Seth Varnadore -- Watching Film (Vanderbilt Game)

I do too. I just see a difference in what each bring. James isn't bad but he isn't even in praise or criticism sometimes. All good.

And I have no hair so I am jealous and confused at the same time looking at that ridiculous doo.

 

Friendly challenge, count how many times he says he likes or loves what the call was on offense in this weeks breakdown.

 

A LOT. The dude is objective. And this last game shows that Billy is at least capable of recognizing things in the offense that need changed and making adjustments, so hopefully that continues.

 

Yeah, James is quite opinionated and consistently negative about our passing schemes and Billy's overall OC performance, but he was a big booster of CBN before and after the hire, so his consistent negativity cuts against his priors, so I give him some credit for that.

I think he calls it like he see it, and admits his own biases for a more wide open offense than CBN likes to run.

 

Yeah, he's either right or he's not. And if he isn't right then those want him to shut up should make their counter-arguments.

 

Uhhh, people have made counter arguments. Not going to rehash it. In any event, preferring Varnadore's objectivity and knowledge to James' opinion and somewhat less detailed explanations doesn't absolve Napier's play calling and game management from criticism. People can like one, the other or both and still hope Napier does in fact relinquish his OC duties. Some of the "perplexing" route trees have been illustrated by varnadore as poor execution and not by design. That's my main dislike of the GNFP version as compared to Varnadore's.

 

Pretty sure Kahliel played QB in HS for Cornelius Ingram at Hawthorne.

 

how does varnadore know the design? I tried watching him I just haven’t made the time.

 

He doesn't always and readily admits except for the cases where a receiver is bumped off his route by a defender, his own teammate via poorly ran rub or in some cases yes, a poorly ran depth, break etc.

Some of the concepts are mirrored on other offenses so it's not too hard to understand what was supposed to happen. One example I used before is when our RB gets off his route because he couldn't clear a defender. Had he ran a cleaner route we would have a 2 vs 1 against the remaining defender on a Mertz rollout. He illustrates this where as James just frustatratingly asks "what is this" over and over.

Now once again this doesn't mean the offensive design or napiers play calling is agreeable. Like many have stated before the passing game has limitations like this play. If it works it would be a chunk play but it takes perfect execution and when that doesn't happen your 2 route play is dead because we are playing on one side of the field via rollout and have limited options to begin with. That's a philosophical argument and one I understand many rightfully may have.

I agree with that somewhat but it seems to be the conservative approach Napier wants. Can't make too many mistakes if you only have so many options. Against a team with better talent like Georgia or more discipline like Kentucky it hasn't ended well.

 

To James's analysis of individual plays? Sure. He's not infallible and he not going to give a perfect breakdown as an outsider.

To his overall point that what's being done is sub-optimal? No.

 

I can agree with that somewhat. Just maybe not to the extent he does. Remember what Meyer's offense looked like in 05 vs 07 with different personnel.

I'm just playing Devils advocate because I don't expect the same explosive results however Georgia and Bama from years past were able to do it albeit with the most elite talent money could buy.

 

It's true. He was effusive in praising both run and pass design. It's also true -- he joked at how atypical this was. So both sides are right: he's fair, but he's been criticism-heavy (whether rightly or wrongly.Y

 

Very true. He was certainly pleased to see some of the picks/rubs and complimentary routes he has been asking to see for some time. I can understand why, as the plays highlighted, particularly the Ricky out route on 3rd down, the defenders are left with basically no chance to stop the play.

 

You can make an argument for any offense being "sub-optimal."

 

I know that play is designed to go downfield but I wonder if there is an opportunity to throw horizontally (top of the screen). I think it was Trey that was standing there by himself. Could have been a big play.

 

He seems like a bit of a quirky guy, but I enjoy how he appreciates play designs and blocking schemes regardless of the outcome of the play or whether it is meant to get 7 yards or 37 yards. I like his perspective on what the scheme and play design is meant to attack on offense and what that will lead to in a game.

Through these replays you can really see a lot of openings to receivers that Mertz chooses not to attempt, which was fine when it was Zanders out there but not so much when it is Trey, Jean, Pearsall or Douglas, and we are losing a lot of the upside on the passing game. Napier obviously wants a conservative, grind it out, high percentage offense that wears out the defense and puts pressure on the other team to pass in the second half. If the OL can give you 4 yards per carry, then this 80+% passing game as an extension of the running game really does work, and much better when you have a guy like Trey that is an instant 10 yards regardless of negative yards in the air.

 

Gave Georgia something to think about

 

I liked the call, but maybe in a different time in the game? don't know, but I still like that we have some trick plays in our repertoire.

 

In that scenario...
If you're gonna be wrong... be long.