Random takes, Doom and Gloom edition.

What stood out to me at the game:

• Our offensive line was not ready to play. I don't mind being outplayed because of talent, and I can understand new players having some trouble with communications, but our returning starters had issues. Way too easy to confuse them to allow a guy to go through untouched. Ridiculously bad. It did get better in the second half, but can't give up an entire half to figure out that you need to at least touch people on their way to hitting our QB.
  
  
• How are we this bad at RB. Shocked at how bad Dan 17ed this up. We couldn't find a legit JUCO RB? That's got to be the easiest hole to plug in JUCO, and to my knowledge, we didn't even look for a JUCO RB. That's inexcusable. And on top of that, as weird as it is to say, Lee and Williams better suck just as bad as Shumpert. A good RB would completely change the outlook for this offense. If we waste Dak's senior year b/c of shitty RB play, we better not have a good option on the roster. Dan better be looking at JUCO options for RB next year now.
  
  
• The game was much worse than the score. We were able to come back b/c Les did what Les does, took a solid lead as an opportunity to go ultra conservative on offense with a belief that his D wouldn't allow the other team to catch up as long as his O avoided turnovers. For those people excited about how we played in the second half, they need to remember that Les closed up 90% of his playbook and then we started catching up. We didn't really show that we could stop them if he tried to be a little balanced.
  
  
• Dak is not Dak right now. He just hasn't thrown the ball well. I assume he is going to figure it out. Unless maybe he's injured and they're not telling people. Or maybe running the ball and moving the chains is what helps him get in rhythm on his throws.
  
  
• Dan Mullen is Les Miles. A very good coach in most aspects but with glaring and inexplicable flaws. They both have poor clock management skills and apparently refuse to just get a GA to keep them from screwing up at the end of the half/game. They both tend to go ultraconservative with leads but at the same time will randomly try make huge gambles when they don't seem to make sense. They both will go into a game with inexplicably bad game plans. The one that is most frustrating to me is that Mullen apparently has a crazy long time horizon or is much to accepting of losing. You'd think this off season would have been all about finding a JUCO RB. He apparently took the position of "This year is going to be extremely limited by RB; that's an issue that we're going to have to fix in future seasons." WTF is that?

We are not far from being very good. If we had a pretty good RB (i.e., one that would at least be invited to camps with the expectations that they could win a spot, not necessarily a star), if our safeties improved (which not crazy unreasonable to expect Bryant to turn into a good safety with his athleticism or for Peters to develop into a good safety if he got to play. I guess Coman is what he is at this point), our O-line at least figures out how to handle basic stunts and blitzes (which should be a bare minimum to expect out of our staff), and Dak start playing like the Dak of old, we're back to a 9-10 win team. With the way everybody in the SEC west has looked, we could still get 10 wins this year. But I don't think we're going to figure out the RB problem and I don't think Dan is going to change things this year. I love Mullen and in no way are my criticisms intended to imply that he's not a good coach or that his strengths do not greatly outweigh his flaws, but we know what he is at this point, and we're just not going to significantly change things during the season unless injuries force us to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnson85

What stood out to me at the game:

• Our offensive line was not ready to play. I don't mind being outplayed because of talent, and I can understand new players having some trouble with communications, but our returning starters had issues. Way too easy to confuse them to allow a guy to go through untouched. Ridiculously bad. It did get better in the second half, but can't give up an entire half to figure out that you need to at least touch people on their way to hitting our QB.
  
  
• How are we this bad at RB. Shocked at how bad Dan 17ed this up. We couldn't find a legit JUCO RB? That's got to be the easiest hole to plug in JUCO, and to my knowledge, we didn't even look for a JUCO RB. That's inexcusable. And on top of that, as weird as it is to say, Lee and Williams better suck just as bad as Shumpert. A good RB would completely change the outlook for this offense. If we waste Dak's senior year b/c of shitty RB play, we better not have a good option on the roster. Dan better be looking at JUCO options for RB next year now.
  
  
• The game was much worse than the score. We were able to come back b/c Les did what Les does, took a solid lead as an opportunity to go ultra conservative on offense with a belief that his D wouldn't allow the other team to catch up as long as his O avoided turnovers. For those people excited about how we played in the second half, they need to remember that Les closed up 90% of his playbook and then we started catching up. We didn't really show that we could stop them if he tried to be a little balanced.
  
  
• Dak is not Dak right now. He just hasn't thrown the ball well. I assume he is going to figure it out. Unless maybe he's injured and they're not telling people. Or maybe running the ball and moving the chains is what helps him get in rhythm on his throws.
  
  
• Dan Mullen is Les Miles. A very good coach in most aspects but with glaring and inexplicable flaws. They both have poor clock management skills and apparently refuse to just get a GA to keep them from screwing up at the end of the half/game. They both tend to go ultraconservative with leads but at the same time will randomly try make huge gambles when they don't seem to make sense. They both will go into a game with inexplicably bad game plans. The one that is most frustrating to me is that Mullen apparently has a crazy long time horizon or is much to accepting of losing. You'd think this off season would have been all about finding a JUCO RB. He apparently took the position of "This year is going to be extremely limited by RB; that's an issue that we're going to have to fix in future seasons." WTF is that?

We are not far from being very good. If we had a pretty good RB (i.e., one that would at least be invited to camps with the expectations that they could win a spot, not necessarily a star), if our safeties improved (which not crazy unreasonable to expect Bryant to turn into a good safety with his athleticism or for Peters to develop into a good safety if he got to play. I guess Coman is what he is at this point), our O-line at least figures out how to handle basic stunts and blitzes (which should be a bare minimum to expect out of our staff), and Dak start playing like the Dak of old, we're back to a 9-10 win team. With the way everybody in the SEC west has looked, we could still get 10 wins this year. But I don't think we're going to figure out the RB problem and I don't think Dan is going to change things this year. I love Mullen and in no way are my criticisms intended to imply that he's not a good coach or that his strengths do not greatly outweigh his flaws, but we know what he is at this point, and we're just not going to significantly change things during the season unless injuries force us to.

---

Good post. I think we have a good enough RB on our roster...unfortunately they are young and Dan won't play them. It could be Lee, Williams, Dear, Gibson...who knows? We won't know til Dak is gone it appears. Personally, I'd like to see if Gibson could help us. I have nothing but his measurables and high school video to base this on, so I'm just throwing it out there, but he seems to be built like what we're lacking....a guy in between the size of Shumpert and Holloway, that has less power than Shump, but much more quickness, balance, and speed. I'd love to know if anybody has seen Gibson in action to tell us what he looks like.

That being said, no chance Dan pulls Gibson's redshirt. So Dear may be our only hope this year at a RB capable of what we're all wanting to see in the backfield IMO. Unless Lee or Williams surprise us, which I'm ready to see if they can.

Dak doesn't look like he has command of the team. Don't know if it's because of the coaches or because of Dak, but on the penalty play, he should have got the ball snapped, plunged for one to three toward the middle of the field, and called the last time out. Apparently the coaches were arguing about whether to go ahead and kick it (my preference) or run another play. Ouch.

I feel like Shump is getting a bad rap. We need another back rotating in, but that's not his decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drunkernhelldawg

Dak doesn't look like he has command of the team. Don't know if it's because of the coaches or because of Dak, but on the penalty play, he should have got the ball snapped, plunged for one to three toward the middle of the field, and called the last time out. Apparently the coaches were arguing about whether to go ahead and kick it (my preference) or run another play. Ouch.

I feel like Shump is getting a bad rap. We need another back rotating in, but that's not his decision.

---

Shump is definitely getting a bad rap. If Dak would help in the run game, Shumpert would look much better.
Unfortunately if this is the QB run game (none) that we're going to see all year, we're going to need a quicker RB, but more size than Brandon Holloway. Shumpert could be a great complement to Dak if Dak was running the offense we ran last year. Shumpert ain't the guy in a Tyler Russell 2.0 running game.

Hell, Russell probably kept it on the zone read more than Dak has through 2 games. Mullen and/or Dak have their heads up their asses, and they better figure it out fast, or this year will be over before game 6.

nothing will improve until our OL improves it's play

The ol will not improve until we play our offense and spread the defense.

Our offensive line isn't any worse than it was last year. Our offensive line last year was made to look good because Dak ran the ball on undesigned runs and we used our option game very well. Until we start running our option game with our quarterback instead of protecting him all game, we are going to suck on offense. We would have went 6-6 last year if we let Dak play this way. No one was concerned about our offensive line this year because no one thought Dan was dumb enough to turn our dual threat quarterback into Tyler Russell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarius

Our offensive line isn't any worse than it was last year. Our offensive line last year was made to look good because Dak ran the ball on undesigned runs and we used our option game very well. Until we start running our option game with our quarterback instead of protecting him all game, we are going to suck on offense. We would have went 6-6 last year if we let Dak play this way. No one was concerned about our offensive line this year because no one thought Dan was dumb enough to turn our dual threat quarterback into Tyler Russell.

---

S. T. R. O. N. G.

+1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FISHDAWG

nothing will improve until our OL improves it's play

---

yet Holloway averaged 7 yards per carry Saturday night

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarius

Our offensive line isn't any worse than it was last year. Our offensive line last year was made to look good because Dak ran the ball on undesigned runs and we used our option game very well. Until we start running our option game with our quarterback instead of protecting him all game, we are going to suck on offense. We would have went 6-6 last year if we let Dak play this way. No one was concerned about our offensive line this year because no one thought Dan was dumb enough to turn our dual threat quarterback into Tyler Russell.

---

Another +1. I used similar words when discussing the game with some friends yesterday. We looked 2012 Tyler Russell MSU and it was no surprise to me that we stunk up the joint as a result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

yet Holloway averaged 7 yards per carry Saturday night

---

and how did that work out for us ? Are we gonna count on Holloway to get our rushing yardage ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FISHDAWG

and how did that work out for us ? Are we gonna count on Holloway to get our rushing yardage ?

---

Well, we have one RB having success- and another that's not. So we need to figure out why one has that success and use it. Shumpert is not the answer as a full-time RB. It's hard to blame the OL completely when Holloway is doing just fine back there on his carries

Do you think the Holloway-Shumpert production gap Saturday had anything to do with how LSU was playing us and how poorly (at least, to my eyes) the interior of our O-Line was blocking? I mentioned this on a FWTCT comment earlier this morning, but it looked to me like LSU was completely focused on stopping us from gashing them up the gut such that the edge plays with Holloway, who has the speed to effectively run them, was a good counter-attack. I mean, early on when we were running Dak more, he wasn't having success running into the teeth of the LSU defense either.

That's not his point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prediction? Pain.

Do you think the Holloway-Shumpert production gap Saturday had anything to do with how LSU was playing us and how poorly (at least, to my eyes) the interior of our O-Line was blocking? I mentioned this on a FWTCT comment earlier this morning, but it looked to me like LSU was completely focused on stopping us from gashing them up the gut such that the edge plays with Holloway, who has the speed to effectively run them, was a good counter-attack. I mean, early on when we were running Dak more, he wasn't having success running into the teeth of the LSU defense either.

---

...... we did not spread them out due to play calling. Just look at last year's game and see the difference in the play calling. When you attempt to run up the middle over and over with out spreading them, meaning a strong lsu defense, there is little hope of success because that is what they are playing. When you force them to spread out by,designed plays, that middle opens up.

We are not doing that early. At all. Have not done much this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prediction? Pain.

Do you think the Holloway-Shumpert production gap Saturday had anything to do with how LSU was playing us and how poorly (at least, to my eyes) the interior of our O-Line was blocking? I mentioned this on a FWTCT comment earlier this morning, but it looked to me like LSU was completely focused on stopping us from gashing them up the gut such that the edge plays with Holloway, who has the speed to effectively run them, was a good counter-attack. I mean, early on when we were running Dak more, he wasn't having success running into the teeth of the LSU defense either.

---

No I don't- because Holloway cut it up inside twice for yardage. He is finding the creases- Shumpert isn't

For the whole of the game, Dak ran 1, O N E read option play where he kept the ball and if memory serves me correctly that was late in the third quarter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prediction? Pain.

Do you think the Holloway-Shumpert production gap Saturday had anything to do with how LSU was playing us and how poorly (at least, to my eyes) the interior of our O-Line was blocking? I mentioned this on a FWTCT comment earlier this morning, but it looked to me like LSU was completely focused on stopping us from gashing them up the gut such that the edge plays with Holloway, who has the speed to effectively run them, was a good counter-attack. I mean, early on when we were running Dak more, he wasn't having success running into the teeth of the LSU defense either.

---

I agree. I think Steele determined to take away Dak's run #1, and Shump's run #2. I doubt very seriously they considered Holloway too much a threat.

And c34, that was after we started to open it up in play calling

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarius

Our offensive line isn't any worse than it was last year. Our offensive line last year was made to look good because Dak ran the ball on undesigned runs and we used our option game very well. Until we start running our option game with our quarterback instead of protecting him all game, we are going to suck on offense. We would have went 6-6 last year if we let Dak play this way. No one was concerned about our offensive line this year because no one thought Dan was dumb enough to turn our dual threat quarterback into Tyler Russell.

---

I agree that the way Dak is running -- or, rather, not running -- is hurting us. But I'm not sure I think the early struggles against LSU -- before we were forced to come from behind the with pass, like it or not -- were due to leaning on Dak's arm or treating him like Russell. In our first three drives against LSU, we ran it seven times, passed it twice, and were sacked twice. Factoring in the losses on the sacks, we gained a total of 7 yards. (And of course, after two of those drives, LSU ended up with the ball in our territory after our punt and proceeded to score two TDs.) I just rewatched those drives, and it looked to me like we were running the same stuff we did last year. There may have been one zone-read play in those three drives where Dak should have kept it, but for the most, it looks like the ends were staying home on him to force the hand-off. To me, it looked like our O-line was getting badly outplayed from the get go, both on the runs and in pass blocking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnson85

What stood out to me at the game:

• Our offensive line was not ready to play. I don't mind being outplayed because of talent, and I can understand new players having some trouble with communications, but our returning starters had issues. Way too easy to confuse them to allow a guy to go through untouched. Ridiculously bad. It did get better in the second half, but can't give up an entire half to figure out that you need to at least touch people on their way to hitting our QB.
  
  
• How are we this bad at RB. Shocked at how bad Dan 17ed this up. We couldn't find a legit JUCO RB? That's got to be the easiest hole to plug in JUCO, and to my knowledge, we didn't even look for a JUCO RB. That's inexcusable. And on top of that, as weird as it is to say, Lee and Williams better suck just as bad as Shumpert. A good RB would completely change the outlook for this offense. If we waste Dak's senior year b/c of shitty RB play, we better not have a good option on the roster. Dan better be looking at JUCO options for RB next year now.
  
  
• The game was much worse than the score. We were able to come back b/c Les did what Les does, took a solid lead as an opportunity to go ultra conservative on offense with a belief that his D wouldn't allow the other team to catch up as long as his O avoided turnovers. For those people excited about how we played in the second half, they need to remember that Les closed up 90% of his playbook and then we started catching up. We didn't really show that we could stop them if he tried to be a little balanced.
  
  
• Dak is not Dak right now. He just hasn't thrown the ball well. I assume he is going to figure it out. Unless maybe he's injured and they're not telling people. Or maybe running the ball and moving the chains is what helps him get in rhythm on his throws.
  
  
• Dan Mullen is Les Miles. A very good coach in most aspects but with glaring and inexplicable flaws. They both have poor clock management skills and apparently refuse to just get a GA to keep them from screwing up at the end of the half/game. They both tend to go ultraconservative with leads but at the same time will randomly try make huge gambles when they don't seem to make sense. They both will go into a game with inexplicably bad game plans. The one that is most frustrating to me is that Mullen apparently has a crazy long time horizon or is much to accepting of losing. You'd think this off season would have been all about finding a JUCO RB. He apparently took the position of "This year is going to be extremely limited by RB; that's an issue that we're going to have to fix in future seasons." WTF is that?

We are not far from being very good. If we had a pretty good RB (i.e., one that would at least be invited to camps with the expectations that they could win a spot, not necessarily a star), if our safeties improved (which not crazy unreasonable to expect Bryant to turn into a good safety with his athleticism or for Peters to develop into a good safety if he got to play. I guess Coman is what he is at this point), our O-line at least figures out how to handle basic stunts and blitzes (which should be a bare minimum to expect out of our staff), and Dak start playing like the Dak of old, we're back to a 9-10 win team. With the way everybody in the SEC west has looked, we could still get 10 wins this year. But I don't think we're going to figure out the RB problem and I don't think Dan is going to change things this year. I love Mullen and in no way are my criticisms intended to imply that he's not a good coach or that his strengths do not greatly outweigh his flaws, but we know what he is at this point, and we're just not going to significantly change things during the season unless injuries force us to.

---

An offensive line is generally only as good as it's weakest player. It also has to function as a unit and that comes with experience. We lost a TON of experience last year. I think it will get better, with time. We miss Jrob bad but I'm not sure that RB is quite as bad as it looks. We have very little run blocking at the moment. Hershal Walker might have looked bad behind that blocking. I do tend to agree about Shumpert though. Miles didn't "go ultra conservative". He started out that way. I expect they will in every game. I would too with what he has: a great defense, a great running back, and a suspect QB. Our comeback was legit because we defended a LOT better after the first quarter. Part of what is going on with Dak is the blocking. I do wonder why he didn't take off on some of the passing plays where everybody was covered and he had a lot of running room. The set runs just aren't there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Percho

For the whole of the game, Dak ran 1, O N E read option play where he kept the ball and if memory serves me correctly that was late in the third quarter.

---

And if memory serves me it was stuffed.

..... he only ran 2 times vs lsu in the first half last year. Just saying. Stuffed once and very little on the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Percho

For the whole of the game, Dak ran 1, O N E read option play where he kept the ball and if memory serves me correctly that was late in the third quarter.

---

He definitely has been handing it off more than I think he should. But having just re-watched the first three possessions -- man, I need to actually do some work today -- I can say that on the second offensive possession of the game, at around 9:30 to go in the first quarter, Dak kept on 3rd and 4. Shumpert had gained a combined six yards on 1st and 2nd down. Dak's run went for no gain. He was tackled from behind. We then punted to our own 48 yard line.

Nobody who watches our first 2 series from last year and this year can say we ran the same style of offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach

The ol will not improve until we play our offense and spread the defense.

---

This^

Also, NEVER choosing to scramble out of the pocket is not indicative of lack of a running game. That's refusing to take what the defense gives you.

Agree with everything you said Johnson85. Glad I am not the only one.