Jim Chaney/Play Calling

DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

Gotta start off by saying that I felt there was definite improvement overall... And, I get that we were holding back to not show too much heading into the Notre Dame game, buuutttt.... I'm not convinced that Chaney just can't break out of his box...

He showed a little imagination by picking up the pace when Fromm came in, which I think would benefit us greatly, but that quickly disappeared as well...

And, if we are running the clock out at the beginning of the 3rd quarter from here on out when we have a lead, it's going to get **** at some point... The loss of momentum when we start that early will be a killer against a decent team...

He's got so many weapons at his disposal, but continues to simply run it up the gut nearly every time... Even the best OL and RB's can't make it happen when it's that predictable...

«13

Comments

  • dbrown7494dbrown7494 Posts: 563 ✭✭✭✭ Senior

    I disagree Chaney called a great game. In the second half Georgia could run the ball with its first team at will. They didn't have to throw it really with first team unit. Also the second half was more about cutting loses and getting out healthy as possible. The game was over in the middle of the 3rd quarter if you didn't notice.
    I mean what a smart move to go wild dog on Fromm first play to help calm his nerves. Also note the amount of times Georgia was in 3 to 4 WR sets showed he was willing to make changes in my book.

  • HotDawgsAndMustardHotDawgsAndMustard Posts: 140 ✭✭✭ Junior

    I was really happy to see Chaney off the field and up in the box. That is where he excels. When he has a birds eye view he has a really good ability to read defenses and make adjustments to destroy them. Keep Chaney up high.

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @dbrown7494 I actually felt the game was over after the 2nd score of the game...

    I'm not advocating that they had to throw it more, I'm simply pointing out that he typically goes to the up the gut route... Nothing more... I think I recall one, maybe two, pitches - that's it...

    I did also mention as an opening statement that I thought it was improved... But, he falls into his lull too often in my book...

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @HotDawgsAndMustard Agreed... He definitely does better up in the box, but I'm not sure we'll ever reach our full potential with him - no matter where he's calling plays from unfortunately....

    I'm hoping that we see the "real" changes he's making next weekend against ND...

  • dbrown7494dbrown7494 Posts: 563 ✭✭✭✭ Senior

    The reason they didn't really go with many pitches is because app st. is built to play side line to side line. They are a very quick and small football team. The best way to attack a team like that was but pounding inside basically like body blows in boxing. Also like many college teams Georgia does run a zone blocking scheme which give the running back the option to pick the hole to run through which he sees. The hole would close quick at points because of app's speed.

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @dbrown7494 Actually, we've moved to a man blocking scheme with CKS and Pittman taking over... That was the greatest issue last season for the OL in that transition...

    And, I certainly get the pounding in the inside, but when it is not mixed with outside, much less any passing, you get stuffed more often than not... That may have been ok yesterday, but won't be as we get into SEC play, etc...

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @Denmen185

    What I'd consider good enough is when we take advantage of EVERY opportunity... Regardless of whether we were up by 7 or 31, the momentum was gone, we were overly predictable from the beginning of the 3rd quarter, and against a decent team (App St was NOT the team everyone hyped them to be) we're going to find ourselves in a problem...

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @tiger_62082

    I'm hopeful that was the case as well... And it make sense, but my gut tells me this is Chaney and there's not much more...

  • donmdonm Posts: 2,422 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Denmen185 said:

    I'm hoping that we see the "real" changes he's making next weekend against ND...

    Good Lord. We get up 31-0 against a decent team (one which many pundits were wary of) and that's not good enough. What, if anything, would be?

    I echo Denmen's thought. If we scored on every drive, would Chaney still be lambasted because he ran too much or not enough? It is clear he took his foot off the gas a little bit, but we were still working on stuff.

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @donm

    I think my point is being missed a little bit... It's not about whether we needed to pass more, or not... I'm saying all we did was run it up the middle...

    I know it's the first game, and we don't want to show too much heading into the ND game, but seriously, it was pretty vanilla even for that...

    To me, we didn't just take our foot off the gas, we went into idle... And immediately out of half time is the bigger issue for me...

    Glad for the win, and definitely see improvement, but just still concerned...

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @tiger_62082 As much as I hope Eason is not hurt, and as counter as it may seem to common sense as he is a freshman, I think Fromm is our better option heading into next Saturday... He, to me, will be an X-Factor that pushes in our favor if he will take another step this week in practice, and if Chaney will loosen it up a little for him... Especially if they push the up tempo more consistently...

  • PortlanddawgPortlanddawg Posts: 217 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @tiger_62082 said:
    Rather vanilla to me - outside of the 3 drives that led to touchdowns. The running game was too predictable. However, I qualify this by stating that the coaching staff was probably holding back for the game next week.

    Nailed it. Exactly how I feel.

  • dbrown7494dbrown7494 Posts: 563 ✭✭✭✭ Senior

    @Lefty honestly I think Eason was a little too amped up yesterday. I also believe Chaney didn't ease him in like he should have with some easy passes. Also I think he would have been better as the game went on as Georgia would have figured out app st game plan on defense

  • PTDawgPTDawg Posts: 280 ✭✭✭ Junior

    Agreed, solid post @dbrown7494 . I think the jury is still out on the playcalling. I don't think we'll know until we've experienced 3rd and Grantham against MSU what we're really going to look like on O . By then, either Eason is back or fromm has a few starts until his belt.

  • dbrown7494dbrown7494 Posts: 563 ✭✭✭✭ Senior

    I feel like we will get a glimpse as I see Georgia opening up the playbook to a solid 60 to 70% next week. I don't believe we need the whole play book to beat ND. Also think temple isn't as good this year as last. Temple lost a lot of guys to the draft last year. I think we see 100% of the playbook when we play grantham and company.

  • Palm_City_DawgPalm_City_Dawg Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @tiger_62082 said:

    However, I qualify this by stating that the coaching staff was probably holding back for the game next week.

    I believe this to be the case 100%. Unless needed, there was no reason to tip their hands...

  • bmauldinbmauldin Posts: 2,186 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @DawgVader said:
    Gotta start off by saying that I felt there was definite improvement overall... And, I get that we were holding back to not show too much heading into the Notre Dame game, buuutttt.... I'm not convinced that Chaney just can't break out of his box...

    He showed a little imagination by picking up the pace when Fromm came in, which I think would benefit us greatly, but that quickly disappeared as well...

    And, if we are running the clock out at the beginning of the 3rd quarter from here on out when we have a lead, it's going to get **** at some point... The loss of momentum when we start that early will be a killer against a decent team...

    He's got so many weapons at his disposal, but continues to simply run it up the gut nearly every time... Even the best OL and RB's can't make it happen when it's that predictable...

    I agree to an extent... I know he was not wanting to show much (jet sweeps etc) to ND, very Vanilla.

    However, getting swift in at receiver and others involved in different ways at least spoke to the fact that "if you are a play maker, you will be in the game."

    Last year, that wasn't close to being the case.

  • cf_ugamancf_ugaman Posts: 649 ✭✭✭✭ Senior

    I was worried about how we started on offense. I agree Eason was amped, and I hope that he isn't significantly injured. I liked that we did up tempo and I'm with @tiger_62082 and others who think we were trying to not tip our hand to ND, but I don't know how much extra we have...

  • TheOneKnownasBrianTheOneKnownasBrian Posts: 43 ✭✭ Sophmore

    Let's also keep in mind that "Jake from state Fromm" is a true freshman and Chaney probably didn't have the full playbook available even if he wanted it.

  • KingoftheSouthKingoftheSouth Posts: 570 ✭✭✭✭ Senior

    Anyone think it was funny how night and day different the play calling was between what we've seen for Eason and the game he called for Fromm. Very efficient yesterday.

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @cf_ugaman Agreed - loved the uptempo and would hope to see more... Not sure how much more we have either, but hoping he can utilize all the weapons we have to their fullest...

  • dawgbybirthdawgbybirth Posts: 316 ✭✭✭ Junior
    edited September 2017

    Chaney did fine for me. He is in a rough spot needing to win converters to his style. If he wins the haters will get over it, if he loses the anti Chaney chants get loud.
    Loved the Fromm uptempo.

  • levanderlevander Posts: 1,896 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited September 2017

    When I rewatched the game, there was this one play I was impressed with. I saw both Chubb and Michel do it a couple of times. But I couldn't tell if it was a called play or if Chubb and Michel turned what was nothing into a big gain.

    Basically, after the snap, there'd end up a big scrum where all the D and O lineman would all be pushing against each other either. Now that's pretty usual. But the thing was, the scrum was all in a big ball either to the left or the right of where the ball was snapped. Sony or Nick would start running right at the scrum and then cut back to the other side of where the ball was snapped.

    Several of the big runs you saw Nick or Sony do in that game was because of that "play". If it was a play. Was trying to figure out if the RB making that cut was designed or if it was just something the RB did.

    If anybody knows what I'm talking about and knows more, I'd love to hear it.

  • Denmen185Denmen185 Posts: 3,307 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Sounds like the Tackle and/or TE was "sealing" the edge allowing the RB to run outside the tackle. I saw 1 such play where Swift also came in to block the ILB from filling the gap.

  • daddydawg72daddydawg72 Posts: 417 ✭✭✭ Junior

    We didn't go hurry up w/ Eason because we went 3 & out on the first 2 possessions. Our first 1st down didn't come till our 3rd possession. That's when the hurry up started, not because Fromm came in. Kirby talked about using the hurry up during his post game presser.

  • DawgVaderDawgVader Posts: 170 ✭✭✭ Junior

    @daddydawg72 But, they could have started with the uptempo from the first (well, second) snap with Eason... My guess is that it would give Eason a more comfortable feel, and be a huge step in allowing him to show his skills better...

    It benefited Fromm, but any QB still has to make plays happen - which he did, thankfully...

  • Palm_City_DawgPalm_City_Dawg Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @levander said:
    When I rewatched the game, there was this one play I was impressed with. I saw both Chubb and Michel do it a couple of times. But I couldn't tell if it was a called play or if Chubb and Michel turned what was nothing into a big gain.

    Basically, after the snap, there'd end up a big scrum where all the D and O lineman would all be pushing against each other either. Now that's pretty usual. But the thing was, the scrum was all in a big ball either to the left or the right of where the ball was snapped. Sony or Nick would start running right at the scrum and then cut back to the other side of where the ball was snapped.

    Several of the big runs you saw Nick or Sony do in that game was because of that "play". If it was a play. Was trying to figure out if the RB making that cut was designed or if it was just something the RB did.

    If anybody knows what I'm talking about and knows more, I'd love to hear it.

    Many plays are designed for a certain hole, but the RB has autonomy to "cut back" against the grain if it is available. It takes good vision and patience to allow that "cut back" to develop, and many RB's don't have those attributes. Luckily, Chubb and Michel both do...

  • Denmen185Denmen185 Posts: 3,307 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    After 3 quarters we were up 31-0 and we have the inquest on what the staff should have done the second snap of the first game of the season (with consequently no idea what the season tenancies of the opponent is) with an offensive line that have 6 starts at their position between them. I can't imagine how many pages this thread will be if and when we lose a game.

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.