SCar

Easy read, makes sense.

Submitted by MikeInValdosta on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 08:45 Mike Bobo stated the reason for going to the no-huddle was to run more plays. Throwing all the other nonsense out, the lack of a huddle does not equate to more plays. The no-huddle Georgia put on display was not a hurry-up offense. In fact, Georgia rarely snapped the ball with more than 7 seconds remaining on the play clock.

Still, if they don't want to huddle, even if they want to hurry, that does not necessitate the shotgun formation. Nor does it necessitate a running game based on handing the ball to a running back standing flat footed (the ill fated draw play) while the defense attacks a stationary target.

At the end of the day our coaches have to be flexible enough in their pregame planning, and newly minted offensive ideology, to make in-game adjustments. They are not playing static X's on a chalk board.

Buc wrote:

Easy read, makes sense.

Submitted by MikeInValdosta on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 08:45 Mike Bobo stated the reason for going to the no-huddle was to run more plays. Throwing all the other nonsense out, the lack of a huddle does not equate to more plays. The no-huddle Georgia put on display was not a hurry-up offense. In fact, Georgia rarely snapped the ball with more than 7 seconds remaining on the play clock.

Still, if they don't want to huddle, even if they want to hurry, that does not necessitate the shotgun formation. Nor does it necessitate a running game based on handing the ball to a running back standing flat footed (the ill fated draw play) while the defense attacks a stationary target.

At the end of the day our coaches have to be flexible enough in their pregame planning, and newly minted offensive ideology, to make in-game adjustments. They are not playing static X's on a chalk board.

Hey Buc, I thought the new football facilities had "magic chalkboards" that only designed plays that would work against the next opponent.....and if the proposed play wouldn't work, the magic chalkboard automatically erased it from Bozo's playbook.

Hmmmmmm, they may want to do a re-look at what they built and hold the architects responsible for all the bad plays that were run against BSU.

wlayton wrote:

Buc wrote:

Easy read, makes sense.

Submitted by MikeInValdosta on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 08:45 Mike Bobo stated the reason for going to the no-huddle was to run more plays. Throwing all the other nonsense out, the lack of a huddle does not equate to more plays. The no-huddle Georgia put on display was not a hurry-up offense. In fact, Georgia rarely snapped the ball with more than 7 seconds remaining on the play clock.

Still, if they don't want to huddle, even if they want to hurry, that does not necessitate the shotgun formation. Nor does it necessitate a running game based on handing the ball to a running back standing flat footed (the ill fated draw play) while the defense attacks a stationary target.

At the end of the day our coaches have to be flexible enough in their pregame planning, and newly minted offensive ideology, to make in-game adjustments. They are not playing static X's on a chalk board.

Hey Buc, I thought the new football facilities had "magic chalkboards" that only designed plays that would work against the next opponent.....and if the proposed play wouldn't work, the magic chalkboard automatically erased it from Bozo's playbook.

Hmmmmmm, they may want to do a re-look at what they built and hold the architects responsible for all the bad plays that were run against BSU.

In my nicest way of saying anything wlayton . . . . Bump! Watching some of these newer posters, pretty doggone impressive . . . you think . . . .

Yeah Buc, the new posters are a welcome addition and give great insight's and thoughts about the Dawgs and other subjects. Have really enjoyed them.

wlayton wrote:

Yeah Buc, the new posters are a welcome addition and give great insight's and thoughts about the Dawgs and other subjects. Have really enjoyed them.

Thought you might be interested in this information wlayton, maybe others also. I am for sure.

hedgestohardwood.blogspot.com/2011/09/hu...-dawg-in-buford.html

Read on the internet where Jarvis Jones is moving to the inside and taking over Tree's backing spot. Lots of snaps for Drew looks like. Hoping my man Ramik Wilson has learned enough to get some time, he has this thing for quarterbacks and running backs.