How many years till he can replace Donovan?

DerekJohnson said:

Tequilla said:

It’d be a shame if there were like actual data points out there that suggests that JonDon ain’t as bad as many of you think he is

You're right but also the sample set isn't a big one. People will adjust. But you're right he wasn't bad.

Sure ... jury is obviously still out.

But everything about JonDon is reacting to 12 months ago at this point ...

The “best” arguments that I’ve seen really are more of an indictment on the defense than the offense

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

DerekJohnson said:

Tequilla said:

It’d be a shame if there were like actual data points out there that suggests that JonDon ain’t as bad as many of you think he is

You're right but also the sample set isn't a big one. People will adjust. But you're right he wasn't bad.

Sure ... jury is obviously still out.

But everything about JonDon is reacting to 12 months ago at this point ...

The “best” arguments that I’ve seen really are more of an indictment on the defense than the offense

Please explain how the fact his offense managed 3 total points over sixty first half minutes against the two decent teams we? played is an indictment on the defense?

Don’t ask questions you don’t want answers to

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

DerekJohnson said:

Tequilla said:

It’d be a shame if there were like actual data points out there that suggests that JonDon ain’t as bad as many of you think he is

You're right but also the sample set isn't a big one. People will adjust. But you're right he wasn't bad.

Sure ... jury is obviously still out.

But everything about JonDon is reacting to 12 months ago at this point ...

The “best” arguments that I’ve seen really are more of an indictment on the defense than the offense

Please explain how the fact his offense managed 3 total points over sixty first half minutes against the two decent teams we? played is an indictment on the defense?

Knute Rockne ran a more explosive offense.

chuck said:

Pitchfork51 said:

chuck said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

DerekJohnson said:

Tequilla said:

It’d be a shame if there were like actual data points out there that suggests that JonDon ain’t as bad as many of you think he is

You're right but also the sample set isn't a big one. People will adjust. But you're right he wasn't bad.

Sure ... jury is obviously still out.

But everything about JonDon is reacting to 12 months ago at this point ...

The “best” arguments that I’ve seen really are more of an indictment on the defense than the offense

Please explain how the fact his offense managed 3 total points over sixty first half minutes against the two decent teams we? played is an indictment on the defense?

It's a diversion. Stupid one too. Donovan's offense has been shit more than it has been good so far.

I see potential. I saw fast receivers running open. That was a change for the better. I saw average RBs putting up decent numbers in spite of being predictably slammed into the middle of the line for long stretches of game. I dont think I'm dooging to say that there are signs the offense could work.

There have been more signs that it doesn't work with Donovan calling the plays. Not on a whole game basis. I dont understand why that's hard for some to recognize...or maybe just to accept. He just needs to call a better game from the first possession on.

A legit oc constantly has wide open receivers.

When Mike norvell was our oc our mediocre tight end had like 800 yards because our receivers were garbage but he schemed open the only guy who could run a route.

That's a bullshit excuse.

We haven't had a legit OC in many years. That's the point. Saying he has receivers running open was faint praise, not an excuse.

Its just crazy. Every time we square off against a legit oc their dudes are open.

At some point you can't just sit back. You have to take chances on a sack, to get the ball back to your offense. K deserved full blame for that.

Agree wholeheartedly with this premise, but lay the blame at Jimmy’s fee, not K’s. That was Lake’s defense out there. Same thing we’ve seen for the past three years against Stanford. K was just running what Jimmy wanted and probably a significant contributory reason for K’s willingness to accept Texas $$$$. It’s the same with blaming Babushka and Hamdan for running Pete’s pain inducing overly complicated offense. That was Pete’s offense that was great against shitty teams and then completely ineffective against good defenses with equal or better athletes.

It’s always the top guys fault. While I saw glimpses of potential from Jon Don’s offense, as long as Lake continues to hamstring his coordinators, the results will be disappointing.

doogville said:

chuck said:

Pitchfork51 said:

chuck said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

DerekJohnson said:

Tequilla said:

It’d be a shame if there were like actual data points out there that suggests that JonDon ain’t as bad as many of you think he is

You're right but also the sample set isn't a big one. People will adjust. But you're right he wasn't bad.

Sure ... jury is obviously still out.

But everything about JonDon is reacting to 12 months ago at this point ...

The “best” arguments that I’ve seen really are more of an indictment on the defense than the offense

Please explain how the fact his offense managed 3 total points over sixty first half minutes against the two decent teams we? played is an indictment on the defense?

It's a diversion. Stupid one too. Donovan's offense has been shit more than it has been good so far.

I see potential. I saw fast receivers running open. That was a change for the better. I saw average RBs putting up decent numbers in spite of being predictably slammed into the middle of the line for long stretches of game. I dont think I'm dooging to say that there are signs the offense could work.

There have been more signs that it doesn't work with Donovan calling the plays. Not on a whole game basis. I dont understand why that's hard for some to recognize...or maybe just to accept. He just needs to call a better game from the first possession on.

A legit oc constantly has wide open receivers.

When Mike norvell was our oc our mediocre tight end had like 800 yards because our receivers were garbage but he schemed open the only guy who could run a route.

That's a bullshit excuse.

We haven't had a legit OC in many years. That's the point. Saying he has receivers running open was faint praise, not an excuse.

Still to this day don't understand the Hamden hire. Pete got who he wanted -- pulled him back from the Falcons. Could have hired almost anyone. Wanted Bush, and he just sucked. Currently coaching wide receivers at Mizzou.

I wonder what would have been different had Pete gone out and used his rep & our ability to pay to hire a top flight OC. Would Pete still have retired?

There was speculation that Phil Longo who was at Ole Miss at the time was a candidate. At one point he started following most of the UW coaches. I think in the end his air raid system would have been too much of a departure from Pete's system so he we went with the safe choice instead. Longo is now at UNC and his offense has been killing it in the ACC.

FremontTroll said:

Classic Tequilla.

I’m right, nobody could disagree with me, and no I won’t take the time to tell you why.

@haie did a pretty good job of saying my point ... which I’ve said multiple times here and on Twitter

I didn’t really feel like going into a TL, DR analysis on the subject at this point

Stanford 1H:
27 plays for 126 yards (4.66 ypp)
2H:
30 for 245 yards (8.17 ypp)

Utah 1H:
29 for 127 (4.38 ypp)
35 for 233 (6.66 ypp)

When he treated each possession as precious and each play as an opportunity to gain maximum yardage the offense was good.

When he tried to protect his qb and play it safe we sucked.

If we get more of the desperate and aggressive offense next year with a more experienced qb or the freshman phenom then great.

If we get more pussy footing around because Donovan fundamentally misunderstands the game of football in 2020 then not great.

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

DerekJohnson said:

Tequilla said:

It’d be a shame if there were like actual data points out there that suggests that JonDon ain’t as bad as many of you think he is

You're right but also the sample set isn't a big one. People will adjust. But you're right he wasn't bad.

Sure ... jury is obviously still out.

But everything about JonDon is reacting to 12 months ago at this point ...

The “best” arguments that I’ve seen really are more of an indictment on the defense than the offense

Please explain how the fact his offense managed 3 total points over sixty first half minutes against the two decent teams we? played is an indictment on the defense?

Don’t ask questions you don’t want answers to

I didn't