Wow ! You are lost now! I couldn't care less about something from 12 years ago. I am lost on the point now. I stand by. If we do not change to Get the players involved that we speak so highly of (I.e. Shepard). We need to Get a pocket passer yes. Because what we watch on sat that is an unwillingness To do anything other than what you have tried to do since he has been here Wake up
Respectfully disagree but I may be wrong. I've always known college coaches to recruit to fit their schemes. Your thinking is right in terms of high school coaches though. There they have to tweak the scheme to the talent they have. If what you're saying is true, however, we'd have to get rid of Crowton since he likes a spread option, right?
I could be off but was thinking you bring an OC in for what he does. All have "their" offense and everyone knows Crowton is a spread option guy. Actually many of our fans think he's a "spread" guy. It was really a moot point though cause I feel fairly certain I was correct about college coaches recruiting to fit their scheme and not matching what they end up with to something other than what they're known for. Conversely, would a coach who likes a pro style offense recruit a Tebow-type, dual threat QB?
IF he could get him, sure. LSU recruited Tebow. An exceptional athlete like will find a place on any team. That's what mean about changing the scheme to fit the players. You get a player like Tebow then you change to a shotgun power running QB offense. When he graduates, you go back to what you prefer . . . providing the team can run it. But it's more important to go to an offense that works for the average crop of athletes. The reason that you see so much I-formation and spread in the college game today is that you can get away with a much less sophisticated playbook that produces results with college-level talent. The pro-set is falling in popularity in college. Even though it can produce spectacular results, you must have really smart, talented players to pull it off. It's hard to count on having such NFL-caliber players available every year in the NCAA.
Let's see. You ask a question, solicit feedback, and then give smart-aleck answers when you see something you don't agree with. Be respectful and you'll receive it in turn. Has anyone stopped to think about the possibility that QB is not the true glaring problem for LSU on offense, but rather the offensive line? It wouldn't matter if LSU fielded Tom Brady or Peyton Manning; when a pocket collapses as quickly as it did last night on a consistent basis, that all-world pocket passer is useless. The very reason Flynn could be an effective game-manager was a veteran O-line and good fullbacks, NEITHER of which LSU has this year. Peyton and Brady are successful in large part because of veteran O-lines that allow very few sacks. Now look at Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay. A solid QB, but has an absolutely lousy O-line that keeps him on his back most of the game, and a team that will be lucky to make the playoffs. Tebow owes a lot of his success to the OL Meyer has in place there. That shotgun option doesn't stand a chance with fast DEs blowing it up in the backfield. Something else LSU doesn't have this year. The young OL is not helping our young QB very much, and seems incapable of opening up lanes for our RBs. Until that part of the game picks up, or until we start running lots of short pass plays and screens to mitigate that weakness, expect the offense to keep sputtering.
I'm not doing the research because I'm lazy but how many of these are true sophomores or freshmen? Stop comparing LSU to teams we are not! Its fckng stupid. Pull for those teams.
Re: GET A BIG TEN QB.... OR GO MICKEY MOUSE... OFFENSE! Um- wait til this weeks Florida-Arkansas game it could be that Florida just makes QBs look really bad, I mean they do have the best defense in the country.
