Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Swamp Gas' started by CitRain12, Oct 22, 2013.
I like to focus on measures of effectiveness so my question is "does it work"...
You might expect it and that's your fault but MOST of us just want to get back to Atlanta.
Well, uh, that's how college athletics work. Players come, players go, coaches come, coaches go.
Actually, not necessarily. We've lost 3 games this year. You're basically assuming we'll lose many more than this. Regardless, you can't really talk "outliers" with a 3-season sample.
Right, which proves that it *can* work.
And back to my original point.... It can work (once) but as a philosophy I do not believe it does work over the long term. I think this is common stance amongst supporters. I'm not calling for anyone's head but it think offense needs to be a larger part of the equation. If you get past calling people silly or trying to determine what I meant to say my position is clear.
Are you sure? "Defense wins championships" is a well-worn, well-tested axiom in football.
Honestly, I don't think your position has been clear. You've asked whether it could work, I have shown that it can. Offense *was* a larger part of the equation last year - we didn't turn the ball over as much, we were able to run.
I believe the whole quote is offense wins games defense wins championships. I would assume you must win games to get to said championship.
I think everyone but you understood my argument. You are word smithing, and using different time periods while conducting comparative analysis; all this with overt condescension. If you have any further questions you can PM me. I think everyone else is ready to move on.
No, it's not. Someone may well have appended that through the year, but the age-old axiom is simply "defense wins championships." It does not preclude a great offense, nor does it require a bad one. It means, simply, of the two ... the most important will be defense.
Sure. We won enough to win championships in most years (7-1 generally will get you there). So I take this as tacit acceptance that the "philosophy" as it was applied last year provided a championship-caliber team.
I'm not sure why you're getting defensive here, I thought it was a fairly civil conversation.
What championship did our 11-2 record get us?
I don't think we will ever be able to prove if the original quote was offense wins games... Etc, unless someone trade marked it of course.
I'm not defensive but I think I have made my point and you continue to dissect my statements without providing your own analysis beyond we went 11-2 last year. We have really reached the end of this debate unless you offer something new. It is my experience that when debates get stale they devolve rapidly. My intention is to prevent a good debate from degrading.
Bastogne, you're tilting at a windmill.
Then there are those snivelers who kiss up to the program and characterize those who don't as snivelers.
You're probably right, although, it really is the quote in full. Check out the list of sports cliches: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sports_clichés
This is unfair. I've provided quite a bit - the only thing I've dissected is whether the "philosophy" can work. 11-2 is evidence that it can. Why are people so jumpy to dismiss it? I'm not saying it's proof that Muschamp is great or the man for the job, but it demonstrates - using real life - that it *can* work.
So any question of "can it work" can be dismissed out-of-hand given the evidence.
The real question is "will it work consistently enough for Gator fans."
It bears repeating here that the "philosophy" we employed last year is absolutely not in effect this year. We can't run the ball and we turn it over constantly.
I don't think anyone reading these boards now should be too concerned with "snivelers kissing up to the program" . In fact, it's a bit lopsided the other way, wouldn't you agree?
Ah, I see. So when you initially brought up the axiom "defense wins championships" in a discussion that singled out our 11-2 season, you were saying what exactly?
*Defense wins championships, except when it just makes you a "championship-caliber team"... did I get that right?
No, you have some comprehension issues. Those were two separate threads.
And I replied that fantastic defense is a fairly common attribute of championship teams.
Do you follow now?
Thank you, and thank you again for providing a complete axiom with context.
Nope, it's all right here in this thread. What else ya got?
Seriously, "Defense wins championships" is the traditional axiom.
Bear Bryant is noted for saying "Offense fills the seats|sells tickets but defense wins championships."
"Defense wins championships" was the retort to this quote:
So you've conflated a few things.