Joe Moorhead article in The Athletic

[bluelightstar]

https://theathletic.com/958264/2019/...ons-sec-coach/

Interesting read. A few points:

1. Taking a larger role in the offense with Getsy's departure
2. Thought some players had success doing things a certain way and maybe were "resistant" (my words, not his) to some different offensive things.
3. Season was overall a success

Quote in there from an unidentified staffer; "it was made out like we inherited the '72 Dolphins"

[msstate7]

I absolutely hate quotes from anonymous people.

[confucius say]

This should end well.

[TrapGame]

Please don't turn this into Joe's A Tard thread #416.

[CadaverDawg]

https://theathletic.com/958264/2019/...ons-sec-coach/

Interesting read. A few points:

1. Taking a larger role in the offense with Getsy's departure
2. Thought some players had success doing things a certain way and maybe were "resistant" (my words, not his) to some different offensive things.
3. Season was overall a success

Quote in there from an unidentified staffer; "it was made out like we inherited the '72 Dolphins"

#Croomspeak

[Jack Lambert]

#Croomspeak

Croom would have had a candy bar in his mouth. Moorhead has lost weight.

[Maroonthirteen]

Bottom line, Moorhead did a good job.

Some may not want to hear this, but an 8 win season is a good season. Any way you slice it.

I agree with anonymous. Defensively, we were hell. But we busted a coverage in the outback that cost us big time. So we weren?t perfect. Offensively our passing game was terrible for
Many reasons and not just on one guy.

Moorhead had a successful first year.

[bluelightstar]

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/mi...tzgerald-2019/

Another interesting read -- transcribing much of an interview with Tom Luginbill, who called our games 3 times last year. Apparently, he and McElroy thought we might need to change QBs after the first game that they saw us (which I'm pretty sure was Florida). A lot of knowledgeable people are convinced that Moorhead's fine but it takes a certain type of offensive coach to win with Fitz. I'm willing to wait out the fall before I jump off the ledge.

[Johnson85]

Bottom line, Moorhead did a good job.

Some may not want to hear this, but an 8 win season is a good season. Any way you slice it.

I agree with anonymous. Defensively, we were hell. But we busted a coverage in the outback that cost us big time. So we weren?t perfect. Offensively our passing game was terrible for
Many reasons and not just on one guy.

Moorhead had a successful first year.

That's a negative. You can't say he did a good job based on getting 8 wins without comparing it to what a likely other hire would have done. Our schedule was set up to where we had basically 6 games where our talent would have made it hard to lose. One game where our talent made it almost impossible to win, one game where it would have been hard, and then 4 you could say were reasonably close talent wise. So basically he split the games where talent was reasonably close and wasn't competitive for the game that would have been hard to win. It's a little worse than that if you look at the fact that his side of the ball made us not competitive in those two losses and well as didn't give us a chance against LSU. In the two we did win, we put up 23 while holding the other team to 9, and 28 while holding the other team to 13, both pretty solid compared to how other SEC teams scored against them.

Moorhead had an ok first year. It's hard to say what our defense would have looked like without Shoop, but he probably did within a game better or worse than say the handful of other potential hires would have done. He looks better from the fact that he had our offense where it could destroy weak teams. It looks worse that it was non-existent in our four regular season losses. It looks worse that he was incapable of adjusting against UK. It looks better that he did something different against Auburn.

The way his offense did against weak defenses was a very good sign. That will hopefully put a pretty high floor underneath us. I'm not bothered by him not being able to score against Bama. You're just not going to score against good defenses that are playing well when you have basically zero legit SEC WRs. I'm bothered by the fact that he couldn't put in a couple of packages to get us some minimal production against UK and UF, which is all it would have taken on offense and which our running game talent was good enough to do. I'm pleased that he's recruiting at a level that it looks like will maintain or improve our talent (well, probably not to the point of having 3 1st rounders again, but overall, should be good). I'm worried that the one thing he really needed to do, which is bring in an impact WR didn't happen.

I think he will be solid to good if we give him time to get some pieces here. I don't think people are going to be happy with the performance next year and probably the year after that, unless we find an impact WR ready to play in 2020.

[Tbonewannabe]

do the things that Trace McSorley did, and then found out very quickly that Nick Fitzgerald was very, very limited. He was limited in terms of the ability to process how quickly things went through his head and the clock went off, the ability to throw the ball down the field consistently and accurately.

This quote by Tom Luginbill is pretty much everything we saw last year. The only question is if one of the QBs on campus can run the offense that Moorhead wants to run or if he has to be better at adapting.

[ShotgunDawg]

I absolutely hate quotes from anonymous people.

I like them. I'd rather hear people's true thoughts than not.

[msstate7]

I like them. I'd rather hear people's true thoughts than not.

I think they're made up half the time (I.e. athlon's coach comments).

[confucius say]

I think they're made up half the time (I.e. athlon's coach comments).

That's why I think it depends on whether you trust the author of the article. I trust sammon

[ShotgunDawg]

I think they're made up half the time (I.e. athlon's coach comments).

Sure I guess. Not sure how we would know that

[DancingRabbit]

I like them. I'd rather hear people's true thoughts than not.

There's no guarantee people are 100% honest, even when given anonymity. People may be motivated to promote a certain idea or agenda without having it attached to them.

You're probably right for the most part.

The degree to which I believe anonymous quotes hinges on the credibility of the reporter putting them out, and whether there's a hint of an agenda by the reporter. If I think the reporter is honest and unbiased, then I'm likely to believe anonymous sources offered up.

[Tbonewannabe]

That's a negative. You can't say he did a good job based on getting 8 wins without comparing it to what a likely other hire would have done. Our schedule was set up to where we had basically 6 games where our talent would have made it hard to lose. One game where our talent made it almost impossible to win, one game where it would have been hard, and then 4 you could say were reasonably close talent wise. So basically he split the games where talent was reasonably close and wasn't competitive for the game that would have been hard to win. It's a little worse than that if you look at the fact that his side of the ball made us not competitive in those two losses and well as didn't give us a chance against LSU. In the two we did win, we put up 23 while holding the other team to 9, and 28 while holding the other team to 13, both pretty solid compared to how other SEC teams scored against them.

Moorhead had an ok first year. It's hard to say what our defense would have looked like without Shoop, but he probably did within a game better or worse than say the handful of other potential hires would have done. He looks better from the fact that he had our offense where it could destroy weak teams. It looks worse that it was non-existent in our four regular season losses. It looks worse that he was incapable of adjusting against UK. It looks better that he did something different against Auburn.

The way his offense did against weak defenses was a very good sign. That will hopefully put a pretty high floor underneath us. I'm not bothered by him not being able to score against Bama. You're just not going to score against good defenses that are playing well when you have basically zero legit SEC WRs. I'm bothered by the fact that he couldn't put in a couple of packages to get us some minimal production against UK and UF, which is all it would have taken on offense and which our running game talent was good enough to do. I'm pleased that he's recruiting at a level that it looks like will maintain or improve our talent (well, probably not to the point of having 3 1st rounders again, but overall, should be good). I'm worried that the one thing he really needed to do, which is bring in an impact WR didn't happen.

I think he will be solid to good if we give him time to get some pieces here. I don't think people are going to be happy with the performance next year and probably the year after that, unless we find an impact WR ready to play in 2020.

Moorhead did a great job hiring defensive coaches, has done a very good job recruiting, and did a good job on offense in 8-9 games (Iowa is a toss up since we should have won that game other than a WR drop turning into a Int and a blown coverage TD).

Moorhead did a shit job adjusting in the UK, UF, LSU, and Bama games on offense.

[confucius say]

Moorhead did a great job hiring defensive coaches, has done a very good job recruiting, and did a good job on offense in 8-9 games (Iowa is a toss up since we should have won that game other than a WR drop turning into a Int and a blown coverage TD).

Moorhead did a shit job adjusting in the UK, UF, LSU, and Bama games on offense.

Fair.

Also worth noting those were prob the 4 best defenses we faced and 3 were on the road.

[ShotgunDawg]

I actually liked the article.

The anonymous quote didn't bother me because whoever said it is mostly right.

I obviously have deep concerns about Moorhead, but I would say that fixing offenses is what his career is built on & I honestly don't see any reason why it can't happen here. This year will tell us an awful lot about the type of coach we hired.

I'm eyeing that road trip to Tennessee. That's a game that, if Moorhead is the right guy, he will win. Our talent & Tennessee's are close enough that coaching will matter as to the outcome & there is absolutely no way we should settle for having a coach that is worse that Pruitt.

[ShotgunDawg]

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/mi...tzgerald-2019/

Another interesting read -- transcribing much of an interview with Tom Luginbill, who called our games 3 times last year. Apparently, he and McElroy thought we might need to change QBs after the first game that they saw us (which I'm pretty sure was Florida). A lot of knowledgeable people are convinced that Moorhead's fine but it takes a certain type of offensive coach to win with Fitz. I'm willing to wait out the fall before I jump off the ledge.

I agree with this.

I think most people's problem with Moorhead is that they think all he needed to do was run Mullen's offense & we would've been fine. Problem is, he doesn't know Mullen's offense

[FriarsPoint]

do the things that Trace McSorley did, and then found out very quickly that Nick Fitzgerald was very, very limited. He was limited in terms of the ability to process how quickly things went through his head and the clock went off, the ability to throw the ball down the field consistently and accurately.

This quote by Tom Luginbill is pretty much everything we saw last year. The only question is if one of the QBs on campus can run the offense that Moorhead wants to run or if he has to be better at adapting.

He has to be better at adapting. That is the huge red flag that went up last year. Luginbill’s quote is a surprise to no one
that followed things closely the last four years. The surprise is the coaching staff couldn’t see a mile away what everybody else could. Yet he kept trying to beat a square peg into a round hole.