PonyFans.com

How much worse was the 1989 Defense of mainly Frosh and Sophomores? They played a much tougher schedule and the results are not all that far off. The numbers from the Houston game tilt the scales quite a bit. They also played with a run and shoot offense that had a lot of 3 and outs. A number of defensive players from that defense went onto play post-college in CFL/NFL.

Have to wonder how that D would have done with this year's schedule.

The 1989 Defense:

Allowed 499 points (includes 95 to Houston, 63 to A&M, 59 to Notre Dame, 49 to Baylor, 48 to Texas Tech, 45 to Texas, 38 to Arkansas)

Allowed 2886 Rush yards

Allowed 2946 Pass Yards

Allowed 5832 Total Yards

Defense Includes Marcello Simmons, Richie Butler, Bill Kiley, Uzo Okeke, Cary Brabham. Guys with a lot of heart who were out-sized by their opponents considerably.

The 2017 Defense

Allowed 388 total points thus far(includes 66 to Memphis, 56 to TCU, 43 to Navy, 34 to Tulsa, 32 to UNT, 31 to Cincy, 31 to UCF)

Allowed 2388 Rush yards thus far

Allowed 2967 Pass yards thus far

Allowed 5355 Total Yards thus far

Comparison is like a RR to a Yugo...

No matter how you try, it is difficult to scheme with smaller, slower, weaker talent. 2017 team does not have that excuse.

Keep in mind, those frosh in 89 were a lot better, when they were seniors in '92 after some time in weight room.

276 points allowed playing a similar schedule

4192 total offense allowed.

Its not even close-

Yes because teams were pulling their punches in 1989-90 because they were so bad that many teams could have 20-30 more points if they had wanted to. SMU's Top 10 Offense keeps all the 2017 games relatively close and so the opponent's starters have played just about the entire game. In 1989-90 they were resting starters in 2nd Q

Stallion wrote:Its not even close-

Yes because teams were pulling their punches in 1989-90 because they were so bad that many teams could have 20-30 more points if they had wanted to. SMU's Top 10 Offense keeps all the 2017 games relatively close and so the opponent's starters have played just about the entire game. In 1989-90 they were resting starters in 2nd Q

Stallion - is this year's defense any better than the 1992 defense that gave up 276 points to a SWC schedule that included #5 ranked Aggies? Add the names Byron Bonds and Chad Patton and Rodney Watkins to that defense, along with the above.

Houston was not pulling its starters when they were losing to SMU - or Arkansas or TCU for that matter...

This comparison is [deleted] our defense this year, but it is an interesting thought

This D is awful, but teams playing the '89 team were literally game-planning their next game, and working in 2nd and 3rd teamers EARLY.

Beyond everything mentioned above, the pace of play now is considerably higher than it was back then.

If I needed someone to tackle a runner I'd rather have Cary Brabham than any of our current DBs any day.

No doubt we could use a Cary Brabham-sideline to sideline headhunter-we don't have that guy right now

Stallion wrote:No doubt we could use a Cary Brabham-sideline to sideline headhunter-we don't have that guy right now

Or two. Or three.

DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:

Stallion wrote:No doubt we could use a Cary Brabham-sideline to sideline headhunter-we don't have that guy right now

Or two. Or three.

or 4 or 5...do we really need 100 posts saying our defense sucks? The schemes are bad, the personal is bad. We lack aggression, speed, and experience. The good news is there no where to go but up. I think?

And all this time I thought we were just trying to show we are a good candidate for the Big XII by playing in these high scoring games with very little defense!

CP - RIGHT

Stallion wrote:No doubt we could use a Cary Brabham-sideline to sideline headhunter-we don't have that guy right now

Headhunter? Is that even PC? lol