Missing In the Armchair Assessments

[Oklahawg]

I must admit: I can only read so many armchair QBs. It wears on me.

What I have read is absent something that a prudent assessment must include - what did Auburn bring to the table Saturday?

Auburn had NCG experience and a much deeper bench. They had a raucous homefield crowd. They magically got their defensive game-changer eligible. They had both QBs and the JUCO recruiting gem WR in mid-season form.

UA made them look good. Maybe, just maybe, they are better than anticipated and are destined to make a run for another NCG appearance.

I am thinking maybe we are a bit hard on ourselves. For anyone predicting 8-4+ you needed the readjustment that Saturday brought. For those in the 5-7 win range you saw exactly that team - capable of playing well, capable of beating some teams, but needing things to improve. Anyone not seeing Auburn as the clear favorite in the SEC was watching different games this weekend.

Biggus nailed the assessment last week - we will opt for experience over skill early this season. The defense will see a gradual transformation of talent from the vets who play due to experience towards the recruits who have the skill but little training/experience. Ramsey, Tolliver, Coley, Liddell, Jackson, Williams...we will hear these names more and more as the season goes on.

I look for us to sacrifice some stats Saturday to get those pups meaningful reps vs Nicholls State.

I also look for Auburn to be a tough team to beat this year, tougher than I anticipated going into the game Saturday. That fact needs to not be discounted in our assessment of UA's ongoing uphill-battle.

[Biggus Piggus]

I saw one very promising half of football. What happened after that ...

Jim Chaney has not adjusted to his personnel. He still expects the passing game to rely on abilities this team lacks. He is way too WR centric and is wasting the TEs. And he does not seem to remember that TBs can catch passes. The guy shows a tendency to lock up and become predictable in the second half. Look at last year. We hardly scored in the fourth quarter in 12 games.

People love to blame Bielema for the offense. I suspect he is going to have to give Chaney less autonomy.

[trashcan maN]

With you 100%. We lost by 3 TDs to [probably] the best team in the SEC/country. Thats where our program is right now. The kids played their heart out; we just arent skilled or deep enough to knock off a national title team in their house in an opener yet. Im surprised at how many people seem floored by the result of that game.

I personally love the way the team is being built, and when Gragg commits and Pettway flips, it will be a clean sweep of the best in state class since at least 08. 10/10

[Pig Worshipper]

All good points.

I'm wondering just how a really good SEC defense will play Auburn? Will anyone be able to stop them?

And will anyone stop Texas A&M this season? Will the Auburn - A&M matchup be a  back-and-forth, up and down the field, twenty overtime affair that ends with a score like 203-199?

Boy, has the SEC changed! From having defenses that no one could do much against to having offenses that only stop themselves!
At some point, like it always does, the pendulum will swing back in the other direction again.
The Hogs will be just fine.

[Biggus Piggus]

Waiting for Auburn to make mistakes did not work. That is core to their aystem.

[lumphog]

I saw one very promising half of football. What happened after that ...

Jim Chaney has not adjusted to his personnel. He still expects the passing game to rely on abilities this team lacks. He is way too WR centric and is wasting the TEs. And he does not seem to remember that TBs can catch passes. The guy shows a tendency to lock up and become predictable in the second half. Look at last year. We hardly scored in the fourth quarter in 12 games.

People love to blame Bielema for the offense. I suspect he is going to have to give Chaney less autonomy.

Hate to say it , but I agree..... With all the film at his disposal, Nutt/Gus, Petrino....He should be able to put together an unstoppable O. I have thought that Chaney would be a big part to our success.....but, after Saturday I'm scratchin my head a little

[PonderinHog]

I'm glad the Auburn game is behind us.  Our weaknesses have been exposed on both sides of the LOS.  Learn from, and correct, the mistakes - on the field and upstairs.  These next three games are critical for newcomer development and postseason aspirations.  There is a lot of football to be played.  It is not time to give up.  Auburn was loaded.  We held our own for a half and then the wheels fell off. 

0-1 in 2014 looks much better than 3-0 in 2013, IMO.   :razorback:

[Bebop]

I saw one very promising half of football. What happened after that ...

Jim Chaney has not adjusted to his personnel. He still expects the passing game to rely on abilities this team lacks. He is way too WR centric and is wasting the TEs. And he does not seem to remember that TBs can catch passes. The guy shows a tendency to lock up and become predictable in the second half. Look at last year. We hardly scored in the fourth quarter in 12 games.

People love to blame Bielema for the offense. I suspect he is going to have to give Chaney less autonomy.

I may be in the minority, but I think Chaney is overrated. The reason why I think so is part of the reasons that you mentioned. He may have the knowledge on how a good offensive system works but his execution and adjustments seem to be lacking. It's not just knowledge but the application and adjustments of that knowledge that make a coach a good one.

His play calling seems to be "vanilla." I don't understand why we didn't throw more in the middle or call more HB screens to offset the blitzes. Maybe it is personnel but you would at least think that we would have practiced enough with our receiving corps to get better results. Maybe our receiving group is not as good because they don't practice as much as they should. I don't know? The lack of adjustments that we made in the second half is disheartening.

[smun83]

I must admit: I can only read so many armchair QBs. It wears on me.

What I have read is absent something that a prudent assessment must include - what did Auburn bring to the table Saturday?

Auburn had NCG experience and a much deeper bench. They had a raucous homefield crowd. They magically got their defensive game-changer eligible. They had both QBs and the JUCO recruiting gem WR in mid-season form.

UA made them look good. Maybe, just maybe, they are better than anticipated and are destined to make a run for another NCG appearance.

I am thinking maybe we are a bit hard on ourselves. For anyone predicting 8-4+ you needed the readjustment that Saturday brought. For those in the 5-7 win range you saw exactly that team - capable of playing well, capable of beating some teams, but needing things to improve. Anyone not seeing Auburn as the clear favorite in the SEC was watching different games this weekend.

Biggus nailed the assessment last week - we will opt for experience over skill early this season. The defense will see a gradual transformation of talent from the vets who play due to experience towards the recruits who have the skill but little training/experience. Ramsey, Tolliver, Coley, Liddell, Jackson, Williams...we will hear these names more and more as the season goes on.

I look for us to sacrifice some stats Saturday to get those pups meaningful reps vs Nicholls State.

I also look for Auburn to be a tough team to beat this year, tougher than I anticipated going into the game Saturday. That fact needs to not be discounted in our assessment of UA's ongoing uphill-battle.

Hey my assessment came equipped with videos and everything lol.
[/quote

[hogsanity]

I saw one very promising half of football. What happened after that ...

Jim Chaney has not adjusted to his personnel. He still expects the passing game to rely on abilities this team lacks. He is way too WR centric and is wasting the TEs. And he does not seem to remember that TBs can catch passes. The guy shows a tendency to lock up and become predictable in the second half. Look at last year. We hardly scored in the fourth quarter in 12 games.

People love to blame Bielema for the offense. I suspect he is going to have to give Chaney less autonomy.

?  Did you miss the TE's catching 2tds or the passes caught by at least 3 tes and one rb?

[Bebop]

?  Did you miss the TE's catching 2tds or the passes caught by at least 3 tes and one rb?

I think he may be referring to the second-half.

[Wildhog]

I saw one very promising half of football. What happened after that ...

Jim Chaney has not adjusted to his personnel. He still expects the passing game to rely on abilities this team lacks. He is way too WR centric and is wasting the TEs. And he does not seem to remember that TBs can catch passes. The guy shows a tendency to lock up and become predictable in the second half. Look at last year. We hardly scored in the fourth quarter in 12 games.

People love to blame Bielema for the offense. I suspect he is going to have to give Chaney less autonomy.

10000% agree.

[onebadrubi]

I saw one very promising half of football. What happened after that ...

Jim Chaney has not adjusted to his personnel. He still expects the passing game to rely on abilities this team lacks. He is way too WR centric and is wasting the TEs. And he does not seem to remember that TBs can catch passes. The guy shows a tendency to lock up and become predictable in the second half. Look at last year. We hardly scored in the fourth quarter in 12 games.

People love to blame Bielema for the offense. I suspect he is going to have to give Chaney less autonomy.

This might be the most fair and accurate criticism of Chaney I have seen.  I do slightly disagree on the wasting the TE's.  We targeted them probably 30% or more of the time (flinging that from my arse mind you). 

Also, many of the people playing Armchair on this holiday are forgetting, we held MANY freshman out of the game completely, which I agree with.  Ragnow, Jojo, wallace, edwards, etc.  I believe they will be eased in the next 2-4 games and make a difference! 

[onebadrubi]

Waiting for Auburn to make mistakes did not work. That is core to their aystem.

They made mistakes, that fumble being one.  We just have to learn how to capitalize on a mistake by the other team and this will go a long way in the game flow. 

[ldfergu]

Jim Chaney has not adjusted to his personnel. He still expects the passing game to rely on abilities this team lacks. He is way too WR centric and is wasting the TEs. And he does not seem to remember that TBs can catch passes. The guy shows a tendency to lock up and become predictable in the second half. Look at last year. We hardly scored in the fourth quarter in 12 games.

People love to blame Bielema for the offense. I suspect he is going to have to give Chaney less autonomy.

This is seeming to be a very unfortunate truth....

[Steef]

I must admit: I can only read so many armchair QBs. It wears on me.

What I have read is absent something that a prudent assessment must include - what did Auburn bring to the table Saturday?

Auburn had NCG experience and a much deeper bench. They had a raucous homefield crowd. They magically got their defensive game-changer eligible. They had both QBs and the JUCO recruiting gem WR in mid-season form.

UA made them look good. Maybe, just maybe, they are better than anticipated and are destined to make a run for another NCG appearance.

I am thinking maybe we are a bit hard on ourselves. For anyone predicting 8-4+ you needed the readjustment that Saturday brought. For those in the 5-7 win range you saw exactly that team - capable of playing well, capable of beating some teams, but needing things to improve. Anyone not seeing Auburn as the clear favorite in the SEC was watching different games this weekend.

Biggus nailed the assessment last week - we will opt for experience over skill early this season. The defense will see a gradual transformation of talent from the vets who play due to experience towards the recruits who have the skill but little training/experience. Ramsey, Tolliver, Coley, Liddell, Jackson, Williams...we will hear these names more and more as the season goes on.

I look for us to sacrifice some stats Saturday to get those pups meaningful reps vs Nicholls State.

I also look for Auburn to be a tough team to beat this year, tougher than I anticipated going into the game Saturday. That fact needs to not be discounted in our assessment of UA's ongoing uphill-battle.

How dare you...making sensible posts!

Cut it out!

[HognitiveDissonance]

Face it, there a few innovative offensive minds in college football. Petrino was one of them. Malzahn is one of them. These are guys that are going to get their points one way or the other, so you better keep up. Auburn has good talent, but it's really Gus's mind that is the weapon. They have rode that, twice, all the way to the NCG. Once in 2010 and once in 2013. Petrino was a game-changer too. We had pretty good talent in 2010 and 2011 but was mainly riding Petrino's brain to 21 wins. Both of those guys, a lot of their games will end up 44-28 or something...but they're the 44. Like the SEC Title Game...59-42, but Auburn was the 59. Really all that matters is you win, whether 7-3 or 59-42.

[HognitiveDissonance]

The point to all that was that I feel Chaney is a good play-caller and coordinator. But he's not in Petrino's or Malzahn's class.

[Hook 'em Hogs]

0-1 in 2014 looks much better than 3-0 in 2013, IMO.   :razorback:

That's how I'm feeling. We are an improved team that got whooped by a very, very good team.

[WilsonHog]

The point to all that was that I feel Chaney is a good play-caller and coordinator. But he's not in Petrino's or Malzahn's class.

No one else is, either. You named the two best in the college game.

[Rocky&Boarwinkle]

?  Did you miss the TE's catching 2tds or the passes caught by at least 3 tes and one rb?

I thought only the FB caught passes out of the backfield during this game.  I for one would like to see once or twice a game, a well utilized RB screen play, throwing to one of our backs and utilizing overzealous linemen and linebackers in the box running themselves out of the play by chasing the quarterback.  It is basically the same idea as the read option, except you intentionally draw the pursuers to the QB then dump it over their heads to where 3 or more lineman can steamroll downfield for the back.

I'm not a huge fan of screen plays as a major part of the offense, but like a well designed reverse, they have their place in slowing down overpursuit by a defense.

[PonderinHog]

I thought only the FB caught passes out of the backfield during this game.  I for one would like to see once or twice a game, a well utilized RB screen play, throwing to one of our backs and utilizing overzealous linemen and linebackers in the box running themselves out of the play by chasing the quarterback.  It is basically the same idea as the read option, except you intentionally draw the pursuers to the QB then dump it over their heads to where 3 or more lineman can steamroll downfield for the back.

I'm not a huge fan of screen plays as a major part of the offense, but like a well designed reverse, they have their place in slowing down overpursuit by a defense.

Seems like Korliss could easily get lost in space.

[Rocky&Boarwinkle]

Seems like Korliss could easily get lost in space.

In a good or bad way?  Like the defense could lose track of him?  Because I totally agree.

[Bebop]

The point to all that was that I feel Chaney is a good play-caller and coordinator. But he's not in Petrino's or Malzahn's class.

I think Chaney is decent for a half. Stuff stops working and he can't adjust. At least that's the way that it appears from last year to this year's Auburn game. I think Chaney has a good offensive system to work with, potentially.

Btw, I have no axe to grind. I'm neither pro or anti anyone. I try to call it like I see it. If I'm wrong, I'll eat it.

[Biggus Piggus]

Texas Tech's leading receiver last year was a tight end. If you think 30% is all the share tight ends should have...I disagree.

[PonderinHog]

In a good or bad way?  Like the defense could lose track of him?  Because I totally agree.

Good way.            Exactly.                                            Thought you would.

[WilsonHog]

I thought only the FB caught passes out of the backfield during this game.  I for one would like to see once or twice a game, a well utilized RB screen play, throwing to one of our backs and utilizing overzealous linemen and linebackers in the box running themselves out of the play by chasing the quarterback.  It is basically the same idea as the read option, except you intentionally draw the pursuers to the QB then dump it over their heads to where 3 or more lineman can steamroll downfield for the back.

I'm not a huge fan of screen plays as a major part of the offense, but like a well designed reverse, they have their place in slowing down overpursuit by a defense.

The reception breakdown:

WRs

Wilson 4-55
Hollister 2-20
Hatcher 1-17

TEs

Derby 4-40
Henry 1-14
Sprinkle 1-10

RBs

Williams 2-(2)
Marshall 1-14
Collins 1-5
Arinze 1-2

[Bebop]

Texas Tech's leading receiver last year was a tight end. If you think 30% is all the share tight ends should have...I disagree.

I think we should rely on them more until we can get a dependable WR.

[ErieHog]

I think Chaney is decent for a half. Stuff stops working and he can't adjust. At least that's the way that it appears from last year to this year's Auburn game. I think Chaney has a good offensive system to work with, potentially.

Btw, I have no axe to grind. I'm neither pro or anti anyone. I try to call it like I see it. If I'm wrong, I'll eat it.

You can plan and attack for a half, because you have a relatively decent idea of how teams will try to attack you, and you can hide the holes in your roster a bit.

There is a very strong tendency,  when a play doesn't work, to say it was a scheme problem;  often, it isn't.   Success is not the determination of whether or not a play call was good.    Lapses in execution, defenders making good plays,  etc-- a lot of factors come in, on whether or not a play call is bad.   

[HVHog]

I saw one very promising half of football. What happened after that ...

Jim Chaney has not adjusted to his personnel. He still expects the passing game to rely on abilities this team lacks. He is way too WR centric and is wasting the TEs. And he does not seem to remember that TBs can catch passes. The guy shows a tendency to lock up and become predictable in the second half. Look at last year. We hardly scored in the fourth quarter in 12 games.

People love to blame Bielema for the offense. I suspect he is going to have to give Chaney less autonomy.

This + 1 

I think Chaney is the weakness on this team.  We have the best running backs we've had in several years, we have a huge OL who is strong, we have arguably the best TE in the country and a very good second TE, and we have more WR's than last year.  I simply can't fathom 2 yds rushing in the second half.  The inability to see and create adjustments is inexcusable.  I didn't expect to win Saturday, but I didn't expect to be embarrassed either.  Someone laid down in the second half; either it was the players or the coaches, but someone laid down.  2 yds. Hopefully CBB gets it figured out (Hint:  Chaney) 2YDS, 2YDS, 2YDS, 2YDS   

[MojaveJoe]

I hate to say this - but although Auburn returns their QB, they lost a ton on offense and still put up 45 on us.

I hope this isn't another winless year.

[3kgthog]

What's the point in going with experience over skill at this point? The upperclassmen, for the most part, aren't part of the solution. Get the young guys in and get their feet wet. The old guys had their shot. They didn't cut the mustard. Move on. We likely aren't a bowl team, so throw your best out there every Saturday and see what happens.

[Bebop]

You can plan and attack for a half, because you have a relatively decent idea of how teams will try to attack you, and you can hide the holes in your roster a bit.

There is a very strong tendency,  when a play doesn't work, to say it was a scheme problem;  often, it isn't.   Success is not the determination of whether or not a play call was good.    Lapses in execution, defenders making good plays,  etc-- a lot of factors come in, on whether or not a play call is bad.

Most of those problems go back to practice. How well are we executing in practice? How much practice is being devoted to a particular area? While some of the responsibility falls on the players (WRs not catching easy passes), the other side of it goes back to coaching. Coaches have to make sure that guys to execute plays under duress. That goes back to them. If a guy can't do it, then why are they starting? Or, is it the coach's fault to begin with?

To have a stark contrast between the 1st and 2nd half is befuddling. We kept up toe-to-toe in the first half only to squander it in the second. Execution of the play as a player is part of it, but the other the responsibility resides in the coach by making sure that their player is in the best possible position to execute the designated role. It is up to the coach to adjust to their opponents adjustments. The player may fail, but it is up to the coach to figure out a way to reduce the percentage of failure. I don't think Chaney reduce the chances of failure. At least, in the second half.

Also, if the player is unable to execute the scheme, then is the scheme too hard or is it too risky to execute? I understand that some of it is because we lack depth and fatigue sets in, but we have to be aware of our weaknesses and try to compensate for them, not play into them.

TL;DR- It has to be more than player "execution" to go toe-to-toe in one half and zilch in the other half.

[FootballFanatic89]

I hate to say this - but although Auburn returns their QB, they lost a ton on offense and still put up 45 on us.

I hope this isn't another winless year.

Besides Tre Mason who was great and an Injured Kozan, who else has AU lost? Tre Mason did a lot for this team, but the tigers have always felt CAP and Grant could carry the workload. TBH, AU is actually 4 deep at rb.

EDIT: Greg Robinson as well, but again, he was replaceable under the AU offensive scheme.

[Steef]

I hate to say this - but although Auburn returns their QB, they lost a ton on offense and still put up 45 on us.

I hope this isn't another winless year.

They lost a few of last years 1s. But the 2s that replaced them, seemed to play like 1s.

[bphi11ips]

I must admit: I can only read so many armchair QBs. It wears on me.

Maybe you should avoid a forum called "MMQB".

I saw a lot of good discussion here yesterday.  You're right about one thing - there's a huge talent gap between Auburn and Arkansas at WR and in the secondary.  On both sides of the ball.  Same is true of A&M, Alabama and LSU.  We'll have to close that gap to compete.  KJ Hill is a good start.  Maybe some of the freshmen will help.  Wisconsin looked like a Bielema team Saturday but couldn't close against LSU because it didn't have the receivers to throw downfield.  Even a power running game like Wisky's needs some balance. 

I haven't seen anyone ask yet what we were hiding in the Spring, but it didn't come out for Auburn.  The first series was similar to the first series of the Spring game minus the interception.  We are simply going to have to throw the ball to the seams off of play action and hold onto it when we beat the safeties over the top.  BA isn't going to wow anyone with his arm strength or pocket presence, but he throws the ball well enough when he has time to set his feet.  Agree with Biggus we need more play action across the middle to the backs.  We are simply going to have to find a way to back 8 or 9 out of the box.  The opportunities are there. 

Excuse my arm chair observations. 

[jbcarol]

Jay G. Tate @JayGTate  ·  4h
CHALK TALK: The Sweep | @wherring54 shows that over-pursuit can be problematic. http://bit.ly/1sV0WCc 

Video of Hog successes with the sweep and correction.

[Speedracer]

Anyone that thought we were going to hold Auburm under 24 points is crazy.  Auburn may have two of the best receivers in college football.  Doesn't matter that they lost Mason, Malzahn's scheme allows any talented running back to run wild.   They have a a very talented offense and a pick your poison scheme.  They're going to put points on anybody they play.

Even Lord Saban and Smart struggle against the spread.

[Oklahawg]

Maybe you should avoid a forum called "MMQB".

I saw a lot of good discussion here yesterday. 

Excuse my arm chair observations. 

Your excused. I saw thread after thread of crap, with occasional insights tossed in.

We played a stout team. That is still the overwhelming conclusion - we were better but they were also.

Biggus' commentary about 2nd half playcalling is spot on - why the mysterious whiff play after play?

[ErieHog]

That goes back to them. If a guy can't do it, then why are they starting? Or, is it the coach's fault to begin with?

Lack of talent.   We've seen that this staff generally doesn't give a darn about anything other than playing the best option;  it is why we're so green in so many positions, still.    Why don't we go with someone else?  We don't have anything better.   

To have a stark contrast between the 1st and 2nd half is befuddling. We kept up toe-to-toe in the first half only to squander it in the second. Execution of the play as a player is part of it, but the other the responsibility resides in the coach by making sure that their player is in the best possible position to execute the designated role.

We have players in positions to make plays.  That is a non-issue; their complete inability to make those plays, is.     Well designed, broken plays were everywhere in that second half.   

It is up to the coach to adjust to their opponents adjustments. The player may fail, but it is up to the coach to figure out a way to reduce the percentage of failure. I don't think Chaney reduce the chances of failure. At least, in the second half.

Also, if the player is unable to execute the scheme, then is the scheme too hard or is it too risky to execute? I understand that some of it is because we lack depth and fatigue sets in, but we have to be aware of our weaknesses and try to compensate for them, not play into them.

The scheme is not on the complex end of offenses.  We can dumb it down a bit, but that makes it even easier to defend, and puts more stress on our few talented spots to execute against even steeper odds.

TL;DR- It has to be more than player "execution" to go toe-to-toe in one half and zilch in the other half.

Not really, it doesn't.    Other teams can make a lot more adjustments, due to a comparative wealth of options;  other teams go to their WRs because they can--- we don't really have that luxury, as our collective group wouldn't know separation if it bit them.

Depth is still a massive issue; pass protection is very worrying-- and when you combine those with getting behind the 8 ball,  it is a recipe for exactly what we saw on Saturday.

[Oklahawg]

Texas Tech's leading receiver last year was a tight end. If you think 30% is all the share tight ends should have...I disagree.

What was the Petrino adage, "feed the studs"? Marshall and Collins looked like they had the wiggle and burst to make Auburn miss. Get them the ball wide or in a screen call. Derby and Henry looked like difference makers. Sprinkle, too.

Wilson showed hands and the ability to find a hole in the secondary, the greatest deficiencies last year (I am connecting the route running issues last year to Wilson being in the right spot, the soft spot, of the Auburn secondary).

That seems to be sufficient to do more in the passing game then we showed. I do not buy for a minute we "held back". Maybe the gameplan found the staff convinced other things wouldn't work, or that we could continue to make hay by stubbornly going after the same plays. Mystifying.

[bphi11ips]

Your excused. I saw thread after thread of crap, with occasional insights tossed in.

We played a stout team. That is still the overwhelming conclusion - we were better but they were also.

Biggus' commentary about 2nd half playcalling is spot on - why the mysterious whiff play after play?

I saw two steps forward and one step back Saturday.  We are who everyone thought we are, and so was Auburn. 

We have to find a way to throw the ball well enough to keep the defense honest.  Pretty simple to say, not so simple to do with our current personnel.

[Oklahawg]

Lack of talent.   We've seen that this staff generally doesn't give a darn about anything other than playing the best option;  it is why we're so green in so many positions, still.    Why don't we go with someone else?  We don't have anything better.   

We have players in positions to make plays.  That is a non-issue; their complete inability to make those plays, is.     Well designed, broken plays were everywhere in that second half.   

The scheme is not on the complex end of offenses.  We can dumb it down a bit, but that makes it even easier to defend, and puts more stress on our few talented spots to execute against even steeper odds.

Not really, it doesn't.    Other teams can make a lot more adjustments, due to a comparative wealth of options;  other teams go to their WRs because they can--- we don't really have that luxury, as our collective group wouldn't know separation if it bit them.

Depth is still a massive issue; pass protection is very worrying-- and when you combine those with getting behind the 8 ball,  it is a recipe for exactly what we saw on Saturday.

Some good comments, and I'd like to reinforce two.

1. We are still a year away from depth at most positions. Maybe more, as we see a staff building long-term depth, the depth that comes from time in the system vs. recruitable depth, the depth that comes in ready to go.
2. We may be able to use some of our pups, but to expect much in game one, vs Auburn, at Auburn, etc., is too much.

[Oklahawg]

I saw two steps forward and one step back Saturday.  We are who everyone thought we are, and so was Auburn. 

We have to find a way to throw the ball well enough to keep the defense honest.  Pretty simple to say, not so simple to do with our current personnel.

Agreed. Progress, but not as much as we wanted.

[hawgon]

I told you months ago that the Chaney/Bielema combo does not mesh well and that Chaney would be gone at the end of the year.  You saw it Saturday, the offense is like two different offenses instead of a smooth meshing of philosophies.  The first half was one thing and the second half was another. 

In my strictly armchair opinion, Chaney does not utilize the middle of the field enough and tends to panic when we get down a couple scores.

[Oklahawg]

I told you months ago that the Chaney/Bielema combo does not mesh well and that Chaney would be gone at the end of the year.  You saw it Saturday, the offense is like two different offenses instead of a smooth meshing of philosophies.  The first half was one thing and the second half was another. 

In my strictly armchair opinion, Chaney does not utilize the middle of the field enough and tends to panic when we get down a couple scores.

He may not be a good mesh. I certainly agree with the middle of the field.

[Bebop]

Lack of talent.   We've seen that this staff generally doesn't give a darn about anything other than playing the best option;  it is why we're so green in so many positions, still.    Why don't we go with someone else?  We don't have anything better.

We didn't play JoJo or Jared Cornelius. I'm sure that they will shine if given the opportunity.I think the talent excuse can only go so far. Some of those drops you or me could have caught and yet we are probably not as talented as those WRs. It's more than just "not enough talent."

Maybe the WRs were nervous or scared. Players have to have nerves of steal, yet coaches are there to help them to become that way. They can catch the ball or they wouldn't be out there.

We have players in positions to make plays.  That is a non-issue; their complete inability to make those plays, is.     Well designed, broken plays were everywhere in that second half. 

That's part of the story. The other part is the preparation to execute those plays. How much did they practice those kinds of plays? Did they do them enough times?

The scheme is not on the complex end of offenses.  We can dumb it down a bit, but that makes it even easier to defend, and puts more stress on our few talented spots to execute against even steeper odds.

Look at Gus' scheme. His system is dumbed down so that a converted DB can run it. It works effectively, however. The point is that even if a scheme is dumb doesn't make it any less effective.

Not really, it doesn't.    Other teams can make a lot more adjustments, due to a comparative wealth of options;  other teams go to their WRs because they can--- we don't really have that luxury, as our collective group wouldn't know separation if it bit them. 

Creating separation goes back to play-calling, to a degree. Are the called plays giving the WR enough opportunity to create separation? This is where I think the TEs could have been more effective in the 2nd half. Our TEs could have created mismatches that would have covered the middle of the field for good yardage.

I think it is a mixture, but I think (like I said last year) that the coaches should be more to blame than the players. It is up to the coaches to shore up any weakness that they may have on their team. Can't catch? Find someone who can. I know we got some freshman that need the experience.

Depth is still a massive issue; pass protection is very worrying-- and when you combine those with getting behind the 8 ball,  it is a recipe for exactly what we saw on Saturday.

Depth is still an issue. I agree. I don't think we helped ourselves in the 2nd half near as much as we could have. Again I'm not saying we could have won just that we should have covered the spread or, at least, scored again.

[Biggus Piggus]

The reception breakdown:

WRs

Wilson 4-55
Hollister 2-20
Hatcher 1-17

TEs

Derby 4-40
Henry 1-14
Sprinkle 1-10

RBs

Williams 2-(2)
Marshall 1-14
Collins 1-5
Arinze 1-2

Would like to see an incompletion breakdown.

Henry with one catch, that is the waste I was talking about. He should be a threat over the middle.

Hatcher had a horrible game. Worried about his confidence.

[PonderinHog]

Would like to see an incompletion breakdown.

Henry with one catch, that is the waste I was talking about. He should be a threat over the middle.

Hatcher had a horrible game. Worried about his confidence.

Hunter only getting one catch is hard for me to comprehend.

[Biggus Piggus]

Anyone that thought we were going to hold Auburm under 24 points is crazy.  Auburn may have two of the best receivers in college football.  Doesn't matter that they lost Mason, Malzahn's scheme allows any talented running back to run wild.   They have a a very talented offense and a pick your poison scheme.  They're going to put points on anybody they play.

Even Lord Saban and Smart struggle against the spread.

Going into the game I had said I expected Auburn to win because we could not cover their receivers. Was that it? When we were giving up lots of passing yards, the Hogs fight Auburn to a tie. When Marshall came in and the offense went heavy to the run, game over.

The surprise was that Arkansas could dominate Auburn's defense for a half then completely shut down. Nobody here understands how that happened. Not sure our coaches do yet. It was more than play calls and personnel.