Coach Hicks Embraces T. Hunt

[OrangePA]

After I think the third TD, Hunt comes off the field and the S&C coach warmly embraces him - for a awhile.

I have never seen him do that before.

It conveyed to me that Terrell is well-liked - that Will Hicks for one was genuinely happy for him.

Maybe having been in the program for three years makes a difference. I don't know. But that moment told me a lot.

 

[SWC75]

I'm reading a lot into body language and stuff but I think the team wants to play for Terrell Hunt more than they want to play for Drew Allen and so they play better when Hunt is in there.

 

[Faegan]

How can you not be rooting for T.Hunt? His story... my word.

 

[Orangejet]

Terrel will make things happen for the Cuse this year. We may not win many games but they will be a lot closer than with Allen at the helm.

 

[007]

I'm reading a lot into body language and stuff but I think the team wants to play fro Terrell more than they want to play for Drew Allen and so they play better when Hunt is in there.

If that's true, and I really don't think that it is, the program is in trouble. The team should simply want to win, even if Bozo the Clown was playing QB.

 

[cuseinchina]

If that's true, and I really don't think that it is, the program is in trouble. The team should simply want to win, even if Bozo the Clown was playing QB.

Human brings don't function like that, leaders matter a great deal. Your qb is your leader and if the team thinks the wrong guy is out there for the wrong reasons it will most definitely have a direct impact on how the offense players perform individually its just human nature.

 

[TerryM]

If that's true, and I really don't think that it is, the program is in trouble. The team should simply want to win, even if Bozo the Clown was playing QB.

These are kids, with emotion. The college game is based on talent and then raw emotion. Emotion wins games

 

[007]

Human brings don't function like that, leaders matter a great deal. Your qb is your leader and if the team thinks the wrong guy is out there for the wrong reasons it will most definitely have a direct impact on how the offense players perform individually its just human nature.

I play a psychologist during the day, so I certainly appreciate the point you are making.

However, in this case, I think that the difference in team performance when Hunt is in there compared to Allen has more to do with Hunt's skill set/Allen's lack of success, and less to do with the predisposition of the team's psyche. Of course emotion plays a factor, and I suspect that Hunt's performance in actual game situations has in fact now inspired confidence. To suggest that the team played harder for Hunt, and, by extension, with less emotion for Allen, puts the horse in front of the cart.

 

[SWC75]

I play a psychologist during the day, so I certainly appreciate the point you are making.

However, in this case, I think that the difference in team performance when Hunt is in there compared to Allen has more to do with Hunt's skill set/Allen's lack of success, and less to do with the predisposition of the team's psyche. Of course emotion plays a factor, and I suspect that Hunt's performance in actual game situations has in fact now inspired confidence. To suggest that the team played harder for Hunt, and, by extension, with less emotion for Allen, puts the horse in front of the cart.

That is nonetheless my perception and that of others, FWIW.

 

[ImperialOrange]

I'm reading a lot into body language and stuff but I think the team wants to play for Terrell Hunt more than they want to play for Drew Allen and so they play better when Hunt is in there.

The players were all hyped up when Drew Allen led them out against Penn State. I can understand why it would look considerably different after the 3rd series of todays game though.

It's hard to play loose if you feel like you must be perfect every play and then even if you are the play could still go horribly wrong. It's a lot easier playing if you miss an assignment and something positive can still come from the play.

 

[anomander]

The players want Hunt. I assume the coaches are well aware of this by now. If for some bizarre reason Hunt doesn't start and play the full game against Tulane (unless blowout) I will be extremely worried about the direction of this team. Shouldn't be an issue though.

 

[nzm136]

How can you not be rooting for T.Hunt? His story... my word.

I root for all the men in orange (or blue in this case)

 

[qdawgg]

This thread sounds like a Cohen inspired conspiracy theory.

The skill sets of the 2 QB's are different and the play calling was noticeably different for each QB. This is pretty simple stuff.

 

[alphaorange]

I play a psychologist during the day, so I certainly appreciate the point you are making.

However, in this case, I think that the difference in team performance when Hunt is in there compared to Allen has more to do with Hunt's skill set/Allen's lack of success, and less to do with the predisposition of the team's psyche. Of course emotion plays a factor, and I suspect that Hunt's performance in actual game situations has in fact now inspired confidence. To suggest that the team played harder for Hunt, and, by extension, with less emotion for Allen, puts the horse in front of the cart.

Having played on teams with different leaders and coaches, I can tell you absolutely it makes a difference. Maybe not consciously, but it does, nonetheless. If you're a fan as well as a Psychologist, and you don't grasp this, I'm worried for your clients...

Sports performance is always in flux, even game to game. There is a reason guys would run through walls for some coaches while merely playing hard for others...even though they think they are doing all they can.

 

[Crusty]

If that's true, and I really don't think that it is, the program is in trouble. The team should simply want to win, even if Bozo the Clown was playing QB.

You can't believe that. Hunt is just the better leader.
These are kids playing a highly charges emotional game. In a post game I think it was Smith who said in a response to a question about the difference between the two in the huddle said Hunt was calm and confident and Drew got on them more. He said Hunt knew what he was doing.

 

[PhatOrange]

All these statements about the players wanting Hunt, being stated as fact, is such crap. The urban legend that's become true because its being repeated so much.

Players intentionally underperforming for one QB is the most outrageous and assinine thing I've ever read on this board.

If the player selected as the starter is playing poorly and the second guy is just as good then there is bound to be division, that's just the way it goes, I've seen it first hand in many locker rooms. On the other hand If Allen had performed well there would be none of his talk. It's ludicrous to say (as fact) the players all wanted hunt when nobody knows dick.

What's the board going to be like when hunt plays like crap?

 

[OrangeTarheel]

All these statements about the players wanting Hunt, being stated as fact, is such crap. The urban legend that's become true because its being repeated so much.

Players intentionally underperforming for one QB is the most outrageous and assinine thing I've ever read on this board.

If the player selected as the starter is playing poorly and the second guy is just as good then there is bound to be division, that's just the way it goes, I've seen it first hand in many locker rooms. On the other hand If Allen had performed well there would be none of his talk. It's ludicrous to say (as fact) the players all wanted hunt when nobody knows dick.

What's the board going to be like when hunt plays like crap?

I agree, but I do think the players just lost hope of winning with Allen. Allen looked like he lost confidence in himself over time, I am sure his teammates felt that as well. A change to Loeb or Broyld would have been welcomed under those conditions.

When Hunt performs poorly there will be much wailing and a little sepuku on this board. As usual.

 

[SWC75]

All these statements about the players wanting Hunt, being stated as fact, is such crap. The urban legend that's become true because its being repeated so much.

Players intentionally underperforming for one QB is the most outrageous and assinine thing I've ever read on this board.

If the player selected as the starter is playing poorly and the second guy is just as good then there is bound to be division, that's just the way it goes, I've seen it first hand in many locker rooms. On the other hand If Allen had performed well there would be none of his talk. It's ludicrous to say (as fact) the players all wanted hunt when nobody knows dick.

What's the board going to be like when hunt plays like crap?

It's not about players tanking when Allen is in there. It's about their excitement and confidence going up when Hunt comes in. Nothing intentional, just emotional.

 

[007]

Having played on teams with different leaders and coaches, I can tell you absolutely it makes a difference. Maybe not consciously, but it does, nonetheless. If you're a fan as well as a Psychologist, and you don't grasp this, I'm worried for your clients...

Sports performance is always in flux, even game to game. There is a reason guys would run through walls for some coaches while merely playing hard for others...even though they think they are doing all they can.

Thanks for the tips. I will pass along your concerns to my clients.

PhatOrange stated this more directly than I care to. The point is, yes the team is responding to Hunt on an emotional and leadership level, but this as an aftereffect of his performance on the field and not the cause of his, or the team's, better play. Similarly, to think that the team consciously or subconsciously under responds emotionally, physically, or at any other level that matters, to Allen is just...nonsense.

 

[SWC75]

Thanks for the tips. I will pass along your concerns to my clients.

PhatOrange stated this more directly than I care to. The point is, yes the team is responding to Hunt on an emotional and leadership level, but this as an aftereffect of his performance on the field and not the cause of his, or the team's, better play. Similarly, to think that the team consciously or subconsciously under responds emotionally, physically, or at any other level that matters, to Allen is just...nonsense.

Is it impossible for you to imagine that players would be more supportive of the guy who's been here longer and who seem to have won the job in the spring? Or that they might respond better to him personally or have more confidence in him? Why do you assume that their attitude has to be neutral before the games start?

 

[007]

Is it impossible for you to imagine that players would be more supportive of the guy who's been here longer and who seem to have won the job in the spring? Or that they might respond better to him personally or have more confidence in him? Why do you assume that their attitude has to be neutral before the games start?

I hope that those questions are rhetorical, SWC. In any case, they do not speak to the heart of this debate. I am not making assumptions about the player's attitudes. If you would like to believe that the players are deliberately under performing when Allen is in the game because Hunt as been here longer, won the position in the spring, or because they "respond better" to Hunt "personally," knock yourself out. I would like to see the response should you run that theory by SS when you call in to the coach's show.

I believe that the team is responding better to and have more confidence in Hunt, but this is primarily as an aftereffect to his performance in real games. The players's personal feelings about Hunt or Allen play a role, but they are not the cause of Hunt's good, or Allen's poor performances.

 

[CuseOnly]

I play a psychologist during the day, so I certainly appreciate the point you are making.

However, in this case, I think that the difference in team performance when Hunt is in there compared to Allen has more to do with Hunt's skill set/Allen's lack of success, and less to do with the predisposition of the team's psyche. Of course emotion plays a factor, and I suspect that Hunt's performance in actual game situations has in fact now inspired confidence. To suggest that the team played harder for Hunt, and, by extension, with less emotion for Allen, puts the horse in front of the cart.

Yeah...what he said...I think ?

 

[SWC75]

I hope that those questions are rhetorical, SWC. In any case, they do not speak to the heart of this debate. I am not making assumptions about the player's attitudes. If you would like to believe that the players are deliberately under performing when Allen is in the game because Hunt as been here longer, won the position in the spring, or because they "respond better" to Hunt "personally," knock yourself out. I would like to see the response should you run that theory by SS when you call in to the coach's show.

I believe that the team is responding better to and have more confidence in Hunt, but this is primarily as an aftereffect to his performance in real games. The players's personal feelings about Hunt or Allen play a role, but they are not the cause of Hunt's good, or Allen's poor performances.

I stated a possibility that I think may be true. You didn't say thta you didn't think it was true. You dismissed it as nonsense, as if it were not possible. It is possible and it is not nonsensical. And I didn't say it caused Allen's or Hunts' performances. I said it affected their own performances.