PAT JULMISTE IS OUR QB! GET OVER IT!

[Guest tulderbull]

Zonald-  I will tell you this much about college coaching. Given we do have some good coaches on staff,  It is a good ol boy system.  It's not all about what you know it has more to do with who you know.  That is a fact.  Of course we have some people who are very good coaches.  We also have some people whose resumes are not that impressive.  Not to dog anyone out, but look at Smith and Earl Lane, Hobbie.  Lane and Hobbie 1st got here and Jim remained loyal to them instead of his players by giving them good coaches. I am not even sure if Lane played High School football and if you don't think the guys don't relize that you are crazy.  It is hard for a player to respect a guy who is coaching you and hasn't been through what you are going through

[BiggTipp]

you know...the playbook didnt suck in 2002..why was that ..oh because we had a better qb. the playbook is fine we just need better talent at that position.  it seems we have the most diverse playbook around...I cant even count the different formations we have

[Apis Bull]

I don't think it's necessarily the playbook, so much as it is when certain plays are called.

[Bull94]

you know...the playbook didnt suck in 2002..why was that ..oh because we had a better qb. the playbook is fine we just need better talent at that position.  it seems we have the most diverse playbook around...I cant even count the different formations we have

So I guess all we need is a near NFL quality QB and then we can have a successful team? I bet R Smith uses that same lame excuse for his inept offense's results. Blames it on a 20yr old kid doing the best with his abilities.

Maybe they should wait to run the spread when we do have that level of talent.  

How about we use the NFL quality talent we have in the backfield and line up and run the freakin ball instead of asking an option style QB to win it with his arm.

Funny how WVU doesn't need to have an NFL quality QB in order to be 6-1. At least they know how to adapt the system to their strengths.

[Guest tulderbull]

nk=board=news;num=1129525908;start=30#31 date=10/19/05 at 09:14:12]you know...the playbook didnt suck in 2002..why was that ..oh because we had a better qb. the playbook is fine we just need better talent at that position.  it seems we have the most diverse playbook around...I cant even count the different formations we have

[twillybull]

So I guess all we need is a near NFL quality QB and then we can have a successful team?

No, absolutely not, and the coaches are culpable for not making the right adjustments, and panicing with their play-calling when behind.  

But...

What doesn't help is that Pat has not consistently proven that he can throw a cathable pass.  He rarely / never threw the ball in high school and doesn't look like his passing technique is very well coached.  We need someone that doesn't leave recievers jumping for balls over the middle against a vicous Miami Secondary or throwing passes at people's feet all day in Pittsburgh.

I haven't been all that impressed with our wide recievers ball-catching ability, but you have to get them the ball with a reasonable chance of catching it.  

[Bull94]

So I guess all we need is a near NFL quality QB and then we can have a successful team?

No, absolutely not, and the coaches are culpable for not making the right adjustments, and panicing with their play-calling when behind.  

But...

What doesn't help is that Pat has not consistently proven that he can throw a cathable pass.  He rarely / never threw the ball in high school and doesn't look like his passing technique is very well coached.  We need someone that doesn't leave recievers jumping for balls over the middle against a vicous Miami Secondary or throwing passes at people's feet all day in Pittsburgh.

I haven't been all that impressed with our wide recievers ball-catching ability, but you have to get them the ball with a reasonable chance of catching it.  

twilly,

I would love to have a drop back gunslinger but we don't. the coaches have to realize this. they are trying to force a square peg in a round hole.

We all know Pat's weaknesses. I assume the coaches do as well.

Why do they expect him to throw the touch passes?Why do we throw the ball 37 times against Pitt? That's about a smart as letting an option QB throw the ball from his own 8 yard line!! (oh yeah that's right the coaches tried that twice)

We were in that game until about 5 mins to go. Even then they expected him to throw these dinky touch passes for 5 yards instead of letting him use his obvious arm strength and putting the ball downfield.

All teams have weaknesses. It is the coaches responsibility to play towards their stengths.

Imagine how horrible Nebraska would have been if Tom Osbourne expected Tommy Frazier to drop back and throw the ball 37 times a game. Would the fans run around saying "man I wish we had a decent QB who could throw the ball?" or would they say "what in the hell are the coaches doing expecting an option QB to sling it 37 times?"

I just hope they don't scrap this offense, recruit a pro style dropback QB and then make him run the option!!

[Guest S.  Bien]

No truer words have been spoken or clearer posts then what twilly, tulder, and 94 just posted.

The point people need to realize is that Pj's capable of throwing a good pass, and making plays.  He isn't very good dropping straight back into a seven step, in the pocket, and trying to checkdown to 5 different options (guess what not many guys are).  He has a tendency to overcompensate, and over-throw, and become a tad indecisive.  However, PJ can throw a good pass.  Look at that slant to Hall.  It was a thing of beauty, but to be successful we've got to recognize Pat's strengths and weaknesses, not spend the off-season praying they'll go away.  You scheme, and play to his strengths.

We know he's not a guy that can effectively throw over 30 passes in the game.  We know he's not a great passer when he's faced with dropping, checking down, and making decisions.  We know on some short stuff he has a tendency to over throw or under throw.

We know those things because we observe.  On the flip we know that on a set play where Pat knows relatively where the pass is going he's got the arm to get the ball almost anywhere.   We know he seems more comfortable rolling out of the pocket, we know he's a very good runner and can create open space.  He's a decent guy at disguising plays as well.

Taking that into account the coaches need to do a better job creating the offense around him more.  That means possibly more deliberate passing routes, more deep routes, and more roll outs.  That means using more TE and RB stuff.  

tulder made a great suggestion.  Why does our spread always include 4 and 5 WR's?  And Tipp, we are very basic in our formations.  We've got a very basic 4 and 5 receiver spread, few to no motion with the receivers, if it's a 3 receiver set we usually go TE, motion the TE and almost always run in that formation, and occasionally play action out of it.  That's about it.  Tulder's suggestion, a rather obvious one of course, is why are we forced to run the spread with WR's always.

HERE's WHERE WVU kills us.  They run a spread, but they also run a ton more than they pass.  But WVU uses more two TE spreads, and a FB.  They love moving around the FB, TE, and RB.  Sometimes you'll see them in a two TE, power-i set, and then they'll go in motion with one TE going wide, another dropping behind the line, and a FB flaring out.  It blows teams away because you're staring at a power formation, you bring in a base defense to defend, and suddenly they're spreading the perimeter on you.  THis is particularly painful because that forces their LB's wide to cover the TE's, and usually leaves 5 guys in for 6 blockers.  You always love those numbers.

That's how WVU adapts to their talents, and USF does not.  We've got outstanding RB's, a OL that averages close to 315lbs, 3-4 deep at TE and the TE"s are actually very athletic and possess good size.  We've got a running, passing QB.

Imagine how difficult it would be to defend if this team lined up Jackson on one side, Peyton the other, had Cedric Hill and derek Carter in tight to the line at TE, and Hall in the backfield.  Suddenly, Hill flares out, Carter drops back to block.  That would blow the defenses mind.  How about flaring out both TE's on the next play, you could run wide and have those wide bodies to seal the inside.  The beauty is as a base formation on non-passing necessity series this forces the defense to go with base formations and eliminate their ability to bring in a nickel and dime.  What's more, start telling PJ that if Peyton looks open then throw it up high for him to grab.

You get the picture, when you're limited with talent at any position you must get more creative.  It's like the offensive staff, mainly Smith and formerly Hobbie continue to try and shove this square peg into a round hole, and instead of changing pegs they feel content to continue shoving in hopes it will eventually slide in.

[twillybull]

S. Bien,

Good analysis.  I think Pat could become a consistent QB, if we play a little more to his talents. Which leads me to say...  

I'd just be happy to see a power-I; tee-off-slober-knocker type of offense for a while.  Why abandon the run when Pitt had consistently been weak down the stretch against the run (esp on the interior)?  

The spread offense is a great switch-up and sets up some good opportunities, but I just cringe every time I see Pat line up alone in the backfield with 5 -wide.  He has yet to consistently hit the home run and until he does, it really makes this formation useless...  The secondary jumps on the short routes knowing that Pat isn't gonna chuck it.  That leaves at least one LB to cover the middle and the d-line just focuses on outside containment.  What is the result?  Pat scrambles inside for 4-5 where the LB's are licking their chops, he dumps off to Hall on a pitch or short pass (don't tell me the WVU LB's won't be waiting for this one) or we reverse...  On second and long, none of these options seem very appealing. We're fast, but not that fast.  What happens if they have a spy on the QB  (who is allready asked to be a one-man show in this setup).  

If we even had the occasional home-run capability this would be great, and we could keep defenses honest.  Otherwise, what the heck are the coaches seeing that I'm not?  Maybe seeting up a screen?  Help me out here...  

I remember Bobby Bowden (back in the day before he passed on and the animatronic robot took over for him) and Steve Spurrier made sparkling gem like QB's out of some real turds.  They did this by using the I more-often, trying to establish a rhythm with a good rotation of backs and optioning to the wonderful play-action pass.  Nothing does more for a QB's confidence.  Unfortunately for the Bulls, inspiring confidence in our QB's does not seem to be a priority for our coaching staff.  I really hope this trend turns around in a hurry.