What were we thinking at RB?

A

Axe

Flats Noob
Joined
Dec 31, 2001
Messages
539
I've seen a lot of talk about our personnel decisions at the QB position. Well, what were we thinking about at RB?

I was afraid that Michael Sampson was going to break in half everytime he touched the ball. The kid is no where near ready to play RB at the college level. Not a knock on Sampson, he is just too light and too young right now. I was disgusted to see us give him the ball on 3rd and 2. IMHO, I would have rather seen the ball in the hands of Jimmy Dixon or Hatch. I think most that watch practice would be stumped trying to figure out why Jimmy Dixon is sitting on the bench while we are handing the ball to Sampson. ?????
 
Originally posted by Axe:
I've seen a lot of talk about our personnel decisions at the QB position. Well, what were we thinking about at RB?

I was afraid that Michael Sampson was going to break in half everytime he touched the ball. The kid is no where near ready to play RB at the college level. Not a knock on Sampson, he is just too light and too young right now. I was disgusted to see us give him the ball on 3rd and 2. IMHO, I would have rather seen the ball in the hands of Jimmy Dixon or Hatch. I think most that watch practice would be stumped trying to figure out why Jimmy Dixon is sitting on the bench while we are handing the ball to Sampson. ?????
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Good question, Axe. Just add that to the already long list of questions about our offensive coaching this year.
 
I was also disapointed we gave up on ACE after the fumble. I thought he was running well before that. Can't give up entirely on the running game which it seemed we did even when there was time to use it.
 
Ace did pretty well for a true freshman and gained valuable D1 experience. Sampson also saw some carries as well as a start in a "bowl" game as a true freshman. With coaching and more practice time logged they could yet blossom into formidable ball handlers.

Irrespective of this, the plays they are asked to run have to be doable. I'm not sure Joe Frank or anyone else could've done much more with plays that weren't going to work anyway and lineplay that wasn't opening the holes. There are very, very few backs that can create a hole to run through out of a stuffed line of scrimmage.

There has to be more thought given to execution, hanging onto the ball (DBO has an alarming tendency to wave the ball around like a loaf of bread), and a less conservative approach to loosening up the defenses we face such as utilizing the tight ends more to keep the LBs from keying on play action at the line of scrimmage. Our opponents are way too aware of what we're going to do next. Not being able to run the option also hurts our chances of success on the ground.

Can you imagine what sort of game prep our opponents are fomenting from watching our game tape?
 
CG has always been EXTREMELY conservative and boring playcalling. Nothing new there.
 
Yeah, almost a carbon copy of GO'L without RF huh?

GJ!
drinking.gif
 
Does anybody have any updated info on Hatch? I thought he recovered from his torn ACL a while ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top