So does Wats get any love today?

gratefullred said:
Wats had a good day. Hes smart again. Minnesota should take notice.
Click to expand...
lol thats hilarious...but I give credit to Wats....he threw the damn ball...which I believe the offense HAD to do....it looked like they had AT LEAST ONE spy on Martinez...if not TWO. I bet they had two. When the passes were being executed...it softened up the run for T-Mobile. Great game plan. I wasn't pleased with the blackshirt defense. Best play of the game!? I would consider Eric Hagg's clutch interception! Or....Cricks sack....the defense didn't look very impressive at all...but then again...OSU's offense....is great. period.

 
I like wats, i think for the most part he has called a good year. Think there are times he could open it up a bit more though. Especially now that Martinez has shown he can toss the ball around a bit.

 
kansas husker said:
Paul in WI said:
I don't like Watson, so I'm sure that I fall into the "hater" category. That said, he called a good game today, making adjustments when necessary. I never said that the guy couldn't call a good game. However, one good game today doesn't vindicate him in my eyes. He needs to do this on a consistent basis against quality defenses. Honestly--and I'm not trying to start an argument, we didn't face a quality defense today. We SHOULD have scored a lot of points on them.

As long as there are posts like these wishing to vindicate Watson when he calls a good game, I'll be here to defend my stance about the guy. When he builds a history of winning clutch games against quality defenses, I'll change my opinion of him. Until then, I'll just hold my breath.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to argue with you, I'm as tired of argueing in support of him as you are agrugeing against him. Your posts does make me wonder about a couple of things just to get your oppinon not to argue.

1.)What do you think of the 2008 season when the defense was still very much rebuilding, and it was Watson's offesne that made it a decent season?

2.)How much to last years poor performance can you atribute to the players lost (Ganz, Lucky, Castile, Swift, Peterson, Murtha, and Slauson) and the fact that our two biggest threats (Helu and Burkhead)played injured for a significant portion of the season?

3.)Does the obvious improvment this year overlast speak to you at all that last year may have just been a rebuilding year?

once agian not trying to pick a fight that has been picked a million times before and has no end just wanted to get your opinon (or for that matter the opinon of anyone who dislikes Watson)on those three questions.
Click to expand...
Oh geez, now you're going to make me have to think. LOL. Let me give it a high-level broad bushing. I think that Watson is more comfortable coaching the type of offense that we had in 2008. We had the players (Gantz) that fit better into the offensive scheme that he would prefer to use. He's probably a great coach for the pros.

Last year, we were pretty crippled at the core, skill positions. That required us to go relatively simple with our offensive scheme. I think that hurts an OC like Watson more than it would a typical OC, due to the type of coach that Watson is.

As an OC, I think that he oftentimes is playing chess during times when checkers may be more appropriate. He seems to relish the complexity, and I feel that being "overly complex" has costs us at times--especially if we don't have the personnel to execute his favorite scheme (like last year). He's obviously a book smart guy, but he needs to be street smart as well.

We're supposedly trying to be more of a power running team, and even though we're putting up some gaudy numbers against lesser defenses, we're really not showing that we can knock people off the ball and ram it down their throats. Even today, we were having trouble getting good yards on first down against the 92nd(?) ranked defense. Most of our ground game this year has come off of the zone read, which is a little more "finesse" than it is "power." When we match up against a defense that can match our offensive speed, that spells trouble if we can't fall back on a power game and just beat them into submission.

To me, he doesn't seem like the type of OC that is willing to commit to that when it is required. As a result, I feel like we are making a half-assed attempt which is good enough against weaker teams, but not what we need to beat the better defenses in the country and make the next step as a program.

We have improved this year, but I think that is largely due to the addition of Martinez. If we plugged Zac Lee back in there, it is my opinion that we'd be seeing pretty much the same offense as we saw last year, albeit slightly improved. However, even WITH Martinez, I very much question just what we can do against stout defenses. I'm not asking to move the ball up and down the field on every series, but I would also expect our ground game to not virtually grind to a halt.

Anyway, that's where I'm coming from. I just don't think Watson is our guy. I really wish he was, because I want to see some conference championships and maybe an occasional national championship again in my lifetime.

 
Hunter94 said:
yes, he called a pretty good game, now......how about 2 in a row?
Click to expand...
This sums everything up. He needs to exploit defenses week in/week out for me to call him a good O coordinator.

I will give him credit, he made did a decent job today... still some head scratchers, but that is typical of almost all coaches.

 
YES! He called an excellent game against the 114 ranked pass defense he exposed it. I've been a huge watson critic. Hats off he called a good game. Now can he keep it consistent? Even more important...after his next lousy game do all the LOVERS come out and admit it?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
He was truely "multiple" today. He sometimes passed on first down, gave the defense a lot of different looks, ran from shotgun AND center and mixed it up very well. If we had this gameplan against texas, we would have won that game. Hopefully we keep the Watson we saw today and not the watson from last week.

 
Agreed, I'll be the first to say it was a great game plan, that's the "Multiple" offense I like to see. He kept it balanced, threw it on first down, ran different formations and running plays, ran play action on first down, didn't run zone read 1,000,000 times, and when things weren't working, we did something else, and spread the ball around.

If we do that more, and do it well, we will be a very solid offense.

Granted, Oklahoma State's defense is HORRIBLE, but it's the "Philosophy" that I liked, not necessarily the stats, [although impressive] and how many points we put up, but the way he called the game.

Hopefully he can call a great game next week, we will need it, Oklahoma State's offense is darn impressive, I don't think our defense is that bad, although there were a lot of missed tackles today, gotta clean that up.

 
^ We always call more than 3 plays. And the reason we aren't more multiple usually, is because we are limited in what we can do with bringing along such a young, barely developed quarterback. Besides, everybody and their mother railed on 'jack of all trades, master of none' multiplicity, but the first thing that happens when we simplify and get a core identity, is people complain about it. Ironic.

I like being more multiple too, but you have to recognize there's limitations to that when we have Taylor in as quarterback. There are rewards too, as we saw today.

You HAVE to give credit to Watson on this one. We have a very rough around the edges guy; basically, a speedy wide receiver playing quarterback. The mental aspect of his game has an extremely long way to go, and he's also young and inexperienced, so he has a long way to go in general. And yet, even through the air, inconsistent as he is and as limited as the O is in what they have at their disposal, Taylor has put up some terrific passing numbers by any measure.

Really, he has no business putting up numbers like that. Some will look at this and say, "Taylor must be a really good quarterback/passer." I don't really think he's really any different in that area than he was last week, or three weeks ago for that matter. But the whole team showed up to play today and guys finished plays. We still have the overthrows, the underthrows, the throws that are making our receivers fall down when they should be getting a lot of YAC, the poor decisions, etc. But we are able to mask this very effectively.

Will we do that against great defenses? I don't know, but that was a Top 20 team we faced today, and we got everything out of Taylor we could have hoped for: a very high passing production-to-talent ratio. I think that's to Watson's credit, making hay out of this situation.

 
zoogies said:
^ We always call more than 3 plays. And the reason we aren't more multiple usually, is because we are limited in what we can do with bringing along such a young, barely developed quarterback. Besides, everybody and their mother railed on 'jack of all trades, master of none' multiplicity, but the first thing that happens when we simplify and get a core identity, is people complain about it. Ironic.

I like being more multiple too, but you have to recognize there's limitations to that when we have Taylor in as quarterback. There are rewards too, as we saw today.

You HAVE to give credit to Watson on this one. We have a very rough around the edges guy; basically, a speedy wide receiver playing quarterback. The mental aspect of his game has an extremely long way to go, and he's also young and inexperienced, so he has a long way to go in general. And yet, even through the air, inconsistent as he is and as limited as the O is in what they have at their disposal, Taylor has put up some terrific passing numbers by any measure.

Really, he has no business putting up numbers like that. Some will look at this and say, "Taylor must be a really good quarterback/passer." I don't really think he's really any different in that area than he was last week, or three weeks ago for that matter. But the whole team showed up to play today and guys finished plays. We still have the overthrows, the underthrows, the throws that are making our receivers fall down when they should be getting a lot of YAC, the poor decisions, etc. But we are able to mask this very effectively.

Will we do that against great defenses? I don't know, but that was a Top 20 team we faced today, and we got everything out of Taylor we could have hoped for: a very high passing production-to-talent ratio. I think that's to Watson's credit, making hay out of this situation.
Click to expand...

Of course, I give Watson credit for calling a good game. Can he continue mixing this up? Granted, OSU'S defense is ranked 92nd in the nation, which is worse than k state. Maybe he should call this gameplan against ALL teams. You didnt see taylor being different in any area than he was last week? Did you see his footwork? Didnt you seem him making better reads? He had a better pocket presence than he did last week. He improved from last week to this week in the fundamentals of the game. He still has some mental lapses and his accuracy is still but that comes with the territory of having a freshman qb. Also, if we called this gameplan against texas, we win by 3 scores. Watson was too afraid to be "multiple" and open up the playbook last week but i think he realized that is what youre going to have to end up doing against good teams whether you have a freshman qb or not.

 
playcalling was pretty good on offense. I wonder how much this is enhanced by Taylor having a really solid game, though. I think there is alot to be ironed out still with the direction this offense has gone, specifically with angles blockers are taking, what their assignments are and whatnot on the running plays. Right now it seems to me that there is some inefficiency there, we manage to have lots of big guys doing essentially nothing while the RB/ QB gets shellacked by three free defenders so many times.

 
I agree with alot of the other post.... It was great t see us throw the ball on first down today. Also able to finally see playaction was nice. I also think we took a snap under center more yesterday than we have all year. Great gameplan now lets bet the Tigers at Home GBR

 
bshirt said:
We roll over another very marginal defense and we're supposed to believe everything is just fine. Right.

You apologists will never understand we would just like a decent offense when we play a good defense. Zero TDs vs good defenses has been the norm for a long time now. But go ahead, carry on....
Click to expand...
2008 VA Tech #7 Overall Defense

2008 Clemson #18 Overall Defense

2009 OU #8 Overall Defense

2009 Arizona #25 Overall Defense

Now I don't know your cutoff for good, but I believe TDs were scored in each of these games. Didn't bother to check Callahan years, but I'd bet more examples would be out there.

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