Ye Olde Green Wave Forum

The DEFINITIVE Tulane discussion forum
It is currently Sun Dec 16, 2018 8:34 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:02 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 20788
Location: Cincinnati, OH
After watching yesterday's game, I've come to a (disappointing) conclusion: Justin McMillan is not the answer. He is a good QB with a rocket arm and apparently a nice touch too, but Tulane can't win with him because he's a pro-style, pocket passer. He's not going to run, or even run the option. You know, like what Banks tried to be in the first three games.

Tulane has NEVER (at least in the modern era) won with a pocket passer. Terrance Jones. Shaun King. JP Losman. Heck, even Devin Powell was mobile. Our only bowl games in how long? Heck... Steve Foley. I'm sure some old timers will come up with a pocket passer that won at Tulane, but before you bother thinking about it, the game was COMPLETELY different than it is now. And we had more beastly offensive linemen then.

We all screamed that Banks was trying to be a pocket passer in the first three games (to avoid injury since we had no backup) and that he's not good at that. But regardless of whether that's his strength or not, we don't have the line, nor the receivers, to win with that style. We've recruited specifically for the option-type offense. Remember all the folks on the recruiting board justifying linemen who were not highly recruited because "they are mobile guys who fit our system"? Now we're taking those guys and asking them to straight up pass block. Not going to work.

So I believe our only chance to win this year is with Banks being Banks. Yeah, he's not as good at the type of offense we want, nay, NEED - He doesn't pitch at all and he hasn't run as much as we need (or at least made himself a threat to do so) - but we will not win with a pocket passer, even if he's got a great arm and a great touch.

Banks needs to start, and be the clear starter. Deal with the 3-&-outs when it other times means sustained drives or huge TD plays in between. Try try try to get him to run an option and make a correct read and pitch the friggin ball sometimes. And then use McMillan as a change of pace. Bring him in when the defense starts keying on the run. Bring him in mid-drive for a play, before the defense realizes it. But don't telegraph things by saying "we're in pro mode now because McMillan is in". It's just not going to work.

My opinion. What say ye?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:16 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:45 pm
Posts: 21027
Location: Irish Channel, New Orleans
I mostly agree but think its too soon to put a final verdict on McMillan. This is what, literally week 6 in the system?

If it were me, I'd go Banks this year, and wait to let McMillan and the USM transfer duke it out next year. But if Fritz really thinks he can fit McMillan into this, then fine. This time, with 2 weeks off at mid season, is a good time to consider that shift. I just wish we wouldn't have done auditions in a winnable game yesterday (especially when there was a bye week after, and especially when we had a good rythym with things working just a week before)

_________________
“We will expect success in all endeavors and be prepared to assess and hold ourselves accountable when we aren't successful. Tulane is a top 40 academic institution and it should expect nothing less from its athletic department.” --Troy Dannen 11.5.16


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:16 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 14683
Why do we recruits guys who can't run the offense?

_________________
Seize the day


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:19 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:45 pm
Posts: 21027
Location: Irish Channel, New Orleans
OGSB wrote:
Why do we recruits guys who can't run the offense?


Simple.

Banks--- Because none of the big time HS recruits we wanted and chased after who fit the system decided to come, and we were all clamoring for a QB who could help us win now


McMillan ---- Because all of the mid time HS recruits who did come left when they realized we were playing to win now, and that they had no chance of being the future, so we were all clamoring for QB depth because if Banks got hurt we had nobody

_________________
“We will expect success in all endeavors and be prepared to assess and hold ourselves accountable when we aren't successful. Tulane is a top 40 academic institution and it should expect nothing less from its athletic department.” --Troy Dannen 11.5.16


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:22 am 
Offline
Regent's Circle

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:48 am
Posts: 6014
I'm ok with playing each of them a lot based on game situation. One runs better; one passes better.

I'm more concerned with the dropsies we had yesterday and last week. I thought we were past that but obviously not.


Team can still go bowling and even do damage in the west. UC simply is better than forecast preseason and Navy is down this season. We'll see.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:24 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:45 pm
Posts: 21027
Location: Irish Channel, New Orleans
Baywave1 wrote:
I'm ok with playing each of them a lot based on game situation. One runs better; one passes better.

So that we can signal what we want to do with our QB just like we do every time we send Dauphine onto the field!!!

This offense works best when it is completely unpredictable. Honestly, other than QB and drops, that's the only real problem with this offense. The play calling is utterly predictable.

_________________
“We will expect success in all endeavors and be prepared to assess and hold ourselves accountable when we aren't successful. Tulane is a top 40 academic institution and it should expect nothing less from its athletic department.” --Troy Dannen 11.5.16


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:38 am 
Offline
Regent's Circle

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:48 am
Posts: 6014
WaveProf wrote:
Baywave1 wrote:
I'm ok with playing each of them a lot based on game situation. One runs better; one passes better.

So that we can signal what we want to do with our QB just like we do every time we send Dauphine onto the field!!!

This offense works best when it is completely unpredictable. Honestly, other than QB and drops, that's the only real problem with this offense. The play calling is utterly predictable.


Sure. It is what it is. We were way down yesterday and needed to score. Fritz decided no ten minute drives would work to help Tulane win. So McMillan played. When you are predictable then you better out execute the other guys which of course didn't happen either. Thus my concern with the drops.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:41 am 
Offline
Coach Level

Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 4:26 pm
Posts: 2480
PeteRasche wrote:

My opinion. What say ye?


If Powell qualifies as a mobile QB, then so does McMillan.
McMillan did have a few designed runs that went for 6-7 yards IIRC.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 10:02 am 
Offline
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 8:43 pm
Posts: 2652
Location: Baton Rouge
McMillin plays a middle of the road 3 quarters against one of the best two or three defenses we play and we are ready to give up on him?

Really?

_________________
Quote:The Good - TULANE
The Bad - LSU
THe Ugly - USM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 10:10 am 
Offline
Navigator Level

Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 1:22 pm
Posts: 899
PeteRasche wrote:
After watching yesterday's game, I've come to a (disappointing) conclusion: Justin McMillan is not the answer. He is a good QB with a rocket arm and apparently a nice touch too, but Tulane can't win with him because he's a pro-style, pocket passer. He's not going to run, or even run the option. You know, like what Banks tried to be in the first three games.

Tulane has NEVER (at least in the modern era) won with a pocket passer. Terrance Jones. Shaun King. JP Losman. Heck, even Devin Powell was mobile. Our only bowl games in how long? Heck... Steve Foley. I'm sure some old timers will come up with a pocket passer that won at Tulane, but before you bother thinking about it, the game was COMPLETELY different than it is now. And we had more beastly offensive linemen then.

We all screamed that Banks was trying to be a pocket passer in the first three games (to avoid injury since we had no backup) and that he's not good at that. But regardless of whether that's his strength or not, we don't have the line, nor the receivers, to win with that style. We've recruited specifically for the option-type offense. Remember all the folks on the recruiting board justifying linemen who were not highly recruited because "they are mobile guys who fit our system"? Now we're taking those guys and asking them to straight up pass block. Not going to work.

So I believe our only chance to win this year is with Banks being Banks. Yeah, he's not as good at the type of offense we want, nay, NEED - He doesn't pitch at all and he hasn't run as much as we need (or at least made himself a threat to do so) - but we will not win with a pocket passer, even if he's got a great arm and a great touch.

Banks needs to start, and be the clear starter. Deal with the 3-&-outs when it other times means sustained drives or huge TD plays in between. Try try try to get him to run an option and make a correct read and pitch the friggin ball sometimes. And then use McMillan as a change of pace. Bring him in when the defense starts keying on the run. Bring him in mid-drive for a play, before the defense realizes it. But don't telegraph things by saying "we're in pro mode now because McMillan is in". It's just not going to work.

My opinion. What say ye?


After the UAB debacle Fritz said the staff had told Banks to stay in the pocket and go through all the progressions. He also said they now realize his running is a big part of the offense. As for accuracy no QB will be accurate behind this line. The hits accumulate and they start getting antsy. Banks throws a better deep ball. His running around sometimes allows WR's to get open deep such as in the Wake game. Fritz has said that McMillan is not a runner. So there's no doubt we need to go with Banks.

_________________
Gladly it's over


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 10:24 am 
Offline
Navigator Level
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 9:39 am
Posts: 1102
Location: Atlanta, GA
I watched tape on McMillan at LSU and he ran quite a bit. I wonder if he refrained from running much in this game because we were behind and went into passing made. I agree though that we need a run/pass threat at QB. That is what Fritz runs best and when the offense has done well, there is a threat of both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:44 pm 
Offline
President's Circle

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:07 am
Posts: 2926
Pete, a couple of things -

1. Don’t judge the new QB off of yesterday. He hasn’t played in a game since high school. Way too early to throw in the towel on this kid.
2. Our coaches are as much to blame for this as anyone. Not adapting to their personnel or failure to recruit the correct personnel has led to this mess. For heaven sake, we are recruiting OL that are in the mold of Army OL, but signing QB’s that cannot run any kind of pass/run option.
3. We are the weakest I have ever seen us at WR. That is pretty pathetic considering the recruiting area we reside.
4. What is the strength of our offense - RB - and it is not close. We have quality backs. How do we utilize them? Do we continue to run the same plays? Do we try to get them on the edge? Corey Dauphine is a home run waiting to happen. He has rushed 43 times for 411 yards. That is a 9.6 yards per carry. He has touched the ball six times per game. In six games we have had TWO RECEPTIONS BY RB’s. One by Huderson, one by Amare Jones. Today and tomorrow, Barkley, Kamara, and Ingram will each be targeted six or seven times each. Remember when Forte was playing for us and the Bears, he would catch 5-8 passes per game. It is just ridiculous how this staff utilize their talent. Bradwell and Dauphine should be touching the ball 35 times per game.
5. Offensive Coaching - pitiful. They are an option bunch with an option OL, and great RB’s with QB’s that are pro style guys. Two receptions by RB’s for the entire year is unexplainable. No crossing routes where you isolate on a LB, no dump offs, no screens, no usage of the TE. What makes this even worst is that we practice sometimes in a facilty with one of the greatest QB’s of all time and we don’t observe, we don’t inquire. Or maybe we do and cannot comprehend. Nevertheless, I really believe if this offense utilized their strengths, we would be 5-1 or 4-2. We need a new OC tomorrow, or dare I say.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:56 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 8:53 am
Posts: 20215
Location: New Orleans
Hard to argue with any of that especially #3

_________________
After a while, the residents of the sea do not hear the sound of the waves.
How bitter it is, the story of routine- Arabic (Anon)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:40 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 20788
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Tjtlja, other than #1, to which I would argue we've seen him in three games now, I don't think anything you say is in conflict with anything I said. In fact, we are very much in agreement about the offense in general. I was just speaking to the QB specifically and not the whole scheme.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:53 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 14683
TP: Tulane to evaluate QBs after former LSU passer Justin McMillan plays 'a little better'

_________________
Seize the day


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 4:15 pm 
Offline
Breaker Level
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:16 am
Posts: 297
wavedom wrote:
PeteRasche wrote:
After watching yesterday's game, I've come to a (disappointing) conclusion: Justin McMillan is not the answer. He is a good QB with a rocket arm and apparently a nice touch too, but Tulane can't win with him because he's a pro-style, pocket passer. He's not going to run, or even run the option. You know, like what Banks tried to be in the first three games.

Tulane has NEVER (at least in the modern era) won with a pocket passer. Terrance Jones. Shaun King. JP Losman. Heck, even Devin Powell was mobile. Our only bowl games in how long? Heck... Steve Foley. I'm sure some old timers will come up with a pocket passer that won at Tulane, but before you bother thinking about it, the game was COMPLETELY different than it is now. And we had more beastly offensive linemen then.

We all screamed that Banks was trying to be a pocket passer in the first three games (to avoid injury since we had no backup) and that he's not good at that. But regardless of whether that's his strength or not, we don't have the line, nor the receivers, to win with that style. We've recruited specifically for the option-type offense. Remember all the folks on the recruiting board justifying linemen who were not highly recruited because "they are mobile guys who fit our system"? Now we're taking those guys and asking them to straight up pass block. Not going to work.

So I believe our only chance to win this year is with Banks being Banks. Yeah, he's not as good at the type of offense we want, nay, NEED - He doesn't pitch at all and he hasn't run as much as we need (or at least made himself a threat to do so) - but we will not win with a pocket passer, even if he's got a great arm and a great touch.

Banks needs to start, and be the clear starter. Deal with the 3-&-outs when it other times means sustained drives or huge TD plays in between. Try try try to get him to run an option and make a correct read and pitch the friggin ball sometimes. And then use McMillan as a change of pace. Bring him in when the defense starts keying on the run. Bring him in mid-drive for a play, before the defense realizes it. But don't telegraph things by saying "we're in pro mode now because McMillan is in". It's just not going to work.

My opinion. What say ye?


After the UAB debacle Fritz said the staff had told Banks to stay in the pocket and go through all the progressions. He also said they now realize his running is a big part of the offense. As for accuracy no QB will be accurate behind this line. The hits accumulate and they start getting antsy. Banks throws a better deep ball. His running around sometimes allows WR's to get open deep such as in the Wake game. Fritz has said that McMillan is not a runner. So there's no doubt we need to go with Banks.



Just my 2 cents..... I believe the staff is just truly stuck between both QB's. We know what Banks can do & has limited upside due to either his poor decision making/reads of defense or play calling. McMillan comes in & just has that "Juice" that seems players can rally behind. Maybe he can run but just seems we are in "throw mode" when he comes in. If we could somehow put the "juice" into Banks' decision making we could have the best of both worlds. Seems like the staff is concerned that if we choose strictly Banks that McMillan may walk & then we have nothing......but I could be way off!!!! :stan:

_________________
You're killin' me Smalls!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 7:03 pm 
Offline
Navigator Level

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:06 am
Posts: 926
Location: River Ridge
We could put Brees back there with this O play calling and he would struggle. In addition to the lack of getting RBs in space and lack of pitches I counted a total of two plays that were designed for the middle of the field. A slant that was defended beautifully by Cindy and was almost a pick six and a pass to Encalade for a first down who then fumbled.

I rewatched the game which showed the Cindy LBs and safeties cheating up and wide. When you run 35 pass plays to the boundary good Ds will take notice.

I thought we brought it physically on D. We gave up a couple of long runs but really matched their defensive intensity. We punished #3 on 80% of his carries…but he was also a good back.

And lastly I thought their Frosh QB was tremendous. It helped that he was placed and coached to deliver quickly and decisively. IMO his coaching seemed to give him the confidence to be the boss of that game. He took control and put his team into the top 25. Good for him and his coaches. Jealous.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 7:15 pm 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 14683
1401973 wrote:
We could put Brees back there with this O play calling and he would struggle. In addition to the lack of getting RBs in space and lack of pitches I counted a total of two plays that were designed for the middle of the field. A slant that was defended beautifully by Cindy and was almost a pick six and a pass to Encalade for a first down who then fumbled.

I rewatched the game which showed the Cindy LBs and safeties cheating up and wide. When you run 35 pass plays to the boundary good Ds will take notice.

I thought we brought it physically on D. We gave up a couple of long runs but really matched their defensive intensity. We punished #3 on 80% of his carries…but he was also a good back.

And lastly I thought their Frosh QB was tremendous. It helped that he was placed and coached to deliver quickly and decisively. IMO his coaching seemed to give him the confidence to be the boss of that game. He took control and put his team into the top 25. Good for him and his coaches. Jealous.


Can Brees run the option?

_________________
Seize the day


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:48 am 
Offline
Coach Level
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 2:30 pm
Posts: 2481
I struggle with the idea of college WRs being incapable of catching a football.


That's all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:53 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:00 pm
Posts: 14683
MattK wrote:
I struggle with the idea of college WRs being incapable of catching a football.


That's all.


Can't quite grasp it?

_________________
Seize the day


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:53 am 
Online
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:18 am
Posts: 4777
Location: Wichita

Maybe I put this on the wrong post. I'm just starting to post the same thing on every thread like no one else does

_________________
#stopbunting
#nomorekicking
#itwasallaruse


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:55 am 
Online
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:18 am
Posts: 4777
Location: Wichita
OGSB wrote:
MattK wrote:
I struggle with the idea of college WRs being incapable of catching a football.


That's all.


Can't quite grasp it?

It is hard to get a handle on

_________________
#stopbunting
#nomorekicking
#itwasallaruse


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:58 am 
Offline
Emerald Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:13 pm
Posts: 20730
Location: Chicago
gerryb323 wrote:
OGSB wrote:
MattK wrote:
I struggle with the idea of college WRs being incapable of catching a football.


That's all.


Can't quite grasp it?

It is hard to get a handle on


I can't get my arms around our DBs not tackling

_________________
Using big words is not a personal attack


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:00 am 
Online
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:18 am
Posts: 4777
Location: Wichita
windywave wrote:
gerryb323 wrote:
OGSB wrote:
MattK wrote:
I struggle with the idea of college WRs being incapable of catching a football.


That's all.


Can't quite grasp it?

It is hard to get a handle on


I can't get my arms around our DBs not tackling

Ok, let's wrap this up

_________________
#stopbunting
#nomorekicking
#itwasallaruse


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The QB "controversy"
PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 12:19 pm 
Offline
President's Circle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 8:02 pm
Posts: 2666
Location: Fullerton, CA
Let me add to the drumbeat here. The QB controversy we have is with the way we use them and the overall quality at the position.

McMillan is game, has a rocket arm, and is a willing runner. On the other hand, he isn't very accurate and isn't a very good open-field runner.

Banks is game, has an acceptably strong arm, has some nice escape moves, and runs very hard. On the other hand, he isn't very accurate and seems to lock into bad reads.

Meanwhile, we have a bunch of WR's who are having a bad collective case of stone hands and have been instructed to run short to medium routes that don't get very open because defenses load up so close to the LOS that there are always bodies around when the QB looks out at an RPO decision point.

This is not good. And last week, as at least one person here pointed out, we totally abandoned the usual features of the offense and instead tried to run something like a pro set.

We should be running the ball a lot more. We don't appear to be running as much because too many RPO decisions are going "pass" when they shouldn't. We are also missing outside action, counter options, and other stuff that surely must be in the current playbook. That's all disheartening. I wonder how much of that has to do with the struggles we have getting hold and drive blocks by the tackles and ends.

Anyway, I'd be tempted in Ruse's position to take some decisions away from the QB and script some play sets based on the looks we are getting from every defense we see. I don't know how well that would sit with WF, though.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gerryb323, pearlriverwave, tulaneoutlaw and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group