Mack Brown's Press Conference, Part 2: John Chiles
I received a number of emails this summer - including from some pretty well-connected people - asking about rumors concerning John Chiles and a potential transfer out of the program. I dug and pressed as far as I could, but everyone I trusted told me that if there was a transfer in the works, they couldn't confirm it; as far as they knew, Chiles was happy in Austin.
And apparently that's the case. Chiles isn't going anywhere, and though he's clearly not supplanting Colt McCoy as the starter, Austin is where he wants to be and - as we learned Sunday - quarterback remains his official position. According to Mack:
We are committed to trying to get Colt (McCoy) and John Chiles on the field at the same time some, so we will start working immediately. I do want to say without question that John is still the second-team quarterback and will not move from quarterback. Colt will be the starter today, just because of the past, and John will be working with the first team some in packages, like he did a little bit last year, but at the same time, John will not move away from the quarterback position.
John will get more reps than Sherrod (Harris). Sherrod will get some. John will try to work in that package and still try to be the second-team quarterback. So he’ll run a play, and then get back in the huddle as a quarterback and run another one. He’ll be in a package with Colt.
We’d like to see if it works first. We didn’t do it in the spring. We’re really developing that package as we speak and we’re going to start working on that immediately to see where it goes, simply because John and Colt are two of our best players. They’re two of our most productive players, so we need to see what we can do. We did feel like playing both of them at separate times in the bowl game was very productive, so if we can continue to do that, but get John on the field more to get the ball in his hands, that would be a help as well.
When in April I wondered aloud what Texas should do with John Chiles, I speculated that the combination of Texas' need for a game breaking player with Sherrod Harris' reported overall polish might well lead to a position switch for Chiles, wherein he could slide to the third spot on the QB depth chart (should Texas need him there) while simultaneously assuming a prominent role among the receivers.
From Mack's comments Sunday, we can safely say that's not the case. Moreover, twelve weeks later that original calculus doesn't quite add up. Entering fall practice, Texas now has a bit of a logjam at the Unproven Wide Receiver position, where no fewer than eight talented athletes (Williams, Hales, Monroe, Buckner, Grant, Kirkendoll, Collins, and Webber) are competing for playing time. Even if Chiles was the best bet to be a playmaker on the outside for the 'Horns (far, far from a given), it's not clear that forthrightly shifting his primary duties would be the best allocation of his talents.
Looking at the situation today, I'm comfortable reversing course to endorse the decision to keep Chiles at #2 on the quarterback depth chart. For one thing, preparing for John Chiles, quarterback/roamer, is different than preparing for John Chiles, wide receiver. Colt McCoy does a lot well, but no one's naive about his weaknesses. Though John Chiles was used cautiously as a supplemental QB weapon in 2007, that was - after all - his true freshman season. Even if the coaches could have been more aggressive in deploying Chiles to accelerate his development, he likely was what he was last year, whether for 50 or 150 snaps under center. (It's also conceivable that the coaches believed correctly that too-much-too-soon would have done more harm than good to Chiles' development.)
In any case, if the current roster itself justifies the decision to keep Chiles at quarterback, less obvious is that the coaches are clearly decided as to how they intend to maximize his value from the position. It's fine and well to hear the staff say they want McCoy and Chiles out there together and that they intend to seek opportunities to get #7 involved in numerous ways, but the jury is decidedly out as to the offensive coaches' ability to translate that concept into something meaningful.
Yet the decision to slot Chiles as the #2 QB almost requires that the coaches get it right and make the most out of him in genuinely creative/effective ways. If they don't, they risk compounding a mistake by under-utilizing Chiles and needlessly burying Harris.
So if I'm behind the idea in theory, it's up to the staff to use Chiles in a way that reflects a genuine commitment to the right ideals.
Next: Thoughts on the defense.
Previously: Part 1: An Evolved Attitude
0 recs |
28
comments
Read Related
Comments
Just now starting work on his package?
I know that sounds weird; yall are perverts. Anyway, I find it odd that just now they are starting to work on Chiles’ special package of plays. I call BS. They know what they want to do with him. They practiced some last year, especially during Holiday Bowl prep. I think what Mack means is that it’s going to be a major part of practice now and not just an afterthought. I wouldn’t feel comfortable if they were just now starting to implement a totally new offensive package for when JC is on the field. That’s something that takes longer than 3 weeks to practice and run successfully, especially when many playmakers involved have little experience.
by BigTexBD on Aug 6, 2008 8:09 AM CDT 0 recs
adding to the package
I think they are just adding new things to the package. I’m sure Major will offer some thoughts on it.
by Longhorns84 on Aug 6, 2008 8:16 AM CDT 0 recs
Best of both worlds - Harris #2 QB, Chiles slash role
I just can’t help but feel like going down this path is going to hurt us sometime down the road. Yes, Chiles is an explosive, game changing player. However, I don’t think he’ll ever be the type of player that we want as the full-time starting QB. In my opinion, we’d be better off grooming Harris as the #2 full-time QB and using Chiles as a change of pace (ie running) QB, with a Harvin/R. Taylor/McFadden type of role. Maybe that is really Mack’s plan, but from the quote about Chiles getting more reps at QB than Harris, it sure doesn’t sound like it. I just don’t get how they can make that determination of who is #2 the first day of camp.
It would be interesting to see the offense’s production on Chiles’ first drive of a game vs. all of the other drives in a game. Just going by memory, when he first came into games he completely put the defense on their heels and we moved the ball extremely well in just a few plays. But every drive after that the offense sputtered with him in.
by Horncasting on Aug 6, 2008 9:01 AM CDT 0 recs
If Colt and Chiles truely are our two best players
Then why would you have one as the others backup, if its not necessary.
Granted I’m just a fan, I’m not privy to intimate knowledge of what they are planning on doing, nor where they perceive the players strengths to lie. But to me, I see Chiles as a excellent athlete, a talented runner, and an experienced wide receiver in high school.
Colt, like him or not, is never going to be anything but a quarterback. Starter or backup, he just doesn’t have the legs, or the experience to play anywhere else.
So if Colt is one of your best players, and he has to play quarterback, why would you handicap yourself by putting your supposed other best player behind him on the depth chart, limiting him to gimmick formations and trick plays in order to get them both on the field at once?
Maybe our overwhelming number of young WR on the roster is whats driving this more than anything, but I cant help but feel Chiles is going to waste away again this year, because we all know when it comes down to it, we tighten up, and play our base offense, and it looks like that is not going to include getting one of our best players on the field.
If we really do believe that Chiles is one of the best football players we have, he needs to get out of the QB 2 spot, and get on the field. Put him at RB, Wide receiver, slot receiver, kick returns whatever it takes. It will be a shame if he rides the pine again, simply because we want to use him as a back up QB. What the hell is it with Mack and thinking you can get a 2-qb system to work. Unless Mack and Co really think he will supplant Colt as the starter this year.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Aug 6, 2008 10:41 AM CDT 0 recs
You're right, this is a fine line.
When you play two, everything can get complicated…and not just on the field. The fans and the press all take an interest and at some point may take sides. (Sports writers search every cranny and speculate. Fans root, take sides in a flash, it’s what they do..) What is an attempt to keep assets in play can become a big distraction. Simms vs. Applewhite still stirs up waves, but Mock/VY might be a better template..
On the other hand, I applaud the fact they’re trying to do something positive. I don’t know if the coaches should let the logjam at WR or even at RB play too big a role. Someone is going to lose some reps in practice and some plays in the game. I think much of this will sort itself out in time, at least through the first two ooc games.
What we must know is if Chiles can pass and do so under pressure.
If he can’t be a passer, then his threat is diminished, and he’s as much a giveaway to what the offense can do as a threat. I doubt the coaches are putting in that many plays, and by conference play opponents will have a clue. Sure, you can hold a couple plays back, but even if they are executed perfectly, everyone from then on still knows what to expect. I once thought we’d hold back plays for OU, but that really never happened. Just wistful thinking on my part. And six games down into the schedule now, it’s not realistic whatsoever. (Not alluding to the general bag of trick plays every team has.)
So, basically, you have a two-QB backfield or a rotation.
The two QB backfield will probably require another RB for blocking purposes. Do you want you QB trying to cut down 270+ pound DL rushers or blitzing LBs?
That seems to indicate shorter passing plays unless the OL turns into gangbusters. So, if there’s a RB included, you have three wide (2 WR, Flanker) and the off QB, still a relative short to medium pattern attack (and, as Caradoc notes, you don’t really want Colt in the pattern), so we’re talking H-back situations.
The best I can see for that is a Preston Pearson situation. For you youngsters, Pearson was a Cowboy receiver who came in for third downs and had a great knack for making the first down catch, a role TE Jay Novacek would later take with Troy Aikman. Wes Welker does that for the Pats.
Otherwise, we’re looking at a rotation.
In addition, it would be foolish and short-sighted to not get Sherrod on the field. A team must develop its assets, and I would hope the coaches understand that this is the key mission and not get lost in their scheming.
Historically, the most workable dual QB situation was probably 1963, with Duke Carlisle and Tommy Wade. Both were seniors and experienced in DKR’s system; no learning curve there. Texas ran, so Carlisle was the better runner and leader and could pass adequately, and he played the bulk of the time. But Wade was a fine passer and when he came in there would be no dissenters. The team needed what he had to offer. Wade probably didn’t play 10-15% of the time, but most of those were critical situations. Texas won it’s first national championship with the system. And turned the tables on #2 Navy with Carlisle throwing a couple of long passes to Phil Harris for 58- and 63-yard TDs, a move totally unanticipated by Navy. Royal was a sneaky devil and the dual QB system never drew that much fanfare because Carlisle was clearly number one and Wade number two.
Aside from the later Simms/Applewhite era, I can’t remember any other dual use QB system Texas used that wasn’t injury related. Mock and VY may be the closest to the real situation here and everyone soon knew where that was headed. Once you saw VY, you knew the field would be his soon.
Frankly, I think it should come down to 50-40-10 to 40-40-20 in the first couple of ooc games. Colt, JC and Sherrod.
by whills on
Aug 6, 2008 12:28 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Fine line, but lots of opportunity
At least if MB and GD can stomach the risk. I agree with most people posting that there’s a lot of talent at WR, but lacking experience. I think Chiles would play QB/RB (H-back, wing-back, etc.) He could be a receiver out of the backfield with the WR’s going long bringing the secondary with them and then Chiles catching and running in space underneath against linebackers. Potential for reverses, H-back pass including back to Colt (uh oh), zone read flea flicker…but after the first few plays, the success of this is predicated on Chiles being able to pass with some consistency and to block, otherwise everybody knows to just key in on Chiles. If it works….think about having Chiles and Harris running the zone read…absolutely deadly.
Give MB and GD a chance. GD can develop some creative plays and can develop terrific gameplans. Remember the 51-21 thrashing of TT in 2004 after being shutout by OU 12-0 and the 28-20 near loss to Missouri? The problem is he so rarely does so, instead depending on the talent to overcome a predictable scheme, but give it a chance and see what the new season brings. Missouri, OU, Kansas, TT…the season will depend on taking risks and developing talent quickly.
Hook'em
by longhorns1 on
Aug 7, 2008 2:04 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Just one thing
When they are in together, please, please, please, do not sent McCoy out to catch a pass.
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
by Caradoc on Aug 6, 2008 11:28 AM CDT 0 recs
it's the right call
to keep Chiles at QB. And the reason is very basic: If Chiles were to become a full-time WR and, heaven forbid, McCoy went down, you have Harris as the lone trained QB in the program. Anyone else old enough to remember the first half of the 1977 OU game, when Texas lost two QBs (for the season) in a span of about a dozen plays?
by edsp on Aug 6, 2008 11:40 AM CDT 0 recs
Chiles wouldnt leave the program
He’d be QB3 and whatever else to get him on the field.
If we lose Colt and Harris, Chiles is still there to come in if necessary. Keeping him at QB2 just keeps him off the field, as you dont risk your #2 QB in case something happens to #1. #3 you can be more creative with.
by BoddickerIsClutch on
Aug 6, 2008 12:03 PM CDT
up
0 recs
True, but we had a scrawny third stringer who won the game.
It wasn’t pretty but Randy McEachern was trained well enough to finish the season.
Your point is well-made. You gotta have that trained #3 because shit happens.
by whills on
Aug 6, 2008 12:39 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Sounds to me like we're making the same mistake
We can speculate that JC is about to play a big role as a slasher and read into Mack’s comments more than what is actually there or flat out believe that once again Mack is trying divert our attention from the truth. One thing that Mack and GD suck at is deception. Maybe they’re just too good at heart. Besides an occassion fake punt, when was the last time any of us were genuinely faked out by anything they’ve ever said or done?
Unfortunately we hope that they’ve got something up their sleeve - this is a mistake that Horn’s fans have made repeatedly in the past about the roles of a host of players – Chiles last year, Jermicheal Finley every year, any I-formation sighting or mention, Henry Melton, the mention of “disguised blitzes” in the past etc. Honestly as fans, we kept expecting the unexpected from the same cast of characters (Mack, GD, Akina) who generally don’t stray too far from the conventional.
Will this year be different? Defensively, Muschamp has enough of a track record to suggest that the scheme will be different.
Offensively, we can’t say the same thing just because a guy named Major is on the staff. Remember, Major is supposed to be coaching RBs, not QBs, not WRs, and not QB/WRs for that matter. Thus, I’m fairly pessimistic that the Chiles express will run out this year for a number of reasons.
First off, Mack is forced to keep Chiles at QB because unfortunately Mack doesn’t have leverage out of the QB position. There is no other back-up QB on the team that has had more meaningful practice time under center. Plus, with the departure of Kinne, there is no one with the dropback style that Mack could elevate to #2 QB simply based on keeping the offense consistent.
So, unless Sherrod develops you really have to save Chiles in case Colt gets hurt. And expect Chiles’ role to stay the same, and don’t expect him to be used more effectively. With the arrival of Garret Gilbert next year, we should expect this year to be Chile’s last.
Furthermore, GD doesn’t have a track record of creativity. You want the guy on the field though, so what do you do? Enter to Colt-Chiles “package”. The problem is Greg Davis is more a “throw a bunch of shit on wall and see what sticks guy” than a schemer. Throwing out the guantlet that both guys need to be on field and be effective probably makes GD squirm at night. He’s been called into question when he tries to not stick a square peg in a round hole (VY circa early 2004) and instead seems more successful when just lets the players do their thing (VY vs Michigan Rose Bowl). Again last year he gave Colt audibles and the green light to tuck-and-run and simply handed the ball to Jamaal as a way to avoid having to scheme.
One could argue that this is the tortured life of an Offensive Coordinator—when things aren’t working you must be trying to do too much, and when things are working its to the players (and not the coaches) credit. However In 2007 when both Colt and Chiles were on the field the offense seemed to grind to a halt. There was hesitation, and it generally flowed like molasses. This, to me, was a reflection on Greg Davis’ unease and lack of “intelligent design”. The effect was predictability when the two of them were on the field together, or when Chiles was there alone.
There are plenty of creative ways to employ the Colt-Chiles package, but they start with figuring out how they can both be successful and then using the predisposition of defenses against them. That means creating schemes and employing decoys - something neither Mack nor GD is good at.
Perhaps I’m underestimating Major’s impact on the scheme—but I don’t think it makes any sense to expect any grandious changes until the team actually starts playing. At this point, I’ve come to the conclusions that speculating as to offensive scheme is pointless and the direction the team will take is based on GD’s “do whatever is working” mentality.
John Chiles - I'm your foster daddy!
by BMG on Aug 6, 2008 12:15 PM CDT 0 recs
2 QB system
What the hell is it with Mack and thinking you can get a 2-qb system to work. Unless Mack and Co really think he will supplant Colt as the starter this year./blockquote>
Probably watching the last 2 national champions use 2 quarterbacks influenced them some.
It’s all about utilizing your best athletes. If we can find ways to utilize the talents of Chiles and mcCoy we’re better than if just one is utilized. It’s not like Simms vs. Applewhite when both were pocket passers.
by RolloTamasi on Aug 6, 2008 12:29 PM CDT 0 recs
Seniors and Freshman
Are NOT the same situation as a Junior and a Sophomore.
I’ve also not seen Urban or Miles claim that Leak or Flynn were two of the best players they had.
My point is if Mack really believes what hes saying, then hes wasting Chiles by keeping him at QB2, and we will have a repeat of last year, when he wasted the burned red shirt (yes it was needed due to Harris’ injury, but still, a waste of a year). And as its been said above, if they are going to be on the field at the same time, you can sure as hell count that Colt wont be out running patterns or laying down blocks on lineman/linebackers/safeties. And if he is, GD should resign on the spot.
So either Colt will be taking the snap, and Chiles will play a role that he would see more time in if he was QB3 instead of 2, or we will play 10 on 11 on those downs as Colt is ineffectual when not playing QB.
by BoddickerIsClutch on
Aug 6, 2008 1:40 PM CDT
up
0 recs
oops
starting with the word “probably” that was me commenting, not a quote.
by RolloTamasi on Aug 6, 2008 12:29 PM CDT 0 recs
2 QB
Are NOT the same situation as a Junior and a Sophomore.I’ve also not seen Urban or Miles claim that Leak or Flynn were two of the best players they had.
I’ve never seen Wade Phillips claim Tony Romo is not one of the Cowboys best players. Clearly he must not be.
There’s a lot we can do with Chiles on the field at the same time as Colt without facing “10 on 11” circumstances. We could run some Meyer-Utah spread option, we can throw laterals to Chiles for deep passes or screens, we can run reverses, direct snaps, zone reads. I don’t see anything wrong with Colt going for a deep pass every once in a while either. The point is, Chiles has a skill set as an explosive player in space that neccessitates his use on the field as did Tebow and perriloux. We don’t have to use him like a QB when he’s on the field with McCoy, the point is to maximize his talent.
by RolloTamasi on Aug 6, 2008 2:00 PM CDT 0 recs
The point is to maximize his talent
Putting him at QB 2 doesnt do that as far as I can see.
Let him do screens, direct snaps, revereses, WR, RB, punt returner, whatever lets maximize the hell out of him. But if last year is any indicator, we wont maximize him if we feel that he has to stay healthy for his responsibilities as QB 2.
We don’t have to use him like a QB when he’s on the field with McCoy, the point is to maximize his talent.
And if we aren’t going to use him as a QB, if not using him as a QB maximizes his talent, then why on earth are we keeping him at the backup spot?
—-—-—-—-—-—--
This doesn’t really have any bearing on the argument, but comparing The Cowboys (or any pro team) to the Longhorns (or any college team) is ridiculous. Nor did I say that players are only good if their coaches say they are. The fact is, Leak and Flynn were above average at best. Matt had a career 56% competion rate, while Leak had 61%. Colts freshman year was better than either QB’s senior MNC run. And both Tebow and Perriloux had a much bigger impact on their teams as changes of pace for Leak and Flynn are no where near the same comparison as Chiles’ relief of Colt in 2007.
2007 Chiles: 1 for 9 (11%), 17 yards, no td
2007 Perriloux: 51 for 75 (68%), 694 yards, 8 TDs
2006 Tebow: 22 for 33 (67%), 358 yards, 5 TDs
Running?
2007 Chiles: 36 for 191 (5.3 ypc), 2 TDs
2007 Perriloux: 52 for 207 (3.98 ypc), 2 TDs
2006 Tebow: 89 for 469 (5.27 ypc), 8 TDs
by BoddickerIsClutch on
Aug 6, 2008 2:26 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I don't know
I think we can do some good things with Chiles with the zone-read, but I’d also like to see him on the field more often than just a handful of series. Plus, when he comes in, it’s not a big secret what we’re going to do… then again, everyone knew Tebow was going to run when he came in for Leak, and that guy still always seemed to get 5-6 yards all the time.
I was leaning towards moving Chiles to receiver in the summer, but while we lack overall experience, I think we have a good amount of talent already there. I don’t think Chiles should be a runningback, and he can really give us a nice change of pace playing QB. So I don’t know.
The only thing I’d ask of GD is if Colt and Chiles are on the field at the same time, please don’t put Colt in motion out wide. That doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me. Colt is actually a lot better athlete than people give him credit for (multi-sport star in high school), but I don’t think opposing defenses will worry themselves that Colt is going to fly down the sideline and Chiles will loft a beautiful deep pass to him. I was always confused why they did that last year, as it seems a lot more logical to send Chiles in motion instead.
They have to be careful with this and make sure this works. Rhythm is important for offenses, and they have to get Chiles in without disrupting the overall flow of the offense (unless it’s been awful… then it needs to be disrupted). And if Chiles is going to play QB, he’s going to have to present SOME threat he can throw. At least, something better than Tebow’s little awkward jump-throw he graced the nation with his freshman year.
by TheElusiveShadow on Aug 6, 2008 2:45 PM CDT 0 recs
That pass was a busted play if I remember right
But you are right, it sure was ugly. The stats above don’t lie though, even Tebow threw the ball 37% of the time, and got 10.8 yards per attempt doing so.
by BoddickerIsClutch on
Aug 6, 2008 2:59 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I'm not sure
.......why you believe there is “a good amount of talent” at WR. If there were, then there wouldn’t have been a call from Mack Brown for Curtis Brown, Chiles and D.J. Monroe to move to WR. Obviously, no one stepped up this summer. Oh, we may have a whole bunch of “recruiting stars” sitting at the position, but as of yet, only Shipley and Cosby are a proven commodity at receiver.
--- All roads to the Big-XII Championship lead through OU/RRS. It's not just another game! We're all about championships here. ---
by HornChamps on
Aug 7, 2008 5:45 PM CDT
up
0 recs
A bit misleading for Tebow..
10 for 12, 200 yds and 2 TDs came against Western Carolina.
And Perriloux had been in school for 2 years already.
by Misterserious7 on Aug 6, 2008 3:40 PM CDT 0 recs
Senior rotating with freshman = breaking in the new shoes just slightly before the old shoes need to be retired.
Junior rotating with sophomore = QB controversy.
This always seems like a good problem to have, but it’s not when it comes to recruiting and preventing a transfer. I really feel bad for Harris, because I think the guy has a skill set that is exactly between those of Chiles and McCoy, and the guy could really do some damage. Throwing him out of consideration is a tragedy, but every report seems to make it sound like he’s getting nothing more than token consideration, and that the playing time will be split between 1a and 1b.
If these three guys all show some stuff this fall, Texas will have a problem, whether it ends up being transfers by the odd man/men out or a logjam that discourages recruits like Gilbert from actually signing.
Then again, UT could be to QBs what USC has been to RBs lately…if so, I’m crossing my fingers they don’t drop like flies and play like crap like most of those four- and five-star USC backs.
by burntorangehorn on Aug 6, 2008 9:01 PM CDT 0 recs
Chiles as Backup
Matt Flynn was drafted and both he and Leak won MNC’s so clearly they weren’t too terrible.
The fear seems to be that if we use Chiles a lot with Colt, he can’t be the backup. Why not? “What if he gets hurt” is a smaller concern than “what if we waste his athleticism?”. He could definitely take lots of snaps with Colt and still be the back-up. Plenty of teams have been doing this. If your argument is “greg davis won’t use him that way” than that’s another matter entirely. But so far, it looks like Davis is interested in using him that way so there’s nothing wrong with hope and there’s nothing wrong with the strategy. Especially with Sherrod back there, however inexperienced.
by RolloTamasi on Aug 7, 2008 8:56 AM CDT 0 recs
Typically your 2nd QB you worry about injuries
As the backup plan, you dont put them at additional risk. Maybe Mack and GD wont think that way with Chiles, I hope they dont, but from what I saw last year, I tend to think he would see the field more if he was designated as 3rd QB rather than 2nd. My end goal is I want him to see the field as much as possible. If that can happen at QB2, great, it makes more sense to me however, that it would happen if he was QB3.
So yes, I guess my concern is more for how GD and Mack approach the position of QB2, and what affect that will have on Chiles seeing the field in a more athletic capacity.
My second part of the concern is if they plan to play Colt as a non-QB, in order to reinforce that Chiles is a QB and in an attempt to get them both on the field at once, as I don’t have faith that Colt can be effective in a non-QB capacity, and due to his history would worry like hell if we expose him to more open field hits, or heaven forbid, require him to block in the backfield.
Again, College and Pros don’t correlate exactly. Who cares if Flynn was drafted? So were tons of great College QBs who sucked in the nfl, as well many mediocre QBs in college turned out to be great pros. Being drafted simply means that some pro team sees something in that player that they think will benefit their team, or has the potential to benefit them in the future. It does not necessarily mean they were a great college player, it does not even mean that they think they are a great player right nowr. Plus, I never said they were terrible, in fact, I specifically said they were better than average. Flynn Id put at a top 40 or 30 QB, Leak Id probably put higher. Neither would I take over Colt, or half of the big 12 QBs.
Lastly, and I dont mean to come off as an ass, but to reply to a post directly, there is a reply link at the end of the post, right after the date stamp and before the “Actions” link. That pops up a “Post a Comment” box, that will allow you to thread responses so that they can be followed easily by other people. I assume you are still responding to me, however its difficult to tell if the responses are not threaded.
This becomes slightly tricky if replying to the last post, as the “Post a Comment” box will pop up directly above the always present “Post a Comment” box at the bottom.
Ive enjoyed discussing with you, and I really hope Im wrong, and Chiles gets on the field in all sorts of capacities, we will just have to wait and see.
by BoddickerIsClutch on
Aug 7, 2008 9:57 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Colt and Injury
We’re already planning on using Colt in the zone-read and designed running plays. It’d be nice to include Chiles in these plays. For instance, yesterday in practice they used Chiles as a receiver and he would motion to the backfield. Colt would hand-off to the running back and then run the other way on a fake option with Chiles. This sort of play would add a lot to the running game and involve Chiles without risking Colt to making blocks, trying to receive, or getting in “10 on 11” situations.
by RolloTamasi on
Aug 7, 2008 10:44 AM CDT
up
0 recs
All of which Im good with
Keep Colt the QB, use Chiles whenever and wherever we can.
by BoddickerIsClutch on
Aug 7, 2008 10:54 AM CDT
up
0 recs














