Smothered( defense) and covered all the wayMore of a hashbrown with a side of doomsday guy myself...
Smothered( defense) and covered all the wayMore of a hashbrown with a side of doomsday guy myself...
That is where a "hmmmm moment" kind of popped up. We all think we know why certain things didn't click on offense this year but I did find it interesting that Deboer did not take over play calling duties when Grubb bolted for the NFL. Play calling isn't something you can just be ho hum about and he knows that. If he is the orchestrator/innovator/mastermind behind his offensive success, letting an unproven play caller take those duties over at your biggest moment as a head coach is suspect. Was Deboer's success more aligned with Grubb than Grubb's success was aligned with Deboer? Time will tell on all of that...I'm not sure if Grubb was his OC at all these stops, but 2020-2021 he (DeBoer) was at Fresno St, 2022-2023 he was at Washington and at Alabama in 2024. He needs a QB...
EDIT: Grubb was at all of these previous stops prior to 2024.
View attachment 48378
That was also true of running the wishbone. I can remember us fumbling the ball 6 or 7 times a game and still wining with a stout Defense in the 70s.Run vs. Pass?
The key is to be able to do both and more specifically to be able do one when the other is taken away.
But here's why I think an offense has to be dynamic with their passing game.
A run is a pretty basic play. It typically involves just 1 or 2 of the 5 or 6 "skill" players: QB keep, handoff, pitch/sweep to a RB...I mean, no matter the method, it remains pretty predictable. On top of that, a running game initially attacks the LOS/tackle box OR sometimes the sideline area on either side of it.
The passing game, however, can involve the quarterback, RB, and WR. It also attacks all the areas of the field at and beyond the LOS.
I know the ole saying, "Three things can happen when you pass and 2 of them are bad." But today's game has erased that and if an offense can't pass it it's gonna be a TFL, TFL, TFL or the proverbial "3 yards and a cloud of dust."
Better be able to do both, but if you can't pass you can't even sniff NCs.
Some coaches feel like getting into playcalling while trying to be the HC during a game is too distracting. You've got some coaches who do it but there are more who feel it's best to give it to their coordinator so they can focus on the entire game and managing it. I'm certain DeBoer knows how to call plays at this stage of his career. LOL!That is where a "hmmmm moment" kind of popped up. We all think we know why certain things didn't click on offense this year but I did find it interesting that Deboer did not take over play calling duties when Grubb bolted for the NFL. Play calling isn't something you can just be ho hum about and he knows that. If he is the orchestrator/innovator/mastermind behind his offensive success, letting an unproven play caller take those duties over at your biggest moment as a head coach is suspect. Was Deboer's success more aligned with Grubb than Grubb's success was aligned with Deboer? Time will tell on all of that...
Agreed and good post. I'll add a few things...Run vs. Pass?
The key is to be able to do both and more specifically to be able do one when the other is taken away.
But here's why I think an offense has to be dynamic with their passing game.
A run is a pretty basic play. It typically involves just 1 or 2 of the 5 or 6 "skill" players: QB keep, handoff, pitch/sweep to a RB...I mean, no matter the method, it remains pretty predictable. On top of that, a running game initially attacks the LOS/tackle box OR sometimes the sideline area on either side of it.
The passing game, however, can involve the quarterback, RB, and WR. It also attacks all the areas of the field at and beyond the LOS.
I know the ole saying, "Three things can happen when you pass and 2 of them are bad." But today's game has erased that and if an offense can't pass it it's gonna be a TFL, TFL, TFL or the proverbial "3 yards and a cloud of dust."
Better be able to do both, but if you can't pass you can't even sniff NCs.
I've been a head coach and play caller, granted not at Alabama. I get the pro's and con's of it more than you know. The fact he didn't take over play calling duties at some point this season or start out as the play caller to give Sheridan more time to get acclimated is a legitimate concern. One of my best friends took over a major program this past year and he was a first year head coach. He juggled all that comes with it but no one on his new staff knew the offense he wanted to put in like he did. He hired an OC that he had worked with in the past and they collaborated on game plans and what not, but at the end of the day he called the plays on game day. Eventually down the road he plans on giving that to his OC but not in year one. Just because it isn't ideal and what you want to do down the road, doesn't mean it isn't what you should be doing for now.Some coaches feel like getting into playcalling while trying to be the HC during a game is too distracting. You've got some coaches who do it but there are more who feel it's best to give it to their coordinator so they can focus on the entire game and managing it. I'm certain DeBoer knows how to call plays at this stage of his career. LOL!
I'm not pushing this up my list of "legitimate concerns", I'm just not. The guy wasn't even running but 10% of "his" offense and by the looks of what Milroe could do, we were only effectively running 10-12 plays so did it really matter who called plays?I've been a head coach and play caller, granted not at Alabama. I get the pro's and con's of it more than you know. The fact he didn't take over play calling duties at some point this season or start out as the play caller to give Sheridan more time to get acclimated is a legitimate concern. One of my best friends took over a major program this past year and he was a first year head coach. He juggled all that comes with it but no one on his new staff new the offense he wanted to put in like he did. He hired an OC that he had worked with in the past and they collaborated on game plans and what not, but at the end of the day he called the plays on game day. Eventually down the road he plans on giving that to his OC but not in year one. Just because it isn't ideal and what you want to do down the road, doesn't mean it isn't what you should be doing for now.
This is actually a very good point. This is why I am looking forward to next season.I'm not pushing this up my list of "legitimate concerns", I'm just not. The guy wasn't even running but 10% of "his" offense and by the looks of what Milroe could do, we were only effectively running 10-12 plays so did it really matter who called plays?
This is just where we are now. People blaming the OC because he can’t draw up plays that make the quarterback throw the ball to the open receivers that the OC schemes open already. This isn’t PlayStation, coaches can only do so much.I'm not pushing this up my list of "legitimate concerns", I'm just not. The guy wasn't even running but 10% of "his" offense and by the looks of what Milroe could do, we were only effectively running 10-12 plays so did it really matter who called plays?
If I came off as I have 100% adopted this theory, I haven't. It is the offseason and topics are scarce...I'm not pushing this up my list of "legitimate concerns", I'm just not. The guy wasn't even running but 10% of "his" offense and by the looks of what Milroe could do, we were only effectively running 10-12 plays so did it really matter who called plays?
For me, I can't get past multiple wide-open receivers running down the field on different levels and the QB either takes a sack or throws to a blanketed receiver for an incompletion. This was standard operating procedure for us last season. So I'm not raising concerns about playcalling when I see playcalling producing open receivers. Let's get the QB position right first then I'll be concerned about the playcalling. Again, when we're only running 10-12 plays what does it really matter at that point who is calling them? The other team is shooting fish in a barrel at that point.This is just where we are now. People blaming the OC because he can’t draw up plays that make the quarterback throw the ball to the open receivers that the OC schemes open already. This isn’t PlayStation, coaches can only do so much.
Some for sure. Me not so much...This is just where we are now. People blaming the OC because he can’t draw up plays that make the quarterback throw the ball to the open receivers that the OC schemes open already. This isn’t PlayStation, coaches can only do so much.
No question, but how many games today are won 10-9?That was also true of running the wishbone. I can remember us fumbling the ball 6 or 7 times a game and still wining with a stout Defense in the 70s.
Agree. But this is where they should have adapted. Last two years they forced in Milroe to start. Then they still want to be a passing team. That’s on OCs. They should have adapted more to a running play action team. The o lines have been bad at tackle for 3 years, Young made them better than they were and Milroe worse than they were. We have had good centers and guards so adapt if you play Milroe. It’s same type of front as last two OC doing power with pulling guards/center. Should have developed the run game to look closer to Mich than closer to a Young being able to bail out the offense type. They just hammered square peg into round hole. I get it’s not the Saban offense or CKD exactly but they choose Milroe (or the team did) so you have to adjust. That is my biggest gripe. You don’t change the whole scheme since it’s still the same o line play but take away more chances at TO, you run more clock and set your defense for better success.This is just where we are now. People blaming the OC because he can’t draw up plays that make the quarterback throw the ball to the open receivers that the OC schemes open already. This isn’t PlayStation, coaches can only do so much.