Appears as if Mackey is making the QB decision for HDN....
- Thread starter RougeDawg
- Start date
- Status
I would be highly surprised if either Mackey or Brunetti are as good as Masoli was last year. For all the problems UM had on defense, their offense last year put up a ton of points under Masoli. I know at one time they were on pace to set a season record for points scored. I think the Reb defense will have to improve some over last year just for them to stay even with what they did last year record wise.
No, it's just that they're all so good that the coaches are having a hard time picking one over the other.
As much as I hate to say it, I could see this easily turning into a three headed monster like we had with Spurlock/Flatt/Lane. That said, the good news is that Nutt's offense has never been all that QB reliant, and he's proven he can make due with QBs that don't throw the ball all that well. That's why I'm confident he and Lee will find something with our offense whichever QB they choose, or even if they use them all.
As much as I hate to say it, I could see this easily turning into a three headed monster like we had with Spurlock/Flatt/Lane. That said, the good news is that Nutt's offense has never been all that QB reliant, and he's proven he can make due with QBs that don't throw the ball all that well. That's why I'm confident he and Lee will find something with our offense whichever QB they choose, or even if they use them all.
Why did he desperately seek out Masoli and run off a serviceable QB in Nathan Stanley? Had he stuck with Stanley, this team would be predicted to have at worst a .500 regular season record in 2011. Instead they will be battling Vandy for theSEC Cellar again.During the '10 Cotton Bowl, Stanley played better than Snead IMO. And he would have been a much better option than trying to fill in the blank, season after season, with transfers and freshmens. Not a smart play from Nutt, but then again isn't that why he was run out of Fayetteville? For making some brilliant decisions.
and they'll have good special teams play. The defense is going to be their limiting factor. Nutt has always been a run-first coach and Mackey's speed will complement the wild rebel nicely. That being said I think their ceiling is going to be 6 wins.
Nutt is good at getting his best athletes the ball and finding a way to do something offensively. Last year that was Masoli. In the past it has been McCluster, McPhadden/Jones, Matt Jones, Cedric Cobbs, etc.
He's not a great offensive coordinator, but he does a better than average job as long as he can find one or two playmakers. The worst offense he had at Arkansas averaged 23 points per game, and I think it's only twice he's had teams average below 25 points in 13 seasons in the SEC. At Ole Miss, his offenses have averaged right around 30 points per game all 3 years. Typically, he's going to get you 25-30 points a game with your offense, sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less. That's whether he has a pro style QB (Stoerner/Snead), a running QB (Matt Jones/Masoli), or a crappy QB (Dick, Sorahan). He does a good job finding the strong points on his offense and highlighting them enough to give your team a chance. This year I'm betting we'll utilize either Brunetti's or Mackey's athleticism along with the running game (Bolden, Davis, and Scott). Maybe one of the freshmen, like Moncrief or Brassell will be a playmaker too. Either way, we have enough options and a solid OL, so I"m confident we'll put something respectable together on offense regardless of any QB shortcomings we have.
He gets a bad wrap for not being creative, but when it comes to production, he's had a solid career with his offenses. You can't deny the numbers.
On the Stanley thing, Stanley just wasn't very good. He didn't play well in the Cotton Bowl. He was 2 of 7 for 3 yards and a pick. Not sure what game you were watching. He had a good first half against Jacksonville State. Other than that, he wasn't very good ever in his career. He left the team this spring because he realized he wasn't going to beat out the other 3 QBs on the roster.
He's not a great offensive coordinator, but he does a better than average job as long as he can find one or two playmakers. The worst offense he had at Arkansas averaged 23 points per game, and I think it's only twice he's had teams average below 25 points in 13 seasons in the SEC. At Ole Miss, his offenses have averaged right around 30 points per game all 3 years. Typically, he's going to get you 25-30 points a game with your offense, sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less. That's whether he has a pro style QB (Stoerner/Snead), a running QB (Matt Jones/Masoli), or a crappy QB (Dick, Sorahan). He does a good job finding the strong points on his offense and highlighting them enough to give your team a chance. This year I'm betting we'll utilize either Brunetti's or Mackey's athleticism along with the running game (Bolden, Davis, and Scott). Maybe one of the freshmen, like Moncrief or Brassell will be a playmaker too. Either way, we have enough options and a solid OL, so I"m confident we'll put something respectable together on offense regardless of any QB shortcomings we have.
He gets a bad wrap for not being creative, but when it comes to production, he's had a solid career with his offenses. You can't deny the numbers.
On the Stanley thing, Stanley just wasn't very good. He didn't play well in the Cotton Bowl. He was 2 of 7 for 3 yards and a pick. Not sure what game you were watching. He had a good first half against Jacksonville State. Other than that, he wasn't very good ever in his career. He left the team this spring because he realized he wasn't going to beat out the other 3 QBs on the roster.
(had free ticket and badass NYE party) And he played much better than Jevan. Maybe the horrible play of Snead just made Stanley seem better.
So you are saying that yall wouldn't be better off this year if Nutt had playedStanley last year, maybe won 3 games, gotten Stanley experience, and had a chance to win 6 games this year with him? Then bring in a Brunetti, attempt to develop him without throwing him to the wolves, to build for the future. Had you played Stanley last season, you might have won one less game but would have an experience QB for the 2011 season.
Or do you like the current approach ofbringing in a bunch of inexperienced QB's every season, throwing them to the wolves, hoping one doesn't get consumed,and crossing your fingers that other teams overlook you and you eek out a few wins that you werent supposed to win?
Let's take Relf for example. Had Mullen taken the Nutt approach, Relf would have never seen the field and we would still be losing. We'd probably have some transfer from a ****** Big 12 team who got beat out of his starting job. We took a few lumps but it was worth it. It just boils down to the fact that Nutt is not the best developer of talent and soley relies on an occasional "Gem" or "Group of Gems" to make him look like a good coach. He continues to gamble, and now that Orgeron's recruits are gone andhe continues to"Crap Out" on his gambles and his true colors are showing through.
So you are saying that yall wouldn't be better off this year if Nutt had playedStanley last year, maybe won 3 games, gotten Stanley experience, and had a chance to win 6 games this year with him? Then bring in a Brunetti, attempt to develop him without throwing him to the wolves, to build for the future. Had you played Stanley last season, you might have won one less game but would have an experience QB for the 2011 season.
Or do you like the current approach ofbringing in a bunch of inexperienced QB's every season, throwing them to the wolves, hoping one doesn't get consumed,and crossing your fingers that other teams overlook you and you eek out a few wins that you werent supposed to win?
Let's take Relf for example. Had Mullen taken the Nutt approach, Relf would have never seen the field and we would still be losing. We'd probably have some transfer from a ****** Big 12 team who got beat out of his starting job. We took a few lumps but it was worth it. It just boils down to the fact that Nutt is not the best developer of talent and soley relies on an occasional "Gem" or "Group of Gems" to make him look like a good coach. He continues to gamble, and now that Orgeron's recruits are gone andhe continues to"Crap Out" on his gambles and his true colors are showing through.
That's what you're going with? That his approach hasn't worked in the SEC? If you had a coach average 7 or 8 wins per season and average a 4-4 SEC record over a decade or longer, take you to a couple SEC title games and take you to 10 bowls in 13 years, you would build a statue to him. Hell, you almost built a statue to Jackie Sherrill for doing slightly less over his first decade with MSU, and I'm not including his 01-03 implosion.
I don't think Nutt is the greatest coach out there, but he's not awful. He gets you what he gets you, and for our situation within the SEC, it could be a lot worse.
We'll see how this year plays out, but even if this year goes poorly, we should be in for a few pretty good years following up on it, getting us back to where Nutt usually takes you. The SEC is not a QB driven league, and Nutt has proven that he doesn't need great QB play to have success offensively. For that reason it doesn't bother me if we bring in a transfer every year. Just get me some points on the board. I'm more concerned with our defense than anything, and I think Nutt realizes that's the issue that needs to be addressed more than anything.
I don't think Nutt is the greatest coach out there, but he's not awful. He gets you what he gets you, and for our situation within the SEC, it could be a lot worse.
We'll see how this year plays out, but even if this year goes poorly, we should be in for a few pretty good years following up on it, getting us back to where Nutt usually takes you. The SEC is not a QB driven league, and Nutt has proven that he doesn't need great QB play to have success offensively. For that reason it doesn't bother me if we bring in a transfer every year. Just get me some points on the board. I'm more concerned with our defense than anything, and I think Nutt realizes that's the issue that needs to be addressed more than anything.
Is the current bear team not full of Nutt, and only Nutts, recruits? Is there not a lack of depth and/or experienceat most every position on the field (minus an O Line that had Masoli running for his life)? Is he not putting all his eggs in his basket, hoping these "TRUE" freshman can improve a 4-8 team?
He cannot develop players and cannot fulfill all his promises he slings out on the recruiting trail. Most coaches who had supposedly pulled in 3-4 top 25 recruiting classes wouldnt be worried about depth at most positions, let alone trying to pick a QB out of 3 QB's who would bebackups at every other school in the conference. This is where Im going with this. Last year was mainly Houston Nutt recruits, this year is all Houston Nutt recruits, and no legitimate QB on the roster. The best one is a freshman who transferred back because he was homesick. Let's see some twist on this.
The Rebel offense has been in steady decline since Nutt has been the coach. Can you twist that and give the delusional answer that I know you will please?
The end of the Sherrill era was unlike 99.99% of coaching tenures. Our AD threw him under the bus and backed over him a few times. He gave up and almost intentionally stuck it to LT.
Can you see where I'm going with this now? Houston, you definitely have a problem. </p>
He cannot develop players and cannot fulfill all his promises he slings out on the recruiting trail. Most coaches who had supposedly pulled in 3-4 top 25 recruiting classes wouldnt be worried about depth at most positions, let alone trying to pick a QB out of 3 QB's who would bebackups at every other school in the conference. This is where Im going with this. Last year was mainly Houston Nutt recruits, this year is all Houston Nutt recruits, and no legitimate QB on the roster. The best one is a freshman who transferred back because he was homesick. Let's see some twist on this.
The Rebel offense has been in steady decline since Nutt has been the coach. Can you twist that and give the delusional answer that I know you will please?
The end of the Sherrill era was unlike 99.99% of coaching tenures. Our AD threw him under the bus and backed over him a few times. He gave up and almost intentionally stuck it to LT.
Can you see where I'm going with this now? Houston, you definitely have a problem. </p>
Actually, we redshirted a lot of our players in 2008, so the 2011 team's senior class still has some Orgeron recruits and is low on numbers. We only have 13 seniors on the roster period, and only 9 of them were originally offered scholarships (5 Nutt/4 Orgeron), so it's a small senior class.
Our 2008 class wasn't very good because it had to be torn apart and rebuilt in 2 months. Only one of Orgeron's commitments in the 2008 class was a signee for our 2008 class, and that player didn't qualify. He didn't walk into a pre-built recruiting class like the one Mullen inherited in 2009. The entire class had to be built in 2 months, and it wasn't very good.
So yes, the majority of the team is made up of Nutt's players, but the reason we're young and relying on a good number of new players is because the 2008 class was such a poor one. We also had some bad attrition in the 2009 class, but overall our junior, sophomore, and freshman classes all look pretty good in terms of both numbers and talent. The problem we will face this year is experience.
That's why I expect 2012 and 2013 and probably 2014 to be pretty good years for us.
This year, we will have to have some young guys step up, but we have a chance to be decent if they do. I expect them to take a year to mature, which is why we'll be back on track by 2012, if we aren't this year.
As I said, I know Nutt isn't a great coach, but he gives you what he gives you, solid offense, normally solid defense, and mostly winning seasons. When I look down our roster, I see that at worst being the case by 2012 and the years immediately following, if we don't show some signs of recovery this year, and I suspect we will.
Our 2008 class wasn't very good because it had to be torn apart and rebuilt in 2 months. Only one of Orgeron's commitments in the 2008 class was a signee for our 2008 class, and that player didn't qualify. He didn't walk into a pre-built recruiting class like the one Mullen inherited in 2009. The entire class had to be built in 2 months, and it wasn't very good.
So yes, the majority of the team is made up of Nutt's players, but the reason we're young and relying on a good number of new players is because the 2008 class was such a poor one. We also had some bad attrition in the 2009 class, but overall our junior, sophomore, and freshman classes all look pretty good in terms of both numbers and talent. The problem we will face this year is experience.
That's why I expect 2012 and 2013 and probably 2014 to be pretty good years for us.
This year, we will have to have some young guys step up, but we have a chance to be decent if they do. I expect them to take a year to mature, which is why we'll be back on track by 2012, if we aren't this year.
As I said, I know Nutt isn't a great coach, but he gives you what he gives you, solid offense, normally solid defense, and mostly winning seasons. When I look down our roster, I see that at worst being the case by 2012 and the years immediately following, if we don't show some signs of recovery this year, and I suspect we will.
his lone int hit a WR in the hands, should have been caught,and then bounced up and was intercepted. I'm guessing stats are the lone indicator of how well someone plays. The offense seemed to move a lot better with Stanley under center than with Snead slinging 3 ints and looking horrible, even if he was handing it off.
If this statement is true, then why areyou in a position where you are going to have to play so many true freshmen this year? It is one thing to have A (singular, but maybe two)freshman come in and play because they are that good. It issomething quite different to have to play true freshmen out of necessity. Hell, there are programs that have signed better classes than Nutt that are in a position where they must throw a bunch of freshmen out from day one.RebelBruiser said:
It is apparent to me that Nutt's comments about these true freshmen are being made, at least on some level,in order to temper what little expectations may exist for 2011 and to preserve his job for 2012. And I know you think 2012 is going to be some miraculouslyresurection of your football program, but you pick up Florida again, play UGA on the road and swap one of your patsyOOC teams for Texas. Although, it will be real interesting to see howquicklyyou move to get out of that game at the end of this season.
I actually think you will probably end up doing better thanmost think and have a shot at a bowl game; but a repeat 4-8 season and another loss toMullen, Nutt is going to need something more than atalented freshman class to save his job.
I can't recall having quite this much wool.
But our schedule is very tough....
and I don't really care how the Bears do. ( I do, but I don't)
But our schedule is very tough....
and I don't really care how the Bears do. ( I do, but I don't)
- Status