Yep. Completely get it. Same boat with me. Just not ultimately helpful to talk too much about it because it opens a lane for complaints (from us, or others within our bases.) Both of our coaches do good work and care; they deserve dignity as do the kids.
ahhhh...
[sigh,] I guess I'll end up doing it, primarily because I have the hopes that next year (and the years to follow) aren't going to be repeats of the same stuff I see tonight. Tonight was really frustrating to watch, and really IMO it just epitomizes the entire shell of things that have gone wrong all-year -- more germane to this post is the fact that these problems are functional
threats to the interests-and-goals of a) being generally competitive and b) the ability to thrive as a program in the future. It's too late for these things to be fixed this year, but they
can be points of
focus over the off-season and the road that lies ahead. Frankly, IMO, they
have to be. The big disclaimer, that cannot be overlooked, is these are all things that I'm sure would be fixed by a waving magic wand by the coach if it were as simple as that -- except they're NOT.
It's going to take a lot of grinding from everyone. Even though I have these listed in a numbered order, they really should not be looked at as priorities based on the ordering: these are all
equal problems that beget the same sense of urgency between now and mid-August '23.
I write the following observations and opinions not to specifically criticize or put down anyone in particular. I fully support Coach and our guys; I know how badly he wants our guys to win today and in the future.
I think he's a really good coach, an even better individual and it's my hope that he is our coach for as long as he wants to be (with the fruits of his labor producing the riches that he deserves.) I can't claim to have all of the answers. I see the program as still having way more opportunity and potential than what it seems on the surface, and I (still) see the program as one worth supporting in every fashion imaginable. It is my hope that over the course of the off-season and the preparations for next year that the program (all actors) can get the following things ironed out. It is also my hope that people around the school and all relevant parties with an interest in the program will continue to unconditionally support the program however necessary and capable.
I. This offense is a
mess, and there is little reason IMO to believe it can be fixed singularly by "kids getting older, stronger and more experienced." It's going to require retooling.
a) While I understand the "why" as to how this became our new system for this year (big drop-off in line quality as measured by experience, ability, size and strength; the dearth of multiple ball-carrying options), there are three main dilemmas that are causing the system to generally fail:
1) lack of
multiple weapons on the perimeter (there isn't a cadre of kids on the field at a given point that can conceivably be a target as a primary read... outside of one player, the rest do not have the tools to create separation or even get the ball into their hands when targeted.) It would be ideal if there was at least one other who could be a playmaker out wide, so as to not basically have every play telegraphed to the best athlete...
in the absence of that...
2) the route tree is generally non-existent for the other guys, but even worse from what I see is the lack of concepts to get the ball moved down field through the air. Few (if any) crossing patterns (either done with or without WR1), no swing passes (more blades of grass for LB's to be responsible for... it's worth some shots to try and utilize some combo of strength/athleticism coming down field flats-onward.) The line is limited in their ability, yes, I get that, which is why I'm not arguing for impossible things (impossible at this stage) like deep in-routes or other things that take a long time to develop.
3) To overcome the shortcomings of personnel limitations, and in the absence of more concepts being implemented to not be big play-or-bust, the system really does need a QB who can make chicken salad out of chicken shins. The
big thing with this is it requires a general development that takes time; there's a shorter track toward getting "there" if you have God-gifted physical traits like Otto Kuhns (old BC qb) or Matt Carlisle (old NC qb) -- and those guys are/were FCS quarterbacks that were
dudes. The longer track toward getting "there" takes several years of defined development with specific training to build up competencies, which the prime example most relevant to FC would be Kaden Starcher. Now, the thing with Starcher was he had general progression and experience built up as a JH QB and when he was in the shoes our current QB is in (sophomore) we had to abandon the pass-heavy offense midway through that season because it was not working; ironically enough he probably developed the tools to be successful in that offense by the time he was a senior, except we went Wing-T by then. The only other QB we've had in semi-recent history for the offense (although it was generally different... Mike Hensley's offense of Granville yore) was Messerly back in 2010. 6'2, 210(?), was able to move around decently but, again, wasn't a QB that had a defined skillset (actually got somewhat outperformed that year -- one game sample -- by the QB2, a freshman, who would later only start four future games for us in his HS career.)
And just to stay ahead of this, because this is important to note: I'm not bashing the QB or throwing him under the bus. I want to see him succeed; I want to see the team succeed -- when one thing happens, the other follows. I'm simply saying that moving onto next season, the program IMO has to evaluate what he can and cannot do... what he
can improve on and what he
cannot reasonably improve on & get the offense recalibrated (along with the other two things above and the one point below I'm about to make) around the profile and capabilities he currently has + will continue to develop into his junior year and senior year. It really is (or ought to be, if the goal is winning) a process. I know he's worked hard on improving his capabilities and raw skills, but there's still room to improve for him to be the best QB he can be for us.
b) The play-calling, frankly, is frustrating. This is easy to get lost in the "shuffle" of other glaring problems that indicate how the team is winless and getting blown to pieces in the box score, but when it came to a reasonably close game (tonight) that was actually competitive through the first half of the game (before it started raining down problems) it was the play-calling's futility that reared its ugly head. Start driving past midfield, one-score game... 1st and 10. The run game is actually working for once, Miller having some trouble with a specific look. "Please, don't pass... don't pass..." GO ROUTE DOWN THE SIDELINE, INCOMPLETE. Like,
c'mon... now we're behind the sticks and if its longer than 3rd and 2 we are probably not getting it. 3rd and 6; ball gets thrown away. Can't convert on fourth down. Big missed opportunity, and again... this crap that gets us behind the sticks causes us to bust because we don't have the tools and capabilities to work out of jams. I understand we have a new play-caller this year and I appreciate that we have volunteers who do it (I'm going to circle back to this) but for crying out loud... this team's third down conversion rate is really low. Ties back to the pitfalls of the original offense and how we don't have the Jimmies and Joe's,
get something else worked in to exploit over-aggressive adjustments from the opposing 'D' that you're expecting. Screens? Interior screens? Dive option? Something to work the intermediates... anything is better than this weird gambling that fundamentally hasn't averaged out to success and won't unless we somehow have WR's that grow into 6'6" trees with <4.7 40 speeds.
II. The defense is also obviously problematic. This is
probably more fixable than the offense, although this is one where 50% of the equation is coaching and the other 50% is the player corps.
a) The tackling is non-existent. This is something that has to be taken care of over the offseason and next summer. General lack of wrapping up and driving; going
way too high. I understand where part of this is also aided by strength and conditioning (although that alone can't replace technique), which in theory is also improved year-over-year for the course of the players, but this is the worst tackling team I've seen at FC by a mile.
b) The players
have to communicate on the field, know their assignments and prepare themselves on their own time. I understand this is a young team, I get it, but the second and third levels have multiple guys with 10+ games under their belt. All of them (except maybe one, a Sr?) are returning next year. Need to communicate, need to be accountable. It should NOT take the coach having to literally guide them through, from the sideline, where they need to be and what they should expect. Boys, it's week
8. I'm sure none of what they're being instructed as the game is happening was new information to them -- film sessions, gameplans, what to look for, the literal mobility of Hudl. It's not like they're lining up against the most expansive of playbooks, either. This
has to stop, and the kids need to STEP UP. It's not as if teams such as TCC, Miller are
that much different than you guys when you get down to the rosters.
1) One segue and general thought is, I understand the issue of low numbers (that hopefully are going to improve the next two years) makes this a little prohibitive... I just can't help but wonder if they would be better served to make certain players (their best players) "defense only" (or have their offensive presence limited to specific packages and designs.) Like, I recognize with the limited bodies there are to work with (and they have general limitations on their time to devote to football vis-a-vis the shrinking calendar) that an equal emphasis on offensive and defensive improvements might annihilate the other cause's intents and purposes (learn more plays on offense, be better at them versus knowing the film better, knowing how to communicate and identify on the field) but maybe it does come down to
"robbing Peter to pay Paul?" Like if its apparent that trying to maximize offensive input while also shoring up the D becomes counterproductive, well, what's the easier lane to take: the goal of hoping to win games via out-shooting (scoring 30+ points every night,) or winning by a vastly improved defense that can cause turnovers and generate better field position (in the process more touches for the offense.)
III. The assistant coaching staff needs more people in order to divvy up the workload among the coaches in order to better concentrate on getting aspects fixed, or, less preferable (if not less attainable), a general retooling.
a) I don't really take any pleasure in saying that publicly, because the people I know who are on the staff do the work in good intentions and do it because they
care. And, they're good people. But, I feel that it has to be said: it's not a very strong staff to help Coach. It's a small staff. I don't want to get too hung up on pointing out every single issue I attribute to the staff writ large, at least not any more than I already have, but this was an original problem I saw three weeks ago that really bothered me. Part of it arises out of something really frustrating that played out: in the game vs FCA, we lined up to punt and for Lord knows what reason we only had 10 guys out there. There was a
ton of confusion on who to get onto the field as the 11th guy (I think what may have happened was the missing kid on the formation had gone out earlier with an injury, but it wasn't communicated or planned in-depth a two-deep as to who his replacement was and where that kid was supposed to line up...) and as a result of the 11th man coming in off the sideline and getting thrown into the chaos and confusion he somehow wound up as the third man on the shield -- punt got blocked.