Zook, Pruett, Stoops and Hoke. Three of those DCs didnt even approach semicompetent. We couldnt come from behind bc we couldnt stop some teams from scoring. Wasnt it 2001 Tinerc when we didnt stop them once in the whole damn game?
No argument that Stoops stood out head and shoulders above the rest, but I think it goes even beyond that.
Spurrier's was a system offense that thrived on balance, on keeping opposing defenses guessing whether he would run on running downs and vice versa. Spurrier was a master, esp early in his career here, at doing just the opposite of what you expected in game situations. We all know that.
And, of course, he was just as famous for stepping on opponents' throats early. How many of our games, including UT in front of 103k shocked Knoxville fans in '96, were essentially over by halftime?
Spurrier was as aggressive of a play caller as I have ever seen.
When we fell behind, we lost that element of surprise. Defenses could stunt and stack more knowing what was coming. That Spurrier quarterbacks were more system quarterbacks than playmakers, and generally unable to evade or run away from the rush, didn't make it any easier to overcome the obstacles.
I always wondered how good Steve's offense could have been with a true playmaker taking the snaps, and yet I knew. Not as good. What made his offense vulnerable at coming from behind made it equally vaunted from the opening kick.
The key was getting a jump on the opponent and, as you correctly pointed out, not letting the opponent jump on you through defensive mistakes.