Spring practice PC

[Pork Twain]

A better question would be: what games do you see as for-sure wins?

Why is that better?  Is proving a positive and proving a negative really all that different?

I see Florida A&M, TCU, New Mexico State, @Ole Miss, Coastal Carolina, Mississippi State, and Missouri as for sure wins (7), but other than Bama (until we actually beat them), I do not see any other for-sure losses.

[Steef]

Why is that better?  Is proving a positive and proving a negative really all that different?

I see Florida A&M, TCU, New Mexico State, @Ole Miss, Coastal Carolina, Mississippi State, and Missouri as for sure wins (7), but other than Bama (until we actually beat them), I do not see any other for-sure losses.

My question was better because its answerable. You proved it with this post. You could name games you thought were sure wins, but couldnt name games you thought were sure losses. Other than Bama.

[Steef]

Lol, I'm guessing Lucy has pulled the ball one too many times for you!! 

LOL. You did see the 16 season...yes? Since that time, we graduated  starters off the Oline, changed DCs again, completely changed our defensive strategy, put more burden on unproven linebackers, and got rewarded with a 10 game streak in our schedule...which happens to include ALL of our conference games.

We do have some really good offensive weapons. We may see a lot of basketball scores this year.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

My question was better because its answerable. You proved it with this post. You could name games you thought were sure wins, but couldnt name games you thought were sure losses. Other than Bama.

I think I prefer to look at the schedule as "likely wins", "toss Ups" (which will probably include the vast majority) and "likely losses". As we all know and as has been proven over the years, nothing is 100% for certain in any game aside from some kick-offs and at least 4 quarters of play (barring a weather intervention). See, even that part isn't guaranteed.

[Steef]

I think I prefer to look at the schedule as "likely wins", "toss Ups" (which will probably include the vast majority) and "likely losses". As we all know and as has been proven over the years, nothing is 100% for certain in any game aside from some kick-offs and at least 4 quarters of play (barring a weather intervention). See, even that part isn't guaranteed.

Got no problem changing the semantics, my friend. And its all guesswork & opinikns anyway.

I just think "likely wins" will be easier to guess this season, than "likely losses".

I also don't think TCU & Mizzoo are gimmees. So I'm going with three "likely wins", three "likely losses", six "toss ups".

[Pork Twain]

My question was better because its answerable. You proved it with this post. You could name games you thought were sure wins, but couldnt name games you thought were sure losses. Other than Bama.

Well you're welcome...dammit...

[ricepig]

LOL. You did see the 16 season...yes? Since that time, we graduated  starters off the Oline, changed DCs again, completely changed our defensive strategy, put more burden on unproven linebackers, and got rewarded with a 10 game streak in our schedule...which happens to include ALL of our conference games.

We do have some really good offensive weapons. We may see a lot of basketball scores this year.

We graduated 1 starter off the o-line, but several WR's. However, we may have better replacements, time will tell. The defense can't be any worse, now can it?

[GuvHog]

Got no problem changing the semantics, my friend. And its all guesswork & opinikns anyway.

I just think "likely wins" will be easier to guess this season, than "likely losses".

I also don't think TCU & Mizzoo are gimmees. So I'm going with three "likely wins", three "likely losses", six "toss ups".

I'm going with 2 likely losses, 2 tossups, and 8 likely wins.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

We graduated 1 starter off the o-line, but several WR's. However, we may have better replacements, time will tell. The defense can't be any worse, now can it?

Defensively we have to learn a new scheme and all of its nuances. How long will that take until everyone can just "react" to calls instead of having to "think"? I don't know, but that is going to be important. As to the question of whether the defense can be worse or not, it could be, but I don't think it will be. I expect there to be more "buy-in" from everyone on the defense this year over last year. That still doesn't solve the problems we have with depth up front so it may be a real gut-check for a few in the absence of ideal depth.

I really believe that the difference in our team this year will be how well the defense performs. I'm not real worried about the Offense at any position.

[ricepig]

Defensively we have to learn a new scheme and all of its nuances. How long will that take until everyone can just "react" to calls instead of having to "think"? I don't know, but that is going to be important. As to the question of whether the defense can be worse or not, it could be, but I don't think it will be. I expect there to be more "buy-in" from everyone on the defense this year over last year. That still doesn't solve the problems we have with depth up front so it may be a real gut-check for a few in the absence of ideal depth.

I really believe that the difference in our team this year will be how well the defense performs. I'm not real worried about the Offense at any position.

We didn't seem to learn the nuances of last year's defense, I think we'll be fairly vanilla, so not a big problem. I'm more concerned with our safety play, then the other 9 positions.

[Ex-Trumpet]

We didn't seem to learn the nuances of last year's defense, I think we'll be fairly vanilla, so not a big problem. I'm more concerned with our safety play, then the other 9 positions.

Unfortunately, opponents seemed to have learned the nuances of last year's defense quite well.

[Steef]

The defense can't be any worse, now can it?

Man, that's a tough one. I'm gonna have to think about that.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

We didn't seem to learn the nuances of last year's defense, I think we'll be fairly vanilla, so not a big problem. I'm more concerned with our safety play, then the other 9 positions.

Different teacher and, the defense has been regressing ever since that one good season in 2014. At least 50% of it is "want to" and "buy in" that motivates a team to put out the extra effort and time to learn coupled with hustle on the field. I just believe that we will see a greater level of commitment on the field this year.

[bennyl08]

Benny, your posts have lots of valuable info...and that's why I am troubled with your statement in bold.  This deep into a coach's tenure (one of which has had a mantra of rebuilding, wait until next year) is troubling.

Is this year as good as it gets?

Is this year as good as it gets? Well, for starters, we have no idea what the results of this year will be. Simply that, on paper, I think due to schedule some and a 5th year senior qb mostly, we have a better shot to win the SEC this year than we do breaking in a brand new qb with a tougher schedule though a more experienced surrounding cast than this  year.

Further, I am comparing only 2 years. Not making any long term projections. However, to answer your question, my expectations for a season that doesn't have too many crazy twists or turns is that we win 9 games this year. If, barring unusually high injury rates and teams like MSU having heisman candidates or something, we win 7 games or fewer, then, IMO, yes, this is as good as it will get with Bielema and we might not be able to fire him this year, but we will be looking for a new coach.
However, given our recruiting under Bielema, assuming he doesn't stall out this year continues improving as he has so far his tenure here, then my opinion on a senior qb being able to lead more upsets than a green qb will have no bearing on the future and the future is very bright. Assuming we do win 9 games or so this year, I would bet that this is indeed not as good as it gets. I don't think any coach here will sustain 10+ wins for a decade here. However, my expectations for where this program should be is averaging 9 wins a season. With a 7 win season being a rebuild year, 8 wins being a bit of a down year, and winning 10+ about a third of the time.

[Biggus Piggus]

Last year's defense didn't have a "nuance" problem. It had a major goodness-of-fit problem. We were usually playing nickel or dime with a 4-3 middle linebacker, weak safeties, and practically everyone on the Dline playing out of position. You cannot possibly reach the low we hit in lost-yardage tackles (ex-sacks) without having a schematic disaster.

[bennyl08]

When CBB said that I interpreted it differently. He and Rhodes have the same philosophy that fundamentals must be learned before scheme. I have heard Rhodes say that no scheme will work if the player is without fundamentals.

So I took CBB as saying the defense needs to learn in this order 1) learn fundaments, 2) learn the basics of the scheme, and 3) get exotic with the variances of the scheme.

For all of the talk about Smith's emphasis on fundamentals, our defense was poor in fundamentals. Especially tackling and knowing their own responsibility in the defensive play being called. I could be completely wrong, but that is how I interpreted what CBB meant by "does a few things well."

I guess I go back to 2013 when he said the same thing almost verbatim talking about the offense. That year, we had very few unique plays that we ran. We didn't fool many defenses, but we were good enough to move the ball with them knowing what we were doing for the most part, but not good enough to get points yet.

2017 isn't 2013. We have a team with a lot more talent and more depth. However, I hear that, and it is almost word for word what was said in 2013, so the 2013 offense is what I envision for the 2017 defense when I hear that. I mention that to show that there are many reasons to believe that what I picture hearing that isn't going to be representative of what we see.

However, it is inevitable that it takes time to learn things. Enos' offense was more complex in last year than in 15. However, the difference conceptually b/w Enos and Chaney isn't that big. Both are still pro-style offenses. Enos just focuses more on the details of the passing game among other things he does better. Changing to the 3-4 would be like us installing the wishbone offense.

Nonetheless, I do believe we have the talent on defense to have to top 30 defense. I think the talent we currently have is best suited for the 3-4. However, few have ever played in that yet. So, they are not only learning new terminology but a whole new scheme and concepts. Taking a shot in the dark really, but I think we have a defense that comes out around 45th next season. I think the new athletes will do a better job of limiting the big plays of the other team, but the new scheme will lead to mental errors that will allow big plays of the other team. So, I think the big plays end up about the same, but with two major differences. First, the defense will have faster players this coming year than in previous years, so when the big plays do happen, they go for 20 instead of 40 or 30 instead of 60. Secondly, the defense will be making more big plays of it's own. So, instead of that big pass play going 60 yards for a td, it may only go for 40 yards, and on the ensuing set of downs, we will stuff a run play and get a sack forcing a fg instead of the td we would have given up in previous years.

[Oklahawg]

We graduated 1 starter off the o-line, but several WR's. However, we may have better replacements, time will tell. The defense can't be any worse, now can it?

There is this to be cautiously optimistic about. We have a pattern from CBB: he mixes in honest rave reviews with subtle challenges to players needing to "step up." It takes a keen eye to see the differences between them.

[Mike Irwin]

I agree with all of this, ^^^.  The one biggest thing that stood out to me, and on the Pigtrail show last night was them talking about Cole Kelley just might be putting pressure on Austin this spring and especially this fall for playing QB.  They are just providing fluff to get people excited about there perhaps being a battle at quarterback, something that there hasn't really been in years.  This is Austin Allen's team and nobody will be close to taking his job this year.

I said that about Cole Kelley and I don't provide fluff.  While I do expect Austin to be the starter there is no question that he was part of the reason why they provided no offense whatsoever in the Auburn game and why they failed to move the ball in the second halves of the Missouri and Belk Bowl games. He wasn't the only problem but you cannot hold him blameless and I'm quite sure he would tell you that.

Any coach on that staff will tell you that this team will be better if Cole Kelley manages to push Austin this spring. That's not fluff. It's important. So yes, that will be one of the stories we'll be following this spring.

[PorkSoda]

I said that about Cole Kelley and I don't provide fluff.  While I do expect Austin to be the starter there is no question that he was part of the reason why they provided no offense whatsoever in the Auburn game and why they failed to move the ball in the second halves of the Missouri and Belk Bowl games. He wasn't the only problem but you cannot hold him blameless and I'm quite sure he would tell you that.

Any coach on that staff will tell you that this team will be better if Cole Kelley manages to push Austin this spring. That's not fluff. It's important. So yes, that will be one of the stories we'll be following this spring.

I agree, one would hope that Allen would win the competition due to his experience, but he shouldn't be able to do so comfortably.  Hopefully Kelley is going to make him earn it.  hopefully every starter has to earn their spot.

[GuvHog]

I agree, one would hope that Allen would win the competition due to his experience, but he shouldn't be able to do so comfortably.  Hopefully Kelley is going to make him earn it.  hopefully every starter has to earn their spot.

I doubt experience means that much to CBB since he opted to start a green freshman redshirt QB over an experienced Junior QB a few years back.

[factchecker]

I doubt experience means that much to CBB since he opted to start a green freshman redshirt QB over an experienced Junior QB a few years back.

Was this here?  If so.....who?

Brandon was a redshirt sophomore when he started.
Derby was a junior transfer and started vs. Rutgers due to Brandon's being out.
Austin was a redshirt junior.

[southeasthog]

Was this here?  If so.....who?

Brandon was a redshirt sophomore when he started.
Derby was a junior transfer and started vs. Rutgers due to Brandon's being out.
Austin was a redshirt junior.

Guv uses alternate facts.

[factchecker]

Guv uses alternate facts.

I would also like to know who the "experienced Junior QB" that he is talking about.

Brandon Mitchell transferred after 2013 spring prior to his SENIOR year in 2013 to NC State.  His experience at Arkansas was limited at best.

In 2010 he completed 1 pass out of 3 attempts for 16 yards, 0 TDs, and 0 INTs.
2011 he went 22/32 for 271 yards, 2 TDs, and 1 INT. (Brandon Allen redshirted in 2011)
2012 he went 2/8 for 45 yards, 1 TD, and 0 INTs.  Brandon thew more passes then he did this season.

Brandon transferred to NC State to play his senior season.  Here is his production for the wolfpack:

86/151 for 1011 yards, 7 TDs, and 6 INTs

Brandon Allen that same season as a green freshman redshirt QB red-shirt sophomore:

128/258 for 1552 yards, 13 TDs, and 10 INTs

[Biggus Piggus]

I doubt experience means that much to CBB since he opted to start a green freshman redshirt QB over an experienced Junior QB a few years back.

Experience means everything in a pro-style offense. This offense makes it virtually impossible to play a newcomer at quarterback, and they've hesitated to even play second- and third-year guys. This offense has a steep learning curve for the QB. The QB and receivers have to be on the same page. They have silent reads. Receivers must recognize situations, make the right reads, and run patterns based on that. QB must know where they're going to be. If receivers do not get to the right spot, it can be disaster. If QB makes the wrong read, same thing, he's throwing to air or an easy pick.

Spread option systems are [CENSORED] easy for young QBs to pick up. They have simplistic versatility, receivers use their athletic ability, QB throws to the open man. You can play a walkon freshman and make it work.

Arkansas can't do that. You saw the Hogs play a younger QB, but it played the one who could run the offense with fewer mistakes. They couldn't teach Mitchell how to stop throwing picks. It wasn't the offense for him.

[Sportster365]

Biggest points to me:

* Seems like almost 100% certain that Austin Allen is the starting QB; don't even joke about there being a competition.
* Very high praise for Frank Ragnow.
* Move to 3-4 sounds like one of necessity due to the limited DL roster.
* Kevin Richardson might be starting at cornerback opposite Ryan Pulley.
* Hjalte Froholdt is ready to handle Oline now. They're raising expectations for Colton Jackson and Jake Raulerson. More talk of Brian Wallace "being pushed." Overall OL situation is better Y/Y.
* Bijhon Jackson is being asked to rise up and take over as the noseguard in the 3-4. Working harder.
* Austin Cantrell is the only ready-for-prime-time TE. Grayson Gunter's preparation (before surgery) was better than that of Jamario Bell, Will Gragg and Cheyenne O'Grady, who are probably more talented. Nobody's going to play without sufficient work ethic.
* Shane Clenin is the most impressive freshman offensive lineman so far, but they like all three a lot.
* Austin Allen is leading players in volunteer workouts. Ty Storey got mention for his offseason work.
* WR position is loaded - Jared Cornelius, Jordan Jones, Deon Stewart, Brandon Martin, Jonathan Nance, T.J. Hammonds, LaMichael Pettway. Unsure of order behind Cornelius. Overall speed is improved. No fricking way they use all these guys. No way in hell.
* Daytrieon Dean was issued a do-or-die challenge, is in the mix at DE and has taken to his new position coach. Maybe spring bravado talk there.
* Positive mention of CBs Korey Hernandez and Britto Tutt, safeties Deon Edwards and Micahh Smith.
* Was talk of linebackers banned? Only names mentioned at all were Karl Roesler (could play OLB, could play DE), Dwayne Eugene, Michael Taylor, Randy Ramsey and Dee Walker (the latter four named for their work in the offseason program). We're switching to the 3-4 but not talking about how we come up with a two-deep.
* Only players limited in spring are Dre Greenlaw and Grayson Gunter.

Just reading this post lets me know we'll still be garbage....Hard to put it any other way.

I still see what could continue to be major flaws in the OL....

From what I've seen so far, it be hard pressed to convince me that O'Grady isn't the best TE on the roster right now.

None of the above mentioned LBs stands out to me while moving to a defense they requires much from them.

Not enough focus on the DL, which will surely need to feature some real horses up front.

Again it goes back to personnel, its not so much that we don't have the player to compete more so than it is CBB isn't putting the right playmakers on the field. If he doesn't change, he will continue to lose in the SEC.

[italian9005]

all the 3-4 change is doing is buying bielema a few more years. im not buying we are going to be a great defense all the sudden.

[Biggus Piggus]

Just reading this post lets me know we'll still be garbage....Hard to put it any other way.

I still see what could continue to be major flaws in the OL....

From what I've seen so far, it be hard pressed to convince me that O'Grady isn't the best TE on the roster right now.

None of the above mentioned LBs stands out to me while moving to a defense they requires much from them.

Not enough focus on the DL, which will surely need to feature some real horses up front.

Again it goes back to personnel, its not so much that we don't have the player to compete more so than it is CBB isn't putting the right playmakers on the field. If he doesn't change, he will continue to lose in the SEC.

Cantrell and Gragg appear to be running ahead of O'Grady.

We don't know much about a lot of the linebackers, so really cannot evaluate them. The failure to sign another noseguard is going to be a problem though.

As for "not putting the right playmakers on the field," in this offense if you don't go where you are supposed to go, you're useless. You can whine about raw talent not being allowed to run wild and free, but those types are useless in this offense. Useless. If you have Matt Jones sandlot and pitch and catch, wonderful. The change necessary is to quit signing players who can't learn the system.

[Stephen Greene]

"Razor is an outside linebacker that's more of a hybrid LB/S."


where's the guy saying Derrick Munson will not be a linebacker?

[bennyl08]

What has Harris done to make you so high on him?  It's way to early to be projecting his draft status when he hasn't started a game.  Greenlaw is a tackling machine.  The defense was much worse without him.  He's the only LB I feel good about at this time.

It's multi-faceted. First, he had great HS highlights. Showed a bit of everything and done exceptionally well. This was then backed up by him being heavily recruited by some big time programs such as a heavy push from Bama, as well as PAC schools ASU, UO, and CU.

However, that's just HS. Next comes what he's done in college. He was talked up quite a bit by the coaching staff during practice reports. In game, he led our special teams with 12 special teams tackles and totaled 25 tackles on defense, including 2 TFL's, 1 sack, and a forced fumble. Further, he didn't pile up those numbers in garbage time vs lower quality teams. 17 of his 37 total tackles came against LSU and MSU. 25 total tackles came in SEC play. His sack came against LSU on third down with 5 min left in the game. He made 3 straight stops inside the Arkansas 5 against LSU as well to force a FG. His forced fumble also occurred at our own 3 yard line against Bama. As a true freshmen, he ranked 12th on the team in tackles. He had more tackles for loss than either Eugene or Greenlaw, only half a tfl than the two combined (who started a combined 13 games btw). Each of them recovered 2 fumbles while Harris didn't recover any, but neither of them forced a fumble.

Finally, he was also graded highly by PFF. In several games, he was one of our top 5 graded defensive players with grades over 80. Scale goes to 99 or 100, and is on an NFL rubric. A grade in the 90's is practically perfection with grades in the 80's being very good. For comparison, Ragnow, who was in his third year starting last year, had an overall grade of an 89 and is one of the best returning players in the SEC and top center in the entire country. Typically, the 4th or 5th highest graded player for offense or defense in a college game will be in the high 60's of a grade unless you are the likes of Bama, LSU, or Ohio St, then the 4th to 5th highest rated players will be in the low to mid 70's.

So, he had the resume to be a high quality player coming out of HS. In limited reps as a true freshmen, he performed extremely well, and doing some of his best against the biggest opponents. And he was graded very highly by a well renowned football stats group.

[colbs]

Just reading this post lets me know we'll still be garbage....Hard to put it any other way.

I still see what could continue to be major flaws in the OL....

From what I've seen so far, it be hard pressed to convince me that O'Grady isn't the best TE on the roster right now.

None of the above mentioned LBs stands out to me while moving to a defense they requires much from them.

Not enough focus on the DL, which will surely need to feature some real horses up front.

Again it goes back to personnel, its not so much that we don't have the player to compete more so than it is CBB isn't putting the right playmakers on the field. If he doesn't change, he will continue to lose in the SEC.

Do you just base TE on pass catching? If so I see why you would say that.  TE is probably the last position I would question BB on. 

[ricepig]

"Razor is an outside linebacker that's more of a hybrid LB/S."


where's the guy saying Derrick Munson will not be a linebacker?

I think that was HRV.

[ThisTeetsTaken]

all the 3-4 change is doing is buying bielema a few more years. im not buying we are going to be a great defense all the sudden.

Probability some truth to the first part of this.  Also, I've noticed CBB doing a lot of cheerleading for the other coaches (Anderson and Van Horn).  I think he knows the honeymoon is either over or on the plane ride home at this point. 

[factchecker]

Probability some truth to the first part of this.  Also, I've noticed CBB doing a lot of cheerleading for the other coaches (Anderson and Van Horn).  I think he knows the honeymoon is either over or on the plane ride home at this point.

Bielema has been "cheerleading" for other Razorback teams/coaches since he's been here.  He was at the College World Series when we made it two season ago.

[CFB_Fanatic]

What games do you see as for-sure losses and why?

Well, I can give a laundry list of reasons why I don't think we will be improved this year, but Ill make it short:
-New D/C with new scheme with new terminology, etc. Hard to think we will vastly improve.
-Unproven LBs becoming the most important part of the defense.
-Essentially no DL other than Agim (who will be great, but still).
-Makeshift OL that, other than Ragnow, doesn't consist of any great quality starters.
-Lack of any real OL depth (freshman aren't going to help much).
-Loss of Skipper at LT, the most important OL position.
-Lack of any proven TEs (talent is there but there will be a drop-off from Sprinkle)
-Loss of most of the WR core, but we have good talent there (but what SEC school doesn't?)
-Bye week is week 3, 10 game stretch to finish the season will be brutal

With that said, the schedule doesn't set up too pretty IMO:

vs FAMU  --- Lol at LR opponent selection. Easy win
vs TCU ----  They owe us one. IDK what they lost from last year, but honestly we could have lost that game easily. I think they will get revenge. Toss up

Bye week.

@ TAMU ---- Havent beaten them in the last several years. Its a mental thing now. No reason to believe we will this year either. Prepare for heartbreak
vs NM State --- Recovery win
@ USCe  --- One of the most improved teams in the SEC last year with loads of young talent. Muschamp will have the defense ready. They will be primed and at their place. Loss for us

@ Bama --- ........Not much needs to be said. Havent beaten them since George Bush was president.
vs  Auburn  --- Again, they killed us last year, and will only be better. They return a ton of players. It could get ugly again. Gus will RUTS if he can
@ Ole Miss --- Should hopefully win this one. Sanctions will hurt them, but their young QB was money at the end of last year, so watch out. Tossup
vs CCU ---- Rent-a-win
@ LSU  ---- Returning a ton, reloaded and stacked where they lost players last year. I expect a repeat from 2016: Loss
vs Miss St ---- Last years game was close if that tells you anything, and they were young. I kinda see this as a tossup, but obviously we should win
vs Mizzou ---- We owe them one from last year, should win but they are young and fast, and the new HC has been recruiting well. Near tossup


Summing up I see 3 for sure wins, 4 tossups, and 5 losses. Go 3-1 in tossup games and you have???

6-6

[factchecker]

vs Miss St ---- Last years game was close if that tells you anything, and they were young. I kinda see this as a tossup, but obviously we should win

Good lord! We won by 16 last year.  Rawleigh ran for 191 yards & 4 TDs....... IN THE FIRST HALF. 

A 16 point victory when half their stadium was gone in the 4th quarter (I WAS THERE) is not close.

vs Mizzou ---- We owe them one from last year, should win but they are young and fast, and the new HC has been recruiting well.

People bitch about us finishing with the #28 ranked class in the nation but Mizzou is recruiting well by finishing 47th?

I give up. 

[CFB_Fanatic]

Good lord! We won by 16 last year.  Rawleigh ran for 191 yards & 4 TDs....... IN THE FIRST HALF. 

A 16 point victory when half their stadium was gone in the 4th quarter (I WAS THERE) is not close.

People bitch about us finishing with the #28 ranked class in the nation but Mizzou is recruiting well by finishing 47th?

I give up. 

We should win the Miss St game. But if you remember, it was a nip/tuck game. Was definitely not a blowout.

Mizzou beat us last year with all those "scrubs," remember?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

We should win the Miss St game. But if you remember, it was a nip/tuck game. Was definitely not a blowout.

Mizzou beat us last year with all those "scrubs," remember?

You mean those "scrubs" that led the SEC in total offense last year? Missouri had a good football team that was just up and down all season long, a lot like us. They will probably be more consistent this year, just as we hope to be.

[ChitownHawg]

I guess I go back to 2013 when he said the same thing almost verbatim talking about the offense. That year, we had very few unique plays that we ran. We didn't fool many defenses, but we were good enough to move the ball with them knowing what we were doing for the most part, but not good enough to get points yet.

2017 isn't 2013. We have a team with a lot more talent and more depth. However, I hear that, and it is almost word for word what was said in 2013, so the 2013 offense is what I envision for the 2017 defense when I hear that. I mention that to show that there are many reasons to believe that what I picture hearing that isn't going to be representative of what we see.

However, it is inevitable that it takes time to learn things. Enos' offense was more complex in last year than in 15. However, the difference conceptually b/w Enos and Chaney isn't that big. Both are still pro-style offenses. Enos just focuses more on the details of the passing game among other things he does better. Changing to the 3-4 would be like us installing the wishbone offense.

Nonetheless, I do believe we have the talent on defense to have to top 30 defense. I think the talent we currently have is best suited for the 3-4. However, few have ever played in that yet. So, they are not only learning new terminology but a whole new scheme and concepts. Taking a shot in the dark really, but I think we have a defense that comes out around 45th next season. I think the new athletes will do a better job of limiting the big plays of the other team, but the new scheme will lead to mental errors that will allow big plays of the other team. So, I think the big plays end up about the same, but with two major differences. First, the defense will have faster players this coming year than in previous years, so when the big plays do happen, they go for 20 instead of 40 or 30 instead of 60. Secondly, the defense will be making more big plays of it's own. So, instead of that big pass play going 60 yards for a td, it may only go for 40 yards, and on the ensuing set of downs, we will stuff a run play and get a sack forcing a fg instead of the td we would have given up in previous years.

Benny you are losing me with so many words. 

2013 was his first year. His basic philosophy is to know the fundamentals first which is the same as CPR. 2013 he inherited a dysfunctional team with little discipline.

So saying it is like 2013 does not surprise me. "Fundamentals first" is his core belief. CPR is the same. I also think being basic is a distraction for other teams. It goes back to CBB's comments that we were too predictable last year. That we surprised no one.

Anyway, I think we are saying similar. I think. 

[Biggus Piggus]

Also, I've noticed CBB doing a lot of cheerleading for the other coaches (Anderson and Van Horn).  I think he knows the honeymoon is either over or on the plane ride home at this point. 

This is a bizarre and ridiculous statement.

[ChitownHawg]

This is a bizarre and ridiculous statement.

Ain't that the truth.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

When CBB said that I interpreted it differently. He and Rhodes have the same philosophy that fundamentals must be learned before scheme. I have heard Rhodes say that no scheme will work if the player is without fundamentals.

So I took CBB as saying the defense needs to learn in this order 1) learn fundaments, 2) learn the basics of the scheme, and 3) get exotic with the variances of the scheme.

For all of the talk about Smith's emphasis on fundamentals, our defense was poor in fundamentals. Especially tackling and knowing their own responsibility in the defensive play being called. I could be completely wrong, but that is how I interpreted what CBB meant by "does a few things well."

I think that you obviously have to be fundamentally sound at any position that you play. It is the solid foundation of everything else.

Imagine for a moment that you are a big offensive lineman who is great at power run blocking, just ok at pass blocking but who doesn't have the quickness and agility to pull and trap a lineman/LB at the LOS, yet you are repeatedly asked to execute this assignment. Either you are too slow to get there or you utilize poor technique (like going parallel to the LOS instead of slightly gaining ground as you pull) and your man keeps beating you and either narrowing the hole or blowing up the play.

You keep getting your arse chewed for not getting there, for not executing, yet you really don't have the skill set to properly execute that particular play. You get frustrated and it builds up inside you and you just begin to believe that there isn't any way that, try as you may, that you are going to get this done to the satisfaction of the staff. But the team is short of personnel so you are stuck with getting hammered every time they call this play. Eventually you lose confidence in the staff for continuing to put you in this position.

Now I am just using this as an example. I'm not saying that the offensive line saw any of this last year. But I do think that we saw some of this on defense last year and I think that is why we saw some of the poor performances and big plays allowed last year.

It isn't just having the proper fundamentals (though vital), it is also having the best fitting personnel in each position. You can't ask kids to do something that they may not be well fitted to execute. If you do that you are just setting yourself and your team up for failure, eventual disgust and lack of motivation.

I think that may be why Bielema made the comment that it was difficult for Coach Rhoads last year, having been where he has been and having done what he has done, to go through last season.

I expect that we will see positive changes on the defense this year in positioning (with the players we have available to us at this time), confidence and motivation. At least, I am hoping that will be the case.

[Biggus Piggus]

What Bielema meant by "doing a few things well" is that the previous defense had far too many reads and calls. The defense could not handle everything they were asked to do, so they did not do much of it well. They got demoralized, communication subsequently broke down, and they'd give up big plays because of being out of position.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

What Bielema meant by "doing a few things well" is that the previous defense had far too many reads and calls. The defense could not handle everything they were asked to do, so they did not do much of it well. They got demoralized, communication subsequently broke down, and they'd give up big plays because of being out of position.

Good point Biggus. I believe that happened as well.

[bennyl08]

What Bielema meant by "doing a few things well" is that the previous defense had far too many reads and calls. The defense could not handle everything they were asked to do, so they did not do much of it well. They got demoralized, communication subsequently broke down, and they'd give up big plays because of being out of position.

Interesting.

So, follow up question to that. When Smith came in, he greatly simplified the defense from what it had been back in 2014. Did he gradually add more and more to the point where there were too many reads and calls, or was that how complicated ash's defense was back in 2013?

[PorkSoda]

Interesting.

So, follow up question to that. When Smith came in, he greatly simplified the defense from what it had been back in 2014. Did he gradually add more and more to the point where there were too many reads and calls, or was that how complicated ash's defense was back in 2013?

I would guess the former.

every time a new guy comes in they have to simplify the scheme by necessity because everyone is learning a new scheme, but each off season and during the season they build on that foundation.  I would guess that eventually he added too many layers to the scheme and it became unmanageable during the heat of the game.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I would guess the former.

every time a new guy comes in they have to simplify the scheme by necessity because everyone is learning a new scheme, but each off season and during the season they build on that foundation.  I would guess that eventually he added too many layers to the scheme and it became unmanageable during the heat of the game.

Go back and listen to what the players said after practice yesterday about Paul Rhoads. It tells us a great deal about how Paul Rhoads approaches coaching and without actually throwing anyone under the bus, it might also indicate a lot about the perception that the players had of Robb Smith and where some of the players attitudes were last fall. Add greater degrees of complexity in the defense to that and perhaps not having some of the right players in the right positions (asking them to do things they couldn't do) and we might begin to have an understanding of why things took such a downturn last season.

That's just my take after listening to the guys after practice yesterday.

[bennyl08]

Go back and listen to what the players said after practice yesterday about Paul Rhoads. It tells us a great deal about how Paul Rhoads approaches coaching and without actually throwing anyone under the bus, it might also indicate a lot about the perception that the players had of Robb Smith and where some of the players attitudes were last fall. Add greater degrees of complexity in the defense to that and perhaps not having some of the right players in the right positions (asking them to do things they couldn't do) and we might begin to have an understanding of why things took such a downturn last season.

That's just my take after listening to the guys after practice yesterday.

Could you provide a recap of what was said?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Could you provide a recap of what was said?

http://www.nwahomepage.com/razorback-nation/hogs-happy-with-day-one-of-spring-football/682130965

[PorkSoda]

http://www.nwahomepage.com/razorback-nation/hogs-happy-with-day-one-of-spring-football/682130965

the text is from the offensive players, and I can't watch the videos at work

[Carl Lazlo]

Experience means everything in a pro-style offense. This offense makes it virtually impossible to play a newcomer at quarterback, and they've hesitated to even play second- and third-year guys. This offense has a steep learning curve for the QB. The QB and receivers have to be on the same page. They have silent reads. Receivers must recognize situations, make the right reads, and run patterns based on that. QB must know where they're going to be. If receivers do not get to the right spot, it can be disaster. If QB makes the wrong read, same thing, he's throwing to air or an easy pick.

Spread option systems are [CENSORED] easy for young QBs to pick up. They have simplistic versatility, receivers use their athletic ability, QB throws to the open man. You can play a walkon freshman and make it work.

Arkansas can't do that. You saw the Hogs play a younger QB, but it played the one who could run the offense with fewer mistakes. They couldn't teach Mitchell how to stop throwing picks. It wasn't the offense for him.

Signed Jacob Eason.