There are a couple of things that I think could use another look.
- Musical players. We seem to switch up players but I don't really see why. Shouldn't certain players be developed at this point in the season?
- Usage of backup QBs. With the exception of W&M this has generally not produced anything. I don't think it's fooling the defense
- Change for the sake of change. For the most part no team has done a good job at covering our receivers.
What say you?
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Don't sit through another game without alcohol
Musical players:
We are developing depth. That requires giving everyone PT.
Backup QBs:
We've needed 3 QBs this year. Having backups ready is valuable. See previous answer.
Change for the sake of change:
You need to be more specific here, it seems redundant given the first two questions.
Some of it is covered by QP. The other part is not attacking their weak DBs. Pitt didn't win this game by being two dimensional and balanced. They ran because that's what was working. We couldn't run, but showed that we could exploit their TERRIBLE secondary. Then we went back to running...
I see what you mean. We did the same thing against GT last week - trying to run for the sake of trying to establish the run. The first three or four drives of the second half were wasted in trying to do this. It was frustrating.
Mike Leech had a good quote: "50% run and 50% pass is 50% stupid".
Do what works.
And BC (or did you mean BC when you said GT). The rationale was they (BC) were in a defensive formation that was conducive to run but we couldn't run. One thing we have been able to do all season is punish smaller DBs with our large receivers.
Kumah: 6'2" 225
Damon Hazelton: 6'2" 222
Tre Turner: 6'2" 187
I know it may seem overly simplistic but put up those points until it stops working. Make the defense work for it.
How many passes that get dropped, overthrown or he takes a sack do we have to see before we understand there isn't an option to just sit in a pocket and pick them apart with passes. The run game is there, kind of. I'll agree some of the run calls and times for runs are awful but there is perfect chances for good run plays even this year.
Then please explain the lack of reps for Hooker at QB. I'm not sure why Hooker is not getting some of the reps Quincy Patterson is getting during games.
Well...
There's what the coaches say which is they don't want to injure the backup.
Then there's what the coaches do which is not let him throw a pass.
IDK... Maybe not explainable at this point.
Hooker is likely the emergency QB if Willis were to be injured. Since they can play QP in 4 games and keep his redshirt, I imagine they figure they will keep Hooker fresh in case something happened to Willis.
I REALLY want to believe that... But... I fear Hooker isn't ready.
I haven't seen anything from Hooker or QP suggesting that they are capable of throwing the ball.
Not that I don't believe it, it's just that the coaches don't seem to want to allow it...
Pitt averaged 13.7 yards per carry and 14.6 yards per pass ATTEMPT. Youth or not, the defense is flat broken. Takeaway the run at least and I would be able to understand. Derrick Hopkins on Twitter calling out the LBs for looking into backfield and not ready their keys. Let's fix ONE thing by next week. Pick one. Any one.
Musical players. If you are referring to defense, I'm assuming it's out if necessity. If you're referring to QB, it appears we were trying to mix it up in the red zone, which is a problem area for us in the past with our poor running game.
Also kick returners and lineman.
Kick returnees have had a fumbling/catching problem all year
OL has had some snapping problems (among others)
Valid points but why aren't these guys getting coached up by this time of the season. Aside from play calling and coordinator level activities are we getting what we need out of position coaches?
Wasn't trying to defend the position coaches. Just trying to point out that there may be a reason why we're seemingly playing musical chairs
Willis was better today, including in the red zone. Wish we hadn't played QP in this game. At the end since this is one of his 4 games, I am ok with giving him experience to prepare him for a QB battle in the next 2 years, or encase Willis gets hurt.
Don't start a vent thread in the second quarter
You really took that personally, didn't you?
If you're gonna bring in another QB, have them throw a pass to keep the defense honest.
And this is a lesson for every team at every level of football.
He has tried to pass a few times. It hasn't gone well. But he will develop.
Both of you have good points here. I think he has to connect on a serious one. Generally I feel like P5 defenses have enough analysts that they'll play the numbers until proven otherwise. I don't think they are going to react to QP or HH until there is something to react to.
Exactly.
I might be remembering wrong, but other than the last drive today, the only cases I can think of where QP or Hooker have even attempted a pass were situations where we were desperate (3rd and long) or in cases where we weren't sure if Willis was coming back (during the BC game).
If we trotted QP out there in the middle of a drive and he attempted a pass on his first play, I wouldn't mind if it was incomplete. At least the defense has to worry that it's coming.
You seem to be a numbers person based on what I have seen from some of your other posts. Do you think they will account for it until they see it happen? I guess it's situational. I'm not sure we're ever tried putting him in when we weren't desparate.
We put him in with the game on the line against UNC and BC. He had good runs and picked up first downs both times. Both times Willis came back and finished of long TD drives.
I don't know. This team reminds me more and more of the 2012 Eagles. That team was also decimated by injuries, showed flashes of good/competent play sprinkled amongst long stretches of rage inducing mishaps, featured defense that would bust often and fold when things got tough, had coaching that left a lot to be desired, and that edition of the Birds was the softest worst football team I've ever watched.
In that situation the problems were systemic. But firing CJF isn't the right move. I know very little about who we would replace Cornelsen with, but at this point I would think that has to be looked into.
Anyway, none of this is gonna matter when we upset Duke and win the Big Dance.
I'm not sure anyone is expecting Fuente to go. Ultimately he needs to be really objective and decide where his loyalties lie. On the flip side, Cornelsen should also take stock of what's happening and decide whether his participation is putting Fuente in a bad position. It's all very complicated, messy and potentially ugly but that's why those jobs pay so much.
Oh man I said the same thing to Cornerstone during the game about how this reminds me of the Eagles about 5 years ago. You can see the talent is there but man, it's too young and injury riddled.
Then again I also said they needed to move on from their legendary DC to get to where they needed to be... I hope the same isn't needed here, but this season is testing me on my faith in Bud
I think Bud has just gotten so set in his ways with his scheme and putting trust in his staff to find those undersized guys with "twitch" and coach em up. Bud's never been a great recruiter, and he did fight hard for a few really key guys in recent years. But the overall talent level on D is nowhere where it needs to be to be successful. DB recruiting has fallen off a cliff since TG left, and we have really dug ourselves in a hole at DT that I honestly don't know how we get out of for several years.
He can scheme all he wants, but when your DL can't get off a block, LBs can't fit their gaps, and the DBs are frankly lost, it's not going to be pretty. A serious failure of recruiting, player evaluation and development, and coaching on D and really the entire team right now.
Bud coaches to a scheme and therefore recruits players that fit it. It would be like asking CPJ to run a west coast offense. We need depth and experience. We have neither at this point.
My problem is that he doesn't seem to play to the strength of what he has. Do that and take your chances (it looks like we are sitting back and playing bend but don't break...then it breaks). Slowly add the other layers as the player gain trust and experience.
It's funny how even now on the other side of a Super Bowl ring some lowlights from that year still stick in my mind. I distinctly remember the punter kicking the ball directly into his teammate's butt in a game against the Bengals, and cracking up in spite of myself at #buttpunt.
I feel the same about Bud, and I almost feel wrong in saying it but there you go.
Tell me about it. Speaking ill of Jim Johnson should be blasphemy in any circle, but I don't think the Iggs win last year with him at DC. It truly pains me to say that, because thats literally saying a great man needed to die to achieve greatness, but they really did benefit from another great mind molding a solid unit.
I hope we don't need Bud to go, but if we did there is precedence that we will be ok.
QB sneak from under center is always more successful than qb sneak from the pistol.
The team never quit even in a blowout, that is a good sign.
But the QP experiment should be over. He isn't misleading anybody going in and his passes have been bad to horrible. I would rather see Hooker play.