In 2011, we allowed the most rushing yards per game in the country. 120 out of 120 teams.
In 2014, we were 124 out of 128 teams in rushing yards allowed per game.
In 2016, we were 116th out of 128 teams in total rushing yards allowed per game.
Those 3 defenses were absolutely terrible at defending the run. In those years -- 2011, 2014, and 2016 -- there were signs of terrible defense early and often. Nevada ran for 300+ yards in the Jones in 2011. UTEP ran for 270 yards against us in 2014. A bad Arizona State team ran for 300+ yards against us in 2016. What followed in those seasons was more of the same. A terrible rush defense continued to allow a lot of rushing yards.
And yet, I don't think any of those three defenses would've performed worse than we played on Saturday night. It might've been as bad. But definitely not worse. And I don't really understand that.
Because those three defenses could not have held UH to 77 yards on 35 carries. And those three defenses could not have held WVU to 94 yards on 27 carries. They physically could not have done it. We didn't have the players to stop anyone from running the ball in those years.
Saturday's performance would be much easier to accept if we'd allowed UH or WVU to run for 270+ yards. Knowing that we have the potential to stop P5-level rushing attacks, and then falling back to the effectiveness of some of the worst defenses in college football history makes very little sense.
TCU gained every yard in the first half that they possibly could have gained. Every one of them. We forced them into three 3rd-and-longs in the first half.. on two of them, they converted with 30+ yard runs. One of them was immediately following a TO that we called because we only had 9 or 10 guys on the field. But that was really about the only pre-snap snafu by the defense. We were getting lined up and then getting demolished.
Every team in college football, as well as their respective offenses and defenses, play to a range of effectiveness each week. The Aggies played on the top end of their range on Saturday, and Bama played on the low end of their range. Some teams have tight ranges, where they are pretty consistently bad or good. Some teams have really wide ranges, where you're not sure what you're going to get.
It should be impossible for our defense to be capable of playing on a range with a top end close to some of the best we've seen in the decade of suck and a low end on par with some of the worst defenses ever fielded in the history of college football. It just should not be possible. But here we are...
Random
I thought it was a bit bush league that we went all out to block their punt with 40 seconds left and then were throwing the ball down the field on our last possession. I'm all for playing games for 60 minutes, but not when you get totally destroyed the way we did on Saturday. We didn't earn the right to play that game to the bone.
FWIW, the 4th down bot thinks it was the right decision to kick the FG down 28-7 with 8 minutes left in the first half on 4th and 6. Ultimately, it was pretty close to a toss up, which makes sense because any decision we made from 0-14 on was irrelevant considering the game was over.
Prior to the season, I would've signed up for 4-2 through 6 games and I would've thought it impossible that any 4-2 could feel so bad that I wouldn't want to take it. Well, knowing what I know now about this 4-2, I would've rolled the dice for a different outcome.
In 2014, we were 124 out of 128 teams in rushing yards allowed per game.
In 2016, we were 116th out of 128 teams in total rushing yards allowed per game.
Those 3 defenses were absolutely terrible at defending the run. In those years -- 2011, 2014, and 2016 -- there were signs of terrible defense early and often. Nevada ran for 300+ yards in the Jones in 2011. UTEP ran for 270 yards against us in 2014. A bad Arizona State team ran for 300+ yards against us in 2016. What followed in those seasons was more of the same. A terrible rush defense continued to allow a lot of rushing yards.
And yet, I don't think any of those three defenses would've performed worse than we played on Saturday night. It might've been as bad. But definitely not worse. And I don't really understand that.
Because those three defenses could not have held UH to 77 yards on 35 carries. And those three defenses could not have held WVU to 94 yards on 27 carries. They physically could not have done it. We didn't have the players to stop anyone from running the ball in those years.
Saturday's performance would be much easier to accept if we'd allowed UH or WVU to run for 270+ yards. Knowing that we have the potential to stop P5-level rushing attacks, and then falling back to the effectiveness of some of the worst defenses in college football history makes very little sense.
TCU gained every yard in the first half that they possibly could have gained. Every one of them. We forced them into three 3rd-and-longs in the first half.. on two of them, they converted with 30+ yard runs. One of them was immediately following a TO that we called because we only had 9 or 10 guys on the field. But that was really about the only pre-snap snafu by the defense. We were getting lined up and then getting demolished.
Every team in college football, as well as their respective offenses and defenses, play to a range of effectiveness each week. The Aggies played on the top end of their range on Saturday, and Bama played on the low end of their range. Some teams have tight ranges, where they are pretty consistently bad or good. Some teams have really wide ranges, where you're not sure what you're going to get.
It should be impossible for our defense to be capable of playing on a range with a top end close to some of the best we've seen in the decade of suck and a low end on par with some of the worst defenses ever fielded in the history of college football. It just should not be possible. But here we are...
Random
I thought it was a bit bush league that we went all out to block their punt with 40 seconds left and then were throwing the ball down the field on our last possession. I'm all for playing games for 60 minutes, but not when you get totally destroyed the way we did on Saturday. We didn't earn the right to play that game to the bone.
FWIW, the 4th down bot thinks it was the right decision to kick the FG down 28-7 with 8 minutes left in the first half on 4th and 6. Ultimately, it was pretty close to a toss up, which makes sense because any decision we made from 0-14 on was irrelevant considering the game was over.
Prior to the season, I would've signed up for 4-2 through 6 games and I would've thought it impossible that any 4-2 could feel so bad that I wouldn't want to take it. Well, knowing what I know now about this 4-2, I would've rolled the dice for a different outcome.
