Rating the SEC- the offenses

[57stratdawg]

Dixon is gone.

Here's my logic: Having a big, hoss tailback helps you convert more 3rd downs. If you need a yard or two, hand it off and more often than not you will get a first down. But...even more effective is when you throw it and shock the other team.

Here's your logic: Having a great tailback hurts you on third downs because teams know what you are going to do. Now, without him, we will be less predictable and more effective on 3rd down.

Do you realize how dumb your logic is? You would rather have no dominant option than a dominant option? Holy ballsack I hope you didn't coach offense. When you have a dominant option, it allows you to be MORE effective because one team is expecting something and they get something entirely different. It gives you more options and allows you to utilize your average to below average players in one on one situations (or wide open situations) where they have chance to be successful.

I will slightly disagree with you, because I never thought about Dixon as a great short yardage back. In fact, if it was 3rd and 3, I think i'd rather have 5'10 180 lb Trent Richardson than 6'1 240 Anthony Dixon.

Dixon was always bad about chopping his feet and dancing. I saw a 49ers rep say they wanted to use AD as a power and goal line back. Thats a big mistake IMO.

 

[Coach34]

bumped threads where people said we wouldnt be much better because we didnt have a QB, we didnt have WR's, our OL sucked, it was going to take Mullen a couple of years before we would see progress...blah blah blah....i'm not going searching again

 

[KurtRambis4]

we aren't going to be better and saying we aren't going to be much better are two different things.

 

[Coach34]

Here's my logic:

Because we won't have Dixon/Lee in the backfield this year, we will be more effective on 3rd down. Why? Our offense won't be based around 1 player as it was in Dixon. We will not be as predictable on 1st and 2nd down, thus creating less 3rd downs for our offense in the 1st place. Also, this will help create more 3rd and shorts for us in 2010 as opposed to alot of the 3rd and 5's or longer that we had in 2009. shorter yardage to convert = more 1st downs.

3rd and short? Instead of having Tyson Lee in there to hand it Dixon, we will have Relf in there running it behind a lead back to outnumber the defense at the point of attack. OR- we will have a big back like Conner in there along with Relf and the defense can't key on just one because they are both running threats.

The defense doesnt have one main player to key on this yer as they did in Dixon most of the time last year. And that makes us more dangerous and more effective in keeping them on their heels.

 

[Coach34]

we had many a thread on here while Croom was coaching with me arguing the Spread would help us and many others saying it wouldn't because of our personnel we had, and then more when we hired Mullen.

 

[KurtRambis4]

completely changing the argument.

 

[rugbdawg]

we will be better in a 3rd down situation because our best player is no longer on the team.

 

[uk196]

uk was able to score aginst good competion last except for Florida
.Florida 7, Bama 20, SC 26, Auburn 21, Miss St 24, Vandy 24, Georgia 34, Tenn 24. Not great but good considering our starting QB went down in the SC game and was replaced by a true freshman for the rest of the year . We are expecting the best offense in many years. The best offensive line in over a decade, very good wide receivers (if our QB can get them the ball). Out tight ends are questionable and QB will be avg, but we have very good backs with Locke and Cobb. Phil Steele rated our special teams in the top 20. If you want to question our defense I will go along with that. DL will be below avg , same could be said with our linebackers. The only good part of the defense will be the secondary. We won at Auburn and Georgia when our QB started to improve. I have been following UK since 1961 and except for Florida we should be in every game on the schedule for the firsr tine in my memory.

 

[Coach34]

Sadd and I both argued for the Spread since 2005 and most on here said it wouldnt work at State. Downtown and Todd to name a couple, but they have since admitted to being wrong unlike some others. The same thing came up when we hired Mullen in saying while Mullen was a good coach, it would take him time to recruit and build his offense. Sadd and I said there would be instant improvement. When I said we would average 20 points a game and around 33-340 yards a game I was called crazy- and we see how that turned out.

It's the Sixpack way to to be opposed to something when its taking place, and then when it turns out like I said, suddenly its "well who didnt think that would happen?"

Many here said Nutt wouldnt win at Mississippi- yet he has
Many here said Meyer's offense wouldnt work at Fla or in the SEC- his QB's would get killed. Nobody owns up to that these days either.

 

[rugbdawg]

that is what you were talking about. It certainly sounded like it.

Now, you are changing what you said. You said we would be better in 3rd down without Dixon. We will probably be better as an offense as a whole and have less 3rd downs. That doesn't mean we will be better in 3rd downs AND it certainly doesn't mean we will be better in short yardage.

And holy ****, why didn't we simply not play Dixon last year? We are going to be more effective without him. The defense won't have anyone to key on this year.
I'm sure glad Dixon is gone...now defenses will be on their heels because they won't know what expect. You think we are going to be better offensively BECAUSE our NFL back is gone.

We aren't going to be better because we don't have superstar TB. We ARE going to be better because we have an experienced O-line, and more experience at QB and WR.

 

[myusernamesucks]

kys. Quickly.

 

[Ol Blue.sixpack]

I have been following UK since 1961 and except for Florida we should be in every game on the schedule for the firsr tine in my memory.

If you've been following UK since 1961, you should know better than to post something like that. History tells us that you can't beat Tennessee, you can't beat Steve Spurrier, you can't beat Florida and you can't stop a back like Anthony Dixon on a delay - even though you know it is coming. UK has benefitted from a cupcake schedule over the last few years - especially since UofL went into the tank. Who wouldn't want to play 4 patsies along with Vandy and MSU every year?<div>
</div><div>I suspect UofL will take the Big Blue to the woodshed right out of the gate and "Operation Win" will immediately find its rightful place on the list of all time gayest slogans.
<div>
</div><div>UK made a huge mistake in buying into the stupid coach-in-waiting fad.</div></div>

 

[rugbdawg]

nm.

 

[Coach34]

me saying we "probably will be better converting 3rd downs this year without Dixon" sound like 3rd and short situations?????

would you be willing to bet me that we are better on converting 3rd downs in 2010? As I stated, we will have more 3rd and shorts this season, and be more likely to convert than the 3rd and longs we had last year...

Damn I'll be glad when the season starts to shut you people up

 

[Coach34]

rates your OL 10th, your WR's 9th, and your RB's 11th....


"The best offensive line in over a decade"


you lost 4 starters off your OL- did ya'll just play the ****** ones last year for the heck of it and keep the best ones on the bench?


I understand having optimism but reality must set in at some point.

 

[markymark.sixpack]

in two years that he cost us due to fumbles. yep, that was his bad....but over his entire career, he held onto the ball. especially the last two years.

i don't even know what you're referring to on the Houston game, but you can grasp at that straw if you want to.

elliot didn't have any real carries in the last two years, but the one year he did carry it he was prone to lay it on the ground.

will the others fumble it? No clue Todd, but like I said none of them have proven that they won't. i never said they would. with dixon, you never had to worry.

As far as Tyson vs. Relf fumbles...yes it was 9-3, but Tyson had 314 touches vs. Relf's 118. That's a fumble every 39 touches for Relf vs once every 35 for Tyson. Not too comforting. Yes, they had about the same amount of rushing attempts, but Tyson lost a lot of his fumbles just standing in the damn pocket.

This got way convuluted...I was just stating the obvious that you could trust Dixon to hang on to the ball and that's something that we will probably miss this year. Of course it got spun into some crazy **** by the resident troll.

 

[markymark.sixpack]

anyone who played in that system would look like ****.</p>

 

[markymark.sixpack]

to admit you're wrong. this started before the season last year when you were blowing charles' scott's balls and hating on dixon. then dixon outplayed him all year and instead of just saying "well, he proved me wrong" and moving on, you've gone out of your way to take jabs at him every chance you get. you still won't admit you were wrong about him. it's obvious from a lot of your crawfishing posts that you KNOW you were wrong, you just won't say it. just man up and move on.

you act like you're tired of talking about it, but you bring it up all the time. I know that's your MO (beating a dead horse with made up crap and spin), but just this once, why don't you break the mold? Come on man, we're all supporting you! We know you can do it; please don't make us put you on an episode of "Intervention".

 

[uk196]

What does Miss ST beating Ky last year have anything to do with the price of tea in China? I remember a Miss St team beating Florida(causing Zook his job). In the last 4 years we are 7-5 against the SEC west with 2 of those losses against Bama. Arky 2-0, Auburn 1-0, Ole Miss 1-0, LSU 1-1they won NC the year we won), Msiss St 2-2(Ky won the last 2 in Starkville you won the last 2 in Lex. we have not done very well in the East but besides Vandy we are 2-2 against Georgia and we could have been 3-1. Florida, USCe and Tenn are the only teams we have not been able to beat. On the Bama and UGA boards they had threads titled SEC 3 HEADED MONSTERS(The best threesomes in the SEC). Arky 1, Bama 2, UGA 3, Fla 4, Ky 5. They only listed the top 5. With Locke and Cobb 2 of the threesome I do not believe Steele has done his homework. Evey one of the offensive line started some games last year with Hines being pre-season 1st team SEC. Most of the posts on the Ky boards talk about the off line being the best in decades. I only said a decade because I am handicapped(wheelchair) and not been able to see the blue white game or any practices. I was not trying to put down MSU I was just trying to put my 2 cents in. I have been to every SEC stadium and have enjoy every one of them. The only problem I have had is with the LSU fans who before the game tried to shout down the playing of My Old Ky Home by shouting we are louder(we got the last laugh by beating them)

 

[uk196]

If was being optomistic I would have youu we have a great defense, but I told you we will be very bad.

 

[KurtRambis4]

You went from arguing thateveryone but you thought our offensive production would be worse underMullenthancrooms coast offenseto everyone said the spread would suck. You'll have to excuse me if I'm not impressed by you saying that we would average 4.8 points and 54 yards more per game in 2009. I'm pretty certain I never disagreed with that. I was a firm believer in the fact that crooms was the worst college football coach ever. Therefore, I didn't find it hard to believe that the offensive coordinator from Florida could average a little over a field goal and one half-field drive than he. If I ever posted other, I apologize. That's not coming back after the fact and saying "yeah me, too!"

 

[Coach34]

people were saying we would be worse under Mullen on offense than Crooms. Learn to read. I did say that people did not think we would improve on offense in year 1 under Mullen because they thought we didnt have the players to run the Spread. Big difference

 

[KurtRambis4]

I misuderstood this

Saddawg and I kept saying we would be much, much better on offense. And of course we were.

as saying you were saying that you and saddawg were the only ones thinking we'd be better. Even so, I still never said the spread wouldn't work here.

 

[patdog]

<span class="post-title">You aren't going to suck because you lost Snead. </span>You are going to suck because you lost your receiving threats and offensive linemen.

I seem to remember some guy named McCluster from their offense last year.

 

[Coach34]

http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=17936?page=1


make sure and check our Ronny's comment and the date


http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=10462?page=1

This was pre-Mullen, but a good read nonetheless



http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=7664?page=1

same here

 

[KurtRambis4]

After reading some of those threads, it only seems to verify that y'all weren't the only two that thought our offense would be better. I guess I just take offense to you thinking that. I never once thought our offense wouldn't be better under Mullen.. My bad. Most of those posts point to crooms as being the reason our offense sucked. That's not that big of a stretch to think that, and I don't think anyone thinks otherwise. Again, please refer me to a post where I said we'd not be as well off under Mullen and his offense (compared to crooms). Using Ronny as an example isn't going to get you very far.

 

[57stratdawg]

you (Coach) saying that all the Charles Scott vs Anothny Dixon stuff would be settled in the NFL draft, after you had pretty much been dead wrong all year.

Then the NFL draft comes and Dixon goes 30 spots higher than Scott.

haha, just saying...

 

[Coach34]

by any part of the imagination coming into the season to say Scott was the better back. Alot of other people other than myself around the nation felt the same way. Many writers around the country had Scott as preseason All-SEC. And after a monster season by Dixon, and Scott struggling behind an average OL at LSU and breaking his collarbone- Dixon only went 30 spots higher in the draft.

Dixon outperformed Scott in 2009
Scott outperformed Dixon in 2008

I was wrong about the draft...enjoy getting one on me- it doesnt happen often

 

[coach66]

the Dixon argument applies. The Reb's are gonna have a tough time on offense this year but their defense and soft schedule will offset most of the problem.</p>

 

[russellwalters]

We are going to be better on offense, period (Micheal Irvin style period).

I don't always agree with Coach34, but he's got this one right. Some of you seem to think that losing AD is going to be some huge, devastating loss. Yes, we would like to have him for 10 years, BUT he's not irreplaceable. He's not Tim Tebow or some kind of talent that only comes along once in a 100 years, he's a 17ing running back. Truth be told, if you gave Christian Ducre the same amount of carries his number probably would have been close to Dixon's. There's a reason why Dixon could lead the SEC in rushing and not even be MENTIONED for the Heisman, while #2 goes on a wins the thing (granted, success of team played a major role, and I know that).

My whole point here is this, while all of the parts get better aside from RB = the entire offense being better AS A WHOLE.

 

[paindonthurt_]

the answer would be:

No you can't answer a simple question without letting your ego get in the way. That is all.