Should we fire Satterfield??

BigRedBuster said:
I'm perfectly fine if Satterfield is fired or whatever changes can be made on the offensive side of the ball.

However, if the QB is not seeing wide open receivers or, for some reason, is choosing not to throw them the ball, is that really a play calling or play design issue?  I don't think so, unless by play design, we are including where the QB is supposed to be looking through progressions and that's why he's not seeing them...which is valid.  Still, the issues are his (and Thomas's) to fix.  But, I have a hard time just saying, the play calling sucks, when an experienced good QB would be making throws that make the offense move the ball....but ours isn't.
Click to expand...


Raiola deserves a decent amount of the blame for the UCLA loss in its own isolated discussion. We maybe win the game if the pick six doesn't happen.

But if everything else had been the same except for that play and then maybe us kicking a field goal to win 24-21, Satterfield would still be stacking up this season to look like pretty bad.

So it can be both. I think the coaches deserve a ton of blame for:

  • Not recognizing when he's "off" earlier in a game and mixing in something different.
  • Not trying to use a little more variation & creativity early in games to setup better lead blocking for our backs in the run game so that we can be more successful on 1st & 2nd downs to setup 3rd & short's instead of having the game plan be to be in the shotgun airing it out - when it's clear Raiola is off.
  •  

There's absolutely some evidence at least that when we use counters or stretch plays or use a lead blockers in the run game that we get more out of it than the swing passes & bubble screens (because we aren't executing those short passes well), and we also seem to get more out of it than the generic inside zone runs out of the shotgun.

I have enough self-awareness that I don't want to be the idiot on the internet claiming I know more than a professional football coach and that I know what would have worked better by using hindsight analysis. But I think the conversation is about doing something different earlier in the game when things aren't going well with your original game plan.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
YetiJR said:
God, I pray that Thomas takes over and we reach out to Nixon to be CO-OC and RB coach.

The 2 seasons they did that together it was the 63rd and 28th offense.

Not sure Satt has ever been close to that. 
Click to expand...


I am skeptical that Thomas will be an improvement. I still think when you break down playcalls by whether or not we had a favorable look against the defense, Satterfield has been decent. At some point, however important it is to be process-oriented, the results matter. And the results have been bad. But in a lot of cases in the last few games, the big issues looked like a freshman QB. To me that's just as likely to be a problem coming from Thomas, the QB coach, as it is Satt. I don't think there's a coaching staff adjustment that will fix this.

Now I will 100% admit last week did swing me much more against Satterfield. I don't have the issues with playcalling that others do, but again the results have sucked and he's the guy in charge of the offense. Being able to scheme things up is great, but if the players have never been able to execute it at a high level under your leadership that's on you. I do expect we will move on from Satterfield after the season barring a monumental leap by the offense, and that's good. But I don't buy that just letting Thomas run the offense would fix anything. 

 
Some of you'all are so far in the Fire Satt mindset you can't see the forest from the trees.

Rhule was about as direct as he could be without coming out and saying that Satt was on the hotseat.  He just isn't going to make an emotional decision and is bringing in an outside perspective to help make the decision.

Those of us that are in high profile leadership roles understand exactly what is happening here.  He is owning the problem, bringing in help to take the emotion out of it, and determining the next steps.  

But, you guys keep on going and Fire everyone!!!!

And I know no one will do it, but go watch the entire PC and not just read the hot takes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Undone said:
Raiola deserves a decent amount of the blame for the UCLA loss in its own isolated discussion. We maybe win the game if the pick six doesn't happen.

But if everything else had been the same except for that play and then maybe us kicking a field goal to win 24-21, Satterfield would still be stacking up this season to look like pretty bad.

So it can be both. I think the coaches deserve a ton of blame for:

  • Not recognizing when he's "off" earlier in a game and mixing in something different.
  • Not trying to use a little more variation & creativity early in games to setup better lead blocking for our backs in the run game so that we can be more successful on 1st & 2nd downs to setup 3rd & short's instead of having the game plan be to be in the shotgun airing it out - when it's clear Raiola is off.
  •  

There's absolutely some evidence at least that when we use counters or stretch plays or use a lead blockers in the run game that we get more out of it than the swing passes & bubble screens (because we aren't executing those short passes well), and we also seem to get more out of it than the generic inside zone runs out of the shotgun.

I have enough self-awareness that I don't want to be the idiot on the internet claiming I know more than a professional football coach and that I know what would have worked better by using hindsight analysis. But I think the conversation is about doing something different earlier in the game when things aren't going well with your original game plan.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree.

 
I think we can all agree--> Play calling is about as good as Baby Ferentz at Iowa.

What I have seen very few conversations around is Dylan overthrowing wide open touchdowns that would have won games. It's not far-fetched that we would've been a one lost team coming into the game against UCLA and probably beating them with momentum. Go back and look at some of those sure touchdowns he overthrew, and you will see my point. Playcalling looks a lot different if Dylan doesn't overthrow those sure touchdowns and were a one loss team right now. Something happened at halftime of the Colorado game-- they have not been the same--Dylans body language and team "fire" is gone. I know a former player was saying the crowd had no fire, well -- us fans are just a product of what we are seeing on the field. You can fire Satt, get diff plays called- but if DR is gonna get excited and overthrow and now he will not be a running QB, we are doomed. And... FFS quit with all the cute plays with HH- they are not gonna work. 

Just my take.

GBR

 
Fru said:
Remember when Rhule said the rebuild was ahead of schedule? 
Click to expand...
He's going to bring in the "Bobs".

Sounds like government.  We need to spend more money for people to tell us how to do our jobs.

How did Rhule go from saying everything right to sounding incompetent?  This is the last thing I wanted to hear.  "We need better people than we already paid out the a$$ for".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Undone said:
Raiola deserves a decent amount of the blame for the UCLA loss in its own isolated discussion. We maybe win the game if the pick six doesn't happen.

But if everything else had been the same except for that play and then maybe us kicking a field goal to win 24-21, Satterfield would still be stacking up this season to look like pretty bad.
Click to expand...
You realize we don't have 21 without 3 personal fouls?

 
gobiggergoredder said:
He's going to bring in the "Bobs".

Sounds like government.  We need to spend more money for people to tell us how to do our jobs.
Click to expand...
This is why you hire an experienced rebuilder: to hire outside help to figure it out because the rebuild is harder than you expected even though that was your whole pitch. 

 
soup said:
Some of you'all are so far in the Fire Satt mindset you can't see the forest from the trees.

Rhule was about as direct as he could be without coming out and saying that Satt was on the hotseat.  He just isn't going to make an emotional decision and is bringing in an outside perspective to help make the decision.

Those of us that are in high profile leadership roles understand exactly what is happening here.  He is owning the problem, bringing in help to take the emotion out of it, and determining the next steps.  

But, you guys keep on going and Fire everyone!!!!

And I know no one will do it, but go watch the entire PC and not just read the hot takes.
Click to expand...
You don't need outside eyes to tell you there's a big problem. There's no emotion knowing that after 1.75 season we are not capable of scoring more than 21 points against any power 4/5 teams (including bottom of the barrel ones) when we've had vastly different talent levels. The season is pretty much over at this point. The odds of winning one more game are very slim and there's really nothing left to loose making a change right now. Infact it would give the next man up a good head start with the bye week. A high profile leader would understand that. Also a high profile leader would know why he brought in a Co OC...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
huskerfan99 said:
The whole you are Satt comment is the biggest throw your team under the bus comment I’ve seen in a while. 
 

This isn’t going to end well. 
Click to expand...
I don't agree at all.  That was a comment directed at a team to take some ownership in the issues, and as have been discussed there is plenty of fault to go around.

You can't take plays off and then blame the OC.  That is the crap that happened, right or wrong to the 07 defense with Cosgrove.  They basically said screw it, Cosgrove sucks, why should I play hard.  And the whole thing fell apart.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top