Started By
Message
Ongoing coaching issue at MU
Posted on 9/25/18 at 12:50 pm
Posted on 9/25/18 at 12:50 pm
Long time issue in my opinion.
Odom is continuing Pinkel's long running tradition of playing the depth chart guy no matter what, ignoring what the guy is doing on the field on Saturday and ignoring when the guys behind him are playing better.
I'm all for rewarding guys who "practice like it's the game" or showing some loyalty to your regular starters, but they need to stay on the sideline if they can't get it done on the field on Saturday.
Holmes has stepped up and made plays in two straight games. Some of the rare positive plays from the secondary. He played 8 snaps against Georgia. 8.....
after getting the early interception!!!!!
Hall was obviously limited to the point he was a non-factor. Now we are hearing Brown was playing gimpy as well. Not very intelligent to take on the #2 team in the country with damaged goods at two prime positions.
Knox and Scott have shown some flashes early on. However, the coaches decided our chances were better with 2 ailing WRs who were not getting anything done on the field than with 2 healthy receivers who have shown some indications they can make good things happen.
I know coaches have to manage egos to keep the team on the right track over the course of the season, but there has to be an emphasis on winning games that are there for the taking as well. Massage egos through the week. Grab the W on Saturday when you can. (And no, I am not arguing changing the 3 players mentioned above would have meant a W against Georgia, but it would have increased our chances!!!)
Odom is continuing Pinkel's long running tradition of playing the depth chart guy no matter what, ignoring what the guy is doing on the field on Saturday and ignoring when the guys behind him are playing better.
I'm all for rewarding guys who "practice like it's the game" or showing some loyalty to your regular starters, but they need to stay on the sideline if they can't get it done on the field on Saturday.
Holmes has stepped up and made plays in two straight games. Some of the rare positive plays from the secondary. He played 8 snaps against Georgia. 8.....
after getting the early interception!!!!!
Hall was obviously limited to the point he was a non-factor. Now we are hearing Brown was playing gimpy as well. Not very intelligent to take on the #2 team in the country with damaged goods at two prime positions.
Knox and Scott have shown some flashes early on. However, the coaches decided our chances were better with 2 ailing WRs who were not getting anything done on the field than with 2 healthy receivers who have shown some indications they can make good things happen.
I know coaches have to manage egos to keep the team on the right track over the course of the season, but there has to be an emphasis on winning games that are there for the taking as well. Massage egos through the week. Grab the W on Saturday when you can. (And no, I am not arguing changing the 3 players mentioned above would have meant a W against Georgia, but it would have increased our chances!!!)
4
Posted on 9/25/18 at 12:56 pm to Tiger97
The nature of football and the way teams prepare with their units is a huge factor that you're missing.
What are the limitations to play calling with Knox or another newcomer?
I mean, I get it. Why play a guy who's damaged if you've got others to step up.
I just think there's more to it than managing egos.
Part of my complain about football is the seeming over emphasis on systems and play calling. You have far better athletes at Arkansas getting absolutely shite-fricked by inferior competition all because the system isn't installed.
One guy goes out in football, and the guys lower on the depth chart don't know how to operate as well with the first unit.
With limitations on practice time, and obvious other restrictions on what can be done to prepare an 80 man army, I understand why it would be hard to install everything to the point that everyone on the team gets it equally.
It's one of those things that sucks.
Overall Barry is doing an A+ job, so enjoy that.
What are the limitations to play calling with Knox or another newcomer?
I mean, I get it. Why play a guy who's damaged if you've got others to step up.
I just think there's more to it than managing egos.
Part of my complain about football is the seeming over emphasis on systems and play calling. You have far better athletes at Arkansas getting absolutely shite-fricked by inferior competition all because the system isn't installed.
One guy goes out in football, and the guys lower on the depth chart don't know how to operate as well with the first unit.
With limitations on practice time, and obvious other restrictions on what can be done to prepare an 80 man army, I understand why it would be hard to install everything to the point that everyone on the team gets it equally.
It's one of those things that sucks.
Overall Barry is doing an A+ job, so enjoy that.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 1:04 pm to Tiger97
Having Hall in there all day confused me too
Posted on 9/25/18 at 1:11 pm to Tiger97
Holmes needs to play more. No doubt, but I don’t think this issue is specific to Mizzou.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 3:46 pm to JesusQuintana
I don't think it's an MU-only problem either. I just don't care if it hurts another team.
Like I said, this is a nerve for me. Saw this so many years with Pinkel teams.
Like I said, this is a nerve for me. Saw this so many years with Pinkel teams.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 4:22 pm to Tiger97
quote:
I don't think it's an MU-only problem either. I just don't care if it hurts another team.
I love coming across examples like this.
Examples that illustrate much larger intellectual problems in society.
What you said here is this: you have no interest in 'understanding' the problem/issue, you want to complain about it while offering a solution that doesn't come from a proper reference point because of the lack of understanding.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 4:32 pm to Wtodd
quote:
Having Hall in there all day confused me too
He was in there to keep uga’s best corner on him keeping him off other receivers. I’m not sure it was a great plan, but that’s why BO did it.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 4:50 pm to Tiger97
1 thing Odom has shown that Pinkel rarely did is the willingness to adjust week to week.
In 2015 Pinkel and Henson stuck with a terrible OL the whole season without giving others a chance to see if they can get it done. Odom has been more willing to replace starters or move players around in season. The example last season was moving Prewett from LB to SS and replacing Cheadle with Sparks. He also had Durant move into a starting role.
In 2015 Pinkel and Henson stuck with a terrible OL the whole season without giving others a chance to see if they can get it done. Odom has been more willing to replace starters or move players around in season. The example last season was moving Prewett from LB to SS and replacing Cheadle with Sparks. He also had Durant move into a starting role.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 4:57 pm to wubilli
It’s time to get Holmes into a starting role.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:02 pm to JesusQuintana
Last season it was after the bye week when most of the lineup changes took place.
Here are the ones I am looking at.
I would like to see more from Holmes.
Can Miller or Bolton provide better pass coverage than the current linebackers?
What about Jeffcoat and Hansford as pass rushers?
would like to see more of Knox and Scott at WR.
Also with Hilton having surgery we will see what Gillespie and Bledsoe can do at saftey.
Here are the ones I am looking at.
I would like to see more from Holmes.
Can Miller or Bolton provide better pass coverage than the current linebackers?
What about Jeffcoat and Hansford as pass rushers?
would like to see more of Knox and Scott at WR.
Also with Hilton having surgery we will see what Gillespie and Bledsoe can do at saftey.
Posted on 9/25/18 at 5:37 pm to wubilli
The position coaches set their two deep under Odom. It was not that way under Pinkel.
Acy and Holmes are clearly the best pair of CBs to have on the field. Sparks as a back up on the field side isn't an issue IMO as long as he isn't trying to jump routes with no help behind him. The issue is who spells Acy if Holmes is taking primary reps. Mills, Collins, and Ware all have potential but throwing true Fr to the wolves on the boundary is going to lead to big plays in conference play. There may end up being no better option. WR is in the same position.
Acy and Holmes are clearly the best pair of CBs to have on the field. Sparks as a back up on the field side isn't an issue IMO as long as he isn't trying to jump routes with no help behind him. The issue is who spells Acy if Holmes is taking primary reps. Mills, Collins, and Ware all have potential but throwing true Fr to the wolves on the boundary is going to lead to big plays in conference play. There may end up being no better option. WR is in the same position.
This post was edited on 9/25/18 at 5:43 pm
Posted on 9/25/18 at 6:04 pm to navynuke
Mills and Collins haven’t really played defensive snaps so the options are Petry and Ware.
Petry got burned pretty bad in place of Acy against Purdue, but hasn’t been bad in dime packages. That leaves Ware there, or rotate Holmes over and use a 3 man rotation with Acy, Holmes and Sparks
Petry got burned pretty bad in place of Acy against Purdue, but hasn’t been bad in dime packages. That leaves Ware there, or rotate Holmes over and use a 3 man rotation with Acy, Holmes and Sparks
Posted on 9/25/18 at 9:35 pm to wubilli
Posted on 9/26/18 at 9:24 am to OG Supreme
Whoa PHIL 101 professor. I'm here for the sports.
I want MU coaches to understand this ongoing problem and fix it. You are right. If refusing to replace a hurt player in a college football game reflects a bigger societal issue, I don't expect the coaches to fix society.
I just want them to replace a player giving the team a 0% chance of success with a player who gives them a better chance of success (even if it is just 10%).
It does not help the MU football team if I understand the issue. It does if the coaches understand the issue.
I did offer a solution. Play kids that give you a chance of success.
I want MU coaches to understand this ongoing problem and fix it. You are right. If refusing to replace a hurt player in a college football game reflects a bigger societal issue, I don't expect the coaches to fix society.
I just want them to replace a player giving the team a 0% chance of success with a player who gives them a better chance of success (even if it is just 10%).
It does not help the MU football team if I understand the issue. It does if the coaches understand the issue.
I did offer a solution. Play kids that give you a chance of success.
Posted on 9/26/18 at 9:26 am to pauliebleaker
This makes sense. I was more upset they were marching Brown out there as well. No decoy argument there.
It was obvious Lock was needing targets, and Brown and Hall were not getting it done.
It was obvious Lock was needing targets, and Brown and Hall were not getting it done.
Posted on 9/26/18 at 9:28 am to wubilli
True. He just needs to keep moving that bar a little more. Like many things, a short leash is something that can be overdone, but Odom needs to keep moving this bar in games that can be had.
Posted on 9/27/18 at 8:14 am to Tiger97
I thought Dooley had a great gameplan going in. And Lock did a great job taking what the defense gave him.
But I wouldn't have been happy with Dooley that he didn't change the plan late when the clock was more of an issue.
Down by 3 scores early in the 4th, there were too many runs and too many plays to give you a chance to win. The 10+ play TD drive looked good. But I don't think you can say that Mizzou was playing to win at that point.
I haven't heard any mizzou fans upset about this. Correct me if I am wrong, but you seem more content in losing by 14 respectably than possibly losing by more because you are trying to air raid UGA and get back into the game and possibly making mistakes.
Would you rather try to win in the 4th? Or continue to be balanced and do what is working just to show that you can against a prevent defense?
But I wouldn't have been happy with Dooley that he didn't change the plan late when the clock was more of an issue.
Down by 3 scores early in the 4th, there were too many runs and too many plays to give you a chance to win. The 10+ play TD drive looked good. But I don't think you can say that Mizzou was playing to win at that point.
I haven't heard any mizzou fans upset about this. Correct me if I am wrong, but you seem more content in losing by 14 respectably than possibly losing by more because you are trying to air raid UGA and get back into the game and possibly making mistakes.
Would you rather try to win in the 4th? Or continue to be balanced and do what is working just to show that you can against a prevent defense?
Posted on 9/27/18 at 8:26 am to meansonny
I come in on the opposite side of this. When Mizzou had the ball down 11 with about 4 minutes left in the game. I thought Mizzou should have continued to use the run game some. Instead Mizzou went straight pass and turned the ball over on downs.
Posted on 9/27/18 at 9:47 am to wubilli
You feel that way because running the football with 4 minutes left in the game would have helped you win? Because it wouldn't.
Posted on 9/27/18 at 10:40 am to meansonny
With pace Mizzou plays at and the clock stopping on first downs, running the ball should have still been an option.
Scoring on that drive would have made it a 3-8 point game with a couple minutes left.
Scoring on that drive would have made it a 3-8 point game with a couple minutes left.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News