Per 680thefan yesterday, Miles only over-rules the really "F'd up" play calls...

quote:

---

one of the radio host on 680thefan reportedly by way of someone he knows close the LSU team

---

sounds legit...

quote:

---

All of the offensive coaches have input on which play is called when. Stud, Krags, Wilson, and Miles

---

Yes, yes, yes, and yes.

That's quite obvious, and it shows every time we need someone to be in control.

quote:

---

Just sharing some interesting info, IMO. I was driving home yesterday in Atlanta and one of the radio host on 680thefan reportedly by way of someone he knows close the LSU team stated Miles only over-rules "the really F'd up play calls". The host stated per the inside source that the play-calling is Coach Stud's show all the way. The reason this came up was obviously because of LSU's offensive woes ahead of the Alabama game and the mind-boggling follow-up play to the 9-play rushing drive which fell apart following the stop route in the red-zone that resulted in a loss of yards instead of continuing to run the ball. Of course they covered the dropped passes and Mett's stuggles and the need to return to what LSU does best which is run the ball.

---

I usually trust what I see but this one has me questioning myself. But I do think it goes to show that even the so called "expert" analysts don't look very close.

Go back and look at the CST version of the replay so you can see more of the field. LSU was in hurry up mode and line up in three wides with Hill the lone back. Landry was in the slot to the left and TAMU left him completely uncovered! The TAMU safety can be seen racing madly from the right to the left right before the snap in an effort to get to Landry.

It looked to me that there was an "eye contact" audible called between Mett and Landry. On the snap the line down blocked as if the call was a stretch play with Hill to the right. Even Hill looks as if he was expecting the ball. Mett makes the throw to Landry but with the safety on the dead run pre snap he got there in time to gum up the play.

Point being, that this particular call is being bandied about as one of the main arguments proving the coaches are clueless in play calling in the red zone, and I think they are getting a bad rap on this one. Check it out and let me know if I'm just seeing things.

quote:

---

I think they are getting a bad rap on this one

---

I'm semi watching ULL embarrass themselves, unfortunately. But, when I'm done, I'm going to rewatch the game. However, it's not the CST replay.

Your observation might certainly explain that particular call, but from my recollection, you're going to have to observe a hell of a lot more to explain away plenty of head scratching in this one.

quote:

---

hell of a lot more to explain away plenty of head scratching in this one.

---

Oh I have scratched my head plenty over the whole season!

The problem is, even with close observation and film study, without access to the actual play calls and intentions and game planning and knowledge of strategic intent, we can only guess at why plays are called or even if they were "called".

We don't have access to practice or the coaches knowledge or beliefs in what players capabilties are. So speculation on why or IF plays are called is just that, pure speculation.

quote:

---

We don't have access to practice or the coaches knowledge or beliefs in what players capabilties are. So speculation on why or IF plays are called is just that, pure speculation.

---

This

/Thread

quote:

---

Miles only over-rules "the really F'd up play calls"

---

Somehow the wheel route to Connor Neighbors made it into the game the other week. That being said, I'd hate to see the "really fricked up play calls."

This is what Miles wants offensively.

If the OP is referring to radio personality, chuck Oliver, there's some validity to his statements. He typically doesn't b.s., has no agenda, and knows a shiteload of people in the business.

quote:

---

without access to the actual play calls and intentions and game planning and knowledge of strategic intent, we can only guess at why plays are called or even if they were "called".

---

You know, it's not even about style. Go ahead and create whatever identity you want on offense. We could debate on philosophy ad nauseum.

The biggest problem I see is it's not coordinated. I'm guessing that we have multiple sources of input, resulting in a, b, c, or d, with a none of the above thrown in for good measure.

I would be willing to bet that half of our delay of games and false starts occur on first down, even after a TO.

I'll give you two examples that I challenge anyone to give me a justifiable explanation. In the third quarter of the A&M game, we run three low risk running plays on the extreme end of FG range, apparently settling for a 50 yd FG attempt. Yet, indecision from the sideline results in a 5 yd penalty. We line up and try from 55 yds. If we're going to try a 55 yarder, how do you explain the indecision and failure to line up for a 50 yarder after a 3rd and 7 running play results in a 4th and 5?

Who's in charge here?

End of third quarter, with the wind to our backs, we face a third and medium with 30 seconds left in the quarter, and 33 seconds on the play clock, around our own 20, I think. I would assume a staff with their wits about them, if choosing to pass on this down, would run the play, and if incomplete and unsuccessful, have the punter with the wind to his back.

Or, if the staff is indecisive, and more concerned with getting the first down with a 5 point lead, might worry less about the wind, and more about the conversion, so they would allow the quarter to end and talk it over.

What do we do you ask? We break huddle, take our time lining up, peer to the sidelines for any changes in plan, and finally snap the ball with 1 second left in the quarter, fail to convert, and switch ends of the field for our punter to face a 20 mph wind.

This kind of shite is consistent, prevalent, and expected. And nothing to do with run, pass, or gameplan. It's attention to detail and game management. And when you see these kind of things repeat themselves over and over, I, personally, don't get a warm fuzzy feeling about what's going on elsewhere when it comes to preparation.