I heard Shane Matthews reference this show yesterday and really put them down as “any dude with a little podcast”. These guys REALLY take time analyzing and are super fair. The way…. Idk…. Journalism is actually supposed to be! It’s sad because Shane was a “call it like I see it” guy but he’s become another UAA defender now that he’s part of the gameday crew over there. What Shane days off the air about Napier passing calls most definitely mirrors what GNFP are saying. It’s crazy to me that every single writer, podcaster abs fan that follows this team says the SAME thing about this offense… EXCEPT the guys in Gnv (Russell, Cardozo, Pat, Shane) and it’s been that way for years. We are all seeing the same game and calling it out but these dudes are all “Mcillwain knows best. Muschamp just needs time” etc until those guys get fired and then it’s all “well, we know things but can’t say it”. Just be honest! Cuz now we’re in a spot, aS Gator fans, when we hear “just give Napier time” that we don’t trust it. Napier can get all the 5stars in here he wants, if he’s running an offense that does not put them in a good position and then blames it all on ‘missed assignments “. That’s not gonna fly
"... if he’s running an offense that does not put them in a good position and then blames it all on ‘missed assignments.“ There were multiple (most, actually) examples where the correct play was called but Mertz either locked onto one receiver or just never looked upfield. I'm not buying that this is a scheme issue, but it might be a coaching issue. Mertz has to improve his ability to read defenses. He's talented and no question can do this (well, maybe some question, but I lean towards he can) but it has to happen. I'm far from an expert, but I understand the basic concept that if you have two receivers and zero defensive backs then there should be someone open. Did we not see that multiple times? So, the play call is not the issue, it's that the quarterback is not reacting to what the defense is giving him. Or is this a case of Napier telling Mertz to ignore decoys or something?
I hope somehow someone on our offensive staff spends a little time watching this each week as a self scout and critique and starts to make adjustments in play design, play tendencies and execution. Simple checks by Mertz to get us out of running plays with 8 or 9 in the box, heck even with 7 in the box we should usually pass it.
I want to start my reply by saying although I disagree with you I am not calling you out in any adversarial way. I concede I could be wrong but I do not think I am. My rebuttal is simply my unexperienced opinion as someone who has never coached. Having said that I could not disagree with you more... Mertz has made some bad reads - as have all QBs. In general, he is playing well for his talent level. You can not expect him to be more than he is. I think he is generally operating at a high level given what he has to work with in terms of natural talent and a bland, poorly schemed passing offense. His completion rate is 78% with one interception on the year and a 162 rating according to ESPN. He is doing exactly what everyone expected which is to manage the game and not make huge errors. "I'm far from an expert, but I understand the basic concept that if you have two receivers and zero defensive backs then there should be someone open. Did we not see that multiple times? " My exact point! What I saw multiple times was this exact scenario and the ball was handed off giving Mertz no opportunity to read the field and make a throw. This is not the QB misreading the open receiver. This is Napier choosing to run into a stacked box. Mertz did not even get a chance to read the field - that is my point. He has made some really brilliant passes when given the opportunity. Napier just does not consistently provide this opportunity and that is 100% scheme and play calling. In my opinion we are not even at the point where we can reasonably debate how good Mertz, Douglas, etc are because they are given no real chance out there. I will just say it - the passing scheme sucks and the offensive play calling sucks. You cannot "read" a defense when you have multiple receivers in the same window, no option to even throw, or predictable routes that do nothing to advantage the receiver. I mean - they run into a nine man box on 3 and 1. How could that possibly be on Mertz? Not adversarial here - I mean no disrespect. I am just trying to understand how this offense is somehow a Mertz problem. Very confusing.
I'm with you. I watch all the GNFP videos, and while he admits he doesn't know what's being called, there is enough data now that some inneficiencies (too be kind) are clearly obvious. Most notably: often going against the numbers, poor route schemes, too many designed roll outs, predictable down and distance calls, etc. I'm 100% in on CBN. I don't think we need to scrap the offense entirely to install some crazy air-raid or anything, but Mertz has - without a doubt - shown the ability to read defenses and make good throws. Play calling and route trees that got guys open would improve our ability to threaten downfield and make it easier for us to do what we really want - run! Drop his completion percentage from 78% to 69% and force the D to respect our passing game. I would certainly expect Stoops to load the box and do a lot of cover 1 or cover 0 until Mertz makes it too painful. Something he hasn't done too often (to no fault of his own).
I've heard Shane be very critical of certain things. I listen to him and Sean Kelly during games and he is often pointing out things that could be done better or at least different, missed assignments, etc. He is definitely NOT just another UAA defender. The GNFP guy seems to either have a problem with Coach Napier . . . or he is not nearly as well-educated as he pretends to be. He is slick . . . I'll give him that. I've found and posted another guy who has played and coached. Last year he put side-by-side a Coach Napier play (when the GNFP guy was telling everyone week-after-week Coach ran a "high school offense"), and it turns out the very same play was used by Kansas City on their way to win a Super Bowl. It didn't work for Florida because AR wouldn't throw the pass. I've posted that guy's latest film session and will start posting it every week for another perspective since GNFP guy is the same things week-after-week. Maybe that's all he has. The new guy specifically showed how there were problems in the Red Zone that were, in fact, technical like Coach Napier said. The new guy knows and explains what is being called and knows and explains why things work, or don't. Just this week he told us we were running plays from an air raid offense . . . there was a triple option play . . . Mertz did a great job on a well-designed RPO . . . there were multiple well-designed route trees being used . . . and other things the GNFP guy would probably never say. Maybe because he doesn't recognize them.
Comes across as a know it all with douche hair. You can pick apart any game in history. Whatever floats your boat. The problem is with airheads who seem to think he'scracked a code and knows more than our coaches.
GNFP guy could definitely be off on his assessments. I'm not football savvy enough to know good film critique from bad, but I don't think he has an issue with Napier. He's quick to applaud what he sees as good pass plays, he always says CBN's zone running schemes are brilliant, and he often talks about the discipline seen on both sides of the ball as being very good. I'm just saying - it could be he's wrong on his assessment - but I don't think it has anything to do with prejudice against coach. I think he's just calling out what he sees.
I respect your opinion. Thanks! I stopped listening to him last year to be honest. When I found this new guy I enjoyed listening and so I thought I'd share with everyone for another perspective. The new guy really seems knowledgeable.
PS -- I'd also add that I've heard Shane be critical of Coach Napier's decisions too . . . several times . . . so he's not a UAA representative. LOL!
Guy seems like a dope to me as do most of the people who run around parroting whatever he says like it’s the word of god.
I listened to the podcast and the statistical analysis or analytics or whatever you want to call them were pretty convincing. I haven't been to a game this year but I've heard from those that have that our receivers are not getting open for the most part. This would seem to align with what that GNFP guy is saying. GNFP guys have effusive praise for the defensive side of the ball. Now I agree with those that say there is a big difference between film critique and coaching. I also would allow that film review provides a window into what's going on and the coaches see and have to react to much more than that tiny perspective. This is year two and coaches are matching talent to play design. UK is going to load the box and dare us to throw. We better see improvement in the passing game or we in for a long day this Saturday.
I really do not get the impression that GNFP dislikes Napier. I do think he dislikes the performance and I agree with this. He does praise a good play call and scheme and put in on the QB (or great defensive play) where appropriate. I heard him do this a several times in the last video for example. Some things I have noted that pertain to your comments... GNFP often points out that scheming being used (bunch sets for example) are run in the NFL and that he believes in them. He goes on to say though that they are well executed in the NFL and points out where we tend to poorly execute them. I do not see this as disliking anyone - just a clear and concise explanation of what he thinks as someone analyzing the play. Seems very objective to me. Additionally, he did call out some improvements in the passing game (early in the game for example). He also calls out consistent errors that we make, and given the performance I think they tend to overshadow the good. I think that is pretty reasonable given the situation. I mean we had to kick five field goals last game and scored one TD against Charlotte. Clearly something is not clicking. I am interested in seeing the new guy you mention. I will say this though... "Technical problems" is a very squishy term and implies it was execution by the players (I guess??). Maybe so, but I absolutely disagree with the scheming and play calling on many of the red zones plays. Am I a coach? No. Do I know wtf I am talking about? Also no. So probably I am wrong but it seems very odd to run into a loaded box against man cover zero when you have a QB that is completing a shit ton of his throws. It seems very odd to have so many technical problems that you tie the school record for most FGs made. It seems very odd to run hitch patterns on third down that are not past the first down line. etc etc Look - I hope you are correct and technical issues are the only thing at play here. I am 100% happy to eat that crow if it shakes out that way. No bamboozle - I really am. As with all things time will tell.
