So CNS and/or CLK call and ask you what to do about QB. What's your advice?

WMack4Bama · Sep 20, 2015

gmart74 said:
This game was tremendously frustrating for evaluating the QB position.

1. Bateman: It appears the game plan was to use his athleticism to exploit the read option. Saban even hinted at it during the postgame interview. It was open the entire first quarter and I kept wondering why Bateman would continuously hand it off instead of take it himself after seeing the DE collapse and no sign of an OLB on the backside. I am wondering now if Bateman wasnt benched bc of that as opposed to the interception. The story I'm telling myself is that he didn't (for whatever reason) perform the gameplan that was specifically designed for him. Which to the coaching staff may be unforgivable. However, his accuracy on passes was pretty good (11/14), I dont recall any stupid penalties and he seemed to be managing the position very well. He got pulled pretty early so it's hard to have an overall opinion.

2. Coker: Came into a game behind and with a team completely out of sorts. So he felt the pressure to try to force plays. 1st- he has the heart of a lion and I loved the way he competed and worked for yardage even when the defense was hanging all over him. Accuracy was erratic (21/45), plays took a long time to snap the ball (not sure if that is solely his fault but it certainly seemed more chaotic with him in), and there were multiple times where the play clock ran out or we needed a TO to save a penalty. He threw into triple coverage, stared down receivers, threw what should have been 2 additional interceptions, was generally slow to release the ball. He is a 5th yr senior and still makes rookie mistakes. Is this his upside limit? Or was this him trying to force plays bc of us playing behind? As a 5th yr senior, this may be who he is: erratic, but competes hard.

So who do you go with? Both have positives, but I dont think you can rely on either one to lead the team. If you put Barnett in before he is ready, are you just hurting him in the long term? This may be why the coaching staff doesn't have a good answer. Maybe there isnt a good answer. It has to be amazingly frustrating to the staff.

First offensive possession: 3rd & 2. Quick slant (sort of a rub) to Robert Foster to the left hash. Foster makes the reception, but it's behind him. Stopped for a 1 yard gain. If that's in front of him, it's definitely a 1st down and probably a TD with Foster's speed.

His next to last drive: Mullaney is wide open in a window on 3rd down. Again, Mullaney makes the reception, but the ball is 2 yards behind him.

The accuracy, more specifically, the lack of consistent accuracy of both QBs we saw last night is very troubling

CullmanTide · Sep 20, 2015

Mack in your opinion was the pulling of Bateman justified? Meaning was it poor execution of the zone read or based on the interception because considering poor line play and route running I thought he played well.

scrodz · Sep 20, 2015

I don't care which one. Just pick one and stick with him. If it's Bateman or Coker, fine. If it's not, I'm fine with that, too (although I cringe to think of Barnett taking hits to that skinny frame). Just pick the one that will make the fewest mistakes, and build the GP around what he can do. Whoever it is, he needs more time with the receivers, because they're not close to being on the same page.

WMack4Bama · Sep 20, 2015

CullmanTide said:
Mack in your opinion was the pulling of Bateman justified? Meaning was it poor execution of the zone read or based on the interception because considering poor line play and route running I thought he played well.

In my opinion, Bateman should have never seen the field. Nothing against him, but you come out of the gate with Jake in your first two games, and then in the biggest game to date, you roll out Bateman? Yes, Bateman played some before, but he didn't start. This ruins the continuity with the offense. It makes a huge difference. Look at the difference in the velocity of the throws. All timing that needs to be fine tuned with game reps. It's tough to find your go-to guy (although Richard Mullaney seems to be that guy for both QBs) and develop on-field chemistry if there is a revolving door at the signal caller position.

With the risk of sounding like someone on the meltdown boards, this one is squarely on the coaching staff. They tried to get too cute. The pass by Coker up the seam to OJ Howard late in the game is what I'd rather see than the little boot that Bateman ran to him early in the game. If we feel like we need to get the ball to OJ Howard so badly, then he needs to work on running better routes and getting open. We don't need to force anything. There are plenty capable weapons on offense.

And while I'm at it, I mentioned this last night, but it seems counter-intuitive to me to run your 240 lb bruiser out of a shotgun but run your 180 lb scat back out of an under center power formation. Just seems backward. Lane confuses me.

CullmanTide · Sep 20, 2015

WMack4Bama said:
In my opinion, Bateman should have never seen the field. Nothing against him, but you come out of the gate with Jake in your first two games, and then in the biggest game to date, you roll out Bateman? Yes, Bateman played some before, but he didn't start. This ruins the continuity with the offense. It makes a huge difference. Look at the difference in the velocity of the throws. All timing that needs to be fine tuned with game reps. It's tough to find your go-to guy (although Richard Mullaney seems to be that guy for both QBs) and develop on-field chemistry if there is a revolving door at the signal caller position.

With the risk of sounding like someone on the meltdown boards, this one is squarely on the coaching staff. They tried to get too cute. The pass by Coker up the seam to OJ Howard late in the game is what I'd rather see than the little boot that Bateman ran to him early in the game. If we feel like we need to get the ball to OJ Howard so badly, then he needs to work on running better routes and getting open. We don't need to force anything. There are plenty capable weapons on offense.

And while I'm at it, I mentioned this last night, but it seems counter-intuitive to me to run your 240 lb bruiser out of a shotgun but run your 180 lb scat back out of an under center power formation. Just seems backward. Lane confuses me.

I 100% agree. I was shocked Bateman got the start considering all you mentioned. Play calling has been a mystery all season. It almost seems the coaches don't have an answer and play quaterback games for a diversion.

day-day · Sep 20, 2015

WMack4Bama said:
First offensive possession: 3rd & 2. Quick slant (sort of a rub) to Robert Foster to the left hash. Foster makes the reception, but it's behind him. Stopped for a 1 yard gain. If that's in front of him, it's definitely a 1st down and probably a TD with Foster's speed.

His next to last drive: Mullaney is wide open in a window on 3rd down. Again, Mullaney makes the reception, but the ball is 2 yards behind him.

The accuracy, more specifically, the lack of consistent accuracy of both QBs we saw last night is very troubling

I haven't watched the replays but in live action, I thought two of the short passes were the fault of the receivers and good tackles by the OM defensive players. It looked like the receivers ran to the first down distance and cut back when they should have taken one step deeper so that their cut wouldn't bring them back short of the first down.

KrAzY3 · Sep 20, 2015

WMack4Bama said:
In my opinion, Bateman should have never seen the field. Nothing against him, but you come out of the gate with Jake in your first two games, and then in the biggest game to date, you roll out Bateman?

I agree, and I'm one of the last guys to criticize coaches (and have to mention Alabama hangs onto the ball and this is an afterthought). I think Coker was prepared to be the leader and Bateman wasn't. Also, you pointed it out, but I'm not sure other people get the issue with him chronically underthrowing balls. A completion on third down that isn't a first down is about as bad as an incompletion and the lack of velocity can make for easier interceptions. I'd tend to agree with another poster though, who said that the gameplan seemed to have been for Bateman to run, and he didn't do that. Had he run when he had the chance I think it might have looked like a better choice.

As it is, I think it probably needs to be Coker. He has issues, but there's reason enough to believe had he started he could have lead the team to victory. Until proven otherwise I'm not sure I can justify more uncertainty at the position.

Matt0424 · Sep 20, 2015

Bateman starting was the worst idea we've had as a team since trying to kick a 60 yard field goal in Jordan Hare.

Coker shouldn't be looking over his shoulder anymore. Period.

If you were in the stadium last night, you could feel Coker's will to win. Yeah he had the two picks, but the kid had guts last night. He made me proud.

The only bad play he had was the deep shot that got picked. Trying to go for it all at that point was ridiculous. Other then that, he would have finished over 50% passing if not for drops.

He also didn't get very good line play until the 4th quarter. Coker was thrown into the frying pan, and I think earned the chance to be named starter. I'm sick of the competition, and I'm sure he is too.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

TIDE-HSV · Sep 20, 2015

WMack4Bama said:
In my opinion, Bateman should have never seen the field. Nothing against him, but you come out of the gate with Jake in your first two games, and then in the biggest game to date, you roll out Bateman? Yes, Bateman played some before, but he didn't start. This ruins the continuity with the offense. It makes a huge difference. Look at the difference in the velocity of the throws. All timing that needs to be fine tuned with game reps. It's tough to find your go-to guy (although Richard Mullaney seems to be that guy for both QBs) and develop on-field chemistry if there is a revolving door at the signal caller position.

With the risk of sounding like someone on the meltdown boards, this one is squarely on the coaching staff. They tried to get too cute. The pass by Coker up the seam to OJ Howard late in the game is what I'd rather see than the little boot that Bateman ran to him early in the game. If we feel like we need to get the ball to OJ Howard so badly, then he needs to work on running better routes and getting open. We don't need to force anything. There are plenty capable weapons on offense.

And while I'm at it, I mentioned this last night, but it seems counter-intuitive to me to run your 240 lb bruiser out of a shotgun but run your 180 lb scat back out of an under center power formation. Just seems backward. Lane confuses me.

I agree with most of what you say. However, Henry is one of the most unusual backs I've ever seen. He's more like a 242 lb scatback. He needs several steps to get speed up. Before he does, he's easy to trip up with ankle tackles, he's so top-heavy, even with his great speed and power once he gets speed up. I'm with you on Drake. Traditional tailback is just not his position. I kept expecting to see Harris in those situations...

colbysullivan · Sep 20, 2015

I just don't understand the QB "competition" to begin with. Coker was clearly our best QB in the first game. Blake got the benefit of the doubt after game 1. Why didn't Jake?

Matt0424 · Sep 20, 2015

colbysullivan said:
I just don't understand the QB "competition" to begin with. Coker was clearly our best QB in the first game. Blake got the benefit of the doubt after game 1. Why didn't Jake?

It almost feels like since he didn't just come in and win the position last year the staff is hesitant to hand him the reigns. I feel like he was the obvious choice after wk 1, and frankly the competition should be over.

If he didn't win the staff over with his will to win last night, he never will.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

KrAzY3 · Sep 20, 2015

colbysullivan said:
I just don't understand the QB "competition" to begin with. Coker was clearly our best QB in the first game. Blake got the benefit of the doubt after game 1. Why didn't Jake?

I can't remember who said this, but someone else posted that they thought Bateman was supposed to run more and I'd tend to agree. Saban's comments indicated this and I was left thinking, why start a guy because he can run if he's not going to run?

With Bateman, hypothetically he can run the option attack and... run being operative. He has to be willing to run when that's available but he didn't. It makes a lot more sense to look at it like Alabama expected that to be part of their offense and it wasn't. Having said that, I think it should be Coker either way, he's the one that looks like a leader out there.

Also, I'll say this. In a weird way I'm more confident about this team than I was before. I was scared of Ole Miss, but Alabama literally gave the ball to Ole Miss 8 times, and they still almost won. This team can be very, very good if they can just clean things up.

colbysullivan · Sep 20, 2015

Matt0424 said:
It almost feels like since he didn't just come in and win the position last year the staff is hesitant to hand him the reigns. I feel like he was the obvious choice after wk 1, and frankly the competition should be over.

If he didn't win the staff over with his will to win last night, he never will.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

That's basically what I was saying. He played well enough in game 1 to put an end to the competition IMO.

WMack4Bama · Sep 20, 2015

colbysullivan said:
I just don't understand the QB "competition" to begin with. Coker was clearly our best QB in the first game. Blake got the benefit of the doubt after game 1. Why didn't Jake?

It's clear to me that this is a wrestling match between the coaching staff. Where one side is in favor of Coker because of the upside (although his lows are very low, his highs are very high) and another side wanting to go with anybody but Coker because Coker struggles with processing and distributing the information in a timely fashion. Make no mistake, these same problems were present all of last season, but Blake Sims had two things to bail him out if all else failed that none of the guys on our roster have: 4.5 speed and Amari Cooper.

Catfish · Sep 20, 2015

colbysullivan said:
I just don't understand the QB "competition" to begin with. Coker was clearly our best QB in the first game. Blake got the benefit of the doubt after game 1. Why didn't Jake?

I agree that Coker is our best option, but he does seem to have some issues that can bite us in the rear. he stares down receivers, doesn't seem to be great at moving through his progressions and his deep balls aren't very accurate. Plus, confusion at the LOS seems more frequent when he's in.

colbysullivan · Sep 20, 2015

It's so frustrating because you could just tell OM wasn't better than us. I thought Manziel and the Barn got away with some ridiculous plays but I can't remember a whackier play, you know the one I mean.

day-day · Sep 20, 2015

I think the coaches wanted to give Ole Miss something they weren't expecting by starting Bateman and running the read-option. I think it was more a function of running a different offense than starting a specific QB.

KrAzY3 · Sep 20, 2015

Catfish said:
I agree that Coker is our best option, but he does seem to have some issues that can bite us in the rear. he stares down receivers, doesn't seem to be great at moving through his progressions and his deep balls aren't very accurate. Plus, confusion at the LOS seems more frequent when he's in.

Sometimes it comes down to leadership and killer instinct though. MTSU and Wisconsin are both two good, most likely bowl bound teams and a Coker lead Alabama team controlled both of them. Alabama seemed to play better with Coker in the Ole Miss game as well, they were just kind of listless with Bateman in. Bateman has lead drives to, but not as consistently and both his interceptions were really bad.

I get that some things Coker does is scary, but he's a big strong guy who can take a hit, who actually can scramble (something that got lost in the mix for a while), and has a big arm. He's not the perfect option but I do think he's a viable one. If he can improve though, if he can take a step forward and clean things up, this team will be very, very hard to beat.

Matt0424 · Sep 20, 2015

day-day said:
I think the coaches wanted to give Ole Miss something they weren't expecting by starting Bateman and running the read-option. I think it was more a function of running a different offense than starting a specific QB.

Read option is worthless if the QB never makes a read. OM never once took Bateman on a read, and he should have pulled the ball a few times.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

day-day · Sep 20, 2015

Matt0424 said:
Read option is worthless if the QB never makes a read. OM never once took Bateman on a read, and he should have pulled the ball a few times.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Agree. The coaches must have expected better decision making or they wouldn't have implemented this ploy to start with.

So CNS and/or CLK call and ask you what to do about QB. What's your advice?

Administrator

Hall of Fame

1st Team

Administrator

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

All-American

Senior Administrator

Hall of Fame

All-American

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Administrator

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

All-American

Hall of Fame

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!