Mike Sewak

[BirdofParadise]

_ So we are going to switch to an offense that emphasizes and relies heavily on a position that is arguably the weakest on our team and ignores positions such as WR where we have some young talent that showed flashes in their limited time this season? Also at least two of our returning QB's including last year's starter are not suited for this type of offense.

The O-line may still struggle a bit regardless of the system but at least the remainder of our offense is more suited to a balanced attack. _

Which position is the weakest? Hope you're not talking about running back. Spikes and Walker will flourish in this offense. And I think at least two of our quarterbacks can run it. Heck, you only need one to do it if he's healthy.

Regardless of the route we go, whether it's trying to run the option with this O-line, or running the spread, we need more hosses there.

Many of you think that all we have to do is change coaches and we have all the talent we need to win seven or eight games.

I'm not one of those.

[rhineaux]

I don't understand why people are so worried about the wide receivers. Do you think Texas Tech fans groaned at Mike Leach for not bringing the nation's #1 tailback to Lubbock when his teams were throwing for 300-400 yards per game?

Quick question for the big Hudspeth fans. I have heard that he already has 4 or 5 coordinators lined up if he gets the job. Does anyone know who these guys might be? Hudspeth's the passing game coordinator at Mississippi State, so I assume his offense would be pass heavy. If he has a guy like the offensive coordinator at SFA lined up for the OC position, I could become a Hudspeth fanatic pretty quickly.

Like a couple of you, I'm really not as concerned with bringing in Sewak and the Triple Option as some are. I don't think we would see 2 years of losing while recruiting "option" players as some have suggested. I think that there are some pieces in place that can have success in this offense. This team’s current deficiencies will be present next season no matter what offense the new coach will run.

I know that having a balanced offense makes people sleep well at night, but I really think that the fastest way for a program like this one to get to the top and stay there consistently (i.e. missing a bowl due to “rebuilding” every 3rd or 4th year) is to have one of these gimmicky offenses, whether that be the Air Raid or Triple Option.

To other arguments…What difference would it make if “future pro” QBs won’t want to come to UL? If the coaches are looking for a QB to run this type of offense, then why are they spending time looking for a QB with an NFL arm? I also think there wouldn’t be much of a problem recruiting O-Linemen. When was the last time anyone heard a good O-Lineman say that he loved to Pass Block?

That being said, while I mentioned that I’m not really concerned about it taking very long to install an offense like this and see it’s successes, I would be MUCH more concerned with what is going to happen after the Triple Option coach leaves. r91c brings up Mike Leach and Texas Tech’s offense. They had some great seasons and used that gimmicky type of offense to work their way onto the national stage. But now that he’s gone, Tuberville is going through some pretty tough times trying to change everything up. The bright side for Texas Tech is that Leach was there for 10 years. So, if you consider a steady rise and excitement for 10 straight years, followed by a couple years of tough times during transition, that’s not too bad. I’d rather have those 12 years than the past 12 years at Texas A&M. However, there’s nothing to say that this new coach would be here for that long. If he’s here and successful for only 5 years, and it takes a couple recruiting classes to rebuild, then the overall growth of the program over that time will likely be minimal. Who knows, though? Maybe that 5 years of success is all this program needs to draw people back in. Maybe that's the impetus for extreme exponential growth of the RCAF. And maybe that increased RCAF growth will be enough so that the next hire could be a high quality one, that will be able to transition to his style of play without taking much of a step back.

[CajunNation]

Why would any decent o-lineman (with a chance at pro ball) go to a option type program?????? Why would any great receiver go to an option school---I remember a former great UL receiver that was recruited by Oklahoma in their wishbone days----When asked why he wasn't blocking well he said if he wanted to block he would have signed with Oklahoma!!!!!---And finally why would a future pro QB want to run the option???? I think that it cuts your recruiting down big time!!!!!

Oh, I didn't know we were in a "recruiting" league. I thought we were in a football league with the objective to win football games, not to win recruitment ranking tournaments.


When we put conditions on our success, we are doomed to fail. That is the football version of political correctness.

I don't care if we run the swinging gate every play with junior high talent. If it leads to us winning and going bowling, so be it.

Actually, the fact that the option scares so many of the people here is a plus for me. It reminds how outside the box this offense is.

[CajunNation]

I simply don't want to run the triple option as our primary offense. While it works in some cases, I'd much rather develop a more balanced attack and tough, rugged defense that doesn't give up many points. I'd rather see us run some more traditional sets, multiple back sets and pro sets using bootleg and playaction mixed in with what we already do now.

Do you realize that option oriented offenses have been our most successful at UL more often than multiple attacks?

Brian Mitchell? Mike Desormeaux? Those names ringing any bells?

Desmo had almost zero passing skills. Yet, the MIGHTY RAGIN' CAJUN STEAMROLLING ZONE OPTION FREAK SHOW never ran better than when he was QB.

With Sewak as the head coach, all we would be doing is changing the word zone to triple.


THE MIGHTY RAGIN' CAJUN STEAMROLLING TRIPLE OPTION FREAK SHOW.


Bring it!!!!!!

[CajunNation]

Of the suppossed final 3 candidates (according to KATC), only one of them has been a successful head coach on the Division I level.


Mike Sewak.


Of the suppossed final 3 candidates (according to KATC), only one of them has been a successful coordinator on the Division I level.


Mike Sewak.


Of the suppossed final 3 candidates, only one of them has coached in a BCS bowl game.


Mike Sewak.



...and we are gonna ignore him not because he doesn't win. We are gonna ignore him because he wins with the wrong offense and the wrong talent.


I hope and pray we are a smarter university than that.

[CajunProud]

_ Oh, I didn't know we were in a "recruiting" league. I thought we were in a football league with the objective to win football games, not to win recruitment ranking tournaments.


When we put conditions on our success, we are doomed to fail. That is the football version of political correctness.

I don't care if we run the swinging gate every play with junior high talent. If it leads to us winning and going bowling, so be it.

Actually, the fact that the option scares so many of the people here is a plus for me. It reminds how outside the box this offense is. _

Winner, winner chicken dinner.

I'm not saying Sewak is or isn't the guy. Like you, I could care less what kind of offense we run as long as we win games.

[SlappyCajun]

Of the suppossed final 3 candidates (according to KATC), only one of them has been a successful head coach on the Division I level.


Mike Sewak.

Division I FCS, where he was fired when his teams squandered second half leads.

R. Bustle would have coached in a BCS bowl game as well.

Another old coach who can come to UL to collect his pension.


Of the suppossed final 3 candidates (according to KATC), only one of them has been a successful coordinator on the Division I level.


Mike Sewak.


Of the suppossed final 3 candidates, only one of them has coached in a BCS bowl game.


Mike Sewak.



...and we are gonna ignore him not because he doesn't win. We are gonna ignore him because he wins with the wrong offense and the wrong talent.


I hope and pray we are a smarter university than that.

igeaux.mobi

[Just1More]

_ Yes, they went 6-6. But last year they were in a BCS bowl.

And, I'm not buying this business of changing the offense means we have to wait to recruit to win.

We'll need a different kind of offensive lineman with the option. But the offensive line we have wasn't great this year. In fact, recruiting offensive linemen has been IMO the weakest point of our recruiting over the last decade. Remember that two of our most decorated OL (Fisher and Bustle) were walkons.

Unless we have some really good redshirts, I question whether this offensive line can help us win regardless of the offense we're running.

We didn't pass block OR run block very well this year. _

This is very true. OL recruiting hasn't just been weak, it will continue to be the toughest group to elevate. I agree with you on one hand, we are not going to have to go through a complete recruiting cycle to change offenses. We were not one-dimensional. Our offense was simply lame in all dimensions. I believe our coaching staff were unable or unwilling to identify our OL as being a liability. Our running game was predicated on our OL opening up running lanes. And our passing game was predicated on buying time for a play to develop and the QB to spot an open receiver. Our style, regardless of the base offense definition, needs to be predicated on a much faster backfield operation.

I don't think UL has the ability to simply recruit, copy offenses done at the BCS level, and expect to miraculously overcome... even in the SBC. The next coach had better throw his old school BS in the wastebasket and realize he has some skill quickness and speed at his disposal on this team and in our recruiting reach and put it in hyperdrive. He does not and will not have OL or DL that will model BCS program line play.

[CajunDreDog]

I simply don't want to run the triple option as our primary offense.

1,000,000% AGREE!!!!!!

[Just1More]

_ If you're running the option, you don't recruit those types of linemen, which in my opinion is an upside. We haven't been able to recruit offensive linemen. In the option attack, you go for linemen who are smaller and quicker. Those guys aren't getting recruited by every college in America and they are easier to get.

Although wide receivers don't get as many opportunities, they actually flourish in the option attack because when the ball is thrown, it's always man to man coverage. You play zone against the option attack and you get killed.

Georgia Tech had a receiver while running the option that was a first round NFL pick.

And the quarterback, who originally signed because Ga. Tech was running a pro set under Chan Gailey, loved the option attack and flourished in it.

There are two negatives about the option attack. It isn't exactly a great come from behind offense, and it can be a high risk-high reward offense. Because of the pulled handoffs and pitches, the ball can wind up on the ground sometimes.

But hey, if you're throwing it all over the place, you risk interceptions. _

Dang Jay, I hadn't read all of your posts. You are dead nuts on. You are making absolutely some of the most solid posts regarding our offense. We are not weak at RB. I sometimes doubt our fans are watching the same games I go to and watch. I think far too many people are stat people these days. I attribute it to Fantasy Football.

The truth is that we have some talent at the skill positions. They were horribly underutilized due to our offensive system. Our system was operating on a lineman domination dependency. That is not at our disposal. Faster lineman (requiring a smaller undersized quicker type of player... largely available to us in this area) are the way to go. And you are correct... the option makes specific WRs very effective. It isn't a great come from behind offense and there are risks of putting the ball on the ground (and in your own backfield - leading to potential deadly turnovers... but it is a great offense to consider for UL). So many people do not understand the difference in what a lower tier FBS school and a southern program should do as opposed to BCS programs.

We in no way are going to simply hire a new coaching staff, run the same system and play sets, and miraculously make the 7 plus win target. We were not running the most effective offense for our talent reach and so we failed to reach some of that talent.

Defense and Special Teams... a different story for another day.