I have felt for a long time that a HC and his staff must have a philosophy towards the game. They must put a stake in the ground and say, "We are going to do these things on offense and these things on defense. We will design our games in such a way to contribute to the success of those things and when we are successful in doing those things, we'll win." I think it is important that you stick to your given phiosophy in order to build consistency. It's important to remain loyal to your constructed philosophy even when things are bad. Otherwise, you cannot build your strengths to the point of becoming a consistently winning program. Now, having said all that, I think a coach and a team that has already reached a certain level of success (e.g. LSU or Texas) can gain some short term, immediate success in big games by going against their established philosophy. If your offensive philosophy, for example, is to control the ball by running first, it might behoove you to air it out against an opponent that outmatches you in the trenches. Of course, this means that you must have the personnel to perform the change of direction. Anyway, I bring all this up b/c I think that many coaches have reached very successful levels by sticking to their guns, but can't get over the top b/c they are too loyal to their guns. In the games where they play an evenly matched or better team, the thing that brought them success brings them losses. Their loyalty to their established pattern of playing the game is their demise. What is Saban like? What seems to be his offensive and defensive philosphy towards the game, and has he shown an ability to change his stripes? (No pun intended my tiger friends) Hook 'Em Safe traveling to Dallas.
Saban sometimes gets a rap (wrap?) for being a little too conservative and coaching "not to lose." A good example is the criticism he received after the Arkansas game, when he decided to run, run, run, then kick the field goal to go up by 6 with less than a minute to play. But, we have seen examples of him going against this style when playing teams that are heavily favored against LSU. For example, during last year's SEC Championship game, he elected to go for it on 4th and inches from his own 23 yard line in the 2nd quarter. He later realized that was a stupid idea, but he did it to show confidence in his team and fire them up. He also went for it on 4th and goal late in the game, up by 4 (I think). Several calls in the Florida game this year, such as the fake field goal to start the 4th quarter, further evidence this point. So, I look for some play calling that is a little outside Saban's normal philosophy. I guess he figures that he can/should take some chances in games in which he really has nothing to lose. What that play calling will entail, I have no idea.
Saban is a defensive coach and lets Jimbo Fisher, the OC, call most of the offense. Saban gets heavily into the defensive game though. Saban coached defense in the NFL and likes an NFL-style defense with a lot of man coverage. LSU blitzes enough to keep an opponent honest, but doesn't live with the blitz. LSU will try to confuse the QB before the snap, by line movement, by fake blitzes, and fake zone coverages. LSU can be good at making a zone lineup turn into man coverage and vice-versa. This is a good LSU defense. It is a mistake to underestimate it. The offense has been inconsistent since the loss of the starting quarterback, but if it brings it's "A" game can compete with the best. All four of our losses came when the offense just couldn't pass well enough and allowed the opponent to put 8 or 9 men in the box the stop the run. Everything depends on whether Randall, the green QB, has a good day. The coach can't do it for him
I agree that anyone who underestimates the LSU defense is foolish. I find that too many fans are obsessed with the rankings and believe it inconceivable that a lower ranked team could possibly have a chance against a highly ranked team - again foolish. Honestly, the LSU defense is what makes this game really interesting to me. It may be the best Texas has faced all year (except perhaps OU). If Texas can stop the run with their base defense, and not give the game away on offense (i.e. turnovers and such) we should win because our offense will score their share. However, it sounds like Toefeild (sp?) will be back, which means that the running attack will be pumping for LSU. If LSU gets the running game going and is not depending on the inexperienced QB, it will be a long day for the Texas defense.
follow up here... I mentioned stopping the run with our base defense only because if we have to resort to different schemes just to stop the run, it opens up the possibility of the big play. I think one of the keys for Texas is stopping LSU's running game with our front seven in their normal set. This will force the issue to your QB (weak area) and allow Texas' defense some opportunities to make some big plays. Wasn't sure if I was clear on all that. Oh, and thanks for the welcome.
Rey, just so you know..... Toefield has been back since the game against Ole Miss (11/23). I've noticed on the Longhorn boards that many UT fans are under the impression that he is still out. He hasn't played a whole lot and has suffered from a bit of fumblitis due to his arm not being completely healed, but that should be over with (hopefully) by Jan. 1. So, we will be throwing 3 frontline TB's at you, Davis, Toefield, Addai. It simply remains a question of Randall making the passing game enough of a threat to keep the 'horn defense honest. I actually felt that during most of the Ark. game LSU did a good job of this. Granted, you are a damn sight toughter than the Hogs, but the WR screens, in particular, seemed to open things up a bit.
