Muschamp's philosophy

Discussion in 'Swamp Gas' started by Wormwood56, Oct 28, 2013.

  1. Wormwood56
    Offline

    Wormwood56 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    5,348
    Likes Received:
    318
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,272
    We have been discussing Muschamp's philosophy all year as a potential reason why the offense performs poorly. It seems clear that Boom wants to (a) control the clock; (b) keep the rock; (c) minimize mistakes, and (d) score in the red zone. This philosophy keeps the defense fresh while wearing down the other team. I think this is universally agreed upon. Muschamp defenders scream "11-2!" every time the pitchfork and noose crowd comes a-callin' for Muschamp's head.

    The question is this: Is the problem philosophy or execution?

    Right now, Florida is struggling mightily due to a variety of issues, but it seems clear where the problem lies:

    Year----School-------W/L-----Total Off----Total Def----T of P---Redzone Off---TO Margin

    2013.........Florida..........4-3........109th............4th...........1st...........114th..............57th

    Let us compare to successful teams from the previous few years (10+ wins with 75th ranked offenses or worse) and see where the success lies:

    2012.........Florida.........11-2......103d.............5th.............9th...........43d..................7th
    2012.........LSU..............10-3........85th............8th..........46th...........34th.................5th
    2012.........Stanford......12-2.........84th..........23d...........23d............29th...............26th
    2012.........USCe...........11-2.........82d...........11th..........66th...........63d................43d
    2011.........Kansas St....10-3.......101st..........72d.............4th...........19th.................9th
    2011.........LSU..............13-1.........86th............2d..........26th..............4th.................2d
    2011.........USCe............11-2.........75th............3d..........25th...........63d.................30th
    2010.........LSU...............11-2.........86th.........12th.........57th...........28th................22d
    2009.........Nebraska......10-3.........99th...........7th.........47th...........69th................33d
    2009.........Iowa.............11-2.........89th.........10th.........29th...........41st................51st
    2008.........Virginia Tech..10-3.......103d.............7th...........3d............99th...............10th
    2008.........Ohio State.....10-3.........76th.........14th..........18th............1st..................6th
    2007.........Virginia Tech..11-3.......100th............4th.........67th...........47th...............14th

    What seems to stick out is redzone offense. With the exception of the 2008 Virginia Tech team, all the other good teams that resembled this year's Gators had at worst middle of the pack redzone offenses.

    The 2011 Kansas State team finished 10-3 in spite of a poor offense and a poor dfense. Bill Snyder must have played a helluva bend but not break defense that year. Miami, Baylor, Mizzou, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Texas, and Iowa State all gained more yardage than did Kansas State -- yet all the teams lost to the Purple Kitties.

    It wouldn't take too much to improve the offense to the 90s. The big issue I see is being able to punch it in when we are in the redzone. Cut that ranking from 114th to even 70th and we win 10 games.
  2. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,079
    Likes Received:
    596
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    There's no question it's efficacy. If you hold the ball all game and don't score, the "philosophy" fails.

    If we capitalized on every possession this season with a field goal, here are our point totals:

    Toledo: 36-6
    Miami: 42-21
    Tennessee: 42-17
    Kentucky: 24-7
    Arkansas: 36-10
    LSU: 24-17
    Missouri: 48-36

    Scoring on every possession is, of course, unreasonable. But so is scoring 0 touchdowns. The point mostly illustrates that if our offense could move the ball and we could kick field goals, the philosophy would be irrelevant.
  3. MyakkaGator
    Offline

    MyakkaGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,504
    Likes Received:
    363
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Myakka City, FL.
    Ratings Received:
    +1,754
    Good stuff worm! I believe it's both philosophy and execution. His stubborn philosophy has rendered this team as one dimensional...look at where the oppositions safeties have played us. Execution wise this team can't afford the "play not to lose" mentality when they're down 2 scores.
  4. Gatuar
    Offline

    Gatuar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,681
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +216
    I think Champ expected an improved offense to balance out losing Sturgis and not having an all time epic defense. 2012 we were virtually perfect on defense and situational punting not to mention Sturgis was automatic from 52 in

    Offense is worse...no Sturgis and we've had punting woes.
  5. nortonis
    Offline

    nortonis New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,183
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tallahassee
    Ratings Received:
    +47
    1) the philosophy is outdated and doesn't work like it did in the 70s

    2) The philosophy does not fit this team.

    3) the play calling is incredibly predictable so the defense is able to stack the box when necessary and play pass on the inevitable 3rd and longs.

    I'm sure you can point to a handful of teams that had good records despite being in the bottom of offensive production. They are the exception, not the rule. You can point to countless more teams with losing records ranked low on offensive. You can also point to countless teams who had good records with a highly productive offense.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,079
    Likes Received:
    596
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    Which philosophy are you speaking of here? Running the ball a bunch? It worked at the same clip (~ 64%) for Alabama last year, as I recall.
  7. samit23
    Offline

    samit23 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Tampa, Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +210
    We just need players to step up. Taylor, DRob, Fullwood, etc. no offense works with out play makers. Taylor looks to have have taken the first step. Hopefully #11 and #5 will follow suit.

    Sent from my iPhone using GatorCountry
  8. ACCecil
    Offline

    ACCecil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2007
    Messages:
    2,928
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +392
    I'm going to respond without data or stats.

    You live by the sword, you die by the sword. UF won a bunch of close games last year that you all could have easily lost. That kind of Karma turns around on you the next year invariably. So, the close games you won last year to go 11-2 are now turning into loses this year. That is actually quite normal.

    Why?

    Execution or philosophy?

    Well, this year, you beat Miami with better execution no doubt about it. You probably lose to LSU and Mizzou regardless. Or, maybe not. Your players tanked it against Mizzou once they fell behind. So throw that loss out the window. I'm not so sure an undefeated UF doesn't give LSU and Mizzou a better game so it is hard to say whether it is an execution or philosophy problem.

    I think Muschamp is a hard nosed, hard driving, expects perfection type coach. When a coach like that is winning everyone rallies around him. But, when things aren't going well, the players just tune the coach out and I think that is what you saw against Mizzou. Capitulation. Throwing in the towel. No mas. Whatever you want to call it. Quitting. Laying down. However you want to say it.

    The question now is can Muschamp regroup and get this team to play close to its potential or not? You are 4-4 if you lose to UGA and you still have SoCar and FSU up ahead. Even if you write off this year as a complete waste of time you have to wonder what next year is going to look like and if recruiting is going to go well for offense players. When Jeff Bowden was the OC at FSU even though Bobby wouldn't admit there was a problem the recruits voted by not wanting to play at FSU for 3-4 year period of time. Mickey Andrews got some NC quality studs but the offense diminished and FSU got no where near a NC. Muschamp has to be careful how he plays his cards over the next few weeks, IMHO.
  9. nortonis
    Offline

    nortonis New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,183
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tallahassee
    Ratings Received:
    +47
    64% when 75% of games are in hand by the end of the first half is not an accurate comparison. We are much less balanced than Alabama and, with all due respect to our coaching staff, comparing our offensive philosophy to Alabama's is a slap in the face to the team that has owned college football since 09 (not that I mind slapping Bama in the face but let's be real here).
  10. prisch1
    Offline

    prisch1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings Received:
    +0
    The other item this displays is it's really hard to have a championship team with this kind of offense. You have to be ultra efficient and that's just not going to happen year in and year out. You may strike lightning one year, but year over year it won't work (cue people pointing out LSU).

    Not to mention the new hitting rules which greatly favor the offense.
  11. Colin
    Online

    Colin Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings Received:
    +395
    I think the bigger question is why coach wants to (a) control the clock; (b) keep the rock; (c) minimize mistakes, and (d) score in the red zone.

    I think many people assume this is his "ideal" offense, but I see some of this as a reaction to the talent he has had.

    In year one, with Brantley as QB, we were not running a control the clock offense, or whatever you want to call it. We were scoring a ton of points. But when JB got hurt, we had to turn to two freshmen with no experience and little grasp of the offense. I think at that point he turned to the ball control offense, because freshmen QBs are more likely to make mistakes that can cost games.

    Last year we had three games in which we scored less than 20 points and five games in which we scored more than 30. I am not sure I would call that ball control offense. Driskel played hurt the second part of the year, and the O-line was pretty banged up the second half as well.

    This year we started out passing the ball, but it was difficult because the O-line is having a bad year, to say the least. Then JD got hurt. At that time our defense was nearly invincible, and with no viable back up to Murphy, I am sure the coaches wanted to minimize the chance of injury.

    If our line could block, things would be different. I believe coach wants to run a run-pass mix using power backs and big receivers who can win match-ups, but without the ability to run block and pass protect, that philosophy isn't going to work.
  12. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,079
    Likes Received:
    596
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    The philosophy, ostensibly, is run the ball a lot and utilize a lot of clock.

    That has put is in position to score more than enough points to win games. But we fail to do so. That's not a symptom of "philosophy."
  13. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,079
    Likes Received:
    596
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    Don't know about this. We averaged 5 more points per game in 2010 in the first five games than we did this year and we had Miami (FL) instead of Miami (OH).

    Most of the difference was in the Kentucky game anyway.
  14. tilly
    Offline

    tilly Superhero Moderator VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Messages:
    19,675
    Likes Received:
    688
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Wilmington, NC via FLA
    Ratings Received:
    +2,480
    When an offense continually moves into the red zone ..but fails to score...its less philosophy and more execution. Long time consuming drives are good. They have a purpose...they just MUST end in points.

    Sent from my All knowing Android Device
  15. nawlinsgator
    Offline

    nawlinsgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    4,310
    Likes Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +181
    Alabama is scoring 41 points a game. They are doing more than just rushing the ball.
  16. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,079
    Likes Received:
    596
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. Of course, they're passing much more this year than last.

    This year they're at 45% passing versus about 36% in 2012. For the record, we're at 36% this year, too.

    The point is, a run-first, clock possession offense CAN work. Ours DOESN'T work, but blaming the philosophy is superficial, lazy and demonstrably wrong.

    Now you can blame situational playcall, you can blame player development and you can blame on-field decisions, but too much focus is applied to "philosophy" as it relates to time of possession and running, neither of which are dooming our offense.
  17. LouisvilleGator
    Offline

    LouisvilleGator Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +21
    Right. I think the reason we don't score is because teams know what's coming. Muschamp's philosophy of ball control is not the issue. It's the type of offensive scheme we are running that doesn't allow us to capitalize on the philosophy. If you're an OC and you are recruiting against Florida, it's easy to tell a high school receiver: "you might get one or two looks a game... IF you are lucky". It's a downward spiral for us. The WR position is almost non-existent in this offense. What a change from the days of five wide, SoS era football.
  18. tilly
    Offline

    tilly Superhero Moderator VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Messages:
    19,675
    Likes Received:
    688
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Wilmington, NC via FLA
    Ratings Received:
    +2,480
    Philosophically we are very similar to Bama. Difference is their O-line can run and pass block.

    This effects situational play calling.

    Sent from my All knowing Android Device
  19. Minister_of_Information
    Offline

    Minister_of_Information I'm your huckleberry Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    13,741
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    In my prime
    Ratings Received:
    +970
    Like a voice in the wilderness.
  20. klgator
    Offline

    klgator Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +55
    How many times have we even gotten into the red zone the last two games? Twice? Hard to execute in the red zone when you don't even get there.

Share This Page