LSU will be starting Danny Etling at QB
http://www.nola.com/lsu/index.ssf/2017/08/lsu_announces_danny_etling_as.html
http://www.nola.com/lsu/index.ssf/2017/08/lsu_announces_danny_etling_as.html
Etling Named Starter
- Thread starter 70boiler
- Start date
I do too but reading between the lines I would wager that there will be a switch not due to injury sometime during the season!
Good to see he is ridding himself of anything Shoop taught him.
We all knew he had talent. it's just finding the right scheme and coach and surrounding players to make him utilize that talent.
I'm confident if LSU had our offensive line and receivers who couldn't get open, he would look just as bad as he did here, . or if we had LSU's offensive line, and our current receiver core, he'd be an All American for us. You'd be amazed at how great a QB can look when given 7+ seconds to throw the ball. last year the announcers were counting the seconds Rogers had to throw the ball, and sometimes he had over 8 seconds. Given 8 seconds, I have confidence Etling would also succeed.
Hazell and Schoop had a pretty good offensive game plan. they were just very bad at developing talent, designed their plays for teams with 4/5 * talent, and were absolutely terrible at making any half time adjustments. but other than that.......
I'm confident if LSU had our offensive line and receivers who couldn't get open, he would look just as bad as he did here, . or if we had LSU's offensive line, and our current receiver core, he'd be an All American for us. You'd be amazed at how great a QB can look when given 7+ seconds to throw the ball. last year the announcers were counting the seconds Rogers had to throw the ball, and sometimes he had over 8 seconds. Given 8 seconds, I have confidence Etling would also succeed.
Hazell and Schoop had a pretty good offensive game plan. they were just very bad at developing talent, designed their plays for teams with 4/5 * talent, and were absolutely terrible at making any half time adjustments. but other than that.......
Shoop's game plans were awful. You don't take a QB like Rob Henry and attempt to make him a drop back passer in less than a year and get praise for good game plans. You also don't get credit for good game plans when your offensive is so incredibly complex that nobody, even the QB, has a good grip on what the hell they are supposed to do.
Ok, as a packers fan, I loved Schoop's Chicago Bears offensive schemes. I also love Cutler as much as favre and rogers contributing to our success and touch downs. .
Schoop had some good plays in his playbook, but they were not plays designed for the talent style or level of talent that Purdue had at the time. I remember a couple of his trick plays and a couple of his this was almost a TD play. but they were all failures because we didn't have the players to execute them. I was not a fan of Henry.
and then he threw out half his plays because they were too complicated for our players. they would have worked elsewhere, or if he had a competent drop back QB to begin with, and an actual Division 1 offensive line.
A lot of hazell's problems were created because he paid too much attention to recruiting skill players and dbacks, and he never tried to upgrade or recruit quality offensive linemen. Did that 400 pound lineman ever play a down?
I felt bad for Etling. With a decent offensive line, he could have become the second coming of Jim Everett.
Schoop had some good plays in his playbook, but they were not plays designed for the talent style or level of talent that Purdue had at the time. I remember a couple of his trick plays and a couple of his this was almost a TD play. but they were all failures because we didn't have the players to execute them. I was not a fan of Henry.
and then he threw out half his plays because they were too complicated for our players. they would have worked elsewhere, or if he had a competent drop back QB to begin with, and an actual Division 1 offensive line.
A lot of hazell's problems were created because he paid too much attention to recruiting skill players and dbacks, and he never tried to upgrade or recruit quality offensive linemen. Did that 400 pound lineman ever play a down?
I felt bad for Etling. With a decent offensive line, he could have become the second coming of Jim Everett.
I just don't think you can say that just because it looks good on paper but the results are horrible...means he was good. Jim Deloroen's car, on paper, was phenomenal. When production actually started and the car was built...it was a massive failure. The same could be said for Shoop's offensive playbook. It might have looked good but the real world application was horrible...making it a total failure.
I will just say in watching many of the games, I saw some really cool plays as they were developing on the field, that turned into a disaster because we didn't have the personnel on the field to pull them off. a couple of those plays would have really worked if we could have provided our QB 8 seconds, or if our receiver actually could catch the ball, or get open.
Schoop was bad, but we also had some very bad talent on the field as well. Maybe not really bad talent, just players who had a very hard time of grasping the elements of the play called and executing it.
Schoop had some cool trick plays, but NONE of them worked. Our triple reverse would end up I a 30 yard loss. our halfback passes would end up intercepted. our fake punts and Fgs would end up being blocked for losses or points for the other team.
it was so sad, it was laughable.
Shoop was a bad college OC. Playbook was took too long to learn, plays took too long to develop and he didnt little to help get his QBs in rhythm.
He was a disaster from day 1.
He was a disaster from day 1.
One of the worst things you can do as a college coach is not put your athletes in a position to succeed regardless of your talent level. That basically summarizes my feelings on the entire Hazell era.
he was not the only coaching disaster on that team. but it was said right above this, the worst thing a coach can do is not put his players in a position to win. When hazell and schoop arrived there was basically no player evaluation of our existing players and their talents. they brought a system and playbook that did not match the talents of our players, and they did nothing in subsequent years to secure talent to match their system/playbook. it was jus t a collection of players with no chemistry or symmetry. At least with brohm, while I may not agree with all of his recruits, they seem to match and fit his system.
Similar threads
