Football question

[CoachTalk]

so mateer says his thumb is not to blame for his crappy play the last 2 games.
it's time to perform or ride the pine.

And put in who?

Def gave up 34? But let’s blame the qb for the whole thing:

Not saying he isn’t to blame for some but #1 in America gave up 34

 

[daqman]

And put in who?

Def gave up 34? But let’s blame the qb for the whole thing:

Not saying he isn’t to blame for some but #1 in America gave up 34

defense gave up 32.
we were only #1 because we played teams with bad offenses. i explained that before the game.
so the offense has to to its part and score.....especially when the defense gives you the ball on the +15 yard line.

 

[stormspencer]

And put in who?

Def gave up 34? But let’s blame the qb for the whole thing:

Not saying he isn’t to blame for some but #1 in America gave up 34

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert, but on Gabe/Teddy's podcast, they put a majority of the blame on Mateer for simply not seeing the field and making the correct decision. He missed (or didn't see) wide open guys on several throws that could have been explosive plays and even touchdowns. And in some cases, the play was supposed to go to the wide open guy and he didn't throw it. You need above average QB play in this conference to win.....even if you have a really good defense. I also agree that the defense didn't make some stops that they should have, but the offense left them hung out to dry far too often in this game. I haven't totally given up on Mateer, but I need to see something from him this weekend for sure.

 

[Eielson]

defense gave up 32.
we were only #1 because we played teams with bad offenses. i explained that before the game.
so the offense has to to its part and score.....especially when the defense gives you the ball on the +15 yard line.

We may not be the best defense, but we are undeniably elite on that side of the ball, and it's not about playing bad teams.

Without a doubt, that first half was the worst this defense has played, but played much better in the second half. Just not quite enough for the rough first half.

Offense could have been better, but outside of the safety, they played well enough through 3 quarters to beat any team in the country if the defense plays at the level it is capable of. Just couldn't get it done in the 4th.

 

[WaymanFan]

We may not be the best defense, but we are undeniably elite on that side of the ball, and it's not about playing bad teams.

I think we all wish we had this defense during the Lincoln Riley era. It's very good, but here's why I'm not ready to call it "elite". This defense does not force turnovers. We have played 8 games so far. In how many of them has the defense forced at least one turnover? 2? 3 at the most. Plus, I'm not the only one who agrees with what Greg McElroy was saying during the Ole Miss game that the cornerbacks were playing way too far off the ball. There were times they didn't look like they knew what they were doing and it was frustrating to watch. BV made some great halftime adjustments, but Ole Miss countered in Q4. Playing great defense for one quarter out of four was very disappointing.

I'm probably a bit more picky than others when defining an elite defense. I remember the mid 1980s when we supposedly had an elite defense. In actuality, it was only elite against schools who couldn't throw the ball effectively (which was all but Miami at the time). That defense would have gotten destroyed if we played against more schools with QBs who could complete a downfield pass.

In my lifetime, we've had two elite defenses - 1974 and 2001. Several others were "very good".

 

[CoachTalk]

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert, but on Gabe/Teddy's podcast, they put a majority of the blame on Mateer for simply not seeing the field and making the correct decision. He missed (or didn't see) wide open guys on several throws that could have been explosive plays and even touchdowns. And in some cases, the play was supposed to go to the wide open guy and he didn't throw it. You need above average QB play in this conference to win.....even if you have a really good defense. I also agree that the defense didn't make some stops that they should have, but the offense left them hung out to dry far too often in this game. I haven't totally given up on Mateer, but I need to see something from him this weekend for sure.

I’m not saying he’s not to blame as well.

 

[WichitaSooner]

I think we all wish we had this defense during the Lincoln Riley era. It's very good, but here's why I'm not ready to call it "elite". This defense does not force turnovers. We have played 8 games so far. In how many of them has the defense forced at least one turnover? 2? 3 at the most. Plus, I'm not the only one who agrees with what Greg McElroy was saying during the Ole Miss game that the cornerbacks were playing way too far off the ball. There were times they didn't look like they knew what they were doing and it was frustrating to watch. BV made some great halftime adjustments, but Ole Miss countered in Q4. Playing great defense for one quarter out of four was very disappointing.

I'm probably a bit more picky than others when defining an elite defense. I remember the mid 1980s when we supposedly had an elite defense. In actuality, it was only elite against schools who couldn't throw the ball effectively (which was all but Miami at the time). That defense would have gotten destroyed if we played against more schools with QBs who could complete a downfield pass.

In my lifetime, we've had two elite defenses - 1974 and 2001. Several others were "very good".

The rush to label this defense elite was crazy. I get it to some extent because our fans have been subjected to so many awful defenses the past decade. But I don’t know how so many folks failed to realize two things: we haven’t played a single good offense all season, and, like you say, the defense doesn’t generate turnovers.

The defense failed its first true test. Ole Miss gashed them the first half. The time of possession was a mismatch not just because our offense struggled, but because our defense couldn’t stop them on their down. And in the second half, our offense did its job, gave us the lead, and the defense immediately gave up a 75-yard touchdown drive.

It’s odd to me how many people act as if a team’s issues are an either/or thing. It’s either the offense or the defense. It’s either Mateer or Arbuckle. The truth is they all deserve blame. If people could be objective, they’d see that Mateer is not even close to being in the top half of the league. He’s maybe in the bottom third of SEC quarterbacks. The rest of the offense isn’t talented enough to compete at the highest level in the league, either. Arbuckle makes some head scratching personnel choices. And the defense has failed to step up in our two biggest tests. Oh, and the special teams are a problem. Lots of issues across the board.

 

[BoulderSooner]

The rush to label this defense elite was crazy. I get it to some extent because our fans have been subjected to so many awful defenses the past decade. But I don’t know how so many folks failed to realize two things: we haven’t played a single good offense all season, and, like you say, the defense doesn’t generate turnovers.

The defense failed its first true test. Ole Miss gashed them the first half. The time of possession was a mismatch not just because our offense struggled, but because our defense couldn’t stop them on their down. And in the second half, our offense did its job, gave us the lead, and the defense immediately gave up a 75-yard touchdown drive.

It’s odd to me how many people act as if a team’s issues are an either/or thing. It’s either the offense or the defense. It’s either Mateer or Arbuckle. The truth is they all deserve blame. If people could be objective, they’d see that Mateer is not even close to being in the top half of the league. He’s maybe in the bottom third of SEC quarterbacks. The rest of the offense isn’t talented enough to compete at the highest level in the league, either. Arbuckle makes some head scratching personnel choices. And the defense has failed to step up in our two biggest tests. Oh, and the special teams are a problem. Lots of issues across the board.

this is STILL an elite defense ..

you know most advanced stats are opponent and tempo adjusted ?

 

[SoonerBounce13]

The rush to label this defense elite was crazy.

Its not a rush. It is looking at the results.

Maybe people have different definitions of elite. To me, it is a select few defenses each year.
Some may look at it differently.

But please go tell the defense that non of the games before Ole Miss mattered and weren't tests

 

[daqman]

apparently bv said we had the better team against ole miss.
what an asinine statement.

 

[WichitaSooner]

this is STILL an elite defense ..

you know most advanced stats are opponent and tempo adjusted ?

You're assuming that because our stats are good, that necessarily means we are elite. There doesn't necessarily have to be an elite defense every year. But also, even advanced stats can be skewed if you absolutely dominate the crap offenses on your schedule. We have dominated those teams, and we have played a lot of them. When you have played several bad offenses and only one good one, it will take time for the stats to adjust. Let's talk in three weeks or so, after we have Tennessee and Alabama under our belts.

 

[WichitaSooner]

apparently bv said we had the better team against ole miss.
what an asinine statement.

Oh he definitely said it, and it's one of the dumbest statements imaginable. Ole Miss won every statistical category but one, led for all but a few minutes, and the only reason we were in the game was because they missed two easy TD throws. There are games when the "better" team doesn't win, but Saturday wasn't even close to being one of those times. For a coach to say that is ludicrous, and Kiffin was right in the way he replied.

 

[daqman]

Its not a rush. It is looking at the results.

Maybe people have different definitions of elite. To me, it is a select few defenses each year.
Some may look at it differently.

But please go tell the defense that non of the games before Ole Miss mattered and weren't tests

elite defenses win games.
this defense gave up some huge 3rd and long downs against ole miss.
also gave up multiple long drives..
it cannot force turnovers....especially in critical situations.
i expect tenn and bama will expose the defense yet again. and if mateer doesn't pull his head out of his ass....the offense might get shut out.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

apparently bv said we had the better team against ole miss.
what an asinine statement.

Once again people will blow this up as something more than it was/is because that is the kind of culture we have.
He was saying he thought we were the better team.
That can be taken multiple ways...i.e. it could me he thinks we are the better team still OR he used to think we were the better team.
Context matters but twitter doesn't care

 

[SoonerBounce13]

There doesn't necessarily have to be an elite defense every year.

And here is the rub.
To some, there will always be an elite defense each year.
TO some, every defense if compared to defenses of the past decade to be elite
To some, every defense is compared to all time defenses

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Ole Miss won every statistical category but one, led for all but a few minutes, and the only reason we were in the game was because they missed two easy TD throws. There are games when the "better" team doesn't win, but Saturday wasn't even close to being one of those times. For a coach to say that is ludicrous, and Kiffin was right in the way he replied.

"only reason we were in the game..." LOL what an idiotic statement.
We missed easy throws as well. We fumbled on a punt return etc....

 

[WichitaSooner]

Once again people will blow this up as something more than it was/is because that is the kind of culture we have.
He was saying he thought we were the better team.
That can be taken multiple ways...i.e. it could me he thinks we are the better team still OR he used to think we were the better team.
Context matters but twitter doesn't care

He was speaking about being the better team Saturday, not in general. And it's a stupid thing to say. You don't say something like that after getting beat, at home, and having your defense diced up by a good offensive team and coach. You don't say it after your high priced QB just played an awful game. You don't say it when you have now flopped on the big stage twice in three weeks. And you don't say it when you are now 4-8 against SEC teams in your career. Brent has won two conference games against teams other than Auburn in two years. He has one ranked win in his two years in the conference. Until you show you are anything other than a bottom tier team and coach in your league, you should just shut up rather than trying to act like the result wasn't consistent with who the better team was.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

He was speaking about being the better team Saturday, not in general.

Really? Why do you say that?
Have you listened to it in context?

 

[cowboysooner]

I watched BV's statement about "being the best team", and I didn't take he meant what most of you and Lane are assuming to be true. I took his statement to mean he was saying he thought they (OU) was the better team -- going into the game, but it is a game of performance and we got out performed. In other words, he worded what he meant poorly. I think he was just saying that BEFORE OR GOING INTO THE GAME he thought that he had a better team than Lane, and that the game showed otherwise.

Who really knows though, and only BV could clarify what he meant to say. Wichita, if he meant what you guys seem to think he was saying, i.e. the better team didn't win, then I agree with you, he was clearly wrong. This being said, on a neutral and dry field, if the teams play 10 times I think OU wins 6 or more. Just an unprovable opinion. I was at the game and believe that if Mateer just plays average, and not horrible (my opinion and judgment) I think OU wins. Arbuckle had schemed guys running wide open all day and John never found them save and except for the Satenga touchdown. There was also the completely phantom roughing call, a silly line up offsides by RMT, and the fumble by Isaiah. But mostly, I just don't believe that Chambliss could make some of the insane throws he made (under extreme pressure) into tiny window on a regular basis. Normally, the team with the best quarterback wins, not necessarily the best team. OU was the beneficiary of that under Riley and we have suffered under that truth under Venables.

 

[Soonerguy06]

any thoughts to if we can win at Tennessee? Or any of the remaining games?

If i'm being optimistic I think we can win 3 out of the next 4.
If i'm being pessimistic/realistic we could very well lose all of our remaining games.
Most likely we will win 1, maybe 2 of the last 4 games. Would that be enough to warrant BV's termination? Since our AD is retiring I bet BV has at least 1 more year remaining in Norman, if the season doesn't end well.