Jump to content

Dahobbs

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    20097
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Dahobbs

  1. Just to be clear, I wasn't doing that. One could see this as an attempt to lessen competition and protect their own status rather than a true belief in the values of diversity and inclusion.
  2. I agree that the defense had 1 bad game in that entire season. I've seen absolutely zero indication that this is a schematic flaw with Muschamp's defenses as opposed to a single bad game. Why are you basing everything on this single game? If this is your standard, you must think PK was an absolutely terrible d coordinator.
  3. Muschamp's defense aren't "completely irresponsible" either, so I'm not sure your point.
  4. Some of this is the danger of trying to make quick changes. When a company states of a goal of diversifying in say three-years rather than gradually, you're necessarily going to lock out others from the less favored pile. But there are some things in his statistics that still reek of privilege. For instance: Non-Hispanic white men (whom I presume his article intends to address) only make up ~28% of the population. I get that his point is that those in culture industries didn't move elsewhere, but he also seems to be implying this unfair effect his plaguing other industries too. I'm not convinced of that. I'll also note that he appears to be ignoring a pretty significant data issue: unknown race/ethnicity is common and prevalent choice in the data. And frankly many people that may be described as "white males" when looking at them may be claiming other ethnicities from their family background. I look white (mostly). But my grandmother was from China, and I often rotate between putting Asian, White, and prefer not to say on surveys.
  5. The theory is you get the big negative play and that stops the drive. You play conservative after getting it. OU is literally in the playoffs with a completely dysfunctional offense because it runs that kind of defense. Again, the 2009 was an elite defense, pretending otherwise is stupid. Pretending Muschamp isn't a great defensive coordinator is stupid.
  6. He was only involved with the true "late Mack era" in the 2010 season. The 2008 and 2009 defenses that he coached were very good. 2010 was just a broken team. There was nothing Muschamp was going to do to fix it. You're focusing on one game. That's ridiculous. It is possible for very good defenses to have a bad game. The defense didn't allow more than 24 points at any other point in the regular season. Texas was #6 in DFEI in 2009, # 3 in total defense, #12 in scoring defense, #1 in rushing defense, #10 in pass efficiency defense, gave up an average of 251 yards per game and 3.8 yards per play. Thinking that defense was anything except very fucking good is fucking stupid.
  7. One of us is not being thoughtful. And it isn't anyone you mentioned.
  8. Dude, that season was Mack, not Muschamp.
  9. You do you. NTTIAWT
  10. I've been perplexed by our struggles in the secondary during his tenure. PK has done an amazing job of building a defense that can stop the run without committing bodies to the box. In theory, that should mean we weren't sacrificing the integrity of our coverage to stop the run and have provided better results in the secondary. And his general philosophy of just running the base defense should have meant that guys had a ton of experience in knowing their assignments. But really, outside of last year, our coverage was often a weakness. He seemed to really need a ton of experience in the secondary for the coverages to work well. Maybe it was the separation we had between the backend and frontend of the defense. Maybe it was the yearly changing of the base coverage. But it is a bit strange.
  11. I don't view complexity and aggressiveness as necessarily meaning a high blitz rate. You can sit back in coverage while also doing a lot complexity to disguise the specific coverage or which 4 are coming.
  12. Insiders, not stalkers. jk
  13. I know you're generally an idiot so I don't know why I'm asking, but what? Did you watch that Ohio State offense in the playoffs last season?
  14. Less plausible if you've ever heard PK speak.
  15. I assumed he meant that Scipio has expertise in not knowing what the problem is.
  16. That's not true. PK's defenses have had coverage issues each time we had youth. Nothing about this season was new. It was just unexpected on the heels of last year where we legitimately had a great secondary.
  17. And, I mean, at least they are actually blocking someone vs the literal turnstiles we had in the interior this year?
  18. Yeah, I agree. I really hope we didn't actually fire him. He wouldn't deserve that. Given how, uh, reserved (neurodivergent?) PK is, it wouldn't be that surprising if he didn't make the usual announcement.
  19. I get it. I'm shocked too. I think Muschamp is good hire. I don't like the look if PK was fired, but if it was mutual because PK wanted to move back west, then it is a great replacement. I'm assuming (hoping?) that we aren't done with staff changes. I also suppose Muschamp might have connections with a very good offensive line coach whose line has mauled us recently...
  20. Miles better? I like PK, but that's ridiculous. Muschamp has been an elite defensive coordinator.
  21. Probably a more successful strategy than hiring strippers as coordinators.
  22. Given recent events, is that something we want in a coach?
  23. 2 years ago. 2023 Georgia.
  24. Are we still considering the ACC a P4 conference? But I agree, he'd have to be like co-DC with a massive pay bump for that to make any sense.
×
×
  • Create New...