Grubb to be next OC at Bama per ESPN

[Cruloc]

Do we believe offensive coordinators do anything? I mean might as well have kept Applewhite, right? Coffee's improvement and so on, that was going to happen either way, or was it? Remember they also added a guy named Julio Jones, if Applewhite was still there he might have thrown the ball even more...

That aside, let's take a look at the guy named Mark Ingram. He averaged 5.1 yards per rush that season, he got 143 carries. You know how many carries Justice Haynes got, who averaged 5.7 last year? He got 79 carries...

The differences are not solely a result of the offensive coordinator, that's obvious. But when an offense gets better or worse, runs more or less, that's the job of the offensive coordinator! I don't see how people keep looking at the results and divorcing the guy calling the plays from them. McElwain chose to make Coffee the focal point of the offense (and reduce the role of the QB) and it paid off.

Because of the QB given those calls from the OC and running the plays.

If I call a play and the QB makes the wrong reads or sets the OL up wrong or doesn't see a wide open receiver.....or......in a read option, should have handed it off and didn't....or should have kept it and didn't....then we don't have a functional offense no matter what's called.

Then we'll have the games like UGA first half or LSU....everything looks great.

Then we'll have games like OU and Michigan where everything looks like a middle school offense.

 

[KrAzY3]

Because of the QB given those calls from the OC and running the plays.

If I call a play and the QB makes the wrong reads or sets the OL up wrong or doesn't see a wide open receiver.....or......in a read option, should have handed it off and didn't....or should have kept it and didn't....then we don't have a functional offense no matter what's called.

Then we'll have the games like UGA first half or LSU....everything looks great.

Then we'll have games like OU and Michigan where everything looks like a middle school offense.

If I tell Milroe to hand the ball off and he's subordinate, he's on the bench. I'm not sure the argument really is they told Milroe to hand the ball off and he flat out refused. I understand he was given a lot of options and made the wrong choices but I'm saying you don't let him do that nearly as often as they did. Going back to my JPW example, I guarantee you Applewhite and McElwain weren't giving him the same option, the latter made it clear they wanted him to hand the darn ball off more.

If you let a guy making bad choices keep making bad choices, it's not just on the guy making the bad choices, it's on the guy who kept letting him do that. It was criminal under-use of Haynes to only give him 79 carries. If Alabama had established a running game and a commitment to that running game, the Michigan game for example would have gone vastly different, due to less turnovers, Haynes likely availability, but a more well oiled running game to turn to.

 

[cdub55]

If I tell Milroe to hand the ball off and he's subordinate, he's on the bench. I'm not sure the argument really is they told Milroe to hand the ball off and he flat out refused. I understand he was given a lot of options and made the wrong choices but I'm saying you don't let him do that nearly as often as they did. Going back to my JPW example, I guarantee you Applewhite and McElwain weren't giving him the same option, the latter made it clear they wanted him to hand the darn ball off more.

If you let a guy making bad choices keep making bad choices, it's not just on the guy making the bad choices, it's on the guy who kept letting him do that. It was criminal under-use of Haynes to only give him 79 carries. If Alabama had established a running game and a commitment to that running game, the Michigan game for example would have gone vastly different, due to less turnovers, Haynes likely availability, but a more well oiled running game to turn to.

I can 100% assure you that the OC wasn't making the call on who the starting QB was...

 

[CrimSonami]

CRG will be just fine in the soon to be expanded CKD offense. He’s done it before and he’ll do it again. Might not be NC level out the gate as we’ve come to expect but a vast improvement and better consistency over last year. I expect Ty or Austin to be the starting QB in the fall with Keelon hot on their heels. Our defense and ST’s will need to step up and contribute to the scoreboard but I’m looking forward to a new beginning.
ROLL TIDE Coach Grubb!

 

[KrAzY3]

I can 100% assure you that the OC wasn't making the call on who the starting QB was...

I think that's a safe bet, but I can also guarantee you that Milroe wasn't being his own offensive coordinator. The issue was he was given a lot of options (namely the RPO) and often was choosing his own number (a very common occurrence for QBs running the RPO). There is a way to fix that though, the guy who is literally whispering in his ear can just call more designed hand-offs. The argument against that is that the defense might be ready for a run. So? Better than turning the ball over.

This does get back to the point that buzzard made earlier, which is that success is likely predicated on a developing the run (specifically running back) game more. The OC will probably need to do what ever they have to, to achieve that to insure more consistency in the offense.

TLDR: The coordinator shouldn't just shrug and go, "he should have handed the ball off there" once that consistently becomes an issue. The coordinator should start just telling him to hand off more often to address the issue.

 

[cdub55]

I think that's a safe bet, but I can also guarantee you that Milroe wasn't being his own offensive coordinator. The issue was he was given a lot of options (namely the RPO) and often was choosing his own number (a very common occurrence for QBs running the RPO). There is a way to fix that though, the guy who is literally whispering in his ear can just call more designed hand-offs. The argument against that is that the defense might be ready for a run. So? Better than turning the ball over.

This does get back to the point that buzzard made earlier, which is that success is likely predicated on a developing the run (specifically running back) game more. The OC will probably need to do what ever they have to, to achieve that to insure more consistency in the offense.

TLDR: The coordinator shouldn't just shrug and go, "he should have handed the ball off there" once that consistently becomes an issue. The coordinator should start just telling him to hand off more often to address the issue.

We couldn't throw the ball. Defenses were putting more run defenders in the box then we had blockers. Most of our plays either we had to use the RB to block, to get an extra blocker, or read someone to account for the extra player. We ran far fewer "RPO's" as you think we did. The offense was dumbed down to below an elementary level for an SEC team. If you want to hand the ball off with 7 men in the box out of a 3 wide set, be my guest and see how that works for you. The only other option was to go jumbo and have RW and company stand on the sideline and we go full 3 yards and a cloud of dust approach. RW and all the other commits would have portal'ed out quicker than William Shatner in Star Trek if that would have happened, and I can't blame them. The truth is, our OC wasn't the NACOY last year, but he was also calling plays with his hands tied behind his back because of who we were snapping the ball to, which was CKD's decision.

 

[KrAzY3]

If you want to hand the ball off with 7 men in the box out of a 3 wide set, be my guest and see how that works for you. The only other option was to go jumbo and have RW and company stand on the sideline and we go full 3 yards and a cloud of dust approach.

I guess it was better to just turn the ball over...

Edit: I'll note that as sarcastic as my response might sound, that's exactly what Michigan did. They couldn't run or pass, so they just said we're not going to just turn the ball over. They won doing that, and that to me is what counts. You're supposed to be trying to win.

 

[cdub55]

I guess it was better to just turn the ball over...

We definitely could have just got under center...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1832603644598051291

 

[REBELZED]

Do we believe offensive coordinators do anything? I mean might as well have kept Applewhite, right? Coffee's improvement and so on, that was going to happen either way, or was it?

I would say that yes, good players are going to naturally make progress either way. And I would attribute their improvement to their position coaches more than the OC regardless, especially for OL.

That aside, let's take a look at the guy named Mark Ingram. He averaged 5.1 yards per rush that season, he got 143 carries. You know how many carries Justice Haynes got, who averaged 5.7 last year? He got 79 carries...

What I see here is our 2nd string RB got twice the production in 2008 vs. 2024. I know Milroe was technically our top rusher, but Coffee had twice the production of Milroe and the 2008 team had 600+ yards more rushing total (top 3 rushers combined) than 2024.

The differences are not solely a result of the offensive coordinator, that's obvious. But when an offense gets better or worse, runs more or less, that's the job of the offensive coordinator! I don't see how people keep looking at the results and divorcing the guy calling the plays from them. McElwain chose to make Coffee the focal point of the offense (and reduce the role of the QB) and it paid off.

I guess I'm just not understanding what you're arguing. JPW had worse stats but the offense was better overall as a result of the running game. I am contending that is largely due to development of existing players and adding key new players which allowed the run game to flourish. I liked McElwain but I could have called run plays that year and been productive.

 

[KrAzY3]

We definitely could have just got under center...

No one is defending Milroe here, and I get that I edited my response right as you posted but for example Michigan didn't operate under center and Milroe wasn't fumbling tons of snaps in the shotgun.

Nothing was stopping Alabama from going run heavy against Michigan for example, nothing but their own hubris. They chose not to. We didn't just discover that day Milroe could be a turnover machine. Michigan lacked the hubris and they won the game because of it. One team did what it took to win, the other team despite having plenty of time to prepare and a weakened opponent they still couldn't humble themselves like Michigan did or Oklahoma (second lowest pass attempts of the season) did.

Michigan's game-plan was we're going to face a top 10 defense and hand the ball off over and over to a guy who averaged 3.9 yards per rush (I'm pretty sure Alabama knew they were going to run as well). That's humbling yourself, but it was what it took to win the game. There's a sort of arrogance to saying if I just draw up passing a play, my personnel can pull it off even if they haven't before. Michigan could have drawn up all sorts of fancy pass plays for their players, but they knew they couldn't execute them so they just ran.

What I see here is our 2nd string RB got twice the production in 2008 vs. 2024.

That's because they used their second string RB in 2008. For example Haynes got 3 rushes in the Oklahoma game. You might think he was bad that game, he wasn't, he averaged 6 yards per carry. He just didn't get any chances to do anything. He didn't get a chance against Michigan either because by then he was already tired of collecting dust and transferred.

But if you just compare Haynes last year to Ingram in 2008, and I'll add Richardson in 2009 for good measure and you will note the main difference is just usage:
Ingram: 728 yards, 5.1 average, 12 rushing TDs
Haynes: 448 yards, 5.7 average, 7 rushing TDs
Richardson: 752, 5.8 average, 8 rushing TDs

Of course we don't really know what Haynes would have done under heavy use, but it would have been more than 7 rushing TDs, that's a safe bet. We do know what Milroe did under heavy use, and I think we'd all agree that Ingram or Richardson would have been a safer bet, so why not Haynes? I guess we'll see part of the answer next year when Haynes plays for Michigan.

 

[cdub55]

No one is defending Milroe here, and I get that I edited my response right as you posted but for example Michigan didn't operate under center and Milroe wasn't fumbling tons of snaps in the shotgun.

You are correct, they didn't. Shotgun it is then...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1874145700784599222

 

[KrAzY3]

You are correct, they didn't. Shotgun it is then...

That was predictable.

I will now demonstrate why Haynes should have had the ball 100% of the time.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1779243247379845397

 

[cdub55]

That was predictable.

As annoying as that was, imagine calling a play that has a high success rate vs. the coverage/alignment/etc and you get that result. On top of that, you get clobbered online by people for not knowing how to call offense. We can agree to disagree but you won't convince me that Sheridan should own more of the fault than JM.

 

[KrAzY3]

you won't convince me that Sheridan should own more of the fault than JM.

Not at all what I'm contending. I'm just saying it was criminal how much he relied on Milroe when it became clear Milroe was unreliable. It's not his fault he got a flat tire, it is his fault he tried going 60 on the highway when he knew he had a flat tire.

 

[cdub55]

Not at all what I'm contending. I'm just saying it was criminal how much he relied on Milroe when it became clear Milroe was unreliable. It's not his fault he got a flat tire, it is his fault he tried going 60 on the highway when he knew he had a flat tire.

As long as CKD is the HC in Tuscaloosa, we will be a QB centric offense. It is who he is, it is what he does, it is how he operates. If we wanted Haynes to get 20-30 carries a game, CKD should have never been hired in TTown. We could have asked Paul Johnson to dust off the ole playbook. Again, I get the analogy but you are asking Sheridan to not go 60 on a flat tire while he is in a Nascar race. Maybe the better answer wasn't to try to quit going fast, but to change the tire...

 

[KrAzY3]

Again, I get the analogy but you are asking Sheridan to not go 60 on a flat tire while he is in a Nascar race.

When the only other car in the race has two flat tires it should become a very different Nascar race. That gets to the heart of the issue.

Alabama treated the Michigan game like a Nascar race, knowing Michigan had two flat tires. Why? Why on earth would you do that, knowing full well you also had a bad tire. So what happens? Alabama ends up rolled over on the side of the road and Michigan limps on by at 15 MPH and wins the race.

If we're sticking to the racing analogy, I would liken using Milroe or really any over-reliance on QB play to using nitrous . Yes you can get more out of the engine, but it comes with greater risk as well. You needed it against Georgia, you needed it against Vanderbilt. No other team scored more than 25 points (even assisted by turnovers like Michigan and Oklahoma were).

So may be part of it is just knowing when you have to go full speed and when you don't need to redline your engine. I do agree with some of your general sentiment about this type of offense and the issues with Milroe, but they do need to find the balance especially when they are not in a Nascar race.

The Oklahoma and Michigan games could have been won purely by handing off more. This would have meant less turnovers, better ball control, and put the defense in better position. Alabama treated mud bogging (more accurate than I'd care to admit for the Michigan game) like a Nascar race, that's not going to go well. In that respect, whoever the OC is needs to understand the type of race they are in and adjust accordingly.

I get the point and I've made it here as well. The idea is this offense only knows how to go one speed, but there are certain road conditions where you need to learn to go down into a lower gear for more traction and safer driving.

 

[cdub55]

If we're sticking to the racing analogy, I would liken using Milroe or really any over-reliance on QB play to a combustion engine that has caught fire . Yes you can get more out of the engine, but it comes with greater risk as well. You needed it against Georgia, you needed it against Vanderbilt. No other team scored more than 25 points (even assisted by turnovers like Michigan and Oklahoma were).

FIFY

 

[Bamabuzzard]

I think we're all pointing at the same thing without saying it. There should have been a QB change at some point in the 2024 season.

 

[gtgilbert]

I think that's a safe bet, but I can also guarantee you that Milroe wasn't being his own offensive coordinator. The issue was he was given a lot of options (namely the RPO) and often was choosing his own number (a very common occurrence for QBs running the RPO). There is a way to fix that though, the guy who is literally whispering in his ear can just call more designed hand-offs. The argument against that is that the defense might be ready for a run. So? Better than turning the ball over.

This does get back to the point that buzzard made earlier, which is that success is likely predicated on a developing the run (specifically running back) game more. The OC will probably need to do what ever they have to, to achieve that to insure more consistency in the offense.

TLDR: The coordinator shouldn't just shrug and go, "he should have handed the ball off there" once that consistently becomes an issue. The coordinator should start just telling him to hand off more often to address the issue.

you just really don't get it.

the RPO based offense as well as the IZR/OZR concepts are the ONLY thing the Nilroe could somewhat do, even though he didn't do that well at all.

There's no way he could run effective play action. We made a few attempts at it and just looked stupid cause the fake wasn't even close - like a yard away so it did nothing and Nilroe was even more off schedule than usual. Even just a hardcore run based set wasn't going to work because Nilroe can't make the most basic throws to keep the safeties from constantly crashing the box and putting us into situations where they'd have 2 free guys we couldn't block.

You're saying take the option out of the RPO or IZR. Well that's exactly what CTR did in 23 and everyone railed against him and thought he was the worst OC ever, at least until this year when someone else had to try to make lemonade out of rotten lemons. There just isn't enough sugar in the world to cover it up.

 

[gtgilbert]

I think we're all pointing at the same thing without saying it. There should have been a QB change at some point in the 2024 season.

Nilroe should have listened to BOB is what really should have happened, and when he didn't, we should have ushered him outta town by arranging a transfer for him. I firmly believe the ONLY reason that didn't happen is because Nilroe was really good friends with Terrion Arnold, and Arnold was one of Ms. Terry's (and the rest of the Saban family) favorite players ever.