Texas A&M Football
Sponsored by

Last time we were good at generating turnovers?

2,626 Views | 22 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by Get Off My Lawn
bigtruckguy3500
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Question in the title. 2012 Bama game popped up on my youtube feed and I watched those 2 INTs and fumble. Seems like it has been a few years since we've consistently generated turnovers and had a big positive TO margin at the end of the season. Why are some teams so much better at it than others?
maver1ck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Defenses that play with intensity and fly to the football tend to generate turnovers. I honestly think it's as simple as that.

And some of it is just being in the right place at the right time.
cevans_40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think our main focus on defense is getting stops. I know some coaches really harp on turnovers to a point where players are taking a risk of giving up additional yardage in order to try and create a turnover. I don't think Elko coaches that way. I think he is all about stopping them and getting off of the field and turnovers are kind of an afterthought.
maver1ck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
cevans_40 said:

I think our main focus on defense is getting stops. I know some coaches really harp on turnovers to a point where players are taking a risk of giving up additional yardage in order to try and create a turnover. I don't think Elko coaches that way. I think he is all about stopping them and getting off of the field and turnovers are kind of an afterthought.
There's a lot of truth to this. Elko wants guys to be disciplined, hold their gaps, fill gaps, etc.

Turnovers come naturally if you do this stuff. And they have. Our defense has forced 5 in the last 2 games, and should be 6. The INT taken away from Leon against Mizzou was terrible.
Bunk Moreland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
some defenses are aggressive. some are conservative.

The better/more physical you are at the LOS usually increases turnover chances across the board. If you can create pressure in the backfield by only rushing 4, you speed up the clock of the QB and force them into worse decisions over time. You also are able to create more fumbles at the LOS when the center/QB/rb are worried about getting hit in the backfield.

If you have to bring 5 (or 6) constantly to get pressure, you may force some wild picks or huge hits on the qb but you'll be vulnerable to giving up huge plays.
EKG1996
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We were in the top 25 in TO margin last year but that was more to do with us not turning it over.

I would guess that the teams that play faster place (ie more plays) tend to generate and have more turnovers. We actually "forced" a good number in 2017 and 2016.

A big portion of it is luck. Tip balls for an int, fumbled snaps, playing in bad weather, etc.

Link to Turnover stats
Alpha Texan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
nbaker2022 said:

Defenses that play with intensity and fly to the football tend to generate turnovers. I honestly think it's as simple as that.

And some of it is just being in the right place at the right time.
Yeah, you can do all the small things right but sometimes you're still just waiting on the QB to make an errant throw. You've gotta take care of business to get turnovers, but you still need your opponent to slip, most times. But unless you're playing fast and hard, you won't capitalize on those mistakes.
akm91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
2021: 11 total (9 int/2 fumble) 1.4 TO/GM
2020: 14 total (10 int/4 fumble) 1.4 TO/GM
2019: 14 total (10 int/4 fumble) 1.1 TO/GM
2018: 7 total (7 int/0 fumble) 0.5 TO/GM

2017: 10 total (10 int/0 fumble) 0.8 TO/GM
2016: 12 total (12 int/0 fumble) 0.9 TO/GM
2015: 11 total (11 int/0 fumble) 0.8 TO/GM
2014: 5 total (5 int/0 fumble) 0.4 TO/GM

Under Jimbo we're generating on avg 1.0 TO/GM (46 TO/44 GM)
Last 4 years of Sumlin we were generating avg 0.7 TO/GM (38 TO/52 GM)

It's a 43% increase in TO/GM.
"And liberals, being liberals, will double down on failure." - dedgod
Detmersdislocatedshoulder
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The last season that I remember we had crazy amounts of turnovers was actually under Fran. I think it was like the 2004 or 2005 season. We beat Clemson at home the year I am thinking of. That season we were very very average but we lucked into tons of turnovers. I guess it happens every 20 years, so watch out in 2024-2025 season.

Obviously coaching had nothing to do with it.
EKG1996
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
akm91 said:

2021: 11 total (9 int/2 fumble) 1.4 TO/GM
2020: 14 total (10 int/4 fumble) 1.4 TO/GM
2019: 14 total (10 int/4 fumble) 1.1 TO/GM
2018: 7 total (7 int/0 fumble) 0.5 TO/GM

2017: 10 total (10 int/0 fumble) 0.8 TO/GM
2016: 12 total (12 int/0 fumble) 0.9 TO/GM
2015: 11 total (11 int/0 fumble) 0.8 TO/GM
2014: 5 total (5 int/0 fumble) 0.4 TO/GM

Under Jimbo we're generating on avg 1.0 TO/GM (46 TO/44 GM)
Last 4 years of Sumlin we were generating avg 0.7 TO/GM (38 TO/52 GM)

It's a 43% increase in TO/GM.
Don't think your fumble numbers are right...
akm91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Crap you're right. I was looking at wrong column!
"And liberals, being liberals, will double down on failure." - dedgod
Mule_lx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
In my Al Bundy HS football days, if you couldn't get the ball carrier down you held on until the wolves got there. The wolves were responsible for the strip. That said, it looks like ball carriers are really good at securing the ball with two hands these days.
Snap E Tom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
akm91 said:

Crap you're right. I was looking at wrong column!
It would be interesting to see the fumbles added.

I had a conversation with a buddy about this. I remember we were tackling terribly under Sumlin's last few years, but immediately better under Elko. At the same time, however, the turnovers plummeted.

I remember at a few pressers in the Sumlin era, the defensive players said they emphasized creating turnovers in practice. It all made sense because if they were too busy trying to strip the ball away, it's going to be easier to break the tackle.

I'd rather have solid, reliable tackling like we have now than the feast of famine approach of Sumlin.
Deplorable
How long do you want to ignore this user?
akm91 said:

2021: 11 total (9 int/2 fumble) 1.4 TO/GM
2020: 14 total (10 int/4 fumble) 1.4 TO/GM
2019: 14 total (10 int/4 fumble) 1.1 TO/GM
2018: 7 total (7 int/0 fumble) 0.5 TO/GM

2017: 10 total (10 int/0 fumble) 0.8 TO/GM
2016: 12 total (12 int/0 fumble) 0.9 TO/GM
2015: 11 total (11 int/0 fumble) 0.8 TO/GM
2014: 5 total (5 int/0 fumble) 0.4 TO/GM

Under Jimbo we're generating on avg 1.0 TO/GM (46 TO/44 GM)
Last 4 years of Sumlin we were generating avg 0.7 TO/GM (38 TO/52 GM)

It's a 43% increase in TO/GM.


Those numbers put how good defense was last year in a different perspective considering it was an all sec schedule.
PascalsWager
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Turnovers are luck.
Stupid@17
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quality of sustained pressure on quarterback and good defensive back athletic ability has a somewhat direct correlation to interceptions on all but the wunderkind qb's.

Pressure consistently will cause errant throws, having athletic backs means they are closer to receiver and can more easily get an interception or tipped ball.
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Before targeting was a penalty.
Emilio Fantastico
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
One of the most frustrating things to me is that it seems like most of the turnovers we commit are unforced yet our opponents seem to rarely commit unforced turnovers for us.
This is more a case on the fumble side of things although we've seen some wtf?!? type interceptions too.
fieldtrailer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just a guess but I'm betting turnovers go up when we start scoring points. That will force teams to be more aggressive. We have not been a good offense for at least 6 years.
Iraq2xVeteran
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Detmersdislocatedshoulder said:

The last season that I remember we had crazy amounts of turnovers was actually under Fran. I think it was like the 2004 or 2005 season. We beat Clemson at home the year I am thinking of. That season we were very very average but we lucked into tons of turnovers. I guess it happens every 20 years, so watch out in 2024-2025 season.

Obviously coaching had nothing to do with it.
We crushed Clemson 27-6 in 2004, and that Clemson team finished 6-5. Clemson's 600th win came November 20 against South Carolina, a game notable for a brawl between the two teams. Due to the brawl, the Tigers declined a bowl bid in part because of the unsportsmanlike nature of the fight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Clemson_Tigers_football_team
Ugly
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Turnovers are generally luck, but if you are willing to give up making good tackles, you can try for the strip more often. I wouldn't expect any top team to make such a decision, but if you are playing the underdog and looking for whatever opportunities you can find, it might be worth giving up some YAC to get an INT or two.
Iraq2xVeteran
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think our main focus on defense is getting stops and limiting scoring. Mike Elko's priorities are getting the defense off the field and clamping down in the red zone to force opponents to settle for field goals. By staying disciplined, holding their gap, and maintaining their coverage assignments, turnovers will come naturally.
Ulrich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If we keep pressuring the QB like we have the last few games, we'll keep forcing turnovers.
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It frustrates me to see defenders giving up yardage and first downs because they're trying to punch the ball out.

Defenders got better at punching the ball, and then ball carriers got better at holding on, and now we're pretty well back to neutral. I'm glad to see we're not still overly committed to that fad.

A turnover-on-downs is still a turnover (even if it isn't as splashy on a stat chart).
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.