Gailey Call-in Show Question

G

GTPilot

Flats Noob
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
976
I didn't get a chance to hear the show yesterday but saw the recap and noticed something that I hoped someone could elaborate on.

When questioned about the shotgun, the recap stated only that he said it wouldn't work for us right now. Did he go into further detail on that matter or was that all he said?

Just curious because I don't see the reason why it wouldn't work for us on obvious passing downs.
 
I was listening. Coach said that they (the coaches) felt like the shotgun wouldn't be effective for the team. He didn't elaborate beyond that.

I also feel like it would gain Ball an additional second or two, but most likely Gailey and Nix knows more than I do about it.
tongue.gif
 
Originally posted by GEETEELEE:
I was listening. Coach said that they (the coaches) felt like the shotgun wouldn't be effective for the team. He didn't elaborate beyond that.

I also feel like it would gain Ball an additional second or two, but most likely Gailey and Nix knows more than I do about it.
tongue.gif
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">And therein lies the problem.
 
Originally posted by spellingbee:
wherein?
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">This should be obvious. Gnome would be a better coach than Gailey. Gnome is actually Bill Parcells.
 
can someone explain how a shotgun cannot be of use , no matter what offense you are running especially with a mobile qb
 
Originally posted by GTPilot:
I didn't get a chance to hear the show yesterday but saw the recap and noticed something that I hoped someone could elaborate on.

When questioned about the shotgun, the recap stated only that he said it wouldn't work for us right now. Did he go into further detail on that matter or was that all he said?

Just curious because I don't see the reason why it wouldn't work for us on obvious passing downs.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">So did he say nothing other than that? I think I could give a recap and I havent even listened to the show: We are working hard. We have got to run the ball. It's my fault for the bad execution of plays by our football players.
 
All right, Mr Intelligent Donkey, Our Head Football Coach repeatedly said during the call in show that he and the staff are doing what is best for the football team in order to win games. A couple of callers, one in particular, was hostile, bordering on rude, and wanted to know how he explained the UGA and CU losses. All Gailey said was he didn't know how to explain it. Everything we're doing is for the good of the players and team.

My point is Gailey didn't screen out negative callers and he didn't dodge the hard questions. He gave a lot of information on the show about what the coaches are attempting to accomplish and a lot of what the players are doing.

Your snide comments are silly and trite. Why don't you read the recap so you'll at least have some knowledge. Call in show recap.

If you have more knowledge than the coaches about why the shotgun would work or not for this team why don't you let us know? I think the shotgun might could work, but I haven't seen the team practice, nor have I evaluated blocking patterns and play development for the personnel we have to work with, so even if I were a football offensive genius (I'm not) I would have to defer to the men that work with the team day in and day out. What about you?
 
I can explain how it wouldn't be of benefit. Watch the UGAG game last year....the ball was snapped ON THE GROUND 7 times...count em...7!!!!! Two of those resulted in fumbles. If you don't believe me, contact the GTAA and get a copy of the game. I recorded it and have watched it as many times as I have been able to make myself stomach doing so.

Oh, and BTW, we still have Reilly at center. I like the kid and think he's a heck of an athlete. But if you put any kind of a decent noseguard over him, like the leg humpers did, then he apparently starts to focus on that and forgets about the need to make an accurate shotgun snap.
 
There are several reasons the coaches may think the shotgun is not the best for this team right now.

One reason is for the elusive nature of Ball. Under center, outside blitzers run to the QB - Ball has shown time and time again the ability to roll out and outrun even F$U speed to the corner. In the shotgun, you take much of this away, as the blitzers run to the shotgun position, forcing the QB back into the pocket (where Ball has had almost all of his sacks), rolling out from the shotgun puts you about 10-15 yds behind the line of scrimmage.

Remember, we were in the shotgun quite a bit last year with AJ - the shotgun actually benefited him from a speed perspective, because he was not going to outrun anyone to the corner. If you recall earlier in the season, when we were trying more play-action with AJ (ala the clemson game), he was getting eaten alive with the outside blitz.

Also another reason the coaches may not feel they want to utilize the shotgun package is that it eliminates the play-action fake. This has been a pretty powerful tool for us, even in the limited amount of scoring we have had. If you recall, the TD against AU was a result of play-action - of course we had some success running the ball out of the backfiled, which is requisite for the play-action to work, but on that play, the FS was clearly frozen for a second while Logan ran a flag pattern out of the slot.

Also our backs have not been the best at picking up the blitz lately, again limiting the desire for shotgun - if you are in shotgun, you are almost assuredly going to get blitzed, as the worry about the run via dive play etc is not as severe.

Also, if you talk to ex-QBs, they will tell you that you actually have *less* time to read a defense out of the shotgun - you have to concentrate on the snap, and lose about half a second of reading what the defense is adjusting to at the snap of the ball. Under center a QB can watch the play develop as he breaks into his back pedal.

Overall, the shotgun is great to give more time for a less-than-mobile QB who excells at reading defenses. If you recall, we were in shotgun a ton with Godsey in passing situations (I think that QB description fits him to a tee), but we really seldom ran Joe Hamilton out of the gun.
 
TIAR - nice analysis/explanation. A lot makes sense but I do want to question a bit of it though - or rather ask a question about it.

While we didn't run Joe in the gun and used an option format to great success - other mobile QBs such as Charlie Ward and a generation of more recent mobile QBs have used the gun to great success (different than your discussion of Suggs) - including that damnable handoff to the remaining back play that FSU ran down our throats for years (a trap play I think).

Recognizing that Reggie wasn't an option QB and won't be one at least this year - I had envisioned him more in the Charlie Ward mode operating out of the gun - not all the time but at least in passing situations where the dive doesn't mean anything anyway.

Is it simply that the gun won't work for Reggie for the resons you state above, that we don't have the other pieces of the puzzle (ie. blocking backs) to run it, or is it just too much to throw at Reggie right now?

I have to admit I expected to see the gun some this year in passing situations I thought to give Reggie another second or so and to spread things out.
 
Thanks for the info. It wasn't meant to be an opportunity to hash out people's stance on Gailey again. Funny how I get 10 responses to this topic but none to the one about what people would like to see this weekend.
 
AlaGold,

You can borrow mine. Don't let my empty wallet scare you away from its awesome powers.
smile.gif
 
Running the GUN would give us another "look" and option and God knows we need SOMETHING.It may not be a panacea but could it get worse much?On the other hand,we still have to make 3rd and ones.
btw-we actually ran a run -action-fake pass on a 3rd and 19 the other night for those who think our OFF coaches are ahead of the curve.er,it didn't work.
PILOT- my crystal ball fell and broke last weekend at the game.
 
The reasonable alternative that most likely would be a good fit is to have RB roll-out much more often. It can buy him some time, give him a better look at patterns (half of the field), and put him in a position to utilize his run skills (especially when 5-7 yards is there for the taking).

As for the OL, if healthy, I would definitely keep Robinson and Honeycutt in as guards. T-N is getting killed. THWG
 
Yjacket - sorry, I was out of town until this am.

You are right that a team certainly can run out of the 'gun - you mentioned F$U and the inside counter, etc. run out of the shotgun formation. I think you have to have the right style of RB to run out of this spread formation - we 'morphed' into an F$U style of open set when we settled on Gordon Clinkscales last year - go back and look at the UVA and NC State tapes in particular. Clinkscales was a smaller 'scatback' who fit the mold for running out of the shotgun. The worst type of RB to run in this sitaution is the big bruser, like Ace. I think you would see us utilize Chris Woods in this role, assuming he recovers from the concussions. Of course F$U had this with some of their smaller, faster backs such as Dunn. You don't see them line up in that formation and hand the ball of to Greg Jones, for example.

It is as you mentioned, not just the QB, but the backs, the whole offensive personnel that lends itself to the shotgun or not.

In the end, it comes down to how the staff feels the best way to move the ball and put points on the board - they may decide that using a piecemeal 'gun offense is something they want to add to the package, particularly since the 2 minute drill at Vandy. Unless I am mistaken, I do not think Vandy blitzed us during our 2 minute drill (I'll go back on Tues and look at the tape)

I guess the whole point of the post was that there are quite a few facets to running out of the shotgun, like any offensive package. It really is a bit more than just the QB.
 
The funny thing is that last week the shotgun wouldn't work for us. Now we are lead to believe that it may be what works best. What a difference a few days makes.
smile.gif
 
GTPilot,

You are right. I beleive I remember the article. They were asking Gailey about his offense and asked about the shotgun and he said something along the lines of that wasn't something that worked well for us. He was also quoted as saying something along the lines of "I've been running this offense for 15 years and don't change something just because of a few set backs. I have alot of experience at this so I don't think I need a lot of feedback from the players. Of course, I'll listen to Patrick and Buddy and Coach D every once in a while." This paraphrased and not a direct quote, but I think it is a fair representation of the quote. What struck me was that it implies that the offense is the straight up "Chan Gailey Offense" without any adjustments made for the specific abilities of our players. In addition, I can't believe he's not seeking input from the players. The players are the one of the best sources for in game recon.
 
I think you're misinterpreting the quotes a little. The coaches have mentioned several specific instances where they got input from players on particular play calls, one was the TD pass against Auburn. What I think Gailey was saying is that he isn't planning to change the offensive philosophy based on input from players. If he's like most coaches he has a ton of plays/formations in his package. What he tries to do is use those that work best with the players he has. He adjusts week to week with input from his brain trust. During the games the players talk to their position coaches and it feeds to him through Nix, Geiss, etc. Assuming I'm correct here, I don't think that's much different from the way most coaches run things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top