and OKST. If anything, they forces the defense to play a little softer on the middle game because of the threat of the big play. Take those out and the windows in the middle gets a lot tighter for the QB.
Your missing the point of that statement. Big 12 teams use spread offenses, meaning their scoring drives are often based on a passing game and big plays. Big plays that help a team move down the field for a passing team would involved their starting QB and their best WR because that is how their offense is designed. Spread offenses are also designed so that if the defense tries to scheme a player out of a game (normally by using more than one defender), other people are open in space because they are spreading the field. So if that star WR is out, 1) the Big 12 that uses passing to control possessions and big plays to score loses one of their main weapons do that resulting in shorter drives and more chances to other team to score points and increase their own time of possession. 2) Allow's the team defending the spread to not use the extra man to cancel out that player. Because of that Losing your star receiver (Bryant) or having a player play who is completely not 100% (Crabtree...seriously he has a hurt leg and slips because of it, so the CB gets a Pick-6 that completely changes the outlook of the game and momentum, and your telling me that MC being hurt had nothing did not cause them to lose that game?)
USC isn't in the championship game. The writer has a legitimate point, there was no defense played in the big 12 this year and oklahoma was the prime beneficiary dropping sixty in multiple games. texas tech couldn't stop a second rate mississippi offense, while ohio st didn't score an inordinate amount of points, they did move the ball up and down the field the first half on Texas. edit: its going to interesting to see what oklahoma does on the offensive end, they play defense in the SEC
Wizkid83 & Rpr52121, I think you are missing my point. The key to killing a pass happy spread is pass pressure and having some decent coverage people. A great defense is going to be able to get a pass rush and have some athletes that can hold up long enough in single coverage if they know pass is coming. If they need to give a little extra shade of safety help on a great #1 WR, so be it, but it isn't necc. going to make it wide open for everyone else. That is why folks in the pros rarely live with a pass happy spread. Against a great defense if you are one dimensional it just isn't going to work very often. In fact in Tech's least impressive offensive performance they had Crabtree healthier than they had weeks before (versus OU). In OSU's least impressive offensive games they had Bryant (Texas & Tech). I do think Muschamp took way too long to make adjustments against Tech. I think he thought the front 4 could consistently beat Techs guys and he could keep 7 back. Unfortunately Texas got in a big hole by the time the D got more aggressive. Venables (OU DC) had a much better game plan in rarely sending less than 5 from the get go and making it more unpredictable which guys were rushing. BTW Arizona has a pretty good spread offense, run by the younger Dykes. They put up big numbers when opponents could not pressure or didn't have good enough athletes to cover. Yet USC absolutely destroyed it (UA's only TD came from a short run after a fumble by Sanchez). Yes Tech's spread is better than Arizona, but I still have little doubt SC's defense would have crushed it. They would have executed OU's gameplan with a far superior front seven and secondary.
