This week Ryan Metz is the only backup qb listed on the depth chart. For the first time all season Simpson is not listed on the depth chart. The more interesting ommision is Kavika Johnson. He took all the reps with the twos the past two weeks. However, for the first time all year he didnt play Saturday. Now he is off the depth chart. I dont know whats up with that, may be nothing, but his lack of playing time and ommision from the depth chart is intriguing to say the least.
More qb intrigue
- Thread starter Minerforlife
- Start date
He's been "sending a message" all season. Perhaps he needs to try a different message because it's generating all the wrong results.
Frankly speaking, it's not always the players. One you can dismiss, but this many player issues (players quitting, players left off the depth chart), it's something else entirely.
Let's not forget, these are millennials we're talking about. They aren't like kids from his day that chew dirt and don't drink water because the coach told them to.
ok off topic but whats going on with the offensive line... wasnt that the one thing that was supposed to be very strong? they are not opening up too many holes and the qb is getting smashed... whats the deal with these guys??
That may be the case, but UTEP is never going to get a truly exceptional QB with a run on first, run on second and with third and 16, run on third. lol. If they're going to be that run heavy, they might as well switch to the wishbone or the triple option - and they can ask Georgia Tech, Navy, Army, etc., how that works for them annually. Of course GTech surprised Florida State with that trip-op thing but that's the exception, not the rule.
I'm a little dumbfounded about that myself. They've been very disappointing for a largely veteran group and I know Kugs has been very involved in coaching them up. He's picked some big kids.
I think us millennials get a bad rap (and this has happened from generations to generation). Kids born in the 60's had it better than kids born in the 40's, etc. Soon enough it's going to be the millennials talking bout how easy the people born in 2010 has it so easy. The facts is nobody "has it easy"- back in the "good old days" you can get by with a high school diploma, now a college degree is basically as good as toilet paper. I know I'm being a little extreme and sarcastic, but it's pretty close the truth.
The fact is some kids better respond to the "Sean Kugler way" and some more to the "Mike Price way". Mike Price was a great college football coach. He was more of a friend to the players. Some people responded well and some players took advantage to him being lenient.
It's beginning to show that maybe the "Sean Kugler way" doesn't really work in college football.
Not anymore. If you look around the coaching landscape few are the chew nails type. The days of the Frank Kush types are long gone. This is what made Bo Pelini and his sideline flare ups stand out so much. Same with Mark Stoops and even Brian Kelly. However, with Kelly, he cooled his jets quick when the Fighting Irish elders pulled his coat to that. There's nothing essentially wrong with Kugs style, per se, but he's not in the NFL and he needs to remember he's getting kids and turning them into men. That means sometimes tough love is the right way, and other times it's not.
Last thought. Every coach's message eventually gets old and ineffective. The hard way is the right way approach is usually the message that gets old the fastest. See Tom Coughlin for an example.
O-Line is fine. Nothing wrong there. They have corrected early mistakes and are playing exceptional football. Look at sack rate, penalties, time of possession etc. Tackles for loss is a little bit high but considering our qb mess and lack of running backs its not that bad.
I couldn't see the last game but heard leftwich took quite a few hits ? Was that not the case then?
Navy isn't doing all that bad using the trip op. Of course you have to have capable athletes to run it effectively, but Navy played ND very well and their QB is about to break the rushing TD record. Still, I don't think UTEP could get the athletes for it, partially because most kids would loathe playing in such a system.
Which is my point. The trip-op isn't necessarily a bad offense (ask FSU) and you're right, you do need the right players to play it. The hitch in the trip-op is you're limited. If someone plays a disciplined defense against it, which FSU did not, and stuff's the run, then you're pretty much dead in the water. Given that most QBs have dreams of playing in the NFL, they would pass on an offense like that. At least the good ones.
The triple option is the great equalizer. You dont need the talent to run the triple option that you do to run the spread or prostyle offense. The option thrives with undersized lineman and tweeners at the skill posistions. The fact that most schools dont run the triple option isnt a impediment in recruiting. There are lots of dual threat high school qbs who lack the measureables to play qb at d1 school, but are smart and very athletic. Those kids would sign up to run the option in a heartbeat. The triple option really levels field because the kids who can thrive in an option offense arent recruited heavily. Im surprised more schools dont run the triple option.
You don't need much talent to run the spread offense either. Look at NMSU. I just don't see very many high schools players wanting to go play for a school that runs the option. The majority of high schools run the spread and no player wants to go run the option. If the option was so bad ass like you say, then more schools would be running it instead of the spread.
Last edited:
The offense you need the most talent for is the prostyle for too many reasons to list here. The spread is, by far, the easiest and least demanding offense to learn (which again explains why so many people use it). The trip op is somewhere in middle, right next to the double wing (which I personally despise, but that's a conversation for another day. lol). Having said that, most high schools don't run the trip option, much less the prostyle - they're running the spread. Any HS QB with dreams of playing in the NFL isn't going to align themselves with the TO or the double wing. I'm not saying there are not dual threat QB's available, because there is, but any dual threat QB is going to want to be in an offense that promotes their passing as well as their running. The TO, you barely throw it. That's not ideal for mid to upper level high school QBs.
Kinda on the same point, but slightly different. A few years ago, a very athletic high school QB got an opportunity to be invited to a Trent Dilfer QB training thing that was broadcast on ESPN. The QB had a cannon for an arm but was a little inaccurate with his passes. Unbeknown to Dilfer (supposedly) he didn't know the QB came from a program that ran the double wing. Dilfer, very emphatically told the young man if he had any dreams of playing in college, he needed to move to a program that threw it. The kid did, but obviously I don't remember his name or where he went. Point being, getting a capable QB that can throw it, requires having an offense that throws it. You can't make gold from clay (nice line from a movie, but a horrible movie just the same. lol)
100% on players not wanting to play for a school that runs the option, much less the triple offense. It's a hard sell offense to any D1 athlete and even harder for D2. RB's love it, but it's a poor evaluation tool to use for RBs.
Which brings me to this last point. The NFL has been moaning and groaning for the past several years that more players are failing at converting to an NFL style of play because they don't know how to read defenses (QBs), block (OL) and run routes (WRs). Well, either they figure a way in develop them faster or they'll need to adjust. Too many programs below them are using the nuances of the spread.
I didnt say it was "badass", but it is a great equalizer and would be a good option for smaller schools. You referenced NMSU. The only time in the last fifty years they have been successful is when tony samuel was running the option. The qbs you recruit to run the option are players who arent recruited by other fbs schools, they will happily play in an option offense. The triple option is a great equalizer when you cant attract top talent.
How was NMSU successful when they were running the option with Samuel? They were winning 4 games instead of 2 back then???? NMSU hasn't been to a bowl game in like 50 years. We ran the option with Shawn Gray and I think Lee was coach back then, and it didn't do anything for us.
NMSU had two winning seasons under Samuel: 6-5 in 1999 (with a victory over Arizona St.) and 7-5 in 2002. They won 5 games a couple of seasons, too.
I don't remember which seasons they ran the option. I was at the 2002 thrashing they gave UTEP and I can't remember what type of offense they ran; the whole game was a memory I choose to forget. There was some actual excitement about that 2002 team because they had a chance at a the conference title, but they lost to North Texas.
Yes. He said that several times. However, they did manhandle FAU late in the fourth to put the game away which was nice to see.
I liked Tony Samuel. He was a no nonsense coach from Nebraska and was a victim of the Price hiring. Oct 2nd 2004 UTEP beat NMSU 45-0 at the Sun Bowl and Samuels was history later that year with no bowl bid for his productivity. NMSU felt they had to hire a big name coach to compete along with Price (and to compete in the recruiting wars, especially for the precious few New Mexico produced at that time). They then hired Mumme the dummy. What a great move that was (but he did win games against UTEP).
Complete agree. What I meant to say is Kugler's approach won't work 100% of the time. I think a mix of Kugler and Price is the best bet.
So he had 2 winning seasons in 8 years there with the triple option. I wouldn't call the triple option a great equalizer.
Understatement of the year! We have posters in need of meds, refusing meds, on too much meds, on the wrong meds, and in need of some major therapy.This board is schizophrenic...
One of the reasons why running the Option can be a benefit to the smaller schools(at least in theory), is because the smaller schools usually have a harder time getting the top talent and depth at the O-Line position. Just look at El Paso area High Schools as an example of this; El Paso has had roughly 15 D1 Football Players sign over the past 3 years, yet only 4 of them were O-Lineman. So running the Option can minimize the smaller schools not being able to get rare O-Line talent, because the Option utilizes smaller and quicker linemen playing on angles. Here is an article from last year, which details how Air Force's O-Line only averages around 255 pounds:
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...0/college-football-military-service-academies
Minerforlife's comment above where he stated that NMSU's only success in the past 50 years was when they ran the option is exactly right! Over the past 50 years, NMSU has never done better than 7-5 and 6-5 with a 35-7 road victory over #22 ranked Arizona State(that's what they did while running the Option under Samuel).
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...0/college-football-military-service-academies
Minerforlife's comment above where he stated that NMSU's only success in the past 50 years was when they ran the option is exactly right! Over the past 50 years, NMSU has never done better than 7-5 and 6-5 with a 35-7 road victory over #22 ranked Arizona State(that's what they did while running the Option under Samuel).
For mid-major competitiveness yes. Equalizer? Against most in CUSA, ok, I can see that. But they can't snag that the top recruit from Dallas Ft Worth area like most teams from a major conference, because the vast majority can't qualify for a service academy. Keeping it on the ground and running with good constant efficiency is hell of a lot easier with players who can not necessarily crack a starting lineup at a major program. Hey, who does that sound like? Kugler you old rascal!! Yup, he's getting half a million to make UTEP the next Rice....wooohoo! Oh that's right, half a million is chump change and UTEP fans are supposed to appreciate that gaudy record of his. Sorry.
This thread - posts regarding alternative offenses - is pointless. After three dfl recruiting classes and almost three seasons, raise your hand if you think Kugler is even remotely interested in changing his base offensive scheme or philosophy. And even if he did, it would take at least two classes to recruit players to fit ANY new scheme. The dye is cast and he ain't got no "three year plan" to retool, this experiment takes on more water each week.
Best example of somebody who"gets it" is TCU's Gary Patterson, a defense-first coach who realized he could neither recruit nor compete against top programs with his preferred, conservative, run-first offense. He switched offensive schemes, hired a quality OC, turned the offense over to him, starting getting primo quality athletes and winning tons of games. In the process, he's built a perennial top 10 program.
And BTW, there is nothing innately ineffective about a pro-set scheme, that's not the point. You can line up in a traditional pro-set, split-back formation every play, but if your offensive PHILOSOPHY is ball/clock control, deep hand-offs, and a conservative, 66% run-oriented philosophy, you're a predictable, one-trick pony. And you will NEVER recruit quality - QUALITY - QBs and WRs, prerequisites for a balanced attack and a winning program in college football today. And even if you could recruit them, you treat them like shit, your team quits on you, and word gets around in the recruiting community. Fans don't exactly pack the Sun Bowl, either.
Bottom line, schemes, philosophies, and recruiting are mutually complimentary. You can't recruit, you can't compete. Kugler will fly this program into the ground doing things "his way". Already happening...
And just curious, what is the predominant offense in greater EP HS programs?
Best example of somebody who"gets it" is TCU's Gary Patterson, a defense-first coach who realized he could neither recruit nor compete against top programs with his preferred, conservative, run-first offense. He switched offensive schemes, hired a quality OC, turned the offense over to him, starting getting primo quality athletes and winning tons of games. In the process, he's built a perennial top 10 program.
And BTW, there is nothing innately ineffective about a pro-set scheme, that's not the point. You can line up in a traditional pro-set, split-back formation every play, but if your offensive PHILOSOPHY is ball/clock control, deep hand-offs, and a conservative, 66% run-oriented philosophy, you're a predictable, one-trick pony. And you will NEVER recruit quality - QUALITY - QBs and WRs, prerequisites for a balanced attack and a winning program in college football today. And even if you could recruit them, you treat them like shit, your team quits on you, and word gets around in the recruiting community. Fans don't exactly pack the Sun Bowl, either.
Bottom line, schemes, philosophies, and recruiting are mutually complimentary. You can't recruit, you can't compete. Kugler will fly this program into the ground doing things "his way". Already happening...
And just curious, what is the predominant offense in greater EP HS programs?
Last edited:
Ok - we got it- you don't like Kug and Epsi<I'm a>00 doesn't like Floyd - we got it, check, move on - you two are both obsessive with this dislike that it probably requires some professional help at this point
welp... this isn't the thread about, who doesn't drink enough coffee and who drinks too much coffee... Where did that thing go? I had my first cup of coffee ever (I hate the taste, but this one was good). I don't know if it is because I'm getting older, or this cafe had milk, but I almost shit my pants. Carry on with your drink of coffees this morning! Salud
If you 'almost' shit your pants you were drinking Folgers. Had you indeed shit your pants, youd've been drinking Maxwell House.
It's just consistency.
Everyone wants to see the program do well. Mostly everyone would love to see Kugs do well with the program. I would. It would be a real triumph to him, to the program and to El Pasonians(sp) that he does. That fact that there is a healthy debate about the state of the program is a good thing. What would be worse is a thread with nothing but crickets.
Will Kugs change his offensively philosophy? I doubt it. But having a healthy debate doesn't hurt.
Last edited:
Similar threads
