If you think we should go after a true pocket passer QB, then you really don't have a grasp of how this offense works. I understand the idea that you're putting across, that maybe we should try it, but we've won 2 National Championships with game-managing, semi-mobile QBs, so why stop now? In a year or two, Jefferson is going to be a great QB in the SEC with how much experience he has amounted. No need to change our offensive style due to two recent QBs that have been thrust into our system very early.
I would not be surprised that by his RS-Sr season, Chris Garrett isn't that QB for us that you are asking about. I think there are two schools of thought to the QB position: 1. Those that want that dynamic duel-threat QB because they like to see him run around the field. But those types typically don't have pin-point accuracy that you see from traditional pocket-passers. Former/current LSU QB's that fit this mold: Herb Tyler, Marcus Randall, Ryan Perrilloux, Jordan Jefferson, Russell Shepard 2. Those that want a pocket passer because they like to utilize the vertical passing game and let a stable of running backs get the rushing yards. Former/current LSU QB's that fit this mold: Rohan Davey, Josh Booty, Matt Mauck, JaMarcus Russell, Matt Flynn, Jarrett Lee, Chris Garrett, If you look at our history, traditionally we've faired BETTER (either in terms of offensive numbers or in season W-L outcomes) with QB's from group #2. Why is that? I think it's because we've ALWAYS had dynamic WR's capable of stretching the field vertically and in the slot. We've always had a stable of top-notch running backs too. Just because you're a pocket passer doesn't mean you are a "sitting duck" in the pocket. Take Peyton Manning and Tom Brady as prime examples. Neither are EVER going to be confused with running QB's--but they side-step and float in the pocket and buy time with no more than a step to the left, right or up in the pocket. With the players we have a WR and RB, I personally favor a more traditional pocket-passer over a duel guy. Have an accurate deep ball passer like Flynn and Rohan and your running game opens up big time. Have players like Jefferson and Herb Tyler and defenses will take their chances with getting beat deep because they know that the percentages of QB's like that who have trouble connecting on downfield passes to be low.
Fully agree. I am a JJ fan. I think he will be great. My problem is I don't think we know what scheme we Are suppose to be running. Thus far, I don't think he has been given a shot. When it is spread out he Throws the ball around alright.
I can definitely agree with this. I love JJ as well, however when I see them running the option with him 5-10 times a game and he looks TERRIBLE running it, I don't know what they're doing. I think they failed to give JJ enough screens and draws to reduce the aggressive pass rush and give him some confidence. When we called screens, they worked well from what I remember, and when you have the bevy of backs that we have, you can't afford to waste them.
this goes back to coaching, you can clearly see some communications issues but where it is breaking down who knows?
great post , not much to add. other than Russsel may be a pocket passer but he doesnt have football savvy.
There is no evidence of any "struggle between the staff on the direction of the offense" that I'm aware of. That's an internet message board comment. If Les had a problem with Crowton, then Crowton would be gone. There are posts here today that accuse Gary Crowton of being lousy and others that say that his genius hands are being tied by Les Miles and another that advocates replacing Miles with Crowton. I think we're all Bozo's on this bus.
As far as what type of quarterback to recruit . . . the answer is to recruit the best quarterback that you can get. It's not like a market where Les can just choose a perfect quarterback. We must recruit the best quarterbacks that are interested in LSU, just like at every other position. Then we craft offensive and defensive skills built around what we have and what is working. It's a college program, where players come and go quickly and most only play 2 or 3 years. Major schools must remain flexible enough to utilize whatever talent comes their way. Schools are not bound to recruit a certain type quarterback only. They can have four or five quarterbacks, each with special skills at pocket passing, option, or roll out/scrambling. This gives coaches an opportunity to mix and match skills to evolving circumstances. They rollover a quarter of their roster each and every year and have to be good at crafting schemes to steadily changing player skill sets.
So you think our staff has molded our scheme around the players we have. That is the point and you made it best and dint even mean to.
Actually you were talking about the need to recruit "a big pocket passer" to match with our offensive schemes. I'm saying quite the opposite, that all college football staffs must always change schemes to match the players because the players change so quickly. It's the only thing that makes sense. The failure of the Lou Tepper Defense that ruined Gerry Dinardo is a prime example. DC Lou Tepper had spent a career developing a defensive system built around the linebackers. It had two critical and devastating flaws: 1-- it worked great when you had three exceptional linebackers. Trouble is that every team south of the NFL is lucky to get one exception linebacker a decade. 2-- The other flaw was that it took three years to implement because you had to recruit special athletes that were perfect for it. After two years of failing to stop anybody the third year never happened. Dinardo should have fired Lou Tepper and his rigid defense that failed to evolve with the offenses and required NFL talent to succeed. Then he should have crafted a defense around the talent that he had, which was adequate.
