OC Hire

UgaBlows

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,405
AlabamaBuzz said:
We have no choice but to give it a chance, so of course I will. Just hoping that Collins doesn't have to fire Patenaude in a few years to save his job. I want Patenaude to do well, but I don't believe he will. BUT, as I said earlier, this is one area I want to be "dead wrong" about.
Click to expand...

Who exactly were you hoping for that A)wanted to be at GT and B)that we could afford?
 
AlabamaBuzz

AlabamaBuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,005
Location
Hartselle, AL (originally Rome, GA)
UgaBlows said:
Who exactly were you hoping for that A)wanted to be at GT and B)that we could afford?
Click to expand...

For me, I would have rather taken a chance with a young coach that has been mentoring under a "known" offensive genius, like one of Lincoln Riley's O coaches (Cade Gundy is one example) I have to believe we could have afforded that type of young coach.

It is SAD we have to be concerned with "that we can afford". But I agree, but this is the problem for CGC having success. Clem's Son lets Dabo pay his coordinators great $$, and that helps him be a success. CGC probably doesn't have even half of that budget to spend.
 
Madison Grant

Madison Grant

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,276
AlabamaBuzz said:
For me, I would have rather taken a chance with a young coach that has been mentoring under a "known" offensive genius, like one of Lincoln Riley's O coaches (Cade Gundy is one example) I have to believe we could have afforded that type of young coach.

It is SAD we have to be concerned with "that we can afford". But I agree, but this is the problem for CGC having success. Clem's Son lets Dabo pay his coordinators great $$, and that helps him be a success. CGC probably doesn't have even half of that budget to spend.
Click to expand...
I think you're chasing a rainbow, not those of us who are optimistic about the new regime. All this bringing up whose team had better stats when Coach X was at School Y seems straightforward, but fails to take into account many factors. You mention Dabo and the money for coordinators. What is making that engine at Clemson go??? Many on here scoffed at the idea of Tony Elliot as a HC prospect. Not only that, they implied Elliot wasn't really the playcaller and had nothing to do with Clemson's success. So who was. Chad Morris, the great OC guru? The same Chad Morris who was decidedly mediocre at SMU, and has nearly gotten fired at Arky in his first year as HC? Venables was about to get the heave ho at Oklahoma before Clemson took him. Maybe, just maybe, all those 5 star receivers like Deon Cain, Tee Higgins and Justin Ross, as well as the 5 star QB Trevor Lawrence and those 5 star DL have something to do with making the coordinators look good.

You keep going back to how Patenaude can't be that good because, afterall, Temple's offense was rated such-and-such. People have tried to point out repeatedly on here that he likes to run RPO, and he did not have the QBs at Temple left by the previous regime to do that. I'd add, after watching the bowl game, they weren't great passers either. So you want to chalk that all up to Patenaude sucking at developing talent. How about him having a shot at talent that fits what he wants to do??? I think he's got more of it here. Oh, damn, back to your f-in stats and rankings again. Just so negative, dude. Give it a chance.
 
AlabamaBuzz

AlabamaBuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,005
Location
Hartselle, AL (originally Rome, GA)
Madison Grant said:
I think you're chasing a rainbow, not those of us who are optimistic about the new regime. All this bringing up whose team had better stats when Coach X was at School Y seems straightforward, but fails to take into account many factors. You mention Dabo and the money for coordinators. What is making that engine at Clemson go??? Many on here scoffed at the idea of Tony Elliot as a HC prospect. Not only that, they implied Elliot wasn't really the playcaller and had nothing to do with Clemson's success. So who was. Chad Morris, the great OC guru? The same Chad Morris who was decidedly mediocre at SMU, and has nearly gotten fired at Arky in his first year as HC? Venables was about to get the heave ho at Oklahoma before Clemson took him. Maybe, just maybe, all those 5 star receivers like Deon Cain, Tee Higgins and Justin Ross, as well as the 5 star QB Trevor Lawrence and those 5 star DL have something to do with making the coordinators look good.

You keep going back to how Patenaude can't be that good because, afterall, Temple's offense was rated such-and-such. People have tried to point out repeatedly on here that he likes to run RPO, and he did not have the QBs at Temple left by the previous regime to do that. I'd add, after watching the bowl game, they weren't great passers either. So you want to chalk that all up to Patenaude sucking at developing talent. How about him having a shot at talent that fits what he wants to do??? I think he's got more of it here. Oh, damn, back to your f-in stats and rankings again. Just so negative, dude. Give it a chance.
Click to expand...

I was asked a question, and I answered. If you read my posts, I said we have to give it a chance. We have no choice. You are so difficult, because you don't want to read anything you don't like. It is ok we disagree and have different perspectives. Why don't you just have a Happy New Year, and I will also. I am not changing my perspective, but if shown results by Patenaude, I will.

By the way, the "ignore" button works if you don't like my posts. You are going on ignore now, and my 2019 will be happier.
 
Madison Grant

Madison Grant

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,276

at 0:45 and 1:00, didn't see this for Temple against Duke. Patenaude does have plays to seriously threaten run with his QB. He ran them at Coastal Carolina more than he did at Temple because of personnel and competition, IMO.
 
UgaBlows

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,405
AlabamaBuzz said:
For me, I would have rather taken a chance with a young coach that has been mentoring under a "known" offensive genius, like one of Lincoln Riley's O coaches (Cade Gundy is one example) I have to believe we could have afforded that type of young coach.

It is SAD we have to be concerned with "that we can afford". But I agree, but this is the problem for CGC having success. Clem's Son lets Dabo pay his coordinators great $$, and that helps him be a success. CGC probably doesn't have even half of that budget to spend.
Click to expand...

So basically just take a chance on a complete unknown that has never been an OC?
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Madison Grant said:
I think you're chasing a rainbow, not those of us who are optimistic about the new regime. All this bringing up whose team had better stats when Coach X was at School Y seems straightforward, but fails to take into account many factors. You mention Dabo and the money for coordinators. What is making that engine at Clemson go??? Many on here scoffed at the idea of Tony Elliot as a HC prospect. Not only that, they implied Elliot wasn't really the playcaller and had nothing to do with Clemson's success. So who was. Chad Morris, the great OC guru? The same Chad Morris who was decidedly mediocre at SMU, and has nearly gotten fired at Arky in his first year as HC? Venables was about to get the heave ho at Oklahoma before Clemson took him. Maybe, just maybe, all those 5 star receivers like Deon Cain, Tee Higgins and Justin Ross, as well as the 5 star QB Trevor Lawrence and those 5 star DL have something to do with making the coordinators look good.

You keep going back to how Patenaude can't be that good because, afterall, Temple's offense was rated such-and-such. People have tried to point out repeatedly on here that he likes to run RPO, and he did not have the QBs at Temple left by the previous regime to do that. I'd add, after watching the bowl game, they weren't great passers either. So you want to chalk that all up to Patenaude sucking at developing talent. How about him having a shot at talent that fits what he wants to do??? I think he's got more of it here. Oh, damn, back to your f-in stats and rankings again. Just so negative, dude. Give it a chance.
Click to expand...

Try to stop coming unglued at folks who simply express less optimism than you. What are you a football fascist? Happy new year, drink some booze and relax.
 

jandrews

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
275
Madison Grant said:

at 0:45 and 1:00, didn't see this for Temple against Duke. Patenaude does have plays to seriously threaten run with his QB. He ran them at Coastal Carolina more than he did at Temple because of personnel and competition, IMO.
Click to expand...


Before we hired Coach Cook I swear some people were begging to look like coastal Carolina a couple years ago. I saw a couple highlights where there was a triple option being run but it was a handoff TD.
 

pbrown520

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
586
Madison Grant said:

at 0:45 and 1:00, didn't see this for Temple against Duke. Patenaude does have plays to seriously threaten run with his QB. He ran them at Coastal Carolina more than he did at Temple because of personnel and competition, IMO.
Click to expand...


The only reason competition would dictate not running the QB is if you aren't athletic enough at the position to be a real threat relative to the competition, which is what they were at Temple. We will see what happens here. Do they recruit true dual threats or do they try to recruit passers who can also run some? I much prefer the true dual threat, but either can win in the right situation.
 
Madison Grant

Madison Grant

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,276
pbrown520 said:
The only reason competition would dictate not running the QB is if you aren't athletic enough at the position to be a real threat relative to the competition, which is what they were at Temple. We will see what happens here. Do they recruit true dual threats or do they try to recruit passers who can also run some? I much prefer the true dual threat, but either can win in the right situation.
Click to expand...
The QBs they had the 2 years there were inherited from Rhule. I think you can look at the kid they signed this year who we flirted with flipping before holding onto Yates. https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2019/kennique-bonner-steward-184972 He's listed as a 'dual-threat' QB, although they signed a 'pro-style' last year.
 
AlabamaBuzz

AlabamaBuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,005
Location
Hartselle, AL (originally Rome, GA)
UgaBlows said:
So basically just take a chance on a complete unknown that has never been an OC?
Click to expand...

Yes, if that person had tutored under a proven genius on offense. I think that is a little risky, but you could hit the bullseye. In this case, I believe we can expect at best "good" and at worst, mediocre to poor. But, with that said, I am rooting for our new OC to reach great heights.
 
jojatk

jojatk

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,374
AlabamaBuzz said:
Yes, if that person had tutored under a proven genius on offense. I think that is a little risky, but you could hit the bullseye. In this case, I believe we can expect at best "good" and at worst, mediocre to poor. But, with that said, I am rooting for our new OC to reach great heights.
Click to expand...

Totally understand the logic of going with a guy who had been in a good offensive program but had not really called plays before. I’m not sure I agree with the ceiling prediction you’ve given, mainly because I don’t think what we saw at Temple without a solid situation at QB or QBs who he felt were right for his liking is necessarily representative of what we’ll see at GT or what his ceiling is. I hope I’m right (as I’m sure do you). But you’re right that we really don’t know what we’ll get this year. And we are both rooting for the same thing :)
 
Top