The change at offensive coordinator is a good start but...

[AU64 10,122]

7 minutes ago, kd4au said:

We need more balance and I hope CL can bring that to the offense.I don't want a total air raid but we need to pass enough to be as good at passing as we are at running.It doesn't bother me if we are still 70% run if we can pass effectively when needed,but I'm not sure you can only pass 30% of the time and still  pass well enough to be effective, you have to have enough reps for your qb and wr to get in rhythm.Any way good luck to CL and Gus hope they can put it all together.

If we run 80 +/- plays in a game and pass 35% of the time....that's about 28-30 passes which is enough in my view, to hone a good passing attack.  When used properly, the completion rate can be pretty high and do a lot of damage.   What's happened lately is that when the offense soured, Gus  or RL started playing slow down and the HUNH disappeared except when running a standard hand-off play after a good gain..... and we mostly passed when everyone in the stadium knew a pass play was needed. 

Looking for a much better blend this year.

[au701948 998]

7 hours ago, AU64 said:

I'm not sure it is how much you throw the ball but when we throw it.     I'm guessing we could be pretty scary if we only passed 30-40 % of the time......but if we only pass primarily on 3rd down and to a lesser extent on 2nd down...and rarely on first down the offense becomes too predictable as we have been in the past couple years.    

Watching a bit of the ASU game someone posted, I note that they passed on first a number of times ...and it was not just the quick outs that we have been using....where we have mostly lost yards.  

We have some stellar RBs and I don't see it as an advantage to take them out of the playbook but every drive should not start with a handoff to KP or KJ.....JMO.   We have lots of weapons....CCL's job is to figure out how to use them.

Can we have a Big AMEN!!

[kd4au 1,145]

1 hour ago, AU64 said:

If we run 80 +/- plays in a game and pass 35% of the time....that's about 28-30 passes which is enough in my view, to hone a good passing attack.  When used properly, the completion rate can be pretty high and do a lot of damage.   What's happened lately is that when the offense soured, Gus  or RL started playing slow down and the HUNH disappeared except when running a standard hand-off play after a good gain..... and we mostly passed when everyone in the stadium knew a pass play was needed. 

Looking for a much better blend this year.

I would agree that 28-30 passes a game would be enough but we would have to get back to running 80 plays a game first for that to only be 35%.I really am not as concerned about the percentage of run/pass as I am the unpredictability of the play calling and being able to execute a passing game when the uga and bama type defenses shut our running game down.Like you I'm looking for a better mix,hope we get it.

[AUloggerhead 2,229]

Being able to pass the ball anywhere, anytime is not only desirable, it's essential -- especially in the red zone against quality defenses.  Note the last-second scores in both the AU-uat & the Clemson-uat games.  Unless you've got 7 road-graders up front blowing the opposition off the line, you're not always going to punch it in from the 3 on 4th and goal.  And it's not just for red-zone effectiveness, either.  Give me more of (insert QB) to Eli Stove or Kyle Davis on a 70-80 yd bomb every game.  Or how about a quick strike with time running out in the half to set up a FG by Legatron (or mini-Legatron as the case may be?)  Don't worry about the running game because it will only be enhanced by a credible passing attack.  I say, bring on the Air Raid -- it's about damn time.  

[WarTim 3,456]

Thank you Stuart!! GREAT work as always!!

[Slammer1 409]

After watching the Atlanta Falcons/Green Bay playoff game I think that CCL should take a long look at the Falcons offensive schemes. Instead of going to a designated receiver on every play, Ryan went to whomever was open. Ryan set a NFL record throwing to different receivers.  I know Julio is a great receiver but you can't rely on him every time and I think throwing to whomever was open was the key to the Falcon's success this year. Can't wait to see the Super Bowl, it should be a battle royale between two very competent QBs. JMO

[I_M4_AU 7,806]

35 minutes ago, Slammer1 said:

After watching the Atlanta Falcons/Green Bay playoff game I think that CCL should take a long look at the Falcons offensive schemes. Instead of going to a designated receiver on every play, Ryan went to whomever was open. Ryan set a NFL record throwing to different receivers.  I know Julio is a great receiver but you can't rely on him every time and I think throwing to whomever was open was the key to the Falcon's success this year. Can't wait to see the Super Bowl, it should be a battle royale between two very competent QBs. JMO

I certainly agree with this.  It appeared the ATL offense put a lot of pressure on the DB's of Green Bay to make a decision and Ryan had the time and experience to see the open receiver.   There were times in the last few years under Gus/Rhett that the opponent's DBs would jump our routes as if they knew where the pass was going (and I'm sure they did).  It just seemed that there was a primary receiver and the check down was the running back.  In other words, the primary or bail, no real progression.

In my opinion, Gus' philosophy of a pass offense was a major factor of Duke's frustration in 2015.

[Beaker 2,457]

I filled my cup with orange Kool Aid this morning!  

What a beautiful sunrise!  

WDE!

[Linayus 676]

22 hours ago, AUsince72 said:

Absolutely.

I say "Death to the WR bubble-screen"!

If it ain't beyond the LoS (preferably by 5+ yds) it's hard to call it Down field Passing.

While I would like to agree, Bama did pretty well with that short passing game this season. When they were forced to go deep, well, you saw the results in the playoffs. The biggest difference between us and them was the mobility and speed of the QB (and physicality of their playmakers).

22 hours ago, 80Tiger said:

Some good info but do not agree with discounting the Clemson game. If you are going to discount the "bad game plan" then you have to throw out the "good game plan" performance. Maybe the first half of the MSU game. 

The Clemson game was discounted because of the insane QB rotation that kills the stat comparison. It was less of Sean's performance and more to do with being yanked out for someone else to come in and kill the drives. If they had stuck with Sean, it would certainly have been included.

[AUsince72 11,084]

23 minutes ago, Linayus said:

While I would like to agree, Bama did pretty well with that short passing game this season. When they were forced to go deep, well, you saw the results in the playoffs. The biggest difference between us and them was the mobility and speed of the QB (and physicality of their playmakers).

I don't disagree with you regarding how the bammers did it.  And I believe the key was the physicality & running ability of Hurts.

My opinion.... Had Auburn had a Hurts this past season, the offense would have looked a lot like 2013.  Granted, his downfield passing left a lot to be desired, but I think a lot of people would say the same for Marshall's as well.

[80Tiger 899]

1 hour ago, Linayus said:

While I would like to agree, Bama did pretty well with that short passing game this season. When they were forced to go deep, well, you saw the results in the playoffs. The biggest difference between us and them was the mobility and speed of the QB (and physicality of their playmakers).

The Clemson game was discounted because of the insane QB rotation that kills the stat comparison. It was less of Sean's performance and more to do with being yanked out for someone else to come in and kill the drives. If they had stuck with Sean, it would certainly have been included.

The point is, if you are going to throw out a statistical outlier due to bad game planning, then should you not throw out the best performance as a statistical outlier due to good game planning? I am not calling anyone out, but there seems to be a habit of not wanting to count a certain type performance if it does not fit a narrative. I am not saying Stat did that by any means, but if you are going to have all these objective numerical performance but discount bad performance due to a subjective reasoning (bad game planning) then sometimes the  numbers will lose some meaning (IMO). Its like dropped passes. A lot of moaning an groaning about dropped passes and how it made QB (choose your name) look bad and affected his numbers, but at the same time receivers will make ridiculous catches that will make the QB numbers look good but we give credit to the QB for a completion (which we should).

My point is, to me you have to count bad with good no matter what. The numbers are what they are. Otherwise you tend to fool yourselves.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

1 hour ago, AUsince72 said:

I don't disagree with you regarding how the bammers did it.  And I believe the key was the physicality & running ability of Hurts.

My opinion.... Had Auburn had a Hurts this past season, the offense would have looked a lot like 2013.  Granted, his downfield passing left a lot to be desired, but I think a lot of people would say the same for Marshall's as well.

Nah... Hurts put the ball on the ground a lot more than Marshall.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

9 minutes ago, 80Tiger said:

The point is, if you are going to throw out a statistical outlier due to bad game planning, then should you not throw out the best performance as a statistical outlier due to good game planning? I am not calling anyone out, but there seems to be a habit of not wanting to count a certain type performance if it does not fit a narrative. I am not saying Stat did that by any means, but if you are going to have all these objective numerical performance but discount bad performance due to a subjective reasoning (bad game planning) then sometimes the  numbers will lose some meaning (IMO). Its like dropped passes. A lot of moaning an groaning about dropped passes and how it made QB (choose your name) look bad and affected his numbers, but at the same time receivers will make ridiculous catches that will make the QB numbers look good but we give credit to the QB for a completion (which we should).

My point is, to me you have to count bad with good no matter what. The numbers are what they are. Otherwise you tend to fool yourselves.

It all depends on what you are measuring.  If you are measuring overall team performance, or coaching performance, yes... you include all, but say you are measuring the performance of a QB... you have to throw out games where they were either hampered by injury or psychotic coaching or you're actually adding variables in that are contaminating your results. In the case of Clemson, there's a difference between a poorly coached game where the QB was allowed to play through it, and one where they were constantly moved in and out of the game and not allowed to gain anything resembling a rhythm. 

[AUsince72 11,084]

4 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

Nah... Hurts put the ball on the ground a lot more than Marshall.

I'll have to take your word for Hurts but it's not like NM was the gold standard of ball security in 2013 - 14 fumbles, losing 6.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

3 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

I'll have to take your word for Hurts but it's not like NM was the gold standard of ball security in 2013 - 14 fumbles, losing 6.

I guess put the ball on the ground wasn't the best term... Hurts fumbled 10 and lost 5 of those, but he also threw 9 INTs on top of that. He averaged a turnover per game.

[AUsince72 11,084]

1 minute ago, lionheartkc said:

I guess put the ball on the ground wasn't the best term... Hurts fumbled 10 and lost 5 of those, but he also threw 9 INTs on top of that. He averaged a turnover per game.

Yeah, I admit that while Marshall wasn't a sterling passer, he was better than Hurts.  However, I'm sure that with Auburn's QB development Hurts would have been a much better passer than he was at bammer.........  ........ ........ BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!  Okay, I couldn't keep a straight face.

[milehighfan 1,240]

8 hours ago, Slammer1 said:

After watching the Atlanta Falcons/Green Bay playoff game I think that CCL should take a long look at the Falcons offensive schemes. Instead of going to a designated receiver on every play, Ryan went to whomever was open. Ryan set a NFL record throwing to different receivers.  I know Julio is a great receiver but you can't rely on him every time and I think throwing to whomever was open was the key to the Falcon's success this year. Can't wait to see the Super Bowl, it should be a battle royale between two very competent QBs. JMO

I was thinking the same thing while watching. I don't know if CCL was watching the game and taking notes but we will find out soon enough.

[JGLEATON 1,244]

And one of the first things CCL does is offer a 2017 Scholarship to a TE / HB 6-feet-3, 245-pound John Samuel Shenker from Moultrie (Ga.) Colquitt County.. 

I like this... 

Edited January 23, 2017 by JGLEATON

[DAG 33,981]

Just now, JGLEATON said:

And one of the first things CCL does is offer a 2017 Scholarship to a TE / HB 6-feet-3, 245-pound John Samuel Shenker for Ga... 

I like this... 

Hell yes.  TE  U

[milehighfan 1,240]

I don't want us to turn into the Mike Leach air raid but I would like to see us pass when we want to, not when we have to.

[Beaker 2,457]

1 hour ago, milehighfan said:

I don't want us to turn into the Mike Leach air raid but I would like to see us pass when we want to, not when we have to.

Amen to that!  I hope that is not sacreligious.  

 

Here is another new twist:  we cross the 40, we go HUNH, then at the 50, we go 4 downs - changes play calling immensely.  

mentally that puts a lot of pressure on the opponent, and when we cross the 50, it's "oh crap, here they come" and no subs...HUNH, 4 downs against a guy who can sling it and Bubba Petway. 

[keesler 5,924]

15 hours ago, JGLEATON said:

And one of the first things CCL does is offer a 2017 Scholarship to a TE / HB 6-feet-3, 245-pound John Samuel Shenker from Moultrie (Ga.) Colquitt County.. 

I like this... 

Boom!  Way to start a new job Chip!

[shceagle 0]

Thanks Stat,

A couple questions....

Do you see Chandler Cox's role changing with the probability of Coach Lindsey installing  wider spacing in his formation sets?

Also, with the emergence of Kam Pettway this past year as the "bell-cow",  do you see Kerryon Johnson lining up in multiple spots to take advantage of his versatility? 

Awesome stuff!!!