Same caveat as always..........Read or don't read...I don't care....but some seem to appreciate any drive by posts.
First some of these statements are likely contrarian to other statements/observations. Second there are some differences in the semantics here that are subtle, and finding and understanding those subtleties, IMHO is key to understanding where we are versus other teams and where decisions will likely take this program.
Talent and recruiting is not going to manifest in guys appearing "coached up" ..... until key positions play tougher. You just cannot make an eval.
But....I don't think the disparity in the skill positions is huge v Abalama. I do think the play of the Line and the tackling make the disparity look much bigger than it really is at other positions because that particular segment of the disparity.
Certainly there is a talent difference but I don't think personally it is a 30 point difference. There is also a depth of talent difference but again not as huge as some specific issues make it look like. The bothersome part of that is they could get better, but it is coaching that makes a soft team IMO and this team will not be able to adjust until they run into some team they can bully.
The disparity IMHO expands and becomes bigger because of tackling, true aggression, and mindset (coaching). This team is an illusion much like we all buy into every year. They will take the hit on a prone or exposed guy, they will take a shot at a guy tied up, they will take the hit when they have an angle....but man on man this team is Soft as Charmin. They absolutely show ZERO willinegness to be tough and tackle man on man, fight through or off blocks or finish blocks..
They catch blocks on defense and then quit, on defense they run around blocks or play off shoulder and do not play through or split field gaps, they show initial pop then don't play through blocks on offense, they set to take one shot and cannot redirect in pass Protection or they set too deep and off balance trying to absorb a shuck and redirect.......they do not need to play Turkey Tits scheme defense but they do need to play through blocks.
IMO they feed off image, high fives, turnover chains and false bravado and not reality....they are not tough and are actually very soft but the image is as undisciplined, but they are actually are in reality undisciplined because they are not tough. Because of this they are late, taking false steps, get pushed around and cannot hold time for the skill positions to execute.....the ball gets channeled because of their soft playing style not creating time. That is all coaching.
There is always a balance every year where scheme catches up with toughness. Clemson looks mortal, UNC certainly is, but these teams will adjust their scheme and attack what is exposed....The U cannot scheme their way out of softness. Sure they will score some points but long term teams take the personality of their coach and this team is an illusion that cannot make a scheme leap, because they are so soft.
You can play aggressive and still be soft...it is when you play aggressive and how you play aggressive...this team is aggressive when they can be...and not aggressive when someone punches them in the mouth......this team is a bully that when the bully gets punched they become who they are coached to be (soft).
Soft is different than unmotivated, which is different than "quitting"....this team did not "quit" against Abalama, they were not "unmotivated"...they have a bigger problem, they are coached to be "soft"... they just are not tough man on man. This team played hard and wanted it, they kept playing and showed "character" ...they just don't have the will or toughness to tackle or finish blocks or to play through blocks. They do like to take undisiplined H2H shots and exposed shots to appear "tough" and will b bully someone when a team lets them.
FSU has 'turned the corner'...not on talent maybe and they blew a lead because the do not know how to win and close yet....but they showed pride and toughness and that is a bad omen for the future given what they have been missing. OU is OU and plays with arrogance so they play down when they don't take a team serious, Ohio State truly is undisciplined but sound fundamentally.
Whatever happens with Manny happens..he has done a decent job, if not better than decent in seeing the deficiencies around him....now he needs to see the deficiencies IN him if this team is going to ever return to greatness under Manny Diaz. I don't think it is as he seems incapable of taking on and identifying multiple problems at once...he seems ok if everything is in a silo, but this is what you get when you have a rookie who has never been head guy..and he is trying to be head guy...they cannot multi identify issues and multi task answering the issues.
This kinda falls into ..."we should have seen this based on the evidence".
First some of these statements are likely contrarian to other statements/observations. Second there are some differences in the semantics here that are subtle, and finding and understanding those subtleties, IMHO is key to understanding where we are versus other teams and where decisions will likely take this program.
Talent and recruiting is not going to manifest in guys appearing "coached up" ..... until key positions play tougher. You just cannot make an eval.
But....I don't think the disparity in the skill positions is huge v Abalama. I do think the play of the Line and the tackling make the disparity look much bigger than it really is at other positions because that particular segment of the disparity.
Certainly there is a talent difference but I don't think personally it is a 30 point difference. There is also a depth of talent difference but again not as huge as some specific issues make it look like. The bothersome part of that is they could get better, but it is coaching that makes a soft team IMO and this team will not be able to adjust until they run into some team they can bully.
The disparity IMHO expands and becomes bigger because of tackling, true aggression, and mindset (coaching). This team is an illusion much like we all buy into every year. They will take the hit on a prone or exposed guy, they will take a shot at a guy tied up, they will take the hit when they have an angle....but man on man this team is Soft as Charmin. They absolutely show ZERO willinegness to be tough and tackle man on man, fight through or off blocks or finish blocks..
They catch blocks on defense and then quit, on defense they run around blocks or play off shoulder and do not play through or split field gaps, they show initial pop then don't play through blocks on offense, they set to take one shot and cannot redirect in pass Protection or they set too deep and off balance trying to absorb a shuck and redirect.......they do not need to play Turkey Tits scheme defense but they do need to play through blocks.
IMO they feed off image, high fives, turnover chains and false bravado and not reality....they are not tough and are actually very soft but the image is as undisciplined, but they are actually are in reality undisciplined because they are not tough. Because of this they are late, taking false steps, get pushed around and cannot hold time for the skill positions to execute.....the ball gets channeled because of their soft playing style not creating time. That is all coaching.
There is always a balance every year where scheme catches up with toughness. Clemson looks mortal, UNC certainly is, but these teams will adjust their scheme and attack what is exposed....The U cannot scheme their way out of softness. Sure they will score some points but long term teams take the personality of their coach and this team is an illusion that cannot make a scheme leap, because they are so soft.
You can play aggressive and still be soft...it is when you play aggressive and how you play aggressive...this team is aggressive when they can be...and not aggressive when someone punches them in the mouth......this team is a bully that when the bully gets punched they become who they are coached to be (soft).
Soft is different than unmotivated, which is different than "quitting"....this team did not "quit" against Abalama, they were not "unmotivated"...they have a bigger problem, they are coached to be "soft"... they just are not tough man on man. This team played hard and wanted it, they kept playing and showed "character" ...they just don't have the will or toughness to tackle or finish blocks or to play through blocks. They do like to take undisiplined H2H shots and exposed shots to appear "tough" and will b bully someone when a team lets them.
FSU has 'turned the corner'...not on talent maybe and they blew a lead because the do not know how to win and close yet....but they showed pride and toughness and that is a bad omen for the future given what they have been missing. OU is OU and plays with arrogance so they play down when they don't take a team serious, Ohio State truly is undisciplined but sound fundamentally.
Whatever happens with Manny happens..he has done a decent job, if not better than decent in seeing the deficiencies around him....now he needs to see the deficiencies IN him if this team is going to ever return to greatness under Manny Diaz. I don't think it is as he seems incapable of taking on and identifying multiple problems at once...he seems ok if everything is in a silo, but this is what you get when you have a rookie who has never been head guy..and he is trying to be head guy...they cannot multi identify issues and multi task answering the issues.
This kinda falls into ..."we should have seen this based on the evidence".
