Is UL's Offense where you thought it would be?

[CharlieK]

_ Our Hurry Up Offense needs to slow down. Take the playclock all the way down. The longer the offense has the ball the less time our so called defense is out there. _

Great point. In hurrying up, we are short circuiting one of the best aspects of a strong ground option attack: the fact you can shorten the game and limit the other teams chances. We should go to the huddle, and run clock when we are on offense...and limit our defensive exposure.

[shof]

About where I expected it. Not where I had hoped mainly due to less effective passing game and red zone offense. Also thought the "hurry up" would live up to its name. Its not fast at all IMHO.

[CrazyCajun]

_ The offense isn't the problem.

If you put up 31 points, it should be good enough to win, especially going up 14-0 at home. Statistically, we are a good offense. My only complaint is that we seem to make mental mistakes in the red zone that cost us points and momentum. I would like to see us use the TE more, which we did a couple of times Saturday, including one TD. Statistically, we might be better than I thought we would be.......but statistics don't win games.

Troy ran an offense that was somewhat similar to ours and it seems like they do a better job of calling plays that will give their players a chance to succeed. I love the 5-10 yd. out routes that they call. Our corners give such a big cushion that it was basically like an easy 10 yd. run play. Troy took what our defense gave them. We were giving them the underneath routes, and they took them all day long.

Our offense is capable of being efficient like that, but from my point of view we do something "different" and put ourselves in a hole, when we could have continued to do what was working and been just fine. Sometimes we out-think ourselves.

We are good enough on offense, to win a few games. We are bad enough on defense to go 0-12. _

i agree with everything you said but the reason we give such a cushion is b/c troy has the deep threat. that is what having a deep threat gives you, the ability to make the underneath passes go for long gains. We throw those same 5 yard outs but b/c we have no deep threat the corners are on us as soon as we get the ball.

[Damon]

Clearly, the HURRY UP offense isn't working. The pace is more of a "please get set a little bit quicker offense", and we're not fooling anyone.

The defense is the issue here. Move some of the practice squad guys up, hold position tryouts, anything. This dffense is going to get us no where but on the NCAA 1A double secret probation list.

Don't look now, but FAU and Troy has officially past up the rest of the conference in very short order. There's real progress, and then there's our dreams of progress.

[RaginFan2]

_ I think that it is great that we are averaging more yards/game than in the past; It is still a problem that the O leaves so much on the table when they don't punch it in from the red zone or fails to convert on 3rd down. I still believe there is tremendous talent on that team that just needs to shine. I do think that we saw a few more plays this week; perhaps that not having Fenroy forced a change in the play book.

Geaux Cajuns!!! _

I agree. I said the O is performing below expectations because the offense's job is to score points. It is not to rack up yards between the 20's. The most disappointing thing about the team for me this year is the number of mistakes and penalties from the offense that keeps killing drives (or preventing drives from even starting). I also think we have enough talent to be scoring more points. I'm not sure what the answer is for the D this year. We look too small, too slow and too weak. The only answer is recruit, recruit, recruit. I think they need to put them through wrestling drills to improve their tackling skills.

[VObserver]

We seem to have addressed the red zone issue. 4 trips to the zone against Troy: 4 TD's. You can't do much better than that.

My big issue with the offense against Troy was that we threw the ball too much. If a team is giving you a average of 7-8 yards/carry in the running game, you should not throw 40 passes. 20, yes, but not 40.

[Just1More]

Our offense (the players) are a little above my expectations. Primarily, MD (first 2 games... where potential was shown), and the WRs have stepped up. Our offense (coaching staff) has not impressed me and is below expectations. I do not like our play call mix, our ability to maintain confidence, our OL technique, and the huge focus preseason on a hurry-up style that has not formulated into anything. I would remove the hurry up (since it doesn't exist). In fact, I think MD should swagger up to the line and take command of the field.

It's misleading to assess the offense alone. Even when we and the opponent have scoring drives, we give up roughly 30 to 40 yards to the opponent effectively in each respective series. We have to drive 90 yards on offense (hence the greater yardage), while they drive it 55 to 60 after kickoffs (for scores). I'd rather punch knuckle ball line drives than what we are doing on kick-offs. Our punting is also way below par. I've seen the guy jack punts, so I'm not sure why they haven't shown up on the field. Our kick/punt coverage and overall special teams play has not met my expectations.

Defense... has to step it up, in every category. Where is this attacking style? I expected more sacks and picks... and perhaps give up a big play ever so often as a result. We are giving up way too many "big plays", and not seeing the other benefit side of the "attacking style".

[MissingMandy]

I guess I'm confused. Didn't we get 31 points in the last game and give up 41 points? To me, such a high scoring game says the offense did their job and the defense did not. Am I missing something here?

[Turbine]

_ I guess I'm confused. Didn't we get 31 points in the last game and give up 41 points? To me, such a high scoring game says the offense did their job and the defense did not. Am I missing something here? _

You are not confused, anyone who says this offense is not clicking is.

Besides incredible yardage all year they have also turned the corner where it counts.

Last week agaisnt a good defense, 4 trips into the redzone . . . 4 touchdowns.

[Just1More]

_ I guess I'm confused. Didn't we get 31 points in the last game and give up 41 points? To me, such a high scoring game says the offense did their job and the defense did not. Am I missing something here? _

The offense is not doing poorly, but I have been to (or seen) every game. The offense has shot themselves in the foot on far too many occasions. And, you are right, it is the defense that is struggling greatly.

However, offense and defense contribute to the scoring both ways. If our offense puts the defense in bad field position, by not moving the ball, it isn't entirely the defense's fault for a short field disadvantage. Turnovers on offense, like with McNeese, are not the defense's fault. Likewise, our defensive stops and takeaways set up our offense for a shorter field.

Bottom line for me is that we are not lacking talent with 90% of the players. It seems to be a coaching issue, and perhaps with new staff trying to "inflict" their ideas there are some miscues for us that are not the case for our opponents. I can only hope we click and shock some of these upcoming opponents (they are bound to be overlooking us to some extent).

[ATXCajun]

_ Our Hurry Up Offense needs to slow down. Take the playclock all the way down. The longer the offense has the ball the less time our so called defense is out there. _

Second that. We dominated time of possession in 2005 and 2006.

[shof]

_ You are not confused, anyone who says this offense is not clicking is.

Besides incredible yardage all year they have also turned the corner where it counts.

Last week agaisnt a good defense, 4 trips into the redzone . . . 4 touchdowns. _

Turbine,
I agree that our offense hasn't been the big problem for us; but please, lets not mistake Troy's defense for a good one. They are dead last in the nation against the run. I'd surely hope we could score successfully against that D.
Shof