Need to use QBs based on the situation (as we have discussed here)

[Bulldog Bruce]

This game really showed were Dan needs to use the QBs based on the situation.

Relf should start, as he has been. If we can play ball control and run successfully he should play the whole game. Almost all his passing should be play action passes. when we go into 5 wides with him, there is not a positive feeling. All that running has got to pull up those DBs and you have to take shots down the field.

When they are stopping the run and the D is giving up big plays and you are down 17 or 21, you have to bring in Russell and try to make some big plays also. Continuing to run the option is effectively giving up. I would rather lose bigger and try to improve so you can teach these players instead of just keep doing what is not working with the same people in.

Hate to give Les any props, but the way he uses his two QBs is much more effective than how we are doing ours.

 

[ImHurtinLinda]

if we can keep our opponent from moving the ball, hang with the read option, and protect the football.<div>
</div><div>if we can't stop our opponent, and we can't move it with the run, we have to put russell in</div>

 

[fedxdog]

i thought before this game that our offense was one dimenional and that swapping the qb was our only chance to throw their defense off...we have no chance with razorbacks if we get behind...PERIOD!

 

[patdog]

We simply can't play from behind with Relf at QB. I realize that Mullen's doing the best he can with what he has to work with, and I agree that Relf gives us the best chance to win games. But when we get behind, this offense is just painful to watch. Despite Coach34 idiotic ramblings (that I doubt he even believes), when we finally put Russell in, he looked OK. He at least gives us a chance to score when a good defense shuts the run down cold.