Lester on his Offense

[Millhouse]

Nope. Look again, chico. The one constant for both teams is their defense. Wiscy is closer to the best case as their offenses have been better than Mich State by a lot. But Mich State shows exactly my point. The foundation is quite clearly their defense. You cannot argue otherwise.

EDIT: I'll give you that I said "last year alone" - I should have said the preceding 4 seasons for Mich State.

part of the reason michigan state is so good on defense is because they get to play so many big ten pro style offenses.

against baylor, they give up 600 yards passing and win on offense

you know why michigan state got better on offense? they handed the passing game to a guy who graduated from SU that worked for Brian Kelly.

maybe Dave Warner's our next head coach.

 

[TheCusian]

i think thats a shot of him after the spring game in 13.

you know...the one where he was 'overwhelmed'.

Do you have a link for this "overwhelmed" quote? I've tried to find it each time you bring it up and never have.

 

[TheCusian]

part of the reason michigan state is so good on defense is because they get to play so many big ten pro style offenses.

against baylor, they give up 600 yards passing and win on offense

you know why michigan state got better on offense? they handed the passing game to a guy who graduated from SU that worked for Brian Kelly.

maybe Dave Warner's our next head coach.

Hmm - now that's a good thought should things not work out.

 

[KaiserUEO]

part of the reason michigan state is so good on defense is because they get to play so many big ten pro style offenses.

against baylor, they give up 600 yards passing and win on offense

you know why michigan state got better on offense? they handed the passing game to a guy who graduated from SU that worked for Brian Kelly.

maybe Dave Warner's our next head coach.

we could do much worse.

 

[TheCusian]

The caveat to my posts earlier, is that I don't really believe in putting either O or D first. I think everyone is actively trying to get better at both. They may not know how to get better at both at the same time - but that is far different than intentionally trying to put one before the other.

I also agree with the board sentiment that it's more fun and beneficial (box office/perception) to be good at offense first.

That's all to say - I'd really like the stars to align someday and have great seasons on both sides of the ball happen the same season.

EDIT: I should also say that my wife is out of town and my young kids were up a lot last night so if none of this makes sense - sleep deprivation.

 

[Millhouse]

we could do much worse.

i think we could do better. still too pro-style for my liking but i think they're becoming less so (and improving as a result). hard to know what warner really wants to do, lots of cooks in that kitchen. but i'd be ok with it

 

[KaiserUEO]

Do you have a link for this "overwhelmed" quote? I've tried to find it each time you bring it up and never have.

ive linked it, youve read it and acknowledged it. theres a few out there on it.

basically he was calling the plays for both teams...and kind of got caught up in the minutia and didnt get all the reps in for the qbs. i think he blamed SS anywho.

 

[Crusty]

To be competitive we have to score more than 30 PPG - period. Even vs ACC or P5 opponents, we need to score about 25 PPG to get to the middle of the pack. Vs non-conference we need about 37!! However, versus conference opponents we only scored 15 TDs in 2013 (10 last year).

We have a very long way to go and I don't kid myself that, in one season, we can more than double our PPG (to get to the middle of the ACC). I do think we have shot of running at that pace during the last quarter of the season.

My primary metric to measure improvement are red zone conversions. Last year we scored TDs 40% of the time and only 27.8% of the time vs conference foes. BC had about the same number of attempts (37) as we did (35) but manages to score 23 TDs to our 14. Versus ACC teams BC was 11 for 19 - we were 5 for 18.

Yards between the 40's means nothing. We have to score TDs.

I may be wrong, but I think Lester's offense may be much better in TD conversions. I certainly hope so.

 

[KaiserUEO]

To be competitive we have to score more than 30 PPG - period. Even vs ACC or P5 opponents, we need to score about 25 PPG to get to the middle of the pack. Vs non-conference we need about 37!! However, versus conference opponents we only scored 15 TDs in 2013 (10 last year).

We have a very long way to go and I don't kid myself that, in one season, we can more than double our PPG (to get to the middle of the ACC). I do think we have shot of running at that pace during the last quarter of the season.

My primary metric to measure improvement are red zone conversions. Last year we scored TDs 40% of the time and only 27.8% of the time vs conference foes. BC had about the same number of attempts (37) as we did (35) but manages to score 23 TDs to our 14. Versus ACC teams BC was 11 for 19 - we were 5 for 18.

Yards between the 40's means nothing. We have to score TDs.

I may be wrong, but I think Lester's offense may be much better in TD conversions. I certainly hope so.

stop it, you are not playing by cusians rules.

how can you make that assumption???!!!!

we havnt even seen lesters offense yet!!!!

 

[Alsacs]

To be competitive we have to score more than 30 PPG - period. Even vs ACC or P5 opponents, we need to score about 25 PPG to get to the middle of the pack. Vs non-conference we need about 37!! However, versus conference opponents we only scored 15 TDs in 2013 (10 last year).

We have a very long way to go and I don't kid myself that, in one season, we can more than double our PPG (to get to the middle of the ACC). I do think we have shot of running at that pace during the last quarter of the season.

My primary metric to measure improvement are red zone conversions. Last year we scored TDs 40% of the time and only 27.8% of the time vs conference foes. BC had about the same number of attempts (37) as we did (35) but manages to score 23 TDs to our 14. Versus ACC teams BC was 11 for 19 - we were 5 for 18.

Yards between the 40's means nothing. We have to score TDs.

I may be wrong, but I think Lester's offense may be much better in TD conversions. I certainly hope so.

See I respect your posts a lot because they are optimistic which I like, but are reasonable and fair. We have played 21 games in 2 years against P5 competition under SS. We have reached 30 points 2 times in those 21 games. 2013 BC game we needed a last second TD and thank goodness got it and 2014 Wake Forest game where the D scored 2 TDs to get us to 30 points.

Our offense is a major problem.

 

[Crusty]

See I respect your posts a lot because they are optimistic which I like, but are reasonable and fair. We have played 21 games in 2 years against P5 competition under SS. We have reached 30 points 2 times in those 21 games. 2013 BC game we needed a last second TD and thank goodness got it and 2014 Wake Forest game where the D scored 2 TDs to get us to 30 points.

Our offense is a major problem.

Agreed, I said as much in another thread. I was just trying to point put that our problems are on the O side and not the D side. In today's CF you win by scoring more than 30 ppg.

 

[TheCusian]

ive linked it, youve read it and acknowledged it. theres a few out there on it.

basically he was calling the plays for both teams...and kind of got caught up in the minutia and didnt get all the reps in for the qbs. i think he blamed SS anywho.

Not sure that's all that damning either. That's not exactly a skill you need to have in a real game environment. You usually get a break half the time, right?

 

[Millhouse]

I'd take this right now, given our 2014:

"The Illini improved from 119th nationally in both yards and points to 52nd in yards and 61st in points. Quarterback Nathan Scheelhaase led the Big Ten in passing (3,272 yards), and Illinois finished 22nd nationally in pass offense with 64 plays of 20 yards or longer."

they were 59th in passer rating. so if they were good at long plays, they were probably bad at not long plays

FWIW cubit offensive simple rating system rankings. he's had a long career.

avg at WMU = 62
avg not at WMU = 82.
overall average = 70

that's not good

 

[TheCusian]

stop it, you are not playing by cusians rules.

how can you make that assumption???!!!!

we havnt even seen lesters offense yet!!!!

Are you this hyperbolic in real life?

This was a great post (Crusty's been killing it lately). Because he didn't try to predict the future, and when he spoke about the future it was couched in "hope so" and "I may be wrong" - this is how it's done.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Not sure that's all that damning either. That's not exactly a skill you need to have in a real game environment. You usually get a break half the time, right?

it just struck me as a warning sign.

football coaches have everything timed down to the second, or at least the successful ones do...and the fact that he let himself get distracted and not get accomplished what he, and im assuming the team, set out to do in the only environment they would have all spring...was quite telling.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Are you this hyperbolic in real life?

This was a great post (Crusty's been killing it lately). Because he didn't try to predict the future, and when he spoke about the future it was couched in "hope so" and "I may be wrong" - this is how it's done.

100% of the posts on this topic are about hope or fear.

you dont allow fear, so we wont allow hope.

 

[TheCusian]

they were 59th in passer rating. so if they were good at long plays, they were probably bad at not long plays

FWIW cubit offensive simple rating system rankings. he's had a long career.

avg at WMU = 62
avg not at WMU = 82.
overall average = 70

that's not good

You'd take that 2014 yardage, percentage, and passing game in a heartbeat for this year, no?

 

[TheCusian]

100% of the posts on this topic are about hope or fear.

you dont allow fear, so we wont allow hope.

Garbage. You can say what you want. I'm not a mod. Just don't expect to say overtly negative stuff and have baseless assumptions about the future without being held accountable. Every time I post something overtly positive you bring out the rainbow and unicorn props. What's fair is fair.

 

[TheCusian]

it just struck me as a warning sign.

football coaches have everything timed down to the second, or at least the successful ones do...and the fact that he let himself get distracted and not get accomplished what he, and im assuming the team, set out to do in the only environment they would have all spring...was quite telling.

Yeah - I guess. I don't see how it wouldn't be confusing. His first year working under Mcit's whacked out sub-par system, running first team offense and second team offense back to back? We know how he felt about that playbook - it's in a dumpster somewhere. Def an unfair assessment.

 

[Millhouse]

You'd take that 2014 yardage, percentage, and passing game in a heartbeat for this year, no?

sure. but you gotta think longer term than that. the bill cubit offense is below average and there is a surprisingly large sample set given his lack of results

 

[TheCusian]

sure. but you gotta think longer term than that. the bill cubit offense is below average and there is a surprisingly large sample set given his lack of results

That's fine - I'm not enamored with Cubit either. Just thought that his last years results were interesting given the muck you sling his direction. I'm on record saying that if Lester/Shafer fail - go the route you espouse with a Leach/Holgerson-like system. I'm just trying too look for signs of hope.

 

[Millhouse]

That's fine - I'm not enamored with Cubit either. Just thought that his last years results were interesting given the muck you sling his direction. I'm on record saying that if Lester/Shafer fail - go the route you espouse with a Leach/Holgerson-like system. I'm just trying too look for signs of hope.

i want to have hope too but that's why this thread is so long. you want to have hope and then your offensive coordinator starts talking texans and west cost offense.

 

[wfschrec]

i want to have hope too but that's why this thread is so long. you want to have hope and then your offensive coordinator starts talking texans and west cost offense.

Yeah but its just that ... talk ... and everyone makes a slew of conclusions ... until they take the field we just don't know. I know that Lester had Elmhurst headed in a really good direction and it took some time but I think the guy can get it done and I think he will sling the ball around, his QB numbers give me that hope. Based on what has been stated on this board it doesn't sound like several coaches had their way in how things would be done on O ... lets give it a few games and see what happens ... if it is still really bad then we scream and stomp. It is premature to do so now.

 

[TheCusian]

i want to have hope too but that's why this thread is so long. you want to have hope and then your offensive coordinator starts talking texans and west cost offense.

Sure - I'd suggest a mix of you/Crusty's analysis is as good as a middle ground as we'll get until news starts leaking from camp.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Yeah - I guess. I don't see how it wouldn't be confusing. His first year working under Mc. . . . it's whacked out sub-par system, running first team offense and second team offense back to back? We know how he felt about that playbook - it's in a dumpster somewhere. Def an unfair assessment.

not unfair.

its the spring game. they have basically 3 months to prepare for it.

the goal is to get plays on film.

whether or not he likes the playbook is completely irrelevent.

they should have 100 scripted plays or whatever with personnel assigned.

his job is to stand behind the huddle, yell...'1st team!!'...then call the play assigned. or 'Orange package!!'...then call the play assigned.

he failed at that.