My understanding was that certain guys had definite routes and a couple guys can read the d and go to the open spot. A big part of it is that you know where the other routes are going. You don't want to run into the other guy. But if you know there are 2 weak spots in a zone you can pick which one you go to and how you get there. A lot of te routes in the pros work like that now.Not sure I get this...
Several times this spring, Kentucky’s wide receivers have mentioned how the new offense allows them more freedom of movement, especially in their route running.
“I don’t have to stick to one route or run it a certain way like it says on the Power Point,” Timmons said this week. “I can do whatever I want just to get open.”
He did not say they were "read" route where the receiver has 2 route options depending on how the defense plays.
Somehow I think this came out wrong. [winking]
Peace
Read routes are one thing but "I can do whatever I want to just get open" is totally different. The former actually requires more route running discipline than a "straight" route and the latter is basically no discipline at all. I cannot imagine that being tolerating which is why I think Timmon's remarks must be a "misquote" by him or a complete misunderstanding by the writer.My understanding was that certain guys had definite routes and a couple guys can read the d and go to the open spot. A big part of it is that you know where the other routes are going. You don't want to run into the other guy. But if you know there are 2 weak spots in a zone you can pick which one you go to and how you get there. A lot of te routes in the pros work like that now.
Read routes are one thing but "I can do whatever I want to just get open" is totally different. The former actually requires more route running discipline than a "straight" route and the latter is basically no discipline at all. I cannot imagine that being tolerating which is why I think Timmon's remarks must be a "misquote" by him or a complete misunderstanding by the writer.
Peace