🏈 I am going to beat a dead horse...two actually.

[Guest]

Why not a goal line offensive package for Jimmy Johns at QB? Play him as a Tebow type QB. QB draws and jump passes are things that JJ could definitely do, and with his speed, size and strength he would be hard to handle inside the 3 or 4.

Thoughts?

 

[musso]

i like the strategy of the idea, but to answer your question of "why not" i think Saban hasn't been completely happy with Johns's performance in other areas. if this is the case, then i support whatever discipline Saban issues to the players relative to their infraction(s).

but yeah, i've long dreamed of Johns running from the QB position.

 

[TerryP]

Why not a goal line offensive package for Jimmy Johns at QB? Play him as a Tebow type QB. QB draws and jump passes are things that JJ could definitely do, and with his speed, size and strength he would be hard to handle inside the 3 or 4.

Thoughts?

Because, he isn't good enough to crack the two deep at RB so the thought of him running out of the QB position doesn't make much sense, does it?

Because, he's had problems that weren't related to on the field performance and he's dug himself a hole so deep it may be next year before he begins to see daylight again.

If the OL can't block for who we have in the backfield now, what makes you think they'll do better with a different person in the backfield?

To quote CNS, "We are going to play the best football players, the guys who are most ready to play." That statement in itself should answer your question and those that question why GM isn't on the field more as well.

 

[Guest]

Why not a goal line offensive package for Jimmy Johns at QB? Play him as a Tebow type QB. QB draws and jump passes are things that JJ could definitely do, and with his speed, size and strength he would be hard to handle inside the 3 or 4.

Thoughts?

Because, he isn't good enough to crack the two deep at RB so the thought of him running out of the QB position doesn't make much sense, does it?

Because, he's had problems that weren't related to on the field performance and he's dug himself a hole so deep it may be next year before he begins to see daylight again.

If the OL can't block for who we have in the backfield now, what makes you think they'll do better with a different person in the backfield?

To quote CNS, "We are going to play the best football players, the guys who are most ready to play." That statement in itself should answer your question and those that question why GM isn't on the field more as well.

(1) I am not talking about 2 deep at RB, only a special formation for hammering the ball in the end zone. I am not suggesting replacing JPW, but JJ has experience taking snaps under center and is bigger and stronger than anyone else who could operate in that scenario.

(2) If the OL cannot block on a sneak or QB draw for a 200# QB who is not particularly strong or fast, compensate with more strength and speed.

(3) This is a message board. Do we discuss different aspects or say "Roll Tide! Sieg Heil Mein Fuhrer!" and then quote coaches like they are canonical scripture? Seriously...some of you would make good borg drones.

 

[TerryP]

Why not a goal line offensive package for Jimmy Johns at QB? Play him as a Tebow type QB. QB draws and jump passes are things that JJ could definitely do, and with his speed, size and strength he would be hard to handle inside the 3 or 4.

Thoughts?

Because, he isn't good enough to crack the two deep at RB so the thought of him running out of the QB position doesn't make much sense, does it?

Because, he's had problems that weren't related to on the field performance and he's dug himself a hole so deep it may be next year before he begins to see daylight again.

If the OL can't block for who we have in the backfield now, what makes you think they'll do better with a different person in the backfield?

To quote CNS, "We are going to play the best football players, the guys who are most ready to play." That statement in itself should answer your question and those that question why GM isn't on the field more as well.

(1) I am not talking about 2 deep at RB, only a special formation for hammering the ball in the end zone. I am not suggesting replacing JPW, but JJ has experience taking snaps under center and is bigger and stronger than anyone else who could operate in that scenario.

(2) If the OL cannot block on a sneak or QB draw for a 200# QB who is not particularly strong or fast, compensate with more strength and speed.

(3) This is a message board. Do we discuss different aspects or say "Roll Tide! Sieg Heil Mein Fuhrer!" and then quote coaches like they are canonical scripture? Seriously...some of you would make good borg drones.

The RB situation should explain a little about what kind of running player he is right now. He's not been practicing well and has been prone to making a lot of mistakes. Working on a special formation for a player that isn't doing well in other aspects makes no sense to me.

More strength and speed doesn't matter if there isn't a hole to run through.

I'm well aware of what message forums are. I'm well aware of what "Sieg Heil Mein Fuhrer" means as well. I can do without your Hitler references. You asked a question, and your question was answered.

Finden Sie ein anderes totes Pferd, um zu schlagen.

 

[Guest]

Now way...no how

Saban (who has final say on offensive schemes) is old school. I don't think he believes in quarterback by committee. He may not be beyond it but he is a no gimmicks type guy.

 

[rammerjammer]

I think Ray Melick's article covers this and says what needs to be said about this subject.

Mash Here

 

[joeman546]

Saban isn't Mike Shula. He won't reward a guy who doesn't perform consistently - on the field or off, in practice or not - just because it might win a game now.

This is the most important line in the article.

This is also what we are getting into by hiring him, but we all know Saban's way works, so we are going to have to be patient as he works that into the players.

 

[musso]

Because, he isn't good enough to crack the two deep at RB so the thought of him running out of the QB position doesn't make much sense, does it? ...

If the OL can't block for who we have in the backfield now, what makes you think they'll do better with a different person in the backfield?

terry, i think the question raised is a legitimate question, theoretically speaking. i mean, the off-the-field realities and previous quotes by coaches are all information that may or may not be known by posters on the board.

as impactful as those factors are on the present situation, i believe BigFan's questions were more hypothetical anyway. personally, i think the prospect of a physical running quarterback particularly in short-yardage situations is certainly deserving of consideration as a successful alternative. when the QB runs with the ball, the offense effectively gains an additional blocker that it misses when the QB hands the ball off. UF's success with Tebow's rushes despite having a suspect OL illustrates how such a play can be difficult to stop.

while Johns's conduct, or rather misconduct, may render his participation as a running QB as highly unlikely, i think it's entirely permissable to discuss it on theoretical grounds (would it or wouldn't it work and why). after all, the chances of our ideas and suggestions actually being used and executed by coaches should NEVER be a factor in evaluating the legitimacy of the posting of our ideas ... by virtue of the simple fact that we all know the coaches aren't looking to us for suggestions.

 

[moreno_iv]

Finden Sie ein anderes totes Pferd, um zu schlagen.

Nice

 

[TerryP]

Because, he isn't good enough to crack the two deep at RB so the thought of him running out of the QB position doesn't make much sense, does it? ...

If the OL can't block for who we have in the backfield now, what makes you think they'll do better with a different person in the backfield?

terry, i think the question raised is a legitimate question, theoretically speaking. i mean, the off-the-field realities and previous quotes by coaches are all information that may or may not be known by posters on the board.

as impactful as those factors are on the present situation, i believe BigFan's questions were more hypothetical anyway. personally, i think the prospect of a physical running quarterback particularly in short-yardage situations is certainly deserving of consideration as a successful alternative. when the QB runs with the ball, the offense effectively gains an additional blocker that it misses when the QB hands the ball off. UF's success with Tebow's rushes despite having a suspect OL illustrates how such a play can be difficult to stop.

while Johns's conduct, or rather misconduct, may render his participation as a running QB as highly unlikely, i think it's entirely permissable to discuss it on theoretical grounds (would it or wouldn't it work and why). after all, the chances of our ideas and suggestions actually being used and executed by coaches should NEVER be a factor in evaluating the legitimacy of the posting of our ideas ... by virtue of the simple fact that we all know the coaches aren't looking to us for suggestions.

I don't disagree with the thought of having a big, physical QB in situations like this. The question was about Johns, specifically.

On a slightly different note Saban's choices in QB's has been more of a pocket passing type QB, but, one that has wheels to move when necessary. He's not one to use a QB to "move the line." Russell had that ability, but his recruitment had more to do with escaping pressure than a rushing type QB. Fanuzzi has wheels like that, AJ does as well.

Even with improved technique we still have problems dominating the LOS. A large part due to who was evaluating the talent on who we should recruit along the OL. We have two good OLmen on the team right now, one is sitting out because of suspension.

The situation will improve. But, I don't like the idea of implementing a system around one player who, quite frankly, hasn't done much to deserve to be on the playing field right now.

All that being said we can discuss Johns in more detail later on...after he's no longer on campus.

 

[Guest]

Because, he isn't good enough to crack the two deep at RB so the thought of him running out of the QB position doesn't make much sense, does it? ...

If the OL can't block for who we have in the backfield now, what makes you think they'll do better with a different person in the backfield?

terry, i think the question raised is a legitimate question, theoretically speaking. i mean, the off-the-field realities and previous quotes by coaches are all information that may or may not be known by posters on the board.

as impactful as those factors are on the present situation, i believe BigFan's questions were more hypothetical anyway. personally, i think the prospect of a physical running quarterback particularly in short-yardage situations is certainly deserving of consideration as a successful alternative. when the QB runs with the ball, the offense effectively gains an additional blocker that it misses when the QB hands the ball off. UF's success with Tebow's rushes despite having a suspect OL illustrates how such a play can be difficult to stop.

while Johns's conduct, or rather misconduct, may render his participation as a running QB as highly unlikely, i think it's entirely permissable to discuss it on theoretical grounds (would it or wouldn't it work and why). after all, the chances of our ideas and suggestions actually being used and executed by coaches should NEVER be a factor in evaluating the legitimacy of the posting of our ideas ... by virtue of the simple fact that we all know the coaches aren't looking to us for suggestions.

One thing I find really interesting about the whole Johns portrayal, is that JJ won the "I Like to Practice" award in spring training. If academics were the issue, he would be ineligible. Most arguments against JJ are off base...If attitude were the issue, he would not be a starter on special teams.

The bottom line to my opinion is this...when you are on the 1-3 yard line, handing it off to the RB requires that you take the ball off the line of scrimmage. With a big, physical QB and even a mediocre OL, 1 or 2 yards is an automatic TD. I put the MSU TD right before half time on the coaches. We should have sneaked it again...even with JPW it went for 3 yards the first time and 1 the second. It was only second down and we still had a timeout at that point. If JPW is not big and strong enough to muscle it in from the 2, put in someone who is.

einige Leute würden nicht einen unabhängigen Gedanken kennen, wenn es sie auf der Nase biß

 

[moreno_iv]

Here's a translator if anyone is curious...

Babelfish

 

[TerryP]

Because, he isn't good enough to crack the two deep at RB so the thought of him running out of the QB position doesn't make much sense, does it? ...

If the OL can't block for who we have in the backfield now, what makes you think they'll do better with a different person in the backfield?

terry, i think the question raised is a legitimate question, theoretically speaking. i mean, the off-the-field realities and previous quotes by coaches are all information that may or may not be known by posters on the board.

as impactful as those factors are on the present situation, i believe BigFan's questions were more hypothetical anyway. personally, i think the prospect of a physical running quarterback particularly in short-yardage situations is certainly deserving of consideration as a successful alternative. when the QB runs with the ball, the offense effectively gains an additional blocker that it misses when the QB hands the ball off. UF's success with Tebow's rushes despite having a suspect OL illustrates how such a play can be difficult to stop.

while Johns's conduct, or rather misconduct, may render his participation as a running QB as highly unlikely, i think it's entirely permissable to discuss it on theoretical grounds (would it or wouldn't it work and why). after all, the chances of our ideas and suggestions actually being used and executed by coaches should NEVER be a factor in evaluating the legitimacy of the posting of our ideas ... by virtue of the simple fact that we all know the coaches aren't looking to us for suggestions.

One thing I find really interesting about the whole Johns portrayal, is that JJ won the "I Like to Practice" award in spring training. If academics were the issue, he would be ineligible. Most arguments against JJ are off base...If attitude were the issue, he would not be a starter on special teams.

The bottom line to my opinion is this...when you are on the 1-3 yard line, handing it off to the RB requires that you take the ball off the line of scrimmage. With a big, physical QB and even a mediocre OL, 1 or 2 yards is an automatic TD. I put the MSU TD right before half time on the coaches. We should have sneaked it again...even with JPW it went for 3 yards the first time and 1 the second. It was only second down and we still had a timeout at that point. If JPW is not big and strong enough to muscle it in from the 2, put in someone who is.

einige Leute würden nicht einen unabhängigen Gedanken kennen, wenn es sie auf der Nase biß

Calling this thread an independent thought is in direct conflict with the thread titled "I am going to beat a dead horse."

There are things going on with Johns you don't know about. Like I said to Musso, the idea in itself isn't a bad one, hardly original/independent, but it isn't something that fits with the offensive scheme we employ...nor, with the players we have in place.

 

[bear facts]

Finden Sie ein anderes totes Pferd, um zu schlagen.

Nice

:lol:

Ich wusste meine zwei Jahre von Deutsch in der Universität würde schließlich auszahlen.

Übrigens glaube ich, dass Jimmy Johns es in ohne viel von einer Linie schmuggeln konnte.

 

[bear facts]

There are things going on with Johns you don't know about. Like I said to Musso, the idea in itself isn't a bad one, hardly original/independent, but it isn't something that fits with the offensive scheme we employ...nor, with the players we have in place.

Well whatever is going on with Johns, I'm sorry it has transpired and really grateful that Orgeron or Croom do not have him on their sidelines.

Man, what a waste. :?

 

[BamaHubMan]

When Stallings was a new coach at Bama and losing to the likes of USM. I remember him being asked why he did not run more trick plays to win games. He said (I paraphrase and no I do not have link) I am more interested in spending my time trying to instill a winning attitude in the whole team than developing a few plays that help us win today but do nothing to help win tomorrow. In fact this sort of thing teaches them a wrong lesson that there are short cuts to being a winner.

Kind of you got to win in the trenches. That is how I remember his words. CGS had a rocky start and I think that turn out ok. So I wonder if CNS is focusing on the same thing?

 

[musso]

One thing I find really interesting about the whole Johns portrayal, is that JJ won the "I Like to Practice" award in spring training. If academics were the issue, he would be ineligible. Most arguments against JJ are off base...If attitude were the issue, he would not be a starter on special teams.

The bottom line to my opinion is this...when you are on the 1-3 yard line, handing it off to the RB requires that you take the ball off the line of scrimmage. With a big, physical QB and even a mediocre OL, 1 or 2 yards is an automatic TD. I put the MSU TD right before half time on the coaches. We should have sneaked it again...even with JPW it went for 3 yards the first time and 1 the second. It was only second down and we still had a timeout at that point. If JPW is not big and strong enough to muscle it in from the 2, put in someone who is.

yeah, i have problems with the notion that Saban is using Johns on special teams, but isn't choosing to use him on offense when/if he may help us win a game. i mean, either kick him off the team or suspend him, but this "spot duty" sends mixed messages. then again, i don't know the particulars of Johns's situation.

i too put that TD opportunity before the half on the coaches, and to my relief i found this link the other day.

http://blog.al.com/rapsheet/2007/11/saban_does_some_secondguesses.html

 

[Guest]

Il des types doit apprendre à nous parler dans une langue que tout comprend.

 

[bear facts]

Il des types doit apprendre à nous parler dans une langue que tout comprend.

Bo, what are you? A French philosopher or something? :wink: