Jarrett Stidham Film analysis

[Strychnine 1,802]

8 minutes ago, JoeTiger said:

+1. Stidham will start regardless of White's health.

 

After reading Franklin vs. White arguments throughout last offseason, I am seriously looking forward to the Stidham vs. White ones.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

4 hours ago, Strychnine said:

 

After reading Franklin vs. White arguments throughout last offseason, I am seriously looking forward to the Stidham vs. White ones.

I doubt you'll see a lot of that. I think most people realize that Stidham has more natural ability than White. The thing that is exciting is that White is not going to give up the start easily, which will push both of them to be even better by Fall.

[Tiger 8,825]

14 hours ago, oracle79 said:

That big bold word is GM's biggest problem, and what is eventually going to be his downfall.

All coaches want things done their way or the way they eventually decide things should be done.  Good coaches have that basic foundation that they are going to live and die with be it power running, play-action, tempo, quick short passing game, complex route running, a combination of those, other things, etc.  But the good coaches achieve their goal of getting that done by hiring competent, qualified coaches who they value feed back from, but also trust that at the end of the day to implement what the coach wants implemented.  And their assistant willing step up and buy into the implementation because they know their head coach trusts them to do their job and will also listen to any concerns that they experience in the implementation of their master plan.

Gus doesn't trust anyone but himself, and possibly RL (see ya DC, hello yes man).  I think the zone read fiasco started much more in 2014 when Prosch and Robinson and Mason were gone, and Gus didn't trust NM and Cap to have that same chemistry and he wanted to throw more to show that he could develop NM into a good passer.  Now I doubt we've had a single true zone read run since then.  I'm sure every zone read or jet sweep is called from the sideline, and I'd also bet most pass routes to throw to are called from the sideline.  I could never see GM allowing a QB to check out of any play on his on.  At best they call 2 plays and look to the sideline to chose one.  And I think the main reason he doesn't trust his players is because he knows he isn't capable of coaching/teaching them what they need to know and read to make a sound decision.

Easy to see from the outside, but if you're a paranoid, egomaniac, it's hard to take advice from others and trust anyone other than yourself the responsibility of making those decisions.  And, that (not his recruiting, or scheme, or game plan, or player development) is what is going to cost him his job in the end.  There is too much to do in college football to be successful for one person to do it all.

Crushed it.

[keesler 5,924]

20 hours ago, Tiger said:

This bolded part is the problem. We have an offensive staff that is dependent on players bailing them out of their play calls.

The bold and underlined part is part of why people call our offense a High School offense. As far as not checking out of WR screens when the D is in press coverage is that we can be baited into calling that play. The defense shows a "dummy" alignment, then after Gus/Rhett counters to how the defense is set up, the defense just slides into their real coverage leaving no time for us to change into yet another play.

If we allowed our QB to make checks at the line this would alleviate the problem. I understood back in 2010 or so when the reason for not giving QBs that responsibility is so that they aren't thinking too much and able to go fast BUT WE DON'T EVEN GO FAST ANYMORE UNLESS WE RUN THE EXACT. SAME. PLAY WE JUST RAN! But our coach wants to micromanage. Hell, he even wants to micromanage the zone read -- a play predicated on a post-snap read and he wants to be the one making that decision before we even snap the ball. Nick Marshall bailed him out of this several times.

Lol I'm probably making people sick of my miserable posts at this point I'm just amazed at how we found ourselves here.

That bold/underlined part of your post is when any Head Coach pulling in +$4mm/yr should recognize that his so called "scheme" has been figured out.  

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

On 1/4/2017 at 4:19 PM, GwillMac6 said:

Your right it is going to be so hard picking up our 4 to 5 plays. Sean may even have to start the first couple of games till Stidham is well versed in the playbook.

You can likely book it that Gus will waste so much time with the theory JS is taking months to learn our 10 plays. 

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

On 1/4/2017 at 4:43 PM, oracle79 said:

Sorry, forgot my yellow font again.  But, GM will find a way to drag it out I think.  Not saying JS won't be starter, but he'll wait as long as he can before naming him.  Like say SW isn't healthy enough for spring practice.  GM will say SW deserves a shot to compete in fall camp and JF3 has really worked hard and made good progress.  And, don't count out Woody because he's starting to understand the offense, and we haven't decided if we're going to redshirt Malik yet or not for this year....BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, etc.

Yep! I posted this in another thread. He wastes so much time on BS stuff that's clearly obvious. 

[C'viewTiger 242]

On Wednesday, January 04, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Barnacle said:

I'm glad you clarified this. When people talk about our "terrible route trees", I've always gotten confused because the images above (with slightly different numbers) are the images that pop into my head when I think route tree, and I think to myself, "a route tree is a route tree, how could ours be any different than another teams?" 

When we start talking about route combinations, splits, and alignments, I'm more inclined to think of words like "scheme" or "concepts", but never "route tree." 

I think our route tree that people complain about is the one that looks like a lot of bammer's family trees, one stem with no branches. 

[api1957 1,783]

3 minutes ago, AU04ever said:

I think our route tree that people complain about is the one that looks like a lot of bammer's family trees, one stem with no branches. 

[autigeremt 6,610]