Started By
Message

re: So what does this offense bring us in 2020?

Posted on 1/20/20 at 11:07 pm to
Posted by meansonny
ATL
Member since Sep 2012
25806 posts
Posted on 1/20/20 at 11:07 pm to
quote:

Coley already adapted


He did. If you cant see the difference in the playcalling from the first 4 games to midseason to the end of the season then there isnt much to talk about.

quote:

and was doing it right.

Just because you change the playcalling doesnt mean that the new plays are successful. But Coley apparently listened to the message boards. Over the course of the season, we saw more passes over the middle and more RPOs. But over the course of the season, we were running plays not repped in the offseason with a fatigued WR/OL group. We weren't successful on the new playcalling except for Florida and Baylor. That is why Coley is gone. Because he couldnt find any identity within the offense (even with the playcalling changes through the course of the year)

RD is right. There are message board narratives that are lazy. They are perpetuated despite being half truths or flat out wrong. This is the first time that I have seen blaming a 50/50 choice to start a series for our offensive woes.
Posted by BeefDawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
4747 posts
Posted on 1/21/20 at 12:05 am to
quote:

He did. If you cant see the difference in the playcalling from the first 4 games to midseason to the end of the season then there isnt much to talk about.
Not only was there very little difference in play-calling from early season to mid-season to end of season (except for the Baylor game there absolutely was), but there was barely any difference from the first half of every game to the second half of every game.

If Zamir White came in during Vanderbilt, it was about a 90% chance he was running a dive up the middle.

And guess what, when he came in during LSU, it was about a 90% chance he was running a dive up the middle.

We'd have a successful throw to Eli Wolf in the first half of a game, and then never throw to him again. Instead, we'd throw 5-6x to Simmons, and he'd drop 4 of them.

People weren't complaining about us running up the middle for no or little gain all the time because it made them feel good or they were delusional and all somehow mistakenly seeing the same false images.

We were all scratching our fricking heads as to why Simmons was the target of the opening game bomb with LSU rather than... ANYBODY else (except Landers).

And we were all miffed as to why Woerner and Robertson were the targets on the final drive in OT against South Carolina instead of Wolf and Blaylock or Pickens. You know, guys who can actually catch.

The head-scratching and dismay in personnel packages and play-calling didn't freaking change all season long, until we got to the Baylor game.

Sure, maybe the run vs pass slightly changed (58/42 run/pass first half of season, to 53/47 run/pass second half of season), but throwing to the wrong players and telegraphing runs didn't.

Not to mention, Coley's route tree combinations were befuddling. I can't be the only one who noticed a lack of usage of the middle of the field, and an abundance of routes that didn't reach the 1st down marker when it was needed.

Look, there's a reason the guy was just replaced and we're seemingly shifting to a "pass to open the run" scheme.

I still can't believe I'm arguing with people who are indirectly suggesting Coley wasn't a problem. And after Kirby has clearly asserted that he was by hiring 3 former OC's who run a different scheme than Coley.

Just craziness.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter