- Messages
- 7,626
- Reaction score
- 1,419
As much as I don't care for Brian Kelly, I cannot fathom being a head coach and having so much QB bad luck year in and year out.
What upsets me is that he never really has a plan b ready.
As much as I don't care for Brian Kelly, I cannot fathom being a head coach and having so much QB bad luck year in and year out.
Gif of UVA student.
CFB - Jiffier gifs through HTML5 Video Conversion.
As much as I don't care for Brian Kelly, I cannot fathom being a head coach and having so much QB bad luck year in and year out.
Kizer is is some respects irrelevant here. The defense doesn't look good, Zaire didn't while he was in there, and outside of Prosise our best skill player is clearly held back by catching a ball away from his body. Some have brought it up before but everybody always discounts it, it's a real fault. It might not stop him from looking good but it defeinitely stops us from consistently moving the ball.
What upsets me is that he never really has a plan b ready.
You dont have this, if you dont have designed qb runs. He knew his depth was limited at qb. Why risk it? You already lost your starting rb game one. Why put your most important player in harms way on purpose. Sure a qb who can run when theres nothing is nice. But to run him on purpose is dumb in my opinion.
No we don't. For 100 years teams used a lead blocker to even out the numbers in the running game. This fool spread is the only reason quarterbacks need to run. Line up with one of your tight ends in the backfield and run behind that big line all game long.We do need to run him. In order to win football games.
Our defense isn't as good as I thought. Malik's injury looks bad too.
We need to talk brother... you should sit down...Our defense isn't as good as I thought. Malik's injury looks bad too.
Our defense isn't as good as I thought. Malik's injury looks bad too.
This is where I'm at. Part of the "bad luck" is on BK. We never have any depth or plan "B" at QB. We're always one QB injury away from disaster it seems. In any other "big time" college football program Tommy Rees would have been the 5th option. Here he was the back up/starter his entire career. It is not by accident that an Urban Meyer led OSU team seems overloaded with QB talent. There seems to be some legit talent development going on there. I feel like I can never look at our QBs and say "yeah, they've gotten way better from last year."What upsets me is that he never really has a plan b ready.
What upsets me is that he never really has a plan b ready.
No we don't. For 100 years teams used a lead blocker to even out the numbers in the running game. This fool spread is the only reason quarterbacks need to run. Line up with one of your tight ends in the backfield and run behind that big line all game long.
No we don't. For 100 years teams used a lead blocker to even out the numbers in the running game. This fool spread is the only reason quarterbacks need to run. Line up with one of your tight ends in the backfield and run behind that big line all game long.
What upsets me is that he never really has a plan b ready.
Been saying this for the last two years
1. Yes, I know the schematic advantage. When you have to account for the quarterback, it takes one defender out of the play for the running back. Know what else takes one defender out of the play? A fullback blocking his ass five yards down field. We're very good at recruiting tight-end-type guys, i.e. fullback-type guys.Two questions:
Do you know/see the advantage to having designed quarterback runs?
Do you honestly think this team has a shot of making the championship with Malik never running the ball?
1. Yes, I know the schematic advantage. When you have to account for the quarterback, it takes one defender out of the play for the running back. Know what else takes one defender out of the play? A fullback blocking his ass five yards down field. We're very good at recruiting tight-end-type guys, i.e. fullback-type guys.
2. It's a situational thing. I'm fine with zone read on first and ten. I'm not okay with it on third and two. It takes too long to develop. Higher reward, but higher risk. We have the offensive line and "big skill" talent to line up and say "we're running B-gap left, so fuck you."
Did anyone else feel like Severin accounted for way too many of their receiving yards? They guys seemed to always be in position for a catch, although a lot of the catches were shorter 10 yard routes underneath the coverage. Despite that fact he came up with over half their yards and was Jones' favorite target by a large margin, we did a crappy job trying to shut him down. I'm not sure why we didn't do a better job covering him.
He seemed to always be the WR who wasn't covered, yet should've been the WR who was always covered.
1. Yes, I know the schematic advantage. When you have to account for the quarterback, it takes one defender out of the play for the running back. Know what else takes one defender out of the play? A fullback blocking his ass five yards down field. We're very good at recruiting tight-end-type guys, i.e. fullback-type guys.
2. It's a situational thing. I'm fine with zone read on first and ten. I'm not okay with it on third and two. It takes too long to develop. Higher reward, but higher risk. We have the offensive line and "big skill" talent to line up and say "we're running B-gap left, so fuck you."
I know you CAN, but we don't.Running with the QB is more than just read and option plays. You can add another lead blocker (it's like having 2 fullbacks!) to the play. Simple math: 10 guys blocking and 1 running > 9 guys blocking, 1 running, and 1 not doing anything but handing the ball off.
As well, "running B-gap left, so f*** you" worked PITIFULLY this entire Virginia game.