Impact on the players?

[SWC75]

All the talk on the radio is about the impact the MacDonald demotion will have on the players. It seems to me it should have very little impact. The position coaches are all the same. the plays come down form the booth and are signaled into the team. They run the plays as best they can. What's the difference?

I think the big difference for the players is the loss of Hunt. They will be playing with 2-3 other quarterbacks, each with different skill sets and, (presumably) plays called for them. And the back-ups will be less likely to check-off into a play of their own choosing, as Hunt supposedly did with the Moore pitch-out.


I think the QB change is what impacts the players, not the OC switch.

 

[Ernj]

If players are emotionally tied to McDonald and not Lester then this could have a negative effect. From all appearances people like Lester so my guess is this will not be as big a deal for the players. I agree that the biggest loss will be Hunt. I remember there being some players that were upset that Allen came in and was named the starter last year when they felt that Hunt should have been the starter from the get-go. there could be some backlash like that but I just don't see it.

 

[007]

All the talk on the radio is about the impact the MacDonald demotion will have on the players. It seems to me it should have very little impact. The position coaches are all the same. the plays come down form the booth and are signaled into the team. They run the plays as best they can. What's the difference?

I think the big difference for the players is the loss of Hunt. They will be playing with 2-3 other quarterbacks, each with different skill sets and, (presumably) plays called for them. And the back-ups will be less likely to check-off into a play of their own choosing, as Hunt supposedly did with the Moore pitch-out.


I think the QB change is what impacts the players, not the OC switch.

If you build a program on, and constantly promote and demand accountability to, the fundamental values of family, hard work, discipline, fighting to the end, never giving up and only pointing with your thumb at yourself yada yada, and then single out coach A (who I am sure many of the kids are close to/respect) as no longer worthy of his responsibility, is it that hard to imagine that some kids will be upset at the hypocrisy or disagree with the decision?

 

[AAM62]

we typically burn our timeouts before we need to because of confusion/coach decision. Expect that to be worse now.

 

[SoBristol]

we typically burn our timeouts before we need to because of confusion/coach decision. Expect that to be worse now.

Why? I expect Lester will trim back the formations & rotations, slow down the up-tempo, and try to establish the run. He has called plays before. Again, it's more about how the new QB handles the situation -- something that the team would have to deal with regardless with Hunt out.

 

[anomander]

we typically burn our timeouts before we need to because of confusion/coach decision. Expect that to be worse now.

ehh amazingly we burn more timeouts on defense then offense.

 

[Statesman1]

If you build a program on, and constantly promote and demand accountability to, the fundamental values of family, hard work, discipline, fighting to the end, never giving up and only pointing with your thumb at yourself yada yada, and then single out coach A (who I am sure many of the kids are close to/respect) as no longer worthy of his responsibility, is it that hard to imagine that some kids will be upset at the hypocrisy or disagree with the decision?

I agree- these are college kids not professionals in the NFL or SEC- there are bound to be some who are not all in on this move-

 

[OrangeTarheel]

we typically burn our timeouts before we need to because of confusion/coach decision. Expect that to be worse now.

I thought just the opposite, that GMD was not able to process plays quickly enough. Will be tough to tell, I imagine, given that our backup quarterbacks don't have much gameday experience.

 

[Chris02M]

ehh amazingly we burn more timeouts on defense then offense.

usually after another timeout by other team or end of quarter

 

[mountaincuse]

I've heard the player discussions have surrounded on Hunt's leg and missed games. Not the oc

 

[Chip]

And the back-ups will be less likely to check-off into a play of their own choosing, as Hunt supposedly did with the Moore pitch-out.

So we just gained 2 points. If that doesn't energize the players, I don't know what will.

I worry about the defense. I think they were already feeling the pressure based on having no offense. This doesn't help. I just worry they'll be flat. Doesn't so much matter this Saturday, but more the week after.

 

[ORANGEsPHK]

Here's a question for the board gurus (because I'm grabbing at straws floating in the air most of the time ):

Do you think that the players did/do not recognize that the offense is/was dysfunctional. Hunt said in a post-game conference, in answer to a question about the lack of success in the red zone, that the team was too anxious when in the red zone which led to mistakes. Hunt recognized an issue (which could, and should have, been addressed via good coaching), what about the rest of the team. The offensive has been inordinately inefficient once in scoring range - do you not think that the players are fully aware of this? And do the players blame themselves? Do they blame the play calling? Do they blame a lack of talent?

The players tend to be very PC in their interviews and all appear team players, and maybe they are, but I can't help but think that some of the players are smart enough to realize that something is wrong. Maybe they have some realization that they are not fully prepared to execute, maybe they realize the play calling is suspect, maybe they realize they cannot execute as McD wanted due to talent limitations. I don't know, but I can't believe that the players are not aware of the deficiencies of the offensive performances this year.

Maybe this change is good for the team, gives them new hope for a more functional/productive offense. I would have to think (perhaps inaccurately) that the players have recognized the offense was dysfunctional and throwing in 'new blood', via Lester, may light a fire under everyone's arses and get everyone on the same page (e.g., missed blocking assignments, unnecessary penalties, etc.).

Just a thought that came to me whilst grasping and said straws floating in the air. What are your thoughts?

 

[FAL]

Not buying lack of talent. Failure or inability to utilize it is at the heart of the problem, IMHO.

 

[SWC75]

Here's a question for the board gurus (because I'm grabbing at straws floating in the air most of the time ):

Do you think that the players did/do not recognize that the offense is/was dysfunctional. Hunt said in a post-game conference, in answer to a question about the lack of success in the red zone, that the team was too anxious when in the red zone which led to mistakes. Hunt recognized an issue (which could, and should have, been addressed via good coaching), what about the rest of the team. The offensive has been inordinately inefficient once in scoring range - do you not think that the players are fully aware of this? And do the players blame themselves? Do they blame the play calling? Do they blame a lack of talent?

The players tend to be very PC in their interviews and all appear team players, and maybe they are, but I can't help but think that some of the players are smart enough to realize that something is wrong. Maybe they have some realization that they are not fully prepared to execute, maybe they realize the play calling is suspect, maybe they realize they cannot execute as McD wanted due to talent limitations. I don't know, but I can't believe that the players are not aware of the deficiencies of the offensive performances this year.

Maybe this change is good for the team, gives them new hope for a more functional/productive offense. I would have to think (perhaps inaccurately) that the players have recognized the offense was dysfunctional and throwing in 'new blood', via Lester, may light a fire under everyone's arses and get everyone on the same page (e.g., missed blocking assignments, unnecessary penalties, etc.).

Just a thought that came to me whilst grasping and said straws floating in the air. What are your thoughts?

We'll see. Losing Hunt may make a comparison hard, though.

 

[tipphill]

we typically burn our timeouts before we need to because of confusion/coach decision. Expect that to be worse now.

we need to scrap the no huddle, they need the huddle to communicate,and focus on execution. all they have with no huddle is mass confusion. this team does not have the makeup or skill for fast paced no huddle. they really need that time to collect themselves rather than be looking around, being unsure and as i said before confused

 

[suloyalfan]

If you build a program on, and constantly promote and demand accountability to, the fundamental values of family, hard work, discipline, fighting to the end, never giving up and only pointing with your thumb at yourself yada yada, and then single out coach A (who I am sure many of the kids are close to/respect) as no longer worthy of his responsibility, is it that hard to imagine that some kids will be upset at the hypocrisy or disagree with the decision?

The key to what you said is accountability. The head coach held GM accountable and he didn't deliver. What part of the demotion was wrong? Most of the bad press from this change is GM opening his mouth and yapping about it.

 

[007]

The key to what you said is accountability. The head coach held GM accountable and he didn't deliver. What part of the demotion was wrong? Most of the bad press from this change is GM opening his mouth and yapping about it.

The OP, and my reply, was not a commentary on the decision to demote GM. It was about the possible impact to the players, as per the title of the thread.

 

[suloyalfan]

The OP, and my reply, was not a commentary on the decision to demote GM. It was about the possible impact to the players, as per the title of the thread.

Right, I'm just saying that Shafer was still exhibiting those qualities that you mentioned with the decision. Whether the players all agree or not, he didn't go against those principles.

 

[Oakland]

I think the players are at least as desirous of winning as us. I suspect they have noticed the losing and might be open to changes.

All the talk on the radio is about the impact the MacDonald demotion will have on the players. It seems to me it should have very little impact. The position coaches are all the same. the plays come down form the booth and are signaled into the team. They run the plays as best they can. What's the difference?

I think the big difference for the players is the loss of Hunt. They will be playing with 2-3 other quarterbacks, each with different skill sets and, (presumably) plays called for them. And the back-ups will be less likely to check-off into a play of their own choosing, as Hunt supposedly did with the Moore pitch-out.


I think the QB change is what impacts the players, not the OC switch.

 

[Crusty]

I don't think it matters to more than half the team. The D and ST are unaffected. On the offensive side, the QB's are probably OK with it and the line may not care. It's the WRs who will be the question. Lester has made it clear than establishing the run game is his top priority. They will naturally be wondering how the changes will affect them.