Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 54

Thread: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

  1. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CameronCajun View Post
    Exactly! Bringing in Nixon does nothing for our offense, everyone knows what is coming.
    The risk of throwing off the rhythm of the o-line and causing a false start or bad snap is much, MUCH greater than any advantage that is gained from inserting Nixon in as QB in the middle of a drive.

  2. Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    Harbaugh damn near won a national championship by running the ball and force feeding tight ends. TE is under utilized universally in college football. It has been said, over and over, we need to use the tight end position better. Especially if you're going to attempt to stretch the field horizontally with screens and swings. Keeping the linebackers worried about the middle of the field is a no brainer.


  3. Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    "Reevaluate" after a WIN, is a rare commodity.


  4. #16

    Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    4th and 1, should be under center...Don't understand UL not doing more of that...1 yard vs 3 or 4 out of the gun....4th (or 3rd) and 2, go with the gun.


  5. #17

    Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    Turn to that page, rip it out. Rip it up. Evaluation complete.


  6. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fanof71 View Post
    4th and 1, should be under center...Don't understand UL not doing more of that...1 yard vs 3 or 4 out of the gun....4th (or 3rd) and 2, go with the gun.
    Even our victory formation is in the gun, so this will not happen.

  7. #19

    Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    Quote Originally Posted by axg8750 View Post
    The risk of throwing off the rhythm of the o-line and causing a false start or bad snap is much, MUCH greater than any advantage that is gained from inserting Nixon in as QB in the middle of a drive.
    How does having Nixon in there throw off the rhythm of the O-Line. Playcalling is coming from the sideline and he has nothing to do with their tempo and blocking schemes.

  8. Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    Quote Originally Posted by zephyr View Post
    How does having Nixon in there throw off the rhythm of the O-Line. Playcalling is coming from the sideline and he has nothing to do with their tempo and blocking schemes.
    Sidelines call the play but they don't CALL the play.

    Cadences matter.

  9. #21

    Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Turbine View Post
    Sidelines call the play but they don't CALL the play.

    Cadences matter.
    Turbine please. That is a load of crap.

  10. Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    Quote Originally Posted by zephyr View Post
    Turbine please. That is a load of crap.
    Then why does the NFL have a rule stopping defensive players from mimicking the quarterback's cadence?

  11. UL Football Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    Turbine is dead right about this.


  12. Default Re: Hudspeth: UL must 'reevaluate' short-yardage plan

    Turbine is right.

    Here is my daily reminder to the staff to USE THE GOSH DAMN TIGHTENDS this weekend!

    Carry on..


Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Big secret: Hudspeth short on defense details
    By NewsCopy in forum Football
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: September 14th, 2017, 12:10 pm
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 17th, 2011, 07:50 pm

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •