The House of Blue

tWhit,

The elite SEC teams every year accomplish two things at the same time. The score over 30 ppg and they hold opponents to under 20 ppg. That is the mark of an SEC contender in any year. Check the records, and you will see that has been the case, and it will be the case again this year.

The elite SEC teams are also highly ranked, and the elite of the elite in the SEC will compete for the national championship. On the defensive side, the recent SEC Champions have held defenses to 10 ppg or less. Those two Curci led defenses in 1976 and 1977 were truly worthy of that level of recognition, and for those of us who were fortunate enough to have experienced those two season, we understand in clear terms how excellent those teams were.

So, the lesson that these data teach is to compete in the SEC a team must have talent on both sides of the ball capable to averaging over 30 ppg on offense AND holding opponents to less than 20 ppg on defense. Those are the benchmarks, and these benchmarks have been consistently true for many years. Having one or the other is sufficient most years to place a team in the middle of the SEC pack, and absent either of them, a team teams to hang around in the bottom of the SEC barrel

Of course it is easier said than done. If it was easily accomplished, everyone would be doing it, but only those teams at the top tier of the SEC are able to post those kind of numbers for a season.

However, those are the technical measurements that should be the basis of targets, and goal setting for a football team. Being content with 24 to 27 ppg on offense, or defense will never elevate a program into the upper division.

One other thing I have observed, and it has been a common topic of lament among the big blue football fans. Why is it that UK seems to be able to get an offense that clicks above 30 ppg, but can't put the quality defense on the same team, or the other way around. When Claiborne's teams were consistently posting sub 20 point defenses, their offense was not near that rare air of 30 ppg.

I have often heard people say that in Claiborne's case, he was a defense first coach, and he implemented that philosophy by putting his best athletes on the defensive side, at the cost of reduced offensive effectiveness. I never quite figured out if that was indeed the case, but in hindsight, it does make sense. Mumme on the other hand was an offense first type of guy, and he put his best players on that side of the ball.

The monster programs have enough quality athletes in a given year to stock both units with quality players at depth.

At the end of the day, it is about the quality of the players, and there are the have's and the have not's in every sport.

Claiborne was a great man but he was on the downside of his career when he came. We never went up that SEC ladder with him as coach. We should have hired Howard Schnellenberger, another missed opportunity.