Can the Cajuns' offense ever get its groove back?

[Just1More]

Good High School offenses like Indest's and Cook's are much more creative than ours. Ours is a collection (ever shrinking) of unrelated plays, none of which build on each other or set the defense up for future plays. They are what is left of the playbook that Hud thinks we can run without turning it over. Well success! No god damn turnovers....and no points. Risk nothing, gain nothing. That is the way of life, Hud.

You are extremely correct. There's one serious concern, however, that I've had when it comes to demanding Hud play football chess instead of football checkers. I'm afraid he would just give the chess pieces his "don't let go of the rope" speech... and then just play checkers with them. I now know it isn't the play book at all. It's the inability to coach the finer points and mechanics of the plays. We can "stretch the field" with our play book... I have no doubt. But we can't actually make the plays. We might make them in practice... but with a decent opponent defense in front of us... they can all blow up our plays. We lose the advantage of the play 0.1 seconds after the snap. Occasionally, an athlete on our side defeats 11 other people on their side. But it just doesn't happen frequently enough to make enough points to win.

[CharlieK]

You are extremely correct. There's one serious concern, however, that I've had when it comes to demanding Hud play football chess instead of football checkers. I'm afraid he would just give the chess pieces his "don't let go of the rope" speech... and then just play checkers with them. I now know it isn't the play book at all. It's the inability to coach the finer points and mechanics of the plays. We can "stretch the field" with our play book... I have no doubt. But we can't actually make the plays. We might make them in practice... but with a decent opponent defense in front of us... they can all blow up our plays. We lose the advantage of the play 0.1 seconds after the snap. Occasionally, an athlete on our side defeats 11 other people on their side. But it just doesn't happen frequently enough to make enough points to win.

We need to play chess. I'd settle for checkers at this point. Right now we are trying to play tic-tac-toe with some 4 year olds and losing every game.

[CajunSaint08]

You are extremely correct. There's one serious concern, however, that I've had when it comes to demanding Hud play football chess instead of football checkers. I'm afraid he would just give the chess pieces his "don't let go of the rope" speech... and then just play checkers with them. I now know it isn't the play book at all. It's the inability to coach the finer points and mechanics of the plays. We can "stretch the field" with our play book... I have no doubt. But we can't actually make the plays. We might make them in practice... but with a decent opponent defense in front of us... they can all blow up our plays. We lose the advantage of the play 0.1 seconds after the snap. Occasionally, an athlete on our side defeats 11 other people on their side. But it just doesn't happen frequently enough to make enough points to win.

A lot of fans keep mentioning our play book, our offense is predictable, our coaches inability to coach the finer points and mechanics of the plays......however, I come from another point of view. I think the guy leading the offense on the field is incapable of learning the playbook and only knows basically five plays; hence, we keep seeing the same plays run over and over and over. And the plays Jennings does know, he is not very good at. He can't read a defense, so he can't call an audible to effectively run a play. He has very poor mechanics and appears afraid to run, but does if absolutely necessary. So as an option QB, he is really useless.

Coaching has obviously tried to hide his inefficiencies by going to a quick snap, trying to catch the defense off guard, but all that does is cause false starts. Until Coach Hud swallows his pride and admits the Jennings project was a huge failure, 3-9 is not unrealistic but more like optimistic. I'm not against the one year savior QB graduate idea, but at-least try and find one that was successful at the college they came from and not one that was clueless to begin with and was benched. What makes you think that would be a success here?

[Just1More]

A lot of fans keep mentioning our play book, our offense is predictable, our coaches inability to coach the finer points and mechanics of the plays......however, I come from another point of view. I think the guy leading the offense on the field is incapable of learning the playbook and only knows basically five plays; hence, we keep seeing the same plays run over and over and over. And the plays Jennings does know, he is not very good at. He can't read a defense, so he can't call an audible to effectively run a play. He has very poor mechanics and appears afraid to run, but does if absolutely necessary. So as an option QB, he is really useless.

Coaching has obviously tried to hide his inefficiencies by going to a quick snap, trying to catch the defense off guard, but all that does is cause false starts. Until Coach Hud swallows his pride and admits the Jennings project was a huge failure, 3-9 is not unrealistic but more like optimistic. I'm not against the one year savior QB graduate idea, but at-least try and find one that was successful at the college they came from and not one that was clueless to begin with and was benched. What makes you think that would be a success here?

Well, I couldn't disagree with you more. I don't think Jennings (or any QB) is going to execute his passing game with the horrendous protection we provide. His window of operation slams on him, and he's forced to work the play while dodging a train. I never have been able to examine why Jennings throws like a pro one series and then starts slinging balls high in the next. That's on him. But I don't think Jennings fails to run the playbook well. We are no better running the simple 5 plays Hud wants to run, as we are the rest of the playbook. It's just that the simple plays don't so obviously show the weak fundamentals and mechanics of each player. The simple plays are just asking the top athletes (lately Eli and Riles) to make something happen on their own. What Hud thinks is the trifecta of that approach is a running QB. That's why he couldn't get away from Nixon. He wants either Eli, Riles or Nixon to do the football checkers game - 3 great athletes to get the ball quickly... and run for it.

As for taking Jennings from LSU... 1) you don't get the SEC starter to transfer to UL. You will be taking a transfer that "got benched". Even Broadway left Houston because he was not the #1. 2) you can't judge every QB by the Les Miles passing game plays. LSU didnt give QBs a lot of options. And SEC defenses have enough capability to exploit a QB with limited options. 3) UL coaching could exploit the SBC. We get exploited, defensively, in almost every contest. It is there to be had. Our coaches aren't teaching "the play". I think they think if every player is in the right position before the snap... and they basically move the direction taught... that's the play. You get watch all of our players on offense body language at the end of most plays and tell that they know they didn't defeat their opponent. Only the skill player is left out there, trying to ram through a crowd, or out juking someone for 2 to 3 yards.

Other teams we play, look at App State, for instance... aren't depending on their QB to run. He is given protection... and you can watch his OL and tell they know what they're doing mechanically to block. Go watch them. Their QB tosses... doesn't gun... the ball to WRs that are running in gaps. Why don't our WRs give Jennings a place to toss to them in a gap that only that WR is in? Why? Go look at the routes we're running and watch our WRs. They are never technically getting an advantage. We have 11 men... they have 11 men. You can always exploit something on a defense, if you orchestrate plays and teach athletes details of their assignment. Our players block like ____ and they cannot figure out how to shed coverage. It's teaching.

Jennings isn't an NFL QB. And neither are any of the other SBC QBs... even if we make them look like one. But Jennings is a pretty damn good SBC QB. We are not doing anything to make anyone look good on that football field. We could swap athletes with App State... and give each other a year with each other's coaches... and they'd kick our ___ all over the field. We coach like ____. But if they want to blame Jennings and throw Davis in that ____ show... have at it. You'll think Davis is the greatest... and then the ____ show will catch up to him. And you'll stop posting about QBs... and you'll want Hud fired... but you'll say "we can't afford it"... and you'll then no longer read my long explanations where I've encoded the cure.

[ATXCajun]

I didn't get to watch the game because I had somewhere to be Wed night. Afraid to watch the replay. Week and a half to prep for a conference opponent that had to travel from the mountains and we can't score? Not even ATXCajun can suger coat that.

[Just1More]

I didn't get to watch the game because I had somewhere to be Wed night. Afraid to watch the replay. Week and a half to prep for a conference opponent that had to travel from the mountains and we can't score? Not even ATXCajun can suger coat that.

We actually moved the ball well on several series. We were in the red zone several times... and as we hunched in to "make sure we didn't turn the ball over"... App State saw we were in worry mode... sent the house after Jennings on 3rd down... blew past our statuesk OL... and managed to take away chip shot FGs. Artigue missed 2 fairly reasonable FGs... and you could see our team deflate as App State inflated. App State could have run it up on us IMO in the second half. They just put it in cruise control and took the victory. Our defense looks pretty decent. They are still terrible in pass coverage. And we get exploited a lot. Other coaches can tell our coaching is off on both sides of the ball. You can even read it in their behavior on the sidelines. They know they can't out bench Hud... but after about 5 minutes into the contest, they realize they don't have to... and they eat his lunch with higher football teaching skills.

[ULGrad@HOU]

This dumbed-down offense and defense is about as pathetic as is gets. I don't blame Jennings, and I don't think Jordan Davis is the answer. This train wreck was set in motion over two years ago. Hud cannot recruit. He gets a few guys, but not enough to make this team competitive.

[CajunEXPRESS]

This dumbed-down offense and defense is about as pathetic as is gets. I don't blame Jennings, and I don't think Jordan Davis is the answer. This train wreck was set in motion over two years ago. Hud cannot recruit. He gets a few guys, but not enough to make this team competitive.

Careful there. Boomer will set you straight. He'll call for T to prove him right. Yes, all the players that never set foot on campus might have made us a little better.

[Ragin' Caleb]

What makes you think that would be a success here?

the Jeff Driskel project

[CajunEXPRESS]

the Jeff Driskel project

Driskel is on an NFL team. You think Jennings gets on one?

[CajunSaint08]

Driskel is on an NFL team. You think Jennings gets on one?

He might, but never as a QB. Ball boy maybe.

[CajunSaint08]

Well, I couldn't disagree with you more. I don't think Jennings (or any QB) is going to execute his passing game with the horrendous protection we provide. His window of operation slams on him, and he's forced to work the play while dodging a train. I never have been able to examine why Jennings throws like a pro one series and then starts slinging balls high in the next. That's on him. But I don't think Jennings fails to run the playbook well. We are no better running the simple 5 plays Hud wants to run, as we are the rest of the playbook. It's just that the simple plays don't so obviously show the weak fundamentals and mechanics of each player. The simple plays are just asking the top athletes (lately Eli and Riles) to make something happen on their own. What Hud thinks is the trifecta of that approach is a running QB. That's why he couldn't get away from Nixon. He wants either Eli, Riles or Nixon to do the football checkers game - 3 great athletes to get the ball quickly... and run for it.

As for taking Jennings from LSU... 1) you don't get the SEC starter to transfer to UL. You will be taking a transfer that "got benched". Even Broadway left Houston because he was not the #1. 2) you can't judge every QB by the Les Miles passing game plays. LSU didnt give QBs a lot of options. And SEC defenses have enough capability to exploit a QB with limited options. 3) UL coaching could exploit the SBC. We get exploited, defensively, in almost every contest. It is there to be had. Our coaches aren't teaching "the play". I think they think if every player is in the right position before the snap... and they basically move the direction taught... that's the play. You get watch all of our players on offense body language at the end of most plays and tell that they know they didn't defeat their opponent. Only the skill player is left out there, trying to ram through a crowd, or out juking someone for 2 to 3 yards.

Other teams we play, look at App State, for instance... aren't depending on their QB to run. He is given protection... and you can watch his OL and tell they know what they're doing mechanically to block. Go watch them. Their QB tosses... doesn't gun... the ball to WRs that are running in gaps. Why don't our WRs give Jennings a place to toss to them in a gap that only that WR is in? Why? Go look at the routes we're running and watch our WRs. They are never technically getting an advantage. We have 11 men... they have 11 men. You can always exploit something on a defense, if you orchestrate plays and teach athletes details of their assignment. Our players block like ____ and they cannot figure out how to shed coverage. It's teaching.

Jennings isn't an NFL QB. And neither are any of the other SBC QBs... even if we make them look like one. But Jennings is a pretty damn good SBC QB. We are not doing anything to make anyone look good on that football field. We could swap athletes with App State... and give each other a year with each other's coaches... and they'd kick our ___ all over the field. We coach like ____. But if they want to blame Jennings and throw Davis in that ____ show... have at it. You'll think Davis is the greatest... and then the ____ show will catch up to him. And you'll stop posting about QBs... and you'll want Hud fired... but you'll say "we can't afford it"... and you'll then no longer read my long explanations where I've encoded the cure.

I'm not gonna go into a long detail rebuttal, but "Jennings is a pretty damn good SBC QB" is as about accurate as Heath Shuler was a pretty damn good NFL QB. I guess in your eyes, Shuler should have been a hall of famer. You must be related to Jennings if you think he pretty good. Jennings may be a very intelligent individual, but he has no football intelligence. He doesn't anticipate the route, but waits until the receiver has stopped and turned to look, which gives the defenders ample time to close on the play. The play where Jennings is suppose to take the snap and quickly turn and throw to the wideout who is near the sideline but not pass the line of scrimmage (you know one of the 5 plays we run 7-10 times a game), he takes 4-5 seconds to pass the ball, which gives the entire defense time to blow the play up before it ever gets started. That should be a snap and throw (1.5 seconds.) which would give the receiver time to catch, look up field and make a play.

I'll stick to my original thought and say, the reason we can't run more of the offensive playbook is because Jennings doesn't know more than the 5-6 plays he runs now. You would think by the 5th game of the season, he could learn another 2 or 3 plays. Obviously not.