HiltonHeadVol
NorthernThailandVol
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2016
- Messages
- 846
- Likes
- 2,004
Kurt Warner did a film study on Hendon about a day ago and he made a few points I want to mention:
(KW chose the Ga game from this past season since it was our most challenging defense, and he prefers to watch an entire game rather than simply break down highlights only)
1). To him it was difficult to analyze HH because of our offense, but he strongly implied that HH tended to "latch on" to a receiver either immediately after the snap or even before. Tended to, not always of course. He also pointedly criticized our "one sided game" where the two off-side receivers simply "jog 5 yards" and quit running any route. Now this didn't happen the entire game, but it happened quite often. And this prevents the QB from reading the "big picture" to find openings that are there almost every play......even against an historically great defense. Mostly it limits Warner from assessing HH's read-ability of the developing play and so KW cannot assess Hendon's ability in that area easily.
I have said this before - I cannot stand this habit in our receivers. We have depth in the WR room.....why not everyone run your route? What happens when the QB's pre-determined choice is covered, and he needs a back up option? In fact KW showed exactly this result where the R side was covered and H had to scramble back to his Left and the receivers on that side acted lost.
2). KW suggested H had a tendency (in this game at least) to panic a bit early and by-pass the opportunity to read the defense at snap and opt for the easier check-down throw. In fairness, Hendon completed many of these balls to his pre-ordained choice, but Warner was simply discussing how a college qb can elevate himself on these opportunities.
3). KW implied that H does not read the defense in general and has a tendency to commit to a WR before giving the play a chance to develop. In other words, Warner asks the question...."can HH develop the ability to do this more often at the next level? It may be a fair question.
It must be said that this was H's poorest game probably, and that he WAS IN FACT playing a really gifted defense. I would think one needs to be more complete in film analysis over a broader context to fairly judge. However, the sloppy "jog 5 yards" irritates me to no end. Its against the #1 team in the country in their house.....can we not fully run the routes please, at least for this opponent?
Another point I noticed.....remarkable how on nearly EVERY play, Georgia DB's were grabbing our receivers with one and sometime two hands when they made their cut in the route. Disgusting and allowed to happen all day long by refs.
A bigger question is this......I'm a bit concerned that Heupel's offense will continue to get labelled as gimmicky or nutty and the perception begins to grow that this offense will penalize a promising qb from developing to his maximum. I'm not saying that is true, but am concerned that someone such as Kurt Warner who comes across as fair begins to modestly suggest the above then it can harm us in the long run of recruiting. Listen, Coach JH almost has NEVER had a mediocre qb run his system, and so credit has to go to him for developing a platform where even average qb's can thrive.....but to climb to the top consistently, do we need to prove a qb can develop to an elite level while he is here? Obviously, Georgia won with a "game manager" talent in Stetson, so it can be done.....but to do so means you surround that game manager with elite talent 2 and 3 deep. Just a question I'm asking.
KW's breakdown on YTube: "Hooker | Part 2 of 2 | College QB Pre-Draft Preview – Kurt Warner Game Tape Breakdown"
(KW chose the Ga game from this past season since it was our most challenging defense, and he prefers to watch an entire game rather than simply break down highlights only)
1). To him it was difficult to analyze HH because of our offense, but he strongly implied that HH tended to "latch on" to a receiver either immediately after the snap or even before. Tended to, not always of course. He also pointedly criticized our "one sided game" where the two off-side receivers simply "jog 5 yards" and quit running any route. Now this didn't happen the entire game, but it happened quite often. And this prevents the QB from reading the "big picture" to find openings that are there almost every play......even against an historically great defense. Mostly it limits Warner from assessing HH's read-ability of the developing play and so KW cannot assess Hendon's ability in that area easily.
I have said this before - I cannot stand this habit in our receivers. We have depth in the WR room.....why not everyone run your route? What happens when the QB's pre-determined choice is covered, and he needs a back up option? In fact KW showed exactly this result where the R side was covered and H had to scramble back to his Left and the receivers on that side acted lost.
2). KW suggested H had a tendency (in this game at least) to panic a bit early and by-pass the opportunity to read the defense at snap and opt for the easier check-down throw. In fairness, Hendon completed many of these balls to his pre-ordained choice, but Warner was simply discussing how a college qb can elevate himself on these opportunities.
3). KW implied that H does not read the defense in general and has a tendency to commit to a WR before giving the play a chance to develop. In other words, Warner asks the question...."can HH develop the ability to do this more often at the next level? It may be a fair question.
It must be said that this was H's poorest game probably, and that he WAS IN FACT playing a really gifted defense. I would think one needs to be more complete in film analysis over a broader context to fairly judge. However, the sloppy "jog 5 yards" irritates me to no end. Its against the #1 team in the country in their house.....can we not fully run the routes please, at least for this opponent?
Another point I noticed.....remarkable how on nearly EVERY play, Georgia DB's were grabbing our receivers with one and sometime two hands when they made their cut in the route. Disgusting and allowed to happen all day long by refs.
A bigger question is this......I'm a bit concerned that Heupel's offense will continue to get labelled as gimmicky or nutty and the perception begins to grow that this offense will penalize a promising qb from developing to his maximum. I'm not saying that is true, but am concerned that someone such as Kurt Warner who comes across as fair begins to modestly suggest the above then it can harm us in the long run of recruiting. Listen, Coach JH almost has NEVER had a mediocre qb run his system, and so credit has to go to him for developing a platform where even average qb's can thrive.....but to climb to the top consistently, do we need to prove a qb can develop to an elite level while he is here? Obviously, Georgia won with a "game manager" talent in Stetson, so it can be done.....but to do so means you surround that game manager with elite talent 2 and 3 deep. Just a question I'm asking.
KW's breakdown on YTube: "Hooker | Part 2 of 2 | College QB Pre-Draft Preview – Kurt Warner Game Tape Breakdown"