Quote:
Originally Posted by general counsel
just curious whether the fans of the martz offense miss the turnovers also. If we had turned the ball over early in the game yesterday, as we did frequently in the martz era, that game would have been over in no time. We stayed in it, pathetic as we were, by taking care of the ball.
Its amazing how the grass is always greener for so many people.
Guys, the talent is the key and its not there on defense and its not there on the oline under the best of circumstances and without pace you can foget it.
Remember how we couldnt get the ball downfield against tampa in the martz era because we couldnt protect? Same thing.
ramming speed to all
general counsel
|
GC, I think you make a bit of wild assumption with your view of Martz. I've always been a Martz supporter and still am. You can criticize him all you want for his turnovers and it is a valid point if you would rather have a conservative type of offense. The thing I don't like about Linehan is that his game plan relies on winning the turnover battle. If you note, our only wins this year are when we have a +2 or more advantage in turnovers (yikes). With Martz, we had a pretty decent record even when losing the turnover battle. It would be a good project to check our exact record with differing turnover ratios and I may do it over the thanksgiving break if family just bores me to utter death. I think we need more information on turnovers than just the numbers themselves though too. We need some type of ranking system for the impact of the turnovers.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that its more the overall impact of turnovers rather than the turnover itself that is really crucial. Blah, I feel like I can't type exactly what I'm thinking. Maybe I'll edit this later, but I hope you get the idea of what I am trying to say. :x