[by JessN] Postgame Wrapup: REVIEWING THE GAME YIELDS NO CLEAR ANSWERS

BamaNation

Publisher and Benevolent Dictator
Staff member
Apr 9, 1999
24,734
24,536
1,532
Silicon Slopes
tidefans.com
POSTGAME WRAPUP
S. CAROLINA 20 @ ALABAMA 3
REVIEWING THE GAME YIELDS NO CLEAR ANSWERS

October 4, 2004
by Jess Nicholas
Editor-in-Chief
TideFans.com

There is a point called "paralysis by analysis" that occurs when you look at something so long, you can't figure out what to do with it because you've already thought of every possible outcome, and can't make a choice between them.

With all due respect to Keith Brown, who escaped real paralysis after his collision with a fencepost, Alabama's team looks paralyzed.

READ MORE HERE!
 
Jess:

What is your feel on what is going on? Do you think that Guillon can improve in the next two weeks, or do you think Shula may end up trying to use Adam Thrash?

TiM
 
Precisely! You read my mind. I don't think there is that big a difference in talent between Brodie, Mark and Spencer. Mark and Spencer were not prepared to be thrown in the fire of SEC play. I believe that coach Shula tried to make up in the fall for Brodie's missing the spring by working with him exclusively and is paying for it now.
 
TiderinMiss said:
Jess:

What is your feel on what is going on? Do you think that Guillon can improve in the next two weeks, or do you think Shula may end up trying to use Adam Thrash?

TiM

I sincerely doubt Thrash or Milwee play unless injuries make it unavoidable.

As to what is going on, I couldn't tell you. But no matter whether it's the coaches' fault or the players' fault, the coaches are the ones that have to make changes to accommodate what their players can do.
 
We are not very good, but not far from it. a field goal here, no penalty there, a better decision and we are a different team. Now is the time for the coaches to step up and prove what they can do. We need to let them know we are behind them and expect them to do better. Lack of effort is not acceptable.
 
I'm not JessN, but...

TiderinMiss said:
Jess:

What is your feel on what is going on? Do you think that Guillon can improve in the next two weeks, or do you think Shula may end up trying to use Adam Thrash?

TiM


I will tell you my two cents anyways.

To answer your question, no I don't think Guillon will improve to the point where he can bring what Croyle did to this offense this year. The best thing a QB can have is the confidence in himself and from the teammates. Unfortunately Guillon has neither right now.

After two games of poor showing from his QBs, I think we can safely assume that Coach Shula is going to play around with the playbook. To put it simply, the offense is going to be ultra vanilla. And that is not a bad thing at this point. We need to put some confidence in Guillon and the best way to do that is by giving him the minimum to work with. What is going to be asked of him is this - do not turn the ball over. The offense will be geared to not lose the field position (and again, this is a good thing given our current situation at QB).

Instead, the entire game plan will be focused on defense. I've said it before and I will say it again. I like where our defense is heading. It's still not there yet, but I see improvements game after game. I think this defense can come to a point where they can dominate the game and eventually pull off a win. Teams have had sucess winning with good defense and medicore offense in the past. The only difference between those teams and this Alabama squad? We kept turning the ball over, lose field position, and not make one or two key plays that would have put 6 points on the scoreboard.

I keep seeing posts from majority that we should open up more on offense, give Guillon a chance to prove himself...etc. I fully disagree. I think we should limit the playbook, go back to vanilla offense, and play to our stregnth - defensive football. It's not very complicated. This team has got to go back to the basics and play fundamentally solid football. Play a solid defense, turnover free offense, good field position in special team, and I can guarantee you that winning will take care of itself. Opening up our playbook now is not going to do any good especially when both of our back up QBs are as rattled as they were in previous two games. The opponents from here on will do only one thing - stack the line and challenge us to throw the ball. But that is O.K> as long as our offense does not make any stupid mistakes or turn the ball over. Guillon will have to show the coaches that he can excute what is given to him in his limited role before throwing down 3-4 wide sets that have more complex reads on defense. This week against kY, I just want to see two things from our offense - no turnovers and no key penalties. And I'm pretty sure that's exactly what Coach Shula is going to work on during the practice.

That is my two cents on the whole ordeal.
 
I rewatched th SC game and there are some times Bama moved the ball quite well. It was mostly the turnover bug and what bothered me the most was when it looked like the Coaches gave up. Shula with his hand over his mouth looking up into the sky. But on the brighter side the players never gave up. If it wasnt for the Defence the score would have been 27 - 3. Bama will return to glory one day. I just hope its in my lifetime.
 
JessN said:
As to what is going on, I couldn't tell you. But no matter whether it's the coaches' fault or the players' fault, the coaches are the ones that have to make changes to accommodate what their players can do.

That's it in a nutshell. I don't think the problem has been the playcalling so much as the players not making the plays (and commiting penalties on top of that). Ultimately, though, it all falls back on the coaching staff. It is their responsibility to make sure this team is fundamentally sound, because we can't win with unforced errors. It is also their responsibility to create a gameplan that centers around the strengths of the team and the playmakers that are in the game. Lastly, it is their responsibility to create some kind of sense of urgency that leads to certain players stepping up and taking on leadership roles on the field.

At this point in the season, it's not happening. The positive is that all of the above things can be corrected during the course of the season. The test is whether or not they will be corrected. The long-term fate of this coaching staff rests right now on if/how they get this team to rebound to win at least three more games.

RTR

:biga2:
 
Jess, Jess, Jess...how is it that you can always find blame

with something Shula did or didn't do? First, he didn't throw the ball enough against Arkansas and then he was too predictable against SC. The fact is that in both games he adapted to what was working...which is something that ALL coaches do! Also, the EXACT same plays that he's been calling worked like a charm with Brodie at the helm. And for some reason you expect him to change his play book when one of the other guys gets in the game. Frankly they are all three drop back pocket QB's and all have similar strengths. Yes, Brodie's arm is stronger, but frankly they are almost 3 mirror images of each other and yet two of them can't get it done. Please tell me exactly what is Shula supposed to do?

Also, it has nothing to do with his sideline demeanor as I am 42 years old and can name you almost as many coaches who show no emotion to those who go crazy! The fact is that once a player is ready to play in a coaches eyes, he's put on the field and expected to perform. Marc Guillon has been playing football since he was 7 years old and don't forget that his dad is a coach! However, for some reason he is not able to get the job done on Saturday. Short of Shula going out there and throwing the passes for him, exactly what would you like Shula to do?

You become a master of seeing what's wrong with a team, but you've got no clue as to how to repair that problem. When does it fall on the players shoulders and when on the coaches? I'll tell you when...as soon as a player steps on the field it is there responsibility to run the plays that the coaches call and for some reason...neither Guillon or Pennington have been able to get the job done! Nobody and I mean nobody other than those two guys threw the balls into the other teams hands! Also, nobody and again I mean nobody caused our linemen to hold the guy they were facing!

Do I think that it is possible for a coach to influence the outcome of a game by his play calling? Absolutely! However, whenever we've had a few good things happen and begin to put a drive together, we eventually have to throw the ball and frankly we don't seem to have anybody capable of doing so without putting a drive in serious jeopardy!

Finally, he'll never be a good coach to those of you who can find fault in what his players do when they are on the field! I'm sorry, I played football and can tell you that once you're on the field, it's up to you to make the plays...not the coaches!
 
Alan,

One thing Shula could have done, clearly, was not weight the practice reps in such a way that Croyle got not just a majority, but virtually all of them. Not adequately preparing a backup quarterback for college football is at best, ill-advised. Considering what Alabama was facing with its OL going into this year, it was worse than ill-advised.

Well, Alabama reaped what it had sowed in practice. When I can be in the stands and literally be saying, out loud, "Do not throw that pass" three times, and the player throws it anyway resulting in three of UA's four interceptions, it points to a quarterback that doesn't know how to make his reads. Your own argument about Croyle, Pennington and Guillon being carbon copies of one another -- or your statement about Guillon's long football history -- only proves this point. If they're so close to each other in abilities, why are the results so different? Perhaps it's because the level of preparation was so different that the backups didn't have a grasp of what they were supposed to do.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that it is Guillon's fault -- either he isn't talented enough, or he doesn't have the capabilities to read the defense the way this offense demands he do it. At that point, it is the coaches' responsibility to design an offense around Guillon's skills, whatever they may be. Instead, after two full weeks of practice preparation and two games, our offense hasn't changed an inch.

You apparently want to put the responsibility on the players. That's no better than putting it on the coaches' shoulders, and arguably worse, considering one group of people is getting paid up to $1 million to come up with a solution and the other group is playing for an education. It's the players' responsibility to execute the game plan, but it's the coaches' responsibility to design a game plan the players are capable of executing, and then teach them how to do it.

Either way, for two weeks I've come very close in the game previews to the actual final scores, and gave you a very accurate description of what you were likely to see on game day -- unfortunately. Yet I seem to find myself in these threads anyway, defending what has proven to be true. And I'll tell you this -- if Alabama can't either change what it's doing to accommodate the reality of Croyle's injury, or somehow put the players left playing on a very accelerated learning curve, it's going to be a 50-50 proposition at best that Alabama will make the postseason, to say nothing of how UA will be treated against UT, LSU and Auburn.
 
JessN said:
Alan,

One thing Shula could have done, clearly, was not weight the practice reps in such a way that Croyle got not just a majority, but virtually all of them. Not adequately preparing a backup quarterback for college football is at best, ill-advised. Considering what Alabama was facing with its OL going into this year, it was worse than ill-advised.

Well, Alabama reaped what it had sowed in practice. When I can be in the stands and literally be saying, out loud, "Do not throw that pass" three times, and the player throws it anyway resulting in three of UA's four interceptions, it points to a quarterback that doesn't know how to make his reads. Your own argument about Croyle, Pennington and Guillon being carbon copies of one another -- or your statement about Guillon's long football history -- only proves this point. If they're so close to each other in abilities, why are the results so different? Perhaps it's because the level of preparation was so different that the backups didn't have a grasp of what they were supposed to do.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that it is Guillon's fault -- either he isn't talented enough, or he doesn't have the capabilities to read the defense the way this offense demands he do it. At that point, it is the coaches' responsibility to design an offense around Guillon's skills, whatever they may be. Instead, after two full weeks of practice preparation and two games, our offense hasn't changed an inch.

You apparently want to put the responsibility on the players. That's no better than putting it on the coaches' shoulders, and arguably worse, considering one group of people is getting paid up to $1 million to come up with a solution and the other group is playing for an education. It's the players' responsibility to execute the game plan, but it's the coaches' responsibility to design a game plan the players are capable of executing, and then teach them how to do it.

Either way, for two weeks I've come very close in the game previews to the actual final scores, and gave you a very accurate description of what you were likely to see on game day -- unfortunately. Yet I seem to find myself in these threads anyway, defending what has proven to be true. And I'll tell you this -- if Alabama can't either change what it's doing to accommodate the reality of Croyle's injury, or somehow put the players left playing on a very accelerated learning curve, it's going to be a 50-50 proposition at best that Alabama will make the postseason, to say nothing of how UA will be treated against UT, LSU and Auburn.


Amen brother! Preach the truth and the truth shall set you free! The jury is still out on coach Shula and staff but the evidence is hard to deny. ;)
 
Jess, I almost don't know where to begin to respond to your response.

JessN said:
Alan,

One thing Shula could have done, clearly, was not weight the practice reps in such a way that Croyle got not just a majority, but virtually all of them. Not adequately preparing a backup quarterback for college football is at best, ill-advised. Considering what Alabama was facing with its OL going into this year, it was worse than ill-advised.

Well, Alabama reaped what it had sowed in practice. When I can be in the stands and literally be saying, out loud, "Do not throw that pass" three times, and the player throws it anyway resulting in three of UA's four interceptions, it points to a quarterback that doesn't know how to make his reads. Your own argument about Croyle, Pennington and Guillon being carbon copies of one another -- or your statement about Guillon's long football history -- only proves this point. If they're so close to each other in abilities, why are the results so different? Perhaps it's because the level of preparation was so different that the backups didn't have a grasp of what they were supposed to do.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that it is Guillon's fault -- either he isn't talented enough, or he doesn't have the capabilities to read the defense the way this offense demands he do it. At that point, it is the coaches' responsibility to design an offense around Guillon's skills, whatever they may be. Instead, after two full weeks of practice preparation and two games, our offense hasn't changed an inch.

You apparently want to put the responsibility on the players. That's no better than putting it on the coaches' shoulders, and arguably worse, considering one group of people is getting paid up to $1 million to come up with a solution and the other group is playing for an education. It's the players' responsibility to execute the game plan, but it's the coaches' responsibility to design a game plan the players are capable of executing, and then teach them how to do it.

Either way, for two weeks I've come very close in the game previews to the actual final scores, and gave you a very accurate description of what you were likely to see on game day -- unfortunately. Yet I seem to find myself in these threads anyway, defending what has proven to be true. And I'll tell you this -- if Alabama can't either change what it's doing to accommodate the reality of Croyle's injury, or somehow put the players left playing on a very accelerated learning curve, it's going to be a 50-50 proposition at best that Alabama will make the postseason, to say nothing of how UA will be treated against UT, LSU and Auburn.

First of all, EVERY SINGLE COACH IN AMERICA gives their starter over between 80% & 90% of the reps each week. Had Coach Shula done anything differently he would have bucked what is considered as a norm in coaching from High School to the NFL. Also, Guillon got 100% of the reps for the entire spring and a lot of the reps in the summer.

Secondly, you intimated that Shula hasn't changed the game plan to meet Guillon's strengths yet, just last week he was criticized for not passing more and now this week he is criticized for trying to run a balanced attack. I'm not sure what you were watching, but he tried everything possible to get Guillon comfortable and yet Guillon failed each time he was given a different type of plan to run. As I said, at some point in time it's on the players shoulders and at this point it is on Guillon's!

Finally, Shula had all spring with Guillon getting 100% of the reps to give Shula knowledge of his capabilities and I am 100% positive that Shula put games plans in to meet those capabilities and yet Guillon has so far FAILED! Your critique is simply not founded in the facts Jess!
 
Alanbama27 said:
First of all, EVERY SINGLE COACH IN AMERICA gives their starter over between 80% & 90% of the reps each week. Had Coach Shula done anything differently he would have bucked what is considered as a norm in coaching from High School to the NFL. Also, Guillon got 100% of the reps for the entire spring and a lot of the reps in the summer.

Secondly, you intimated that Shula hasn't changed the game plan to meet Guillon's strengths yet, just last week he was criticized for not passing more and now this week he is criticized for trying to run a balanced attack. I'm not sure what you were watching, but he tried everything possible to get Guillon comfortable and yet Guillon failed each time he was given a different type of plan to run. As I said, at some point in time it's on the players shoulders and at this point it is on Guillon's!

Finally, Shula had all spring with Guillon getting 100% of the reps to give Shula knowledge of his capabilities and I am 100% positive that Shula put games plans in to meet those capabilities and yet Guillon has so far FAILED! Your critique is simply not founded in the facts Jess!

I have to agree with this assesment. I would add that in a similar game time situation others have responded differently. Take BC himself. He was thrown into the Ark game last year, it was his first real action, he responded. I have seen the Ainge kid do well at Ten. as a true freshmen.
I am not knocking MG at all. I am all for him. However, like I said before why shouldnt we recognize that we were thin at the QB spot like we were and are all across the board?
 
For starters, Alley Cat, the differences between myself and Finebaum are chiefly that I'm a UA grad, a lifelong and unabashed fan of the school, and members of my family have been season ticket holders (and in one case, a former Alumni Association chapter president) for many years. Finebaum writes what he writes to generate traffic and interest in his business. I don't care about those things. I just think sugarcoating problems equates to dishonesty.

Alan,

Every article and post I put on this site is grounded in fact, or I don't write it. You're simply wrong about what other coaches do re: practice reps. From talking to other coaches, I'd say the figure varies between 66 and 75 percent depending on where you go. You also forgot that Zach Golson was on the team in the spring, and Guillon didn't get 100 percent of the reps.

I appreciate your defense of the coaches, because too few people choose that road, but a large part of Alabama's problems recently have come from people putting up walls around the coaches to deflect criticism. Franchione used that buffer to engineer his exit under cover of half-truths. DuBose and Price used (or in Price's case, attempted to use) those same loyalties to cover personal indiscretions. I was guilty of it myself when DuBose was here; no more. I've seen Louisiana Tech beat Alabama with a backup quarterback, or LSU upset UT in the SECCG by developing a game plan around a then-very inconsistent Matt Mauck, and countless other teams adjust to key injuries in a manner that allowed the ship to continue to sail without completely sinking. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the same thing here.
 
Jess, I am not actually trying to defend Shula as much as point out

the inaccuracies of your comments. Also, I have no idea what coaches you're talking about because they are not the norm and frankly even at 75% of the reps, it was plenty of time for Shula and Guillon to become comfortable with each other and for Shula to know what Guillon's capabilities are! If you were unaware, which I find not possible, Guillon got 100% of the reps in the spring game and don't forget that he looked TERRIFIC in relief against Western Carolina, which says that he can run the offense...yet another reason to prove you're wrong in this assessment. If he can do it against lower ranked teams, but still good college football teams, he can surely run the offense against an Arkansas or USC!

Finally, once again you are making my point for me. When other coaches put kids in the game they are able to run the offense. What's different here? I'll tell you what, it's the players! The say that either our system is too tough for a kid to learn (who has had our playbook for 18 months) is simply wrong! Brodie and Marc have had the exact amount of time to learn this offense and yet Brodie was able to do it. Also, it's not like Marc has been throwing interceptions on passes he can't make, they've been passes of less than 20 yards and yet they've been poor decisions! The same is true of Spencer!

I'm 100% behind Guillon, but to try to deflect criticism from him and put it on Shula is simply unfounded!
 

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads