Went where you weren’t supposed to on a pocket breakdown? Please explain. I’d love some clear examples of DR or AM going the opposite way they were coached to go when the pocket broke down.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
Big Ten Coaches Talk Anonymously...Time for Rhule to prove them wrong.
- Thread starter The_Real_PJ
- Start date
When a QB tucks it and runs, he becomes a RB. The best RBs are known to have great vision. This means they can see where holes and lanes are opening up. Combined with their vision is timing and ability, how strong. elusive and fast they are.
If you cant see holes or lanes, overestimate or underestimate your opponents speed agility etc, you picked the wrong trajectory/path.
If you think you're strong enough to break an arm tackle, fast enough to elude an opponent but arent, you've picked the wrong path, hole or lane. Even running out of bounds can get you hit hard if you miscalculate the above.
Simple.
If you cant see holes or lanes, overestimate or underestimate your opponents speed agility etc, you picked the wrong trajectory/path.
If you think you're strong enough to break an arm tackle, fast enough to elude an opponent but arent, you've picked the wrong path, hole or lane. Even running out of bounds can get you hit hard if you miscalculate the above.
Simple.
Sorry if I wasn't clear: I wasn't speaking about when the pocket breaks down, I was speaking about them moving outside of the pocket when they actually had a pocket to be in. AM had the tendency to try and take off running or roll out when he had a pocket to throw from. This ended up leading to sacks or holding penalties because the linemen weren't expecting the position of the QB to change. DR didn't have that same issue because he wasn't mobile, his was more either stepping up or dropping back when he didn't need to and giving rushers a chance to get to him when they were already blocked.
Like I said in some of my other posts, I still put a lot of the blame on poor line play. If the QB doesn't trust the pass protection, they are going to struggle to stay where they are supposed to, even when protection ends up being good on a play. Comes down to trust and bad line play doesn't build up trust.
It is definitely a balance that has to be struck. You don't want to be reckless in your decision making, but you also don't want to have paralysis by analysis, either. At this level of football, we aren't going to have guys running wide open every play. If you are going to pass the ball, there are times where you are going to take on risks of turning the ball over. You want to limit those risks as much as possible, but you can't be so afraid of turning the ball over that you never air the ball out.
You don't want to turn the ball over when you are in positions to score, but you also don't want to pick up 20 yards in sacks that take you out of scoring position, too. Different problems but similar results.
After the Minnesota game, I broke down what I saw on each of the sacks from that game (quoted above). The vast majority of those I pinned on the offensive line. Over the course of the season, there were definitely some that rest on DR's shoulders. But the biggest issue in all of this was having guys come in unblocked when we were allocating more people to block than were rushing. That simply can't happen.
First, I’ll admit I haven’t read all 6 pages.
Is (one of) the anonymous coaches quoted actually saying Rhule *doesn’t* like it when his assistant coaches are “comfortable” and *likes* staff turnover?!?! Have I read that correctly?
If so, Rhule needs to have a serious conversation with Osborne, or, really, 99% of the most successful living CFB head coaches, and that conversation needs to happen quickly. Just because a guy gets “comfortable” in a job *doesn’t* mean he stops trying to get better at teaching/coaching, and it *doesn’t* mean he slacks off on the recruiting trail either. If Rhule actually believes staff turnover is a good thing, how has he managed to get this far in his career?!?! If he thinks a coach needs to feel like his job isn’t secure as a motivating factor, he’s really selling people short IMO.
There are so many benefits to keeping your staff around long term (if they’ve shown they can coach, teach and recruit) it’s hard to know where to start. I guess I’ll start with, it’s not a good thing to ask your players to learn a new system multiple times in their careers. Even if it’s the same basic system, many coaches have different terminology that players need to be able to remember and recall quickly while under pressure on game day. Secondly, a coach getting “comfortable” recruiting the same area can indicate he’s developed good relationships with the HS coaches in the area. That helps!
Is (one of) the anonymous coaches quoted actually saying Rhule *doesn’t* like it when his assistant coaches are “comfortable” and *likes* staff turnover?!?! Have I read that correctly?
If so, Rhule needs to have a serious conversation with Osborne, or, really, 99% of the most successful living CFB head coaches, and that conversation needs to happen quickly. Just because a guy gets “comfortable” in a job *doesn’t* mean he stops trying to get better at teaching/coaching, and it *doesn’t* mean he slacks off on the recruiting trail either. If Rhule actually believes staff turnover is a good thing, how has he managed to get this far in his career?!?! If he thinks a coach needs to feel like his job isn’t secure as a motivating factor, he’s really selling people short IMO.
There are so many benefits to keeping your staff around long term (if they’ve shown they can coach, teach and recruit) it’s hard to know where to start. I guess I’ll start with, it’s not a good thing to ask your players to learn a new system multiple times in their careers. Even if it’s the same basic system, many coaches have different terminology that players need to be able to remember and recall quickly while under pressure on game day. Secondly, a coach getting “comfortable” recruiting the same area can indicate he’s developed good relationships with the HS coaches in the area. That helps!
Last edited:
You have to assume whoever that coach was wasnt just being snarky as to how MR handles bad coaching arrangements.
I wonder how this genius anon coach felt about Saban? He must of thought him a complete failure.
I think fans should get out of their “feelings” and not worry about what “allegedly anonymous” Big 10 “coaches” think about the Nebraska football program.
Micro aggressionI think fans should get out of their “feelings” and not worry about what “allegedly anonymous” Big 10 “coaches” think about the Nebraska football program.
Micro aggression
I feel great. Nebraska football is in the proper place in my life…not so sure about some “fanatics” in the fanbase.
Last edited:
Temple and Baylor is how.
He is good at culture. He’s can’t think of a time he clearly won the game planning, although we haven’t seen the halftime adjustments so one-sided like we did under Frost.
A culture head coach can win with the right assistants given the right authority. Bobby Bowden was like this. I think Rhule can have success too. But he may be more susceptible to a bad assistant hire having more detrimental impact.
I think it’s taken a few years after his return from the NFL to really get the quality of staff he needs for success. I like this uear’s staff a LOT more than any other group he’s had. We are also seeing more competitive recruiting.
A culture head coach can win with the right assistants given the right authority. Bobby Bowden was like this. I think Rhule can have success too. But he may be more susceptible to a bad assistant hire having more detrimental impact.
I think it’s taken a few years after his return from the NFL to really get the quality of staff he needs for success. I like this uear’s staff a LOT more than any other group he’s had. We are also seeing more competitive recruiting.
The kids think so too
