Shawn Watson trolling the fanbase?

[Matt Cotcher]

— Twitter API (@twitterapi) November 7, 2011

!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+"://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");

 

[Aaron Carrara]

— Twitter API (@twitterapi) November 7, 2011

!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+"://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");

 

[drgilbert]

In less they have the same skill set that is poor coaching. Starting to understand why people have a problem with this man.

 

[Lukus Alderman]

I think he's trolling.

 

[lakeman74]

Let me help you out Shawn.  PLAY MALCOLM BROWN MORE THAN JONATHAN GRAY.

 

[BevoBlake]

If he's not trolling, I'm not amused. 

 

[java]

There was nothing wrong with Watson's game plan against Tech.  There were execution flaws.

Our offense has built in constraints with an inexperienced quarterback and an inexperienced offensive line.  How many different plays can we realistically have?  We aren't the Seattle Seahawks, guys.

Hook 'em!  

 

[BevoBlake]

There was nothing wrong with Watson's game plan against Tech.  There were execution flaws.

Our offense has built in constraints with an inexperienced quarterback and an inexperienced offensive line.  How many different plays can we realistically have?  We aren't the Seattle Seahawks, guys.

Hook 'em!  

Eh, you can have enough. We wouldn't be the first or hundredth team to run a two-back offense with various schemes. You're not going to run Barry Sanders and Jerome Bettis the same way. I'm sure he's being snide but if there is truth to what he's saying, it's not a good game plan. There should be a different approach with each player. 

 

[Worster1]

What Lakeman74 said: my dear Watson it is easy, if it is 4th down and you need 1-3 yards and the play IS a running play, you have Brown at RB - calculate that your odds are better he will get the yards needed vs. Gray.  You failed to do this the other day and Gray came up short....

 

[HornEsch]

So unless he is trolling, we went from and over-zealous package based setup in the previous years to one that does not take personnel into consideration? Why can't we just get "normal", whatever that is

 

[Hiphopopotamos]

I don't have any issue with what Watson said - for a couple of reasons:

1.  Its a press conference, and I'm going to take anything a coach says with a grain of salt - especialy if its an answer to a question that could be seen as a bit absurd.  I don't expect any coach to be entirely honest in a press conference - by nature these guys think what they do is top secret.

2. Play calls are based on down/distance/score/time, and sub packages mirror that.  This is mostly on the position coaches.  Teams go into the games with packages for each down and distance (depending on game situations).  The position coach should know who is supposed to be out there in each situation and should be subbing accordingly.  If a team plays with any tempo at all the play call is coming in about as soon as the next play has just finished - the position coach should be the one shuttling players in and out. 

 

[Matt Cotcher]

I don't have any issue with what Watson said - for a couple of reasons:

1.  Its a press conference, and I'm going to take anything a coach says with a grain of salt - especialy if its an answer to a question that could be seen as a bit absurd.  I don't expect any coach to be entirely honest in a press conference - by nature these guys think what they do is top secret.

2. Play calls are based on down/distance/score/time, and sub packages mirror that.  This is mostly on the position coaches.  Teams go into the games with packages for each down and distance (depending on game situations).  The position coach should know who is supposed to be out there in each situation and should be subbing accordingly.  If a team plays with any tempo at all the play call is coming in about as soon as the next play has just finished - the position coach should be the one shuttling players in and out. 

Excellent post. I'll add that this coaching staff is hyper-focused on execution. The result of that is a belief that a play, when executed properly, should result in the same result regardless of personnel.

It's team over individual.

 

[Hiphopopotamos]

Excellent post. I'll add that this coaching staff is hyper-focused on execution. The result of that is a belief that a play, when executed properly, should result in the same result regardless of personnel.

It's team over individual.

Good point.

There is also a matter of tendencies and the desire for the offense to keep a defense 'on its toes' by not falling into any sort of pattern of what each RB does.  If the offense is aware of these patterns than it is a safe bet the defense knows about them too.  

The playbook is already limited by the inexperience of the QB and the struggles of the OL, I'd be surprised if they were handicapping themselves even more by limiting plays to only certain personnell.   

 

[UTK66]

Not sure if he's trolling or being serious. There was a pretty long thread on Horns247 about this recently. Watson and Strong have both said that Watson has no say in what player is in the game. That decision is left up to the position coach so if Robinson wants Gray to get some work and sit MB1 then he has that authority and Watson just calls his plays. I don't agree with their philosophy but that's apparently the way they've always done it.

 

[echeese]

Confirmation bias remains strong. . . . So far Watson is doing a great job. . . but I'm starting to understand why football posts get so little play. . .hey, I love Q as much as the next guy but it's a football not gossip board. . . .

 

[JimR]

In less they have the same skill set that is poor coaching. Starting to understand why people have a problem with this man.

I am starting to understand that you do not understand.

 

[JimR]

What Lakeman74 said: my dear Watson it is easy, if it is 4th down and you need 1-3 yards and the play IS a running play, you have Brown at RB - calculate that your odds are better he will get the yards needed vs. Gray.  You failed to do this the other day and Gray came up short....

and Gray got the first down on 4th and 1 with tough running v Tech. your point?

 

[Hiphopopotamos]

Not sure if he's trolling or being serious. There was a pretty long thread on Horns247 about this recently. Watson and Strong have both said that Watson has no say in what player is in the game. That decision is left up to the position coach so if Robinson wants Gray to get some work and sit MB1 then he has that authority and Watson just calls his plays. I don't agree with their philosophy but that's apparently the way they've always done it.

If Robinson thought or coached that way - would he be a position coach for long?  I'm sure because of Robinsons experience and success as a RB coach he has more leeway than most - but I expect most of these decisions about who plays, how much, and when are discussed in the coaching room when they are developing the game-plan. 

Injury and endurance surely causes Robinson to alter the plan coming in, but I wouldn't expect there is a whole lot of 'free-lancing' going on when it comes to player substitutions.

But I could be dead wrong.

 

[Worster1]

and Gray got the first down on 4th and 1 with tough running v Tech. your point?

If I recall correctly he did not vs. KSU and that what the example I was thinking of.