Dave Clawson

#1
Hens67

Hens67

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
4,263
Likes
132
#1
WBIR.com has a couple of interviews from yesterdays media days. Dave, to me , seems to be very knowledgeable about the game of football. He is well spoken and took all the blame for the bad offensive performance and lack of productivity from the QB spot. I really like what I see concerning Dave from hearing him talk. He knows and admits that QB play is horrible and that a change is needed and that is why the competition exist. He also acknowledged that it isn't his plays...receivers were open...it is the QB's read progressions that is stalling this team. I hope Nick can perform Saturday.
 
#2
#2
I too think that Clawson is a good coach, and it is not his play calling that has been the issue this season. I really think that if we can get a quarterback that can execute, that we would see even more wide-open plays. That is if Fulmer will allow it to happen....
 
#4
#4
like DC said, it's hard to say the offense isn't working when there are receivers running open
 
#5
#5
I think the play calling is better than I have seen in a while. I think he is getting conservative because dummy cant throw the ball to the open receiver
 
#6
#6
I hope that no matter what happens with the HC job....With or without Fulmer...that Dave is kept on. I really think the guy can coach if given time. I hope one of our QB's can mature enough to enable Dave to open it up a bit.
 
#7
#7
Hens67 said:
I hope that no matter what happens with the HC job....With or without Fulmer...that Dave is kept on. I really think the guy can coach if given time. I hope one of our QB's can mature enough to enable Dave to open it up a bit.
Click to expand...

More grist for the rumour mill. I have heard/read in at least three places that Clawson plans to leave at the end of the season because the promise that was made to him about having total autonomy to run the offense was broken. In another thread I quoted part of Basilo's blog from today in which he claims that someone inside the program told him that Clawson wanted to bench Crompton after the UCLA game but he was overridden.
 
#8
#8
VolunteerHillbilly said:
More grist for the rumour mill. I have heard/read in at least three places that Clawson plans to leave at the end of the season because the promise that was made to him about having total autonomy to run the offense was broken. In another thread I quoted part of Basilo's blog from today in which he claims that someone inside the program told him that Clawson wanted to bench Crompton after the UCLA game but he was overridden.
Click to expand...

If that last part is true, the outcry against Fulmer would be magnified 100 fold.
 
#9
#9
He was scouted.Then recruited by a big time SEC school.The University of Tennessee.

He is qualified.I thing he has been hampered by Things out side his control.
 
#11
#11
I think Clawson has called some great plays we just have a sucky QB who can't read a defense and a RB who can't hold onto the football
 
#12
#12
From what I've seen so far, Clawson puts out a product that I have heard called a "thinking man's offense"...unfortunately I don't think we have the most talented thinker available to us right now...hopefully Nick Stephens has been thinking for a while.
 
#13
#13
I think after having lived through RS for so many years. Volunteer fans can identify a bad OC.
ANd I have yet to hear many of our brethern pick at him too much.
Although - that shot they had of him at UCLA were his eyes and facial expression made him look a little deerish. But after seeing him more I dont think there is too much to that.
 
#14
#14
It would be sad to see him go. He is so bright and well spoken. I think we will be hearing alot from him in the future. I just hope if he does leave it doesn't come back to bite us down the road. I hope fulmer is gone after this season and someone comes in and keeps him on board. (Kiffin) :crossfingers:
 
#15
#15
I thought the coaches were soley responsible for the players' performance? But you guys are saying a player can suck without the coach sucking as well? I'm lost!
 
#18
#18
Some of the looks in the booth on Saturday after some of Crompton's throws, I felt sorry for the guy. I don't doubt Clawson wanted to bench him. Fulmer thinks he screwed up in 05 benching Ainge and didn't want to make the same mistake with Crompton.
 
#19
#19
TennesseeT said:
I thought the coaches were soley responsible for the players' performance? But you guys are saying a player can suck without the coach sucking as well? I'm lost!
Click to expand...

Yes, a player can suck without the coach sucking. But a player can't be good without a coach being good, that's impossible as we all know.
 
#20
#20
A lot of people here say the coaches are completely responsible for the players performance. If a guy fumbles, ball security was not emphasized. If a player false starts it shows a lack of discipline as do personal fouls. A kick returned for a TD = the coaches did not spend enough time on ST. A CB misses a int or gets burnt = the coaches should have known the CB should not have been playing or he was put in bad position by the coaches. Just saying it's def not Crompton's fault he sucks so bad.
 
#24
#24
TennesseeT said:
A lot of people here say the coaches are completely responsible for the players performance. If a guy fumbles, ball security was not emphasized. If a player false starts it shows a lack of discipline as do personal fouls. A kick returned for a TD = the coaches did not spend enough time on ST. A CB misses a int or gets burnt = the coaches should have known the CB should not have been playing or he was put in bad position by the coaches. Just saying it's def not Crompton's fault he sucks so bad.
Click to expand...

How would you explain Florida winning a NC within 3 years of UM taking over when Zook never won the SEC there? All of a sudden the players got good?
 
#25
#25
JZVOL said:
Unless the non-sucky coach knows his backup is suckier than his sucky player. In which case the non-sucky coach would not bench his sucky player because the backup is suckier.
Click to expand...
In which case a non-sucky coach would've put more emphasis on recruiting non-sucky players at said position and trying to develop the sucky and suckier players he already has.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top