How much of an impact did getting rid of Les kenning have with our improved offense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MSUDawg4Life

So, when we would see Dan fussing at Les through his headset during the games, what would they be fussing about? If Dan called all the plays, what was there to fuss about during the game?

---

Les advising Dan on what to run- you got to remember- there are 4 people on the headset- not just Les and Dan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

Les advising Dan on what to run- you got to remember- there are 4 people on the headset- not just Les and Dan.

---

Okay. I'll take your word for it.

However, in the early days, it sure seemed like Les called the plays with Dan having veto authority. That's just the way it looked to me - from the outside looking in.

I don't know if it's improved offense, but firing him allowed us to hire Brian Johnson. From all indications he is one hell of a coach and recruiter with ties to Louisiana.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by messageboardsuperhero

Agreed. Our offensive improvement is as simple as looking at who the QB is now.

---

And who the receivers were, and who the main running back was. Dark is obviously the biggest change, but we got better pretty much across the board. Our offensive play calling is obviously going to be better with a running threat at qb, but a large prt of the reason we couldn't adjust with Russell was thy we didn't really have any of the other pieces either.

Les ran the offense Dan put in place. The offense works with the right players in the right positions. It does not work well with a pro style qb. Way to many people posting as experts who just like to throw rocks at glass houses. Les is a great coach and a wonderful human being.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawgcentral

Whoever told Tyler he was a decent running QB and should hold the ball that long is to blame.

For some reason, Russell thought he was a good enough runner to be elusive. That just wasn't the case. He never had the sheer number of pass catchers that Dak will have this year. I do think he was a good leader, and a dedicated player.

Back on topic, Les made some calls that really made me wonder why he was on the staff. It's not as though he moved on to another OC job if I recall correctly.

---

And Dan doesn't still make calls that make you go WTF??. how about a fake punt when are blowing Auburn away? How about going for it on 4th and 14? How about a fade to a 5'7" wr when the Bear is available. I could go on and on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Interpolation_Dawg_EX

I don't know if it's improved offense, but firing him allowed us to hire Brian Johnson. From all indications he is one hell of a coach and recruiter with ties to Louisiana.

---

Came here to post that. Les was an experienced HC at the end of his career that helped Dan when he needed experienced guidance. Now that Dan is more mature, we have Brian who brings different value to the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by codeDawg

Les was an experienced HC at the end of his career that helped Dan when he needed experienced guidance. Now that Dan is more mature, we have Brian who brings different value to the table.

---

very good post and dead on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnson85

And who the receivers were, and who the main running back was. Dark is obviously the biggest change, but we got better pretty much across the board. Our offensive play calling is obviously going to be better with a running threat at qb, but a large prt of the reason we couldn't adjust with Russell was thy we didn't really have any of the other pieces either.

---

Here it is. Last year was our best QB, best WR group, and best OL under Mullen. And probably our best read option RB since Dixon. Plus our best defense. Everything came together last year. I doubt Les had a lot to do with it. But you put Tyler back there, and we weren't going 10-3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PMDawg

Here it is. Last year was our best QB, best WR group, and best OL under Mullen. And probably our best read option RB since Dixon. Plus our best defense. Everything came together last year. I doubt Les had a lot to do with it. But you put Tyler back there, and we weren't going 10-3.

---

First the remarks about Tyler Russell are way off the mark. I'm never surprised by the masses thinking that the "failure" of that season is on him. That's the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Just like the 8-0 run when we lost to Bama. All of the sudden "Tyler can't throw"... "his passes were off". Never a consideration to an issue we had.. lack of a run game by the RBs. When a DL can stop your run with a 3 man front... your QB is not the issue. At no point has an SEC been consistently successful without a viable run game.

You could have put DAK (and we did btw) behind that OL without a run game and he would have had no better results.

The success of last season is exactly what PMDawg stated. Credit that to Mullen red shirting players and building them while recruiting ready to play guys. It gave us depth that we lacked. The OL was seasoned and when that happens, younger players get to see how that position is played within this system.

To the question.... I believe it helped. To many chiefs.

Nm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tcdog70

And Dan doesn't still make calls that make you go WTF??. how about a fake punt when are blowing Auburn away? How about going for it on 4th and 14? How about a fade to a 5'7" wr when the Bear is available. I could go on and on.

---

Indeed. Dan makes some calls that make is all scratch our heads. But I honestly believe that many of those times he's really over thinking the situation. Hoping those head scratchers will lessen in numbers as he is gaining maturity as a head coach.