Would we really be that bad

[Stinger90]

Duke is not a option. He cant transfer within the ACC.

True. However, he could go to ECU where his girlfriend goes, or a nearby SEC school.

If he wants to play right away, he could drop down a division or to a Jr college, where he could transfer to a big school that is suited to his style of play.

Just my opinion if he decides to go.

 

[Eric]

His girlfriend transferred to South Carolina.

 

[Stinger90]

His girlfriend transferred to South Carolina.

I don't do tweeter anymore. Thanks for the info!

Like in the other part of my post......to a nearby SEC school....like South Carolina

 

[IronJacket7]

i never saw any read option plays maybe i missed it though, and maybe i'm not calling it the right thing, but where the quarterback holds the ball in the halfbacks gut and they run together for a couple steps and then he gives or keeps based on read. that play kills

we ran the inverted veer out out of the diamond. it is a mesh read with the qb and the weak side rb/ab.

 

[IronJacket7]

At this point I am not so sure. He wasn't handling the mesh and reads very well back there either. My gut tells me he would be more comfortable, but...

Not saying you are wrong but I cannot recall seeing Vad run more than 1 or 2 mesh reads out of the pistol in a single game since Duke. When we did run it more extensively against Duke it looked like he was more comfortable.

 

[gtdrew]

I think our pass protection issues would be exposed even more if we went to a more traditional offense.

I've always thought that for every foot away the quarterback is from the center at the point of exchange, that's another half-second your pass pro has to hold up. One of the reasons I do prefer the under-center exchange to the shotgun one is that the pass-rushing lanes are "flattened" a good bit.

 

[Rodney Kent]

I tend to agree with Klaus, a player should have the option to transfer to the school that he desires regardless of the conference. The only drawback I could see is if a conference Head Coach tried to get a lot of players from a given team with problems to transfer en-mass to his school, it could be a bad situation. However, if it was limited to one player only, it might be okay. I am thinking out loud while considering this idea. I guess the initial reason may have been valid, but we just don't know why this option was instituted to give the option to the coach. My roving mind thinks maybe a conference foe might misuse a non-limiting rule, and it might destroy the integrity of the conference unity. I guess now, I haven't really thought this idea out very much (Rambling mind).

 

[IronJacket7]

I think our pass protection issues would be exposed even more if we went to a more traditional offense.

I've always thought that for every foot away the quarterback is from the center at the point of exchange, that's another half-second your pass pro has to hold up. One of the reasons I do prefer the under-center exchange to the shotgun one is that the pass-rushing lanes are "flattened" a good bit.

I feel like it would help our pass pro to be in a shotgun or pistol. After the snap, the QB is already in a spot to step and throw quicker from being 5 yards behind center. Thus negating the 3 and 5 step drops that take 1 to 2 seconds for the QB to execute before he can even consider a pass.

 

[gtg936g]

I feel like it would help our pass pro to be in a shotgun or pistol. After the snap, the QB is already in a spot to step and throw quicker from being 5 yards behind center. Thus negating the 3 and 5 step drops that take 1 to 2 seconds for the QB to execute before he can even consider a pass.

We could throw it earlier, but we would not be able to sell the fake block by the ABacks that open up most of the big pass plays unless the play has longer to develop. The quick out / smoke route was the first call of the game. You really don't get much quicker of a throw than that, and Vad sailed it over the head of the receiver. I know very little about coaching QBs, but I just do not see all this mature talent everyone else does. He has a strong arm, he can throw a nice ball, but checking down and scrambling are skills that are a must at this level. There is nothing wrong with tucking the ball and getting 5 yards if the coverage gets confusing, or the throw is not there. He may have the physical characteristics of a QB, but I do not think he is mentally there yet. I think he can be coached there, but I do not think we have a polished diamond that is out of place. I think we have a rough diamond that needs a lot of polishing before he can really shine. I do not see that as a system issue. If he were a truly great QB mentally and physically, he would have learned how to make the reads by now.

 

[gtdrew]

I tend to agree with Klaus, a player should have the option to transfer to the school that he desires regardless of the conference. The only drawback I could see is if a conference Head Coach tried to get a lot of players from a given team with problems to transfer en-mass to his school, it could be a bad situation. However, if it was limited to one player only, it might be okay. I am thinking out loud while considering this idea. I guess the initial reason may have been valid, but we just don't know why this option was instituted to give the option to the coach. My roving mind thinks maybe a conference foe might misuse a non-limiting rule, and it might destroy the integrity of the conference unity. I guess now, I haven't really thought this idea out very much (Rambling mind).

The problem would be if, say, James Frankin went from Vanderbilt to Texas. If there were no transfer rules in place, his team could follow him to Vandy and really put Vandy in a bad spot. The

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Vad would excel in a shotgun or pistol based scheme.

I do not see it. His passing was about on par with his running and his inability to read the option.

 

[KlausMikaelsonTheOriginal]

The problem would be if, say, James Frankin went from Vanderbilt to Texas. If there were no transfer rules in place, his team could follow him to Vandy and really put Vandy in a bad spot. The

Just like when a HC leaves and then takes 8 out of 10 Assts. with him, plus the entire Strength & cond. staff to boot.

Those guys have lawyers, the dirt poor players do not.

 

[gtdrew]

Sort of, but a new coach can bring in a whole new staff pretty quick. You could only hypothetically replace up to 25 players in a given year. It's an extreme example, but say 30+ guys left the program. The new staff would be in a hole they couldn't get out of in a single season.

It's an interesting idea. Ultimately I think the rule will always stay how it is...