re: Said it on day one, saying it again.

quote:

---

Yep, that's the ticket...do nothing about the very obvious problems we have and continue to ignore them for years on end

---

Congrats to all the Mark Richt haters. You've fixed our "problem" of consistently good teams that were competitive in our league and nationally. But we never finished first, so we burned it all down. Enjoy your little lesson in what real problems look like, although obviously most of you will never figure out that they start and end with Kirby Smart.

quote:

---

Most of this was the fact that we have two 5 star running backs. Very few times were there holes and almost all was yards after contact, a lot of contact. The line is terrible..period. Both of these backs should have had a banner year but getting hit behind the line and at the time of getting the hand-off is troublesome for any back. Yes there was some improvement at times but it was up and down..like crossing your fingers. They largely had to use gimmicks to get things going.

---

Actually, the gimmicks were double pulls, gap and a half down blocking, difficult combo blocks, pulling centers, and other stuff only the most athletic lineman can do. When we did less gimmicky stuff and just blocked gaps and pulled single guards, we got a lot more drive.

Pass blocking was tough when we were in obvious pass down and distances all game long. This line was not great, but they were serviceable. They did fine when they were put in the position to do so. I get that there are a lot,of,people out there who don't understand football enough to see what is happening with an offensive line scheme. I'd be glad to explain it more if you would like.

quote:

---

Dude. Why didn't those two 5* RB's run against Nicholls' then? 20* RB's can't run when there is no hold. One explanation for the Jekyl/Hyde running game this year is blocking scheme. We ran the ball against some teams with very good run defenses and did not run against some teams with very poor run defenses.

---

Have you read my posts? That is exactly what I was saying, we got what we got because of the good backs....very, very hard earned BUT I also said, the line has been night and day, up and down AND EXTREMELY INCONSISTENT.

quote:

---

Actually, the gimmicks were double pulls, gap and a half down blocking, difficult combo blocks, pulling centers, and other stuff only the most athletic lineman can do. When we did less gimmicky stuff and just blocked gaps and pulled single guards, we got a lot more drive. Pass blocking was tough when we were in obvious pass down and distances all game long. This line was not great, but they were serviceable. They did fine when they were put in the position to do so. I get that there are a lot,of,people out there who don't understand football enough to see what is happening with an offensive line scheme. I'd be glad to explain it more if you would like.

---

Though I certainly don't agree with a lot of the play calling by Chaney, already said he needed to be replaced, the gimmicks were often needed as a last option. The reason: this is, without a doubt, the worst o-line in modern history for the school...period. Any word to the contrary is complete nonsense and nothing but arguing for the sake of arguing. Your kid playing on the o-line or what? We supposedly have one of the best o-line coaches in the game...he did what he could do with this bunch. When we have a starter on the line coming from Rhode Island, pretty much speaks volumes.

"Don't understand football", I played tailback/DB and ran track at the college level.. I get football. Bottom line, we were reaching for answers at the line most of the season because the line could not blow anyone off the ball at least most of the time. This is not a new concept created by myself, the entire nation of "football" analysts happen to agree. They are garbage. I fully get it, as a back, you can't do much with a very, very crippled line. Oh but keep defending them because you are certainly correct.

quote:

---

Congrats to all the Mark Richt haters. You've fixed our "problem" of consistently good teams that were competitive in our league and nationally. But we never finished first, so we burned it all down. Enjoy your little lesson in what real problems look like, although obviously most of you will never figure out that they start and end with Kirby Smart.

---

Not a hater, didn't burn CMR down and I'm not burning CKS down, just posting what I see as obvious issues which ARE fixable.

quote:

---

But we never finished first, so we burned it all down

---

quote:

---

Isn't a coach's job to finish first every once in awhile?

---

Didn't we finish first "every once in a while?"

He's been white knighting for the shite OL all year. Don't take it personal. He's just wrong

Pretty much agree but.....

1. Chaney is an experienced OC and with better players his offense would probably work. Chaney isn't causing Eason's ongoing accuracy issues and OL and WR inadequacy.

2. Still I don't like having a fat arse coach and I think his offense is behind the times/what is obviously working at other programs.

3. I want an OC with a system that utilizes dual-threat QB's. If you look at all the prolific offenses in college football, they all have dual-threat QB's: Clemson, Louisville, Bama, Ohio St., Tennessee, etc. Two of the best dual-threat QB's came from the state of Georgia, Deshaun Watson and Joshua Dobbs. Couple such an offense with superior defense and you have a winning formula.