Playmakers on Offense

[zephyr]

_ I agree on all counts. If these coaches are worth their salt, we should be able to select and elevate a RB out of this stable. If he does not emerge, I blame coaching. As for the QB, I just want the guy that has a solid head on his shoulders and knows how to distribute the ball. I do not want a running QB. Mobile... yes... running... no. We have some of our best weapons in the receiving corps and we need a QB who knows how to toss a ball to the right spot. I could care less what name is on the back of that jersey at this point.

Every time a QB runs with the ball... even when he picks up yardage... is a failure on the offense. There are rare exceptions. Our QB needs to take every opportunity during a game to match his intellect against a guessing defense. He should use his brain to out match them... with what he knows to do... and they can only hope to guess. Everything opens up when that happens. Everything. It is past time our coaches coach a QB into running an offense... like Jake did... with his brain. I'm about to believe this coaching staff is addicted to the legs of our QB. That will get you to a 6 game max win year in and year out. I'll debate anyone on that one.

I'm still not sold on looking to the sideline for every offensive play... unless the QB has 100% backing to audible out based on whatever he decides is best. I'm tired of the puppit QB that has no decision-making responsibility. Are young men coming out of highschool that ignorant and lacking in leadership? The time that elapses looking over at the fat old men on the sidelines, is time lost in a huddle taking in the eyes and hearts of your friends that are actually playing the game. JMO _

You can coach running backs, or any player for that matter, however if they do not adapt to the coaching as well as others or do not take to the playbook and blocking schemes of the particular offense quick enough, how do you just blame coaching on their lack of growth. Kevis Streeter and Aaron Spikes are in town working out with the team and while they have likely started learning and studying the playbook, nothing makes up for repetition in live drills and action to absorb the information as second nature. These guys will have literally one month to do that. By the same account, Tyrell Fenroy came in and took to it quickly and started and flourished from his first moment on campus. I'd venture to guess that they "coached" him similarly to how they will prepare these young men. For these running backs now, preparation must meet opportunity and I feel strongly that they will do what they have to do to grasp the offense and present their best case for playing time. I do not think that you will see one back emerge however, but do not confuse a committee approach with lack of coaching or lack of talent.

We adapted this offense some years ago to meet the talents we had on offense which were versatile quarterbacks who could run and throw. I think that the QB's we have now are very similar to that of Jerry Babb who flourished his first two years in this offense. Desormeaux was a bit different as he was a much better runner but obviously not as talented passer. However, he had smarts, character, leadership and toughness to go with his athletic ability. I think that is why we went away from the triple option sets we saw often with Babb to running the single option zone read offense we now employ. I would much rather go back with the triple option sets using two of our talented backs in the backfield at one time while still allowing the QB to set up the run and take it when need be. None of our QB's should run the ball much more than about 10 times per game max but to say that we shouldn't utilize their mobility is not rational. These QB's are mobile and that is an asset not a liability. It proposes another variable in an offense that is geared to take advantage of spatial matchups and advantages. I'm not sure how or why you can say that having a running QB is a failure for an offense but that ideology is proved wrong in every conference in college football.

I'd say that Masson played pretty darned well last year given his inexperience and lack of options in both the running and passing games. He is given many more options this year with the athleticism we have at RB and the returning experience in the receiving corp.

[zephyr]

_ With the season right around the corner, I was thinking who I would consider our playmakers on Off. L. Green, Marlin Miller, Brad Mcguire come to my mind. Mason is a good QB and hopefully he will be one also. Which running back will jump out and be a playmaker. We will have many good backs that can do it and it will be great if it is more than one can answer the challenge.

CC _

Playmakers are obviously Marlin Miller, LG and Masson. Last year we had no playmakers at RB but that will be different this year. There is absolutely no way that we can be less productive at that position and we still managed to average about 130 on the ground. That number will go up. I think all three newcomers at RB are going to have their moments and I think that Streeter may end up having the biggest impact overall with his abilities in the punt and kick return games. We were terrible on special teams last year and he can hopefully manage to add another level of potency to our offense with great field position off of nice returns. I also think the RB's will be much more involved in the passing game this year as that is part of all of their skill sets and I think the offense will be that much more balanced.

On defense, I'd say that Nate Douglas and Bernard Smith along with Dwight Bentley are our playmakers there, or at least I hope they will be. Smith and Douglas are absolutely critical to our defensive production this year as they will likely be the leading candidates to accumulate some sacks and put pressure on the QB. Our defense will be as sorry as previous years if we do not pressure the QB and get tough in the middle. I'd bet Fourquier still wakes up from nightmares of watching Alfred Morris and Lance Dunbar (Oh wait, I forgot Southward and Harris from Troy) running all over us last year while most of their runs were simple A and B gap runs because our DL was blown off the ball all game long.

[RaginWaldo]

looks like Darryl Surgent will be #6
http://www.ragincajuns.com/ViewArtic...&Q_SEASON=2010

And I dont think James Butler (Hahnville WR Recruit) Will be a "suprise" unless you expect him to do some big things right out the gates.

I seen him and the QB (dont remember his name or where he was recruited) just destroy Destrehan HS in person and was extremely impressed and actually really excited to see he was going to be a cajun.

I really think this guy is one OF MANY hidden gems of talent that UL recruited. Regardless of what happens this upcoming year. I know for a fact the talent that is coming in will be a challenge for any opponent in the near future.

Here's my high hopefuls from the new recruits:
QB Blake Hollingsworth
RB Kevis Streeter JC
WR James Butler
OL Andre Huval
RB Aaron Spikes
WR Darryl Surgent
LB Jelani Smith TR
DT Benay Prior JC

I also think there is room for Suprise with the countless other prospects that have been recruited.

[Just1More]

_ i'll try again. ahem, mark macguire? didn't he play for the cardinals? lol _

My first read when Turbine posted it made me stop and think "why is he talking about Mark Macguire" - just spelled incorrectly - so here's one who did get your chuckle.

[Just1More]

_ You can coach running backs, or any player for that matter, however if they do not adapt to the coaching as well as others or do not take to the playbook and blocking schemes of the particular offense quick enough, how do you just blame coaching on their lack of growth. Kevis Streeter and Aaron Spikes are in town working out with the team and while they have likely started learning and studying the playbook, nothing makes up for repetition in live drills and action to absorb the information as second nature. These guys will have literally one month to do that. By the same account, Tyrell Fenroy came in and took to it quickly and started and flourished from his first moment on campus. I'd venture to guess that they "coached" him similarly to how they will prepare these young men. For these running backs now, preparation must meet opportunity and I feel strongly that they will do what they have to do to grasp the offense and present their best case for playing time. I do not think that you will see one back emerge however, but do not confuse a committee approach with lack of coaching or lack of talent.

We adapted this offense some years ago to meet the talents we had on offense which were versatile quarterbacks who could run and throw. I think that the QB's we have now are very similar to that of Jerry Babb who flourished his first two years in this offense. Desormeaux was a bit different as he was a much better runner but obviously not as talented passer. However, he had smarts, character, leadership and toughness to go with his athletic ability. I think that is why we went away from the triple option sets we saw often with Babb to running the single option zone read offense we now employ. I would much rather go back with the triple option sets using two of our talented backs in the backfield at one time while still allowing the QB to set up the run and take it when need be. None of our QB's should run the ball much more than about 10 times per game max but to say that we shouldn't utilize their mobility is not rational. These QB's are mobile and that is an asset not a liability. It proposes another variable in an offense that is geared to take advantage of spatial matchups and advantages. I'm not sure how or why you can say that having a running QB is a failure for an offense but that ideology is proved wrong in every conference in college football.

I'd say that Masson played pretty darned well last year given his inexperience and lack of options in both the running and passing games. He is given many more options this year with the athleticism we have at RB and the returning experience in the receiving corp. _

There is very little complexity to our running back assignment. There is no more complexity to our RB assignments than any other offense at 90% of the FBS conference teams. If the RBs these guys recruit (and let's consider the fact that we have 5-6 guys at various depths at any given time). These are academic qualifiers. They are RBs out of highschool (not just "athletes") and have succeeded in their roles in those systems. You almost act like we should give our coaches a free pass because on Tyrell's success... not going to happen. I'm not crediting them for what that special young man was able to do... if 8-10 other running backs that these coaches personally recruited... are not nearly as capable of quickly picking up their full assignments in this offense and cannot be productive.

A RB's ability to succeed are also coupled to the rest of the offense. If our QB cannot complete passes... if our coaching staff cannot call the right plays... if our OL isn't blocking well... if our coaches don't have our OL blocking technically well for our RB... all of that falls on our coaching staff. The verdict is not in on this year... but I can absolutely with certainty guarantee you that if we do not see one of these RBs have a breakout year this year... this coaching staff does not know how to coach these kids.

As for our QBs... I did state that I like having mobility. I do like a QB that is a threat to pick up yardage on a given down. I DO NOT like it when his legs are one of the primary "required" weapons to make our offense tick. I consider it a failure when our RBs cannot find holes, our QB cannot complete short and medium passes, BUT... we have limited success... down to the wire against mediocre teams... and we inch out a win on the battered legs of our QB. That is exactly why and how you end up with no more than 6 wins in a season.

As for our offense... we discussed this last year at length. I agree with you that we are still operating the zone read and without dismantling and recreating (which is virtually impossible) I would like to go back to the triple option with a QB that has mobility... but has an accurate short and medium passing ability. The spread requires that defenses also spread. The last couple of years, the Cajuns have been ineffective at getting the opponent defenses spread out. They plug the middle as if they know when we are running the ball, and they have no fear of our QB taking flight. They do not fear our passing attack one bit. I still feel like we are basically only a sure thing (almost) against only very bad opponents. That is simply unacceptable.

In a nutshell... all of that is the fault of coaching. You will rarely ever get me to single out a player for the inconsistency of the 11 man operation out on the field. If you've ever run something, you know damn well that if you picked the individuals, picked the plan, taught the plan, and expect the plan to win... you are the one to blame for failure... whether somewhere in that system you created is a headcase or 20 headcases... it is all on you.

I'm not negative about this coming year. I just expect this to either be a year that Bustle finally makes it past 6 wins... or the admin gets a flame thrower directed on their lard... and is forced to act... much quicker than they did with men's basketball. We fans had better either feel the sense of urgency for our football program this year... or create it.

[zephyr]

_ There is very little complexity to our running back assignment. There is no more complexity to our RB assignments than any other offense at 90% of the FBS conference teams. If the RBs these guys recruit (and let's consider the fact that we have 5-6 guys at various depths at any given time). These are academic qualifiers. They are RBs out of highschool (not just "athletes") and have succeeded in their roles in those systems. You almost act like we should give our coaches a free pass because on Tyrell's success... not going to happen. I'm not crediting them for what that special young man was able to do... if 8-10 other running backs that these coaches personally recruited... are not nearly as capable of quickly picking up their full assignments in this offense and cannot be productive.

A RB's ability to succeed are also coupled to the rest of the offense. If our QB cannot complete passes... if our coaching staff cannot call the right plays... if our OL isn't blocking well... if our coaches don't have our OL blocking technically well for our RB... all of that falls on our coaching staff. The verdict is not in on this year... but I can absolutely with certainty guarantee you that if we do not see one of these RBs have a breakout year this year... this coaching staff does not know how to coach these kids.

As for our QBs... I did state that I like having mobility. I do like a QB that is a threat to pick up yardage on a given down. I DO NOT like it when his legs are one of the primary "required" weapons to make our offense tick. I consider it a failure when our RBs cannot find holes, our QB cannot complete short and medium passes, BUT... we have limited success... down to the wire against mediocre teams... and we inch out a win on the battered legs of our QB. That is exactly why and how you end up with no more than 6 wins in a season.

As for our offense... we discussed this last year at length. I agree with you that we are still operating the zone read and without dismantling and recreating (which is virtually impossible) I would like to go back to the triple option with a QB that has mobility... but has an accurate short and medium passing ability. The spread requires that defenses also spread. The last couple of years, the Cajuns have been ineffective at getting the opponent defenses spread out. They plug the middle as if they know when we are running the ball, and they have no fear of our QB taking flight. They do not fear our passing attack one bit. I still feel like we are basically only a sure thing (almost) against only very bad opponents. That is simply unacceptable.

In a nutshell... all of that is the fault of coaching. You will rarely ever get me to single out a player for the inconsistency of the 11 man operation out on the field. If you've ever run something, you know damn well that if you picked the individuals, picked the plan, taught the plan, and expect the plan to win... you are the one to blame for failure... whether somewhere in that system you created is a headcase or 20 headcases... it is all on you.

I'm not negative about this coming year. I just expect this to either be a year that Bustle finally makes it past 6 wins... or the admin gets a flame thrower directed on their lard... and is forced to act... much quicker than they did with men's basketball. We fans had better either feel the sense of urgency for our football program this year... or create it. _

I do not give them a pass on Fenroy's success. However, to lay blame and responsibility for a RB's missed assignments or lack of progression entirely on a coach or staff in general is absolutely ludicrous. The same offensive line we've had for several years completely underwhelmed any and all defenses they challenged last year. That same offensive line which opened up gaping holes for our running game and helped it become one of the nations leading attacks played subpar last year. It's that simple. However, you're telling me that the coaches failed the kids when we ran the same system with the same line? That's crazy. I am willing to lay "blame" which to anyone that deserves it even though it seems highly vogue to, as fans, sit down and start blaming everybody for things that don't go our way. However, to not acknowledge a player's role for a lack of work in progression over a given year or even career is absolutely negligent. I also don't buy the whole "well he recruited him " thing since there were numerous schools who recruited Yobes Walker to see him struggle last year. Would you have said the same thing had he signed with Nick Saban to only struggle in his first year and see the practice squad?

Also, I tend to be a bit confused on your QB statements. You did not mention that you were for mobility as you put it " everytime a QB runs with the ball, even if it is positive yardage, is a failure of our offense". To me, you are referencing that you would prefer a QB who is a more traditional passer since you also referenced comparing them to a Jake Delhomme. This day and age is moving towards multiple weapons in a spread field attack and that often means looking for mobile QB's who can hurt you with their legs. If McGuire or Gautier is our QB, they can run this system we've employed well. If Masson is the QB, they might want to find some diversity in the offense as he is mobile and quite quick but would be better served running when we need to rather than thinking it is a strength of his.

Lastly, I do not think you will see either of these backs have a "breakout" year. I think all will contribute in a very positive manner and at times, show us why we recruited them. I think they are all very similar in what they bring to the table and I think all will play. I really don't care how we get the running game going as long as we do. If its by committee, then that's fine. I think that would likely be a good concept given this offense runs at opponents and we have smallish backs who may not be able to handle to pounding of 20-25 carries per game over the course of a season. If we average 180 yards per game and win 7, I don't think I'd say that this staff has undercoached either of the backs simply because they didn't have that breakout season. I think we must look at it and put it in its proper perspective.

I'm not in love with this staff. As a matter of fact, I was extremely excited and enthused to see the possibilities this past offseason in acquiring Ed Orgeron. However, I think a proper perspective is required when judging coaching and play on the field and how it translates into victories. Talent wins but coaching prepares you for the day to display your talent. I think its a two way street.

[zephyr]

_ Sorry, but no-way Blaine Gauthier should be the starter at QB. (no offense, JMO) _

Blaine has the best skill set of running the offense we have run for several years now. He flourishes in a zone read type of offense and has the best blend of mobility and passing. Masson and McGuire are very good leaders and I've heard Gautier is a little quieter but still a solid leader. He has done nothing but make plays when he is in the game or even scrimmages. The true test comes by having him play entire games and prepare as a starter over the course of a season. However, his upside is the greatest of the QB's we have. This is partially why McGuire was moved to H-back this offseason.

[zephyr]

_ Butler gets my vote as one of the potential "surprises" of the incoming class... _

Absolutely. A family member who handles recruiting in that area pointed him out to me last fall and mentioned that he might be a big steal in our class. The only concern with James is qualifying academically. I haven't heard anything to the contrary after school ended so I'm hoping for the best that he will be able to start up and contribute but he and Surgent are both very good prospects for us. I do believe that it will take a season or so for him to really contribute though. We play a ton of guys at the position who all do things very similarly and I don't see him stealing time from Joseph, Wolfe or Falgout and certainly not from Javone Lawson. We will have to see. One other thing about him is his size. He is bigger than most of our WR's and that may be a big factor for him and his future success.

[Just1More]

I'm not in love with this staff. As a matter of fact, I was extremely excited and enthused to see the possibilities this past offseason in acquiring Ed Orgeron. However, I think a proper perspective is required when judging coaching and play on the field and how it translates into victories. Talent wins but coaching prepares you for the day to display your talent. I think its a two way street. _

When you have a stable of backs to choose from, you can dang well believe I'm going to blame the staff for lack of RB production. You pointed to an underwhelming offensive line. That is also a coaching issue. I can absolutely guarantee it. I don't like the offensive line's blocking schemes. They do not open holes for running backs. Our staff and few unobservant observative fans can say that our backs can't "find" the holes... well heck, I've watched film and there was no hole. And, I'll say it again... if the QB isn't threat in the passing attack... you also cannot expect a RB to flourish.

And yes... from any stable of RBs, there should emerge a ball carrier that carries the load. Most successful backs require reps. If we run these backs by committee, it will also be a sign of failure. We either do not have a standout, or our coaches can't see the forest through the trees.

As for our offense, the spread is not simply a "who in the backfield is going to run the ball". The spread is meant to also massively capitalize on the passing aspect of a spread out defense. I think you know what I mean and you're just opting to argue with me. Babb was almost as ideal a QB to this system as we've had. If MD would have progressed to throwing more accurately, he would perhaps have reeled in the running and sliced and diced more defenses with more legs than his, Fenroy's, and a Chery on top.

I am not liking the lack of overwhelming advantage this coaching staff has manifested with this offensive scheme. Last year, just as I saw Chris able to successful throw the ball, our run production went down. I understand the injury excuse and not having Fenroy anymore... but the spread, when operating like a decent coach can operate it, takes broader advantage than... for whatever reason... this offense can maintain for 4 quarters.

Again... if we depend on our QB for a lot of ground game... I will call the season early on... no way we reach beyond 6 games. This team needs to make use of our skill players on the passing side of the offense... or we are doomed. And yes... that should also allow one or possibly two of our best backs to gain some steady production. I DO NOT blame... and could care less if the staff comes back blaming... a lack of run game on lack of RBs "adapting". If I take 2 decent running backs into my system, I absolutely guarantee you that they will learn their assignments... or else I will resign. That is a big bogus bunch of malarchy. Every school in the SBC has had a decent RB and has reloaded... at the SBC level... year in and year out. WE are the ones that have only "found" a single Fenroy in that past 6 years. That is absolutely a coaching issue no matter how you cut it.

[ULGrad@HOU]

_ Blaine has the best skill set of running the offense we have run for several years now. He flourishes in a zone read type of offense and has the best blend of mobility and passing. Masson and McGuire are very good leaders and I've heard Gautier is a little quieter but still a solid leader. He has done nothing but make plays when he is in the game or even scrimmages. The true test comes by having him play entire games and prepare as a starter over the course of a season. However, his upside is the greatest of the QB's we have. This is partially why McGuire was moved to H-back this offseason. _

I have not seen the skills you claim, maybe you have in a practice setting. From what I saw in a mop-up duty, last minute, can't win anyway situation against Troy at the end of the game, he was ok and showed some QB skills. However, that is in no way reflective of a real game setting and I really don't believe he possesses the kind of leadership it takes to be a successful starting QB. I will stick with Mason until I see more, a lot more.