Was it just my imagination or did a different Razorback team come out to start the third quarter against Alabama?
It didn’t seem obvious on the TV, but it seemed obvious to me at the game. There was an intensity level on the field that I hadn’t seen in Razorback Stadium in quite a while. That drive to start the third quarter was serious – McFadden, the offensive line, everyone. They looked like people that weren’t going to be denied. That drive was big.
The defense had every reason to throw in the towel in the fourth quarter. But they didn’t. After the interception on the second play after a great stop, they came back out and played with great intensity. Yes, Alabama may have played safe for a field goal, but they did that because of multiple worry points our defense had given them good reason to have. Our guys had that ‘don’t mess with us’ look that makes an offense tuck into a shell.
For those keeping up, the team that ran the ball the best and stopped the run the best won, just as Houston Dale predicted. If Alabama had made the field goal towards the end of regulation then the team that ran the worst and passed the best (both total yards and yards per attempt) would have won. If life were fair for kickers - should have won.
Does anyone but me find it interesting that the team that ran the best got beat in time of possession by over 19 minutes and ran 19 fewer plays from scrimmage?
The team with the most turnovers won the game. The team with the fewest penalty yards won the game. The team with the most first downs lost. The team with the best third down conversion percentage won.
You see how all of that stuff really doesn’t make any sense?
Notice how the team that was most effective passing ran more plays and controlled more clock? And their offense scored more points than ours. But our defense scored more points than theirs and helped out.
How did we manage to win? Good breaks. Great intensity. I think the team that played the hardest won the game. My hat is off to the defense. That was a performance that I wasn’t sure we had in us. But there it was. Give me that every SEC game and I like our chances.
By the way, we were clearly held on the 78 yard pass. That was a cool play – you have to tip your hat and say ‘too good’ – but it took the holding to give the QB enough time to make it work.
The offense – well, I have a few issues, but we’ll have plenty of time to get into those with the bye week. This was a good game for them to survive and get to learn from.
You have to admit there is ice water in some of these guys. Malzahn going to the pass in the second overtime, twice, and two freshman doing an ad-lib off of a brand new play on 3rd and 8 for a touchdown. You may have thought it was a bit crazy, but you have to admire their guts. You really have to admire that they pulled it off.
And that’s the real story here. The Razorbacks dug deep and played their hearts out to win. When you do that good things come your way.
Am I the only one disapointed with our defense. Yes they did some things right (stopping the run) but good golly. I'm placing the time of possession issue squarely on the defense. And by the way, when you have a loose ball on the ground you got to get it. When it's 3rd and forever, how do you let the receiver get behind you (several times)? And for the love of Pete, when you stop the offense just get off the field. This personal foul thing is really getting under my skin. Ok, that's the end of my rant. Thank goodness for an off week.
Razorbilly – the defense does have issues getting teams off the field. i've been studying on this time of possession thing and will probably do a post on it this week. take a look at the first quarter against alabama and see what you think about our offensive possessions versus theirs and the amount of clock both took up. alabama ran 3 more plays and made 6 more yards – but used almost 4 minutes more clock. i'd be interested in what thoughts you have on this.
HogBlogger – you've done a great job of teeing it up. I think the time of possession is not nearly as important as the number of plays run. Since the clock stops on pass plays, it can give the appearance that the offense has been on the field less. I look forward to your analysis.
Razorbilly – take a look at that first quarter and let me know what you are thinking. it is an interesting deal. time between snaps appears to be much quicker under Malzahn. refs are spotting the ball pretty quickly – i'm sure coached a bit regarding our needs if we go no huddle. many of our running plays go out of bounds and stop the clock. longer running plays stop the clock because of the first down and we get the next play off pretty quickly. of course, incomplete passes stop the clock.
HogBlogger – Good points. Here's a couple of mine. I submit (and I'm sure some disagree) that the offense that Malzahn runs can actually be harder on a defense than a more "normal" offense. Why? There is less time to rest between plays and situational substitution is limited with the "no huddle". These points are not true with a more "traditional" passing oriented team. I think some folks are relying on outdated rules of thumb and not thinking things through with some of the criticism they are dishing Malzahn's way.