|
Post by rsmith627 on Nov 10, 2015 18:42:39 GMT -6
The topic here is obvious based off of the thread's title. The TCU thread got me to thinking, can you be great on both sides?
You don't see many teams in college that play stellar on both sides of the ball. The entire Big 12 is tough on offense, but none of them play defense. Michigan State has had good defenses with the exception of this year, and I think they've been more than adequate on O, but they aren't going to go out and hang 70 on anybody.
In high school I think it can be tough. We are a big enough school that we can platoon for the most part, but I think as a whole some of our better skilled guys end up on defense some years, and other years they end up on O, but we usually aren't lights out on both sides of the ball. Aside from that, at the level most of us on here are coaching at we have little to no control over what we are going to have in our program in a given year.
What do you guys think? Is it possible to be amazing on both sides on a consistent basis?
|
|
|
Post by poundtherock1 on Nov 10, 2015 18:57:41 GMT -6
The school I'm at now had a state championship year where we placed 21 players on the All-Conference team. Gave up something like 5 ppg and scored 32. This was in the 90's.
The game has changed so much in the past few years with up tempo offenses that I'm not sure you can see that level of dominance unless a team is just loaded with D1 talent.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Nov 10, 2015 19:34:29 GMT -6
I think the answer might vary depending on how you define "amazing". I agree with poundtherock1 's assessment that many aspects of offensive football have changed, and that combined with the paradigm shift regarding the importance of ball control has changed what "dominant" defense might look like on the stat sheet.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 10, 2015 19:43:05 GMT -6
The topic here is obvious based off of the thread's title. The TCU thread got me to thinking, can you be great on both sides? You don't see many teams in college that play stellar on both sides of the ball. The entire Big 12 is tough on offense, but none of them play defense. Michigan State has had good defenses with the exception of this year, and I think they've been more than adequate on O, but they aren't going to go out and hang 70 on anybody. In high school I think it can be tough. We are a big enough school that we can platoon for the most part, but I think as a whole some of our better skilled guys end up on defense some years, and other years they end up on O, but we usually aren't lights out on both sides of the ball. Aside from that, at the level most of us on here are coaching at we have little to no control over what we are going to have in our program in a given year. What do you guys think? Is it possible to be amazing on both sides on a consistent basis? Alabama for the last 7 years?
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Nov 10, 2015 19:51:27 GMT -6
I think it depends on your definition of good...IMO offense and defense should compliment each other. obviously, the idea is to score one more point than the other team...with the money today this is not necessarily the "motive " for college coordinators. or AD's they want to see points..I think that some would rather lose 49-48 than will 10-7. teams like navy again IMO, "get it"
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Nov 10, 2015 19:52:46 GMT -6
The topic here is obvious based off of the thread's title. The TCU thread got me to thinking, can you be great on both sides? You don't see many teams in college that play stellar on both sides of the ball. The entire Big 12 is tough on offense, but none of them play defense. Michigan State has had good defenses with the exception of this year, and I think they've been more than adequate on O, but they aren't going to go out and hang 70 on anybody. In high school I think it can be tough. We are a big enough school that we can platoon for the most part, but I think as a whole some of our better skilled guys end up on defense some years, and other years they end up on O, but we usually aren't lights out on both sides of the ball. Aside from that, at the level most of us on here are coaching at we have little to no control over what we are going to have in our program in a given year. What do you guys think? Is it possible to be amazing on both sides on a consistent basis? Alabama for the last 7 years? In 2014 they were ranked 9th in terms of total offense, 2013 32nd, 2012 19th, 2011 30th, 2010 22nd, 2009 15th, 2008 41st, 2007 67th and as of this point this year they are ranked 47th. While they are definitely in the top tier that are hardly consistent, and most years fall well short of being anywhere near the top 10. Their offense is adequate, but I don't know if I would call that elite. And don't misunderstand what I'm saying. Alabama as a program is elite but I think they're better and more consistent on D. I'm interested in looking up their D stats to see. espn.go.com/college-football/statistics/team/_/stat/total/year/2014
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Nov 10, 2015 19:54:13 GMT -6
The school I'm at now had a state championship year where we placed 21 players on the All-Conference team. Gave up something like 5 ppg and scored 32. This was in the 90's. The game has changed so much in the past few years with up tempo offenses that I'm not sure you can see that level of dominance unless a team is just loaded with D1 talent. This is a fair assessment. Where I'm at now won state titles the last 2 years in the biggest division in Michigan. This year we got bounced in the first round. The difference was for those 2 years they were absolutely LOADED with D1 talent. Also, they added me to their staff LOL
|
|
|
Post by olinedude on Nov 10, 2015 20:01:50 GMT -6
Consistently, maybe not. Can you be great on both sides? Yes. In high school it all depends on where you choose to put your best players. The teams that have good players on both sides tend to win championships.
Also, I think it's important to understand how tempo has changed defense. Most notably the defenses of good tempo offenses, because the idea of tempo is extend the game which puts your defense on the field more plays and ultimately they give up more points. Just because you give up more points per game is not indicative of how good or effective defense is.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Nov 10, 2015 20:05:32 GMT -6
Great points on how the game has changed. On our JV squad this year I was the OC. We were by no means loaded, but we had kids who had a blue collar mentality, banded together and went to work every week. The couple athletes we did have I gave up the defense, and will continue with this philosophy. If I load up the defense I can play offense a little differently and a lot more aggressively knowing the D will bail my ass out 9/10 times if I screw up.
If it's tight and I need a stud, I'll borrow one from D and use him on O in certain situations. We gave up 6 points on average this year, and scored 35 on average. Again, we weren't loaded, we were creative in finding ways to get our slow small receivers open. I'll save that for a facemelter thread though.
|
|
|
Post by 44dlcoach on Nov 10, 2015 20:08:30 GMT -6
I'd say it depends on how you want to measure being "good" on either side of the ball. There's a team in our area that totally subscribes to running the ball and holding it as long as possible. They always have a reputation as being a great defense that struggles on offense, but in reality that is just the style they play. They routinely play games where each team only gets 6-7 possessions in the entire game, so they don't score a ton and they don't allow a ton, but it says nothing about their efficiency.
Our offense is up tempo, and we have routinely played 7-9 possessions in a half, so we score more and typically allow more total points and always have a reputation as a power on offense and an average defense, at least in the media.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2015 20:50:30 GMT -6
Yes it's possible. But I think it takes an understanding that I see all that often
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 10, 2015 21:42:12 GMT -6
What level of football are you talking here?
|
|
|
Post by agap on Nov 10, 2015 21:43:13 GMT -6
If you look at the top 10 teams in points per possession in Division 1, there isn't a team that is on both lists. The other interesting thing about that is 3 of the current top 4 teams in the CFP rankings are in the top 4 defenses in points per possession.
There's a team in Minnesota playing for the state title this weekend that is averaging 48 points/game and gives up an average of 5 points/game. Their closest game all year was 34-7.
|
|
|
Post by leethefootballcoach on Nov 10, 2015 22:21:32 GMT -6
I think you are forgetting the importance of special teams also.
Last year i checked and our average starting drive on offense was on the 46 yd line. This year its the 27.
Our punter averaged about 41 per punt and we only gave up 48 total yards in returns all year, and 40 of that was a td against the #1 team in the state, so minus that we only gave up 8 yards in returns all year.
Our defense was good for us last year, 14.5 ppg and but we averaged 33 ppg offense. This year we gave up a lot more points, 19.5 ppg and scored 35 ppg. Our offense is better, but with longer fields. Had our defense been better this year we would have scored probably 40 ppg, also we punted 14 more times last year than we have this year so far, so I think Offense and Defense go hand in hand.
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Nov 11, 2015 7:11:33 GMT -6
Team that won our region averaged almost 50 a game and gave up something absurd like 40 a game. Lead the district in both categories. We average 39 a game and gave up 17 a game which put us in the top ten in both for the district. We finished second to the team above. I think in HS football most good teams are good at both. Looking at our district leaders and the teams that won or finished second in their regions were all top 10 O and D. No one really platoons around here and most guys play the best 11 on both sides regardless, maybe that makes a difference I don't know but I do not think it's all that hard to be good at both in HS.
|
|
|
Post by marinercoach1 on Nov 11, 2015 8:11:54 GMT -6
In my HS playing days we averaged 38 points a game (598 total points) and gave up 7 points a game(98 total points)..Its not impossible but it required lots of work seeing that most of us were two way players, so specializing got thrown out. It also helps that that team was ridiculously talented and revered as one of the best to come out of the area.
|
|
|
Post by mountainman on Nov 11, 2015 8:12:51 GMT -6
Through our 10 regular season games we have scored 477 points and have allowed 127. We are 10-0 heading into he playoffs. We have been known as a team that is dominant on offense but rather weak on defense. The truth is, we have scored so quickly that our D has played significantly more snaps that our offense. We have 23 picks (tops in the state) and 9 forced fumbles on the season. Even with those extra possessions we have still played significantly more defense than offense.
One game this year (a 56-14 victory) in the first half we had one more possession and still ran 10 fewer plays than the opposition. We were leading 49-0 at half and pulled the starters. Our backups/JV team play 7-14 to their starters in the second half and the next day I am answering questions about how we would have a great team if our defense played better (did they watch the game?).
Another team right down the street has a reputation for having a stellar defense and weak offense. They are a veer/wing t team that controls the ball and runs significantly more plays than their opponents. They allowed 7.3 points per game and had been scoring 15.7. All everyone can talk about is how incredible their D is.
when we played they were 6-1 and we were 7-0. It was billed as our O vs. their D. We promptly beat them 39-3. Instantly I am fielding questions about what happened to our offense and why I thought our defense played so well this week, WTF?
My point is that good teams have offenses and defenses that compliment each other and ultimately win games. If you are lighting up the scoreboard it is harder to put up big defensive stats as you are playing more d. If you hold the ball, control the clock and keep your D off the field, and don't score many points, that doesn't mean your offense is inept, it is just your style of play. Both styles can work, as can many styles in between.
|
|
|
Post by coachdlo on Nov 11, 2015 8:17:20 GMT -6
The topic here is obvious based off of the thread's title. The TCU thread got me to thinking, can you be great on both sides? You don't see many teams in college that play stellar on both sides of the ball. The entire Big 12 is tough on offense, but none of them play defense. Michigan State has had good defenses with the exception of this year, and I think they've been more than adequate on O, but they aren't going to go out and hang 70 on anybody. In high school I think it can be tough. We are a big enough school that we can platoon for the most part, but I think as a whole some of our better skilled guys end up on defense some years, and other years they end up on O, but we usually aren't lights out on both sides of the ball. Aside from that, at the level most of us on here are coaching at we have little to no control over what we are going to have in our program in a given year. What do you guys think? Is it possible to be amazing on both sides on a consistent basis? i think that is a BIT misleading... Look at how prolific the Big 12 offenses are... then look at some numbers of their defenses (particularly OU's and possibly OSU's) to say "none play defense" is a stretch IMO... Put them in a conf. where teams done regularly have offenses capable of doing what they're doing and then they would become "a great defensive team" so its difficult to say.. But i think it is VERY tough to be great on both. At the HS level that realistically means you have your studs playing both ways. Which USUALLY means they have to take a "break" somewhere... IDK though, solid thread!
|
|
|
Post by blb on Nov 11, 2015 8:45:02 GMT -6
Short answer, yes, you can be good at both.
At the HS level it probably depends on quality of your depth relative to competition.
As others have noted, the evolution of the game including rules changes has made it more difficult to be DOMINANT on defense, though.
Don't forget the impact Kicking Game has, too - if you're always defending a short field, makes it tough for your defense to be "good," for example.
Bo Schembechler was fond of saying "You achieve what you emphasize." To me that meant Defense, Kicking Game, then do what you can Offensively.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Nov 11, 2015 8:50:47 GMT -6
I think it's easier to have both in small school classes where most players play both ways and a few special players have a larger overall impact on the team and really stand out. The future D1 OL is also a great DL. The future D1 RB is also a bad a$$ LB. In other words, you kinda get a 2-for-1 deal plus a higher degree of dominance because the competition isn't as great. At large schools - and especially college - where teams two platoon and there are a larger number of good players in the mix that can at least hold their own against the special players, I think this impact is diluted somewhat and it's more difficult to be dominant on both sides of the ball.
|
|
|
Post by coacht2210 on Nov 11, 2015 9:01:35 GMT -6
Some good points. I agree a team's overall philosophy impacts this. A hurry spread team may be pretty dang good on defense BUT their stats may not be great because their offense scores so quickly and they are on the field so much.
|
|
|
Post by agap on Nov 11, 2015 9:15:44 GMT -6
Most teams look at points per possession now to measure how good a defense is. TCU had 600+ yards against Oklahoma State this past Saturday, but they also had 17 possessions, so is their defense really that bad? If you give up 600+ yards on 7 possessions, then your defense isn't playing too well.
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Nov 11, 2015 9:29:15 GMT -6
The topic here is obvious based off of the thread's title. The TCU thread got me to thinking, can you be great on both sides? You don't see many teams in college that play stellar on both sides of the ball. The entire Big 12 is tough on offense, but none of them play defense. Michigan State has had good defenses with the exception of this year, and I think they've been more than adequate on O, but they aren't going to go out and hang 70 on anybody. In high school I think it can be tough. We are a big enough school that we can platoon for the most part, but I think as a whole some of our better skilled guys end up on defense some years, and other years they end up on O, but we usually aren't lights out on both sides of the ball. Aside from that, at the level most of us on here are coaching at we have little to no control over what we are going to have in our program in a given year. What do you guys think? Is it possible to be amazing on both sides on a consistent basis? Its very tough to be stellar at anything so, yeah, its tough to be stellar at both.
|
|
|
Post by chi5hi on Nov 11, 2015 9:31:58 GMT -6
Can you be consistently "amazing" on both sides of the line? I don't think so...but I believe you can consistently be pretty good.
If I could choose which side that would be amazing, I'd pick defense.
|
|
|
Post by 44dlcoach on Nov 11, 2015 9:38:46 GMT -6
I think it's definitely possible to be both, but sometimes it's hard to look that way statistically unless you wanted to separate 1st string stats vs 2nd string stats.
For example, if you are dominating offensively, scoring lots of points, holding the other team down defensively and build a big lead you are going to put backup players in. If the backup offense struggles, the points already scored stay on the board so your offensive performance remains representative of how the game went. If you've given up 0 and your backups give up 17 points, now you're allowing 17 points per game.
I'm not saying it's the end of the world and we will always play our backups if we are fortunate enough to be in that position, but so often teams are judged in the media based on raw numbers that may not be representative of the actual play on the field.
|
|
|
Post by agap on Nov 11, 2015 12:20:54 GMT -6
I think it's definitely possible to be both, but sometimes it's hard to look that way statistically unless you wanted to separate 1st string stats vs 2nd string stats. For example, if you are dominating offensively, scoring lots of points, holding the other team down defensively and build a big lead you are going to put backup players in. If the backup offense struggles, the points already scored stay on the board so your offensive performance remains representative of how the game went. If you've given up 0 and your backups give up 17 points, now you're allowing 17 points per game. I'm not saying it's the end of the world and we will always play our backups if we are fortunate enough to be in that position, but so often teams are judged in the media based on raw numbers that may not be representative of the actual play on the field. And that's why teams are using points per possession now to measure how good a defense is. Throw out drives where the offense is trying to kill time (end of half/game) and garbage-time drives (2nd/3rd string) and figure out where you're at.
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Nov 11, 2015 12:40:43 GMT -6
Why can't a high school team be stellar at both? Even if they face all HUNH offenses all the time. If you have the athletes and the scheme why can't you score 35 ppg and allow less than a TD per game.
Question: with regards to points per possession does anyone have info on what would be considered "good" for high school? Both from the point of view of the offensive production and from the point of view of defense.
|
|
|
Post by agap on Nov 11, 2015 14:06:59 GMT -6
Why can't a high school team be stellar at both? Even if they face all HUNH offenses all the time. If you have the athletes and the scheme why can't you score 35 ppg and allow less than a TD per game. Question: with regards to points per possession does anyone have info on what would be considered "good" for high school? Both from the point of view of the offensive production and from the point of view of defense. The answers can be found in the binder.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Nov 11, 2015 14:20:12 GMT -6
If we're talking about HS ball I don't see why anybody would think that you can't be good at both. In this state the defending state champs in the three highest levels have all scored over 400 points and given up very few. Maybe college is different.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2015 19:29:49 GMT -6
Can it be done? Yes, but it's a function of talent more than anything else. Look at FSU and Nebraska in the 90s or Miami when they've been loaded.
Few teams are lucky enough to have such an embarrassment of riches, so they choose where they focus their talent.
The elite HS programs in my state dominate on both sides because they have the better Jimmies and Joes than the teams they play. When they do give up points, it's either to another elite team or after subbing down in yet another blowout win.
|
|