2018 Football Staff

[Just1More]

Oh, goodness. You have become Kevin Foote. "Turnovers aren't stops."

You have to admit... from coach speak... Hud talked way too much about turnovers. We weren’t a turnover machine. If coach speak created turnovers... we’d be undefeated. Unfortunately, if you don’t coach (recruiting included) a defense that runs offenses off the field on downs... and you’re counting on “forcing turnovers”... you are what they call “the loser” at the end of a football contest.

[ManAboutTown]

Oh, goodness. You have become Kevin Foote. "Turnovers aren't stops."

Trust me when I say, I don’t have any Kevin Foote anything.

But turnovers aren’t stops. They are a band aide.

[CharlieK]

Trust me when I say, I don’t have any Kevin Foote anything.

But turnovers aren’t stops. They are a band aide.

The turnover battle obsession is a prime example of people confusing correlation with causation.

[basinbear]

Trust me when I say, I don’t have any Kevin Foote anything.

But turnovers aren’t stops. They are a band aide.

Turnovers are stops....just as forcing a punt is a stop.....you want both....

[MetryCajun]

Good defenses create turnovers. Bad defenses talk about creating turnovers.

[Just1More]

The turnover battle obsession is a prime example of people confusing correlation with causation.

The key word was “obsession”. It never was an argument of how special it is for you to benefit more from turnovers... and not be the victim of them. If I see DL that cannot ever pressure a QB... or a secondary that leaves people wide open... and never wraps up the ball carrier... that coach needs to shut up about turnovers. If he says “we need to protect the ball” - of course we do. And you study your ball carriers tendencies and coach better ball carrying. If you’re talking about stripping the ball - you damn well make it very clear that you don’t forego tackling to “attempt” a strip or punch to create a fumble. If a coach doesn’t seem to cover the fundamentals well, but salivates over a mystical “turnover battle” - you are not listening to a high IQ football coach.

[Just1More]

Good defenses create turnovers. Bad defenses talk about creating turnovers.

A jewel of a post Metry.

[JMV JustMyView]

Maybe Karl Scott can bring Rusty Whitt back with him, lol...Have not heard any talk of who will be the new strength coach for football yet.

[CharlieK]

The key word was “obsession”. It never was an argument of how special it is for you to benefit more from turnovers... and not be the victim of them. If I see DL that cannot ever pressure a QB... or a secondary that leaves people wide open... and never wraps up the ball carrier... that coach needs to shut up about turnovers. If he says “we need to protect the ball” - of course we do. And you study your ball carriers tendencies and coach better ball carrying. If you’re talking about stripping the ball - you damn well make it very clear that you don’t forego tackling to “attempt” a strip or punch to create a fumble. If a coach doesn’t seem to cover the fundamentals well, but salivates over a mystical “turnover battle” - you are not listening to a high IQ football coach.

The turnovers come from playing good, sound defense. Having players who can make plays, who know their jobs, and have been put in the right positions. Also, winning comes from that. So winning the turnover battle and winning the game flow from the same set of actions. They correlate. You cannot however attempt to win the game by winning the turnover battle. Attempting to create turnovers does not cause winning. Correlation is not causation.

[cajunref]

Turnovers are stops....just as forcing a punt is a stop.....you want both....

Bingo