- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: When the Topic of an OC is Brought Up.....
Posted on 10/25/12 at 6:10 am to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 10/25/12 at 6:10 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
These are the head in the sand folks. I have no idea why they even come to a discussion board.
Losing Faulk had no impact on the game plan? Having Mett not perform up to expectation has no impact on the game plan? WR's not catching or holding onto the ball once it's caught?
I agree we often play not to lose but I'm ok with not losing. I am thankful that we can run it down just about everyone's throat when we need to. I'm pleased we can have a two score lead and give the other team the ball with 40 seconds and no time outs and see if they can drive 80 yards. I guess my head is in the sand.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 6:27 am to OGTiger
Yes. A bombs away approach is not required. LSU does not need to be Texas Tech or Houston. A top 50 passing attack would be very complimentary to this team. Even a top 60 passing attack would be fine, at least we would be in the company of ULL.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 6:29 am to LSU GrandDad
quote:
think he's trying to get it fixed. he hired gonzales and he hired kragthorpe. he let crowton go. then kragthorpe gets sick and we have stud. he's giving this a try but miles is not going to accept what's going on now. i give him credit for trying to work with the kragthorpe situation and give stud his shot. if the woes don't get fixed, miles with do what's right; he always has and he will continue to. i believe they are busting their arse to do so but the progress is damn slow. should he fire stud tomorrow? what will that do to our season, esp. with the revolving door on the OL.
I agree totally w/ you GrandDad, CLM has in the past made the needed changes to get the program where its at now. It took a few years for us to land a Chavis, lets be optimistic for minute: we pick up an OC comparable to Chavis! Now, that would be worth waiting for!
Posted on 10/25/12 at 6:52 am to OGTiger
quote:
well, he did get a new OC. The poor guy just got a terrible disease shortly into his hiring, and we were forced into a hasty bit of shuffling. That shuffling resulted in a 13-1 season, with perhaps the most dominant regular season in school history (BCS rematch notwithstanding). Pretty tough to find a lot of fault in that, and very tough to justify firing someone to go hiring a replacement. That's first off. Secondly, it's not like there are teeming pools of OCs that mesh with the current staff, personally and in philosophy, to pick and choose from. Miles has a winning percentage of about 80%, you gotta be careful not to disrupt things. Some offensive coordinators will want to bring in their own people, and that might mean replacing a valuable recruiter; the guy has to fit into Miles' plans. Next, you have to be careful not to change too much scheme, or the experienced players are just as lost as new recruits. You would like freshmen starting if they are great players, but you don't want to lose upperclassmen because they no longer fit what the team does. If things keep being such a struggle this entire season, Miles in the offseason will have to decide if the problem (passing game, as of now) is due to a schematic failure, growing pains going away from the read option we just dropped last season, a lot of new players (some due to injuries), etc, and then make a call. My guess is the biggest problem is the "new players" issue; Beckham for example showed last season he could do well in this scheme (which was what Lee ran). Now he's having a classic sophomore slump, with a new QB playing behind a makeshift O Line. Get our line healthy and intact, and return Mett and most of the skill players with a year's experience together, and I think we'll be fine.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 7:04 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
i believe they are busting their arse to do so but the progress is damn slow.
This is said with a completely straight face and with all due respect: They sat down a kid who was leading the conference in passing efficiency last year.
Logic tells any outside observer that sitting a player who is operating the passing game more efficiently than any other conference QB obviously means they are not interested in a passing offense operating as efficiently as possible.
They replaced him with a much less efficient passing QB who ran much better.
Logic tells any outside observer that-again-they have zero interest in the passing offense compared to the running game.
This year, we see play calls involving only two receiver routes, even while the team defends the rush adequately with offset backs (IE-Two RB's which is a personnel grouping we run often). Most of these routes are on opposite sides of the field, known as a "whole field read".
Simply throwing in a 3rd WR and giving the QB a half field read with basic keys and zone stretching concepts, while still allowing for vertical routes on the backside if man coverage gets called on defense is a simple, elementary aspect of offensive football for developing QB's.
We do not do this for our QB. We mainly ask him to beat the defense with extremely difficult throws-especially for an inexperienced QB-which are things like the deep fade, skinny posts on a vertical release, etc.
Again, making the passing game uncomplicated makes it easy for a defense to defend. At the same time, giving the QB fewer options while requiring low-percentage, high-degree-of-difficulty throws to utilize those options is not logical. There is no conceptual attack we use in our passing game that I can see. There were some things developing early in the year in OOC games. But that has disappeared.
We as a staff are simply not interested in developing a quality, efficiently operating passing game. Folks who disagree are simply ignoring the staff and head coaches previous behavior and track record, nevermind the current way we operate this part of our offense.
This post was edited on 10/25/12 at 7:07 am
Posted on 10/25/12 at 7:17 am to OGTiger
Miles knows he can run the ball, play good special teams and great d and will win most of his games and doesn't want to risk that, so that's what he does. The passing game has been an issue since 2007 and was before 2007. Different players and coaches but the one constant was clm. I just don't understand why he won't take the risk.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 7:57 am to GFunk
GFunk, you do make some good points.
Bama game 1- we won, and several things occurred with that game. First off, it cemented us as heavy favorites to play for the national title; secondly it was clear the new scheme wasn't established enough as of then to beat Bama. Lee wasn't moving the team at all with the passing attack, and Bama stonewalled the power runs. Also, Bama didn't drop far, and a rematch was even discussed (the "I'd be honored" quote) in the immediate postgame interview.
So- what do you do? Keep trying to go prostyle/playaction with Lee, having seen firsthand that Bama had that locked up, or go with JJ and the more fluid option runs, which were the only chinks exposed in Bama's defense? Miles chose the latter. Probably either scheme combined with our defense and special teams would beat any other team, but the option running game was the best shot in a rematch (heck, that even fits the "definition of insanity" threads we see now; Miles chose what worked instead of what didn't).
It didn't work, but that's not relevant. It was the smarter move. Just imagine the screaming if we went back to Lee and Bama tore him up again, and we knew JJ was sitting on the bench with a win under his belt. "Why the hell didn't you switch to him for this game? Hell, why didn't you start him the rest of the season, you knew we would be seeing them again? You stupid blah-blah, you got rocks in your head! Even I know JJ gave us the only chance to beat them!"
Anyhow; that was last year. This year, we're all-in with the prostyle offense, and we're taking lumps to develop it. Combined with the injuries on the line, forcing the new QB to have to react faster than Lee did, things have looked bad at times. The WRs are mostly trying too hard to do something to make up for the problems- Beckham and Landry are not relaxed out there. Instead of taking the catch and tackle, they're pressing- and dropping. But they just want to make a play for their QB, and that's normal. Boone seems like he's finally getting used to seeing the field after being a career fill-in player, and that's to be expected too.
I'm of the opinion that this break came at the perfect time. I bet that despite some new plays being added for Bama, most of the practices will be to calm the offense down, and get them more comfortable. Get Mett to see the field in rhythm, instead of panicking and trying to get rid of the ball to 1 player before he gets hit. Get the WRs to trust themselves more and just run the correct routes and catch the balls, instead of looking to see if the QB is still standing, or trying to score as soon as they see the ball in the air.
The scheme is fine, the current players are a little rattled right now. We're 7-1 despite that. Give them time.
quote:Ok, context. New offensive coordinator and resulting coaching shuffle. Rough, nasty schedule. Expect to lose a couple games (Oregon, WVU are potential losses). Take your lumps implementing the new system in a rebuilding year. But, look out- we caught lightning in a bottle, and that tough schedule pushed us to the top of the polls. Time to consider scaling back the changes, take advantage of the experience your players have in the old system (which they should be more comfortable running), to win NOW. By the time JJ is back, we're in position to realistically play for the title, only 1 of 2 teams (with Bama) with a clear path. If we lost to Oregon or elsewhere, when JJ returned, we might still be doing the "new" scheme exclusively (even with JJ); instead we're re-inserting parts of Crowton's offense.
They sat down a kid who was leading the conference in passing efficiency last year.
Logic tells any outside observer that sitting a player who is operating the passing game more efficiently than any other conference QB obviously means they are not interested in a passing offense operating as efficiently as possible.
They replaced him with a much less efficient passing QB who ran much better.
Logic tells any outside observer that-again-they have zero interest in the passing offense compared to the running game.
Bama game 1- we won, and several things occurred with that game. First off, it cemented us as heavy favorites to play for the national title; secondly it was clear the new scheme wasn't established enough as of then to beat Bama. Lee wasn't moving the team at all with the passing attack, and Bama stonewalled the power runs. Also, Bama didn't drop far, and a rematch was even discussed (the "I'd be honored" quote) in the immediate postgame interview.
So- what do you do? Keep trying to go prostyle/playaction with Lee, having seen firsthand that Bama had that locked up, or go with JJ and the more fluid option runs, which were the only chinks exposed in Bama's defense? Miles chose the latter. Probably either scheme combined with our defense and special teams would beat any other team, but the option running game was the best shot in a rematch (heck, that even fits the "definition of insanity" threads we see now; Miles chose what worked instead of what didn't).
It didn't work, but that's not relevant. It was the smarter move. Just imagine the screaming if we went back to Lee and Bama tore him up again, and we knew JJ was sitting on the bench with a win under his belt. "Why the hell didn't you switch to him for this game? Hell, why didn't you start him the rest of the season, you knew we would be seeing them again? You stupid blah-blah, you got rocks in your head! Even I know JJ gave us the only chance to beat them!"
Anyhow; that was last year. This year, we're all-in with the prostyle offense, and we're taking lumps to develop it. Combined with the injuries on the line, forcing the new QB to have to react faster than Lee did, things have looked bad at times. The WRs are mostly trying too hard to do something to make up for the problems- Beckham and Landry are not relaxed out there. Instead of taking the catch and tackle, they're pressing- and dropping. But they just want to make a play for their QB, and that's normal. Boone seems like he's finally getting used to seeing the field after being a career fill-in player, and that's to be expected too.
I'm of the opinion that this break came at the perfect time. I bet that despite some new plays being added for Bama, most of the practices will be to calm the offense down, and get them more comfortable. Get Mett to see the field in rhythm, instead of panicking and trying to get rid of the ball to 1 player before he gets hit. Get the WRs to trust themselves more and just run the correct routes and catch the balls, instead of looking to see if the QB is still standing, or trying to score as soon as they see the ball in the air.
The scheme is fine, the current players are a little rattled right now. We're 7-1 despite that. Give them time.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:06 am to Bombblonde
quote:
1) NOTHING you say on this board will change the way the coaches coach.
2) NOTHING a posi tiger can say will change a negatiger's opinion on the subject
3) see #2. Vice versa
4) if you know what everyone is going to say in response, why bring it up?
Why I changes the sig quote. I finally came to realize this.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:07 am to Weaver
quote:Miles, at Oklahoma St, once led Texas 35-7. He lost that game, and Texas ended up scoring over 50 points. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that game stuck with him. I say that, because in watching him coach a game, it's inconceivable that any team would have enough time to come back on him like that, regardless of his defense; he just runs the clock too much.
Miles knows he can run the ball, play good special teams and great d and will win most of his games and doesn't want to risk that, so that's what he does. The passing game has been an issue since 2007 and was before 2007. Different players and coaches but the one constant was clm. I just don't understand why he won't take the risk.
Not knowing the specifics of the game, you'd have to assume the passing game was prominent- both in building the big lead fast, and in giving up so much time for the comeback. You'd have to think simply kneeling the ball to make Texas burn timeouts and run the clock, they might have held that lead (or at least not give up 50+).
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:10 am to GFunk
Wow, GFunk, someone else gets it. Well stated and right to the point.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:15 am to OGTiger
Not long enough, DID read. Please, we need more people to speak up.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:27 am to OGTiger
quote:
why are so many on the Rant so quick to criticize?
quote:
If you are satisfied with the passing game being 112th in the nation and continuing to be behind Bowling Green, Central Michigan and Florida International then that's ok because that's exactly what you're gonna continue to get without an OC
quote:
Hire and OC.....PLEASE!!!!!!!!
You say these things as if anything said on here will have an effect on the outcome. Well, that's just stupid. The reaction from some reflect this. It's one thing to discuss offensive philosophy, but to discuss changes is just a waist of time. No one here has a say in that.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:34 am to Croozin2
quote:
someone else gets it. Well stated and right to the point.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:36 am to OGTiger
Maybe it is simply Burnout. 7 of the 20 threads on the first page are about the LSU offense. I thinkn most people get that there are issues with the offense, they have different approaches on how to fix it.
Admins should just sticky an Offense Sucks thread and keep it all in there.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:38 am to AlxTgr
Will the discussion of offensive philosophy on this site change CLM's offensive philosophy......uh, no.
It's called the Rant for a reason.
And, by the way, I do believe when a tide of negative sentiment gets expressed on a site as popular as Tiger Droppings and the word gets out it usually finds it's way into the inner sanctum.
Not saying it makes any difference but it still gets heard.
And, if you don't think coaches read message boards.....then you're naive. Again, not saying CLM spends hours pouring through Tiger Droppings like some do...but they know what the public sentiment is and what is being said.
It's called the Rant for a reason.
And, by the way, I do believe when a tide of negative sentiment gets expressed on a site as popular as Tiger Droppings and the word gets out it usually finds it's way into the inner sanctum.
Not saying it makes any difference but it still gets heard.
And, if you don't think coaches read message boards.....then you're naive. Again, not saying CLM spends hours pouring through Tiger Droppings like some do...but they know what the public sentiment is and what is being said.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:39 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Miles isn't going to hire any OC that will blow anyone away and that is fine with me. Someone as competent on the offensive side of the ball as the Chief is on the defensive side would be fine with me.
That's everyone's gripe. Because if he did this, we wouldn't have the problem we have been having. If he had someone half as good as Chief, we would be estatic. It's not for the lack of good players five years in a row now.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:39 am to JaxTigah
i have no prob recognizing what the OP is saying as long as you recognize how much more effective this offense would be without injury and execution problems.
would an OC cause our receivers to catch better or half of mett's passes to be on target??
would an OC cause our receivers to catch better or half of mett's passes to be on target??
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:41 am to BigEdLSU
quote:probably because you can't
Did you in lclude tldr? Cause I didnt
Posted on 10/25/12 at 8:51 am to OGTiger
Look, I gave you the answer to the question posed.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News