We are going to rotate Olinemen in the opener

[rodrigo]

The article quotes DJ as saying both Adkins/Iltis will play at LG, Stevens/Daniels at C, and Bahktiari/Givens at RT. He goes on to say that they will all get work and see if anyone separates themselves. He also says they will be evaluated in "games," not just the CSU game. So while he does not say "rotation," not sure what else you can call it.

Muchas gracias. Rotation would seem to suggest some set, pre-ordained substitution schedule, no? That they will play doesn't necessarily they will rotate in and out according to some established plan. I could be completely wrong, of course...

 

[DBT]

The article quotes DJ as saying both Adkins/Iltis will play at LG, Stevens/Daniels at C, and Bahktiari/Givens at RT. He goes on to say that they will all get work and see if anyone separates themselves. He also says they will be evaluated in "games," not just the CSU game. So while he does not say "rotation," not sure what else you can call it.

Dude, that could mean so many things. This is what we do here. We take a statement and insert our own interpretation of what the speaker meant. Typical message board overreaction.

 

[Buffnik]

Post Game Interview:

Reporter: Coach, tell us your thoughts on the play of the O-Line?

Hawk: Well, it was one of those deals. We just never seemed to find any rythm. We saw some good things on the drive just before half when we were driving to cut the lead in half but then got hurt with the false starts and killed that drive.

Reporter: 12 penalties for 95 yards. 8 of those penalties were false starts. Any reason for that you pin things on?

Hawk: Well, its the little things again. I talked about not getting into a rythm and that was part of that deal. We had not had one single false start all week in practice so, we thought we were go to go there. The kids just have to get thier heads in the game more. We will work to get that chinched up.

Reporter: Coach, you speak of failing to get into a rythm, especially on the O-Line. What are your thoughts about the rotation of the line and the potential effects that may have had on not finding a groove along the line?

Hawk: Well, I dont think it had any effect. If you have kids, you will know that one week you can have the 6 year old take out the trash and the next your 8 year old can do it and its all fine. Trash is out, trash man picks it up. Simple. Same thing here. But, some have never had kids and just dont understand that. The kids need to work on getting the trash to the curb next week. When they get it there, I think things will pop!

Reporter:

Hawk: Well, time for me to go. Bohn said I had to have my stuff out of Dal Ward by 8 a.m.

Holy pos-rep, Batman!

:lol:

 

[Duff Man]

I'm not going to quote DJ verbatim from the article, but it is not a stretch to say they are still looking for a LG. and to a lesser extent, RT. You guys want to play semantics fine, but an OL coach does not say what he said unless he is planning on more than five guys seeing meaningful playing time.

Call it whatever you want, but how the hell do we have three different guys currently on the team that have started multiple games at LG and it is still an issue?

 

[Ruckus]

I think that's DBT's point. Does DJ use the term "rotation" in the article? Does anybody? If he does is it at all clear what he means? Maybe someone with a Rivals sub could illuminate us?

The article quotes DJ as saying both Adkins/Iltis will play at LG, Stevens/Daniels at C, and Bahktiari/Givens at RT. He goes on to say that they will all get work and see if anyone separates themselves. He also says they will be evaluated in "games," not just the CSU game. So while he does not say "rotation," not sure what else you can call it.

Muchas gracias. Rotation would seem to suggest some set, pre-ordained substitution schedule, no? That they will play doesn't necessarily they will rotate in and out according to some established plan. I could be completely wrong, of course...

One thing I have a problem with is he says Stevens will start, but Daniels will play, but later in the article Hawk says this:

"He is just a great kid and a great story," Hawkins said of Stevens. "[Here is] a guy that comes out, works hard, asks for nothing, works his tail off, continues to progress, battles through some injuries. Just a tough guy, just emerges. He is just kind of a staple for us in there. I think he just sort of exemplifies what that offensive line ought to be about and he is kind of their leader in there.

"He is just a dirt dog, he really is. Guys just kind of gravitate towards him that way and he just sort of exudes that whole blue collar mentality."

about Stevens. If Stevens is a "staple for us in there" and "exemplifies what that offensive line ought to be about" and is "their leader in there", then what is the point in taking him out for someone else to play?

Then at the end he talks about how much experience we have on the offensive line and how important it is. Well isn't it important to get as much experience to them without subbing them out during the game?

The point to having depth, is so you have another option if someone gets hurt or isn't performing well. Not so you can play them all even though some are better.

 

[DBT]

I think that the overall philosophy with the two deep on both sides of the ball is that you get as much PT as you can for the twos. But not at the expense of winning games.

 

[buffsyko]

I think that the overall philosophy with the two deep on both sides of the ball is that you get as much PT as you can for the twos. But not at the expense of winning games.

Thanks for clearing that up, lord knows our staff wouldn't want to make any bad decions that would lead to us not winning games.

Whatever, just beat csu .

 

[BuffLuke80]

I think that the overall philosophy with the two deep on both sides of the ball is that you get as much PT as you can for the twos. But not at the expense of winning games.

You get pt for the twos when we are kicking that ass, injury, or spelling folks. Doing this now is a really bad idea. Get our best 5 at each position and go with it. Those pukes are probably laughing at sheep ****er farmersville.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

Wow, I love the idea!!!!




Now that I have your attention..... Same kinda stuff being talked about here in enemy territory. According to talking-head radio (if they can be believed), the starting 5 are set and 3-4 others will see time. Definitely for the first sacrificial lamb, and possibly thru the OOC.

Sounds kinda familiar (to CU's reported plan). I don't really have an idea of what's going on. Perhaps CU's linemen have had such an intense competition that a few haven't really separated themselves. Perhaps certain combinations of players have done well together in scrimmages. I dunno.

I understand the continuity ideal. I'm not sure how you could sub in 2 or 3 linemen to start a new offensive series -- that seems a little dicey. I hope we see the starters in for 2 - 3 series, and then maybe one replacement put in for the 4th, etc. But who knows?

 

[BuffsNYC]

Whatever, just beat csu .

:stupid:

Wake me up on Saturday and let me watch CU put an ass whoopin on CSU. I don't care if Solder plays QB and Hawkins plays LT, just win and win big.

 

[sackman]

Dude, that could mean so many things. This is what we do here. We take a statement and insert our own interpretation of what the speaker meant. Typical message board overreaction.

Given the incredible stupidity from Hawkins the last four years, can you blame us?

 

[White_Rabbit]

LT: Solder, he stays in unless he's injured or dead tired.
LG: Play Atkins, Play Iltis, Play Speedy, nobody cares. Find one and stick with them.
C: Stevens, apparently he's really good, why bother rotating him?
RG: Miller, good player, no need to rotate unless injured or tired.
RT: Givens/Bahktiari, if they're still neck and neck go with the guy with experience starting. We've seen what youth and inexperience does on the OL. We can't really be doing this again can we?

Problem solved.

 

[JimmyBuff]

Dan Hawkins strikes again. Its the same **** with him putting in six or seven WR's a game, 2 QB's, 4 RB's, etc, etc. Not sure why anyone is surprised. Getting a rhythm isn't what Hawkins teams do.

 

[Darth Snow]

After some thought, the only thing that makes sense here is that some of our guys are battling nagging injuries. Givens has had an issue or two in camp, and we've been incredibly lucky with reported injuries. All we have reported so far are serious multi week injuries. There has to be quite a few guys battling injuries of various lesser importance.

I mean, there is no way Shawn daniels shifts positions MIDWAY THROUGH FALL CAMP to Center, of all places, and all of a sudden is pulling snaps from our award nominated senior center with a season of starting under his belt, right? Right? Unless we've been getting fed a load of bull**** and he really was not that good last year....? Even though he already beat out our #2 at LG, Iltis, for the position?

Injuries make sense at both C and RT here, and maybe even LG.

So, either Hawk is going with this harebrained scheme... OR... 3/5 of our starting Oline is injured. Awesome. :rofl: ... ...

 

[lvbuff]

If your Dan Hawkins why do you allow this information to be released? What purpose does it serve?

 

[Darth Snow]

If your Dan Hawkins why do you allow this information to be released? What purpose does it serve?

piss off internet scum/sacky especially.

 

[Sexton Hardcastle]

Dude, that could mean so many things. This is what we do here. We take a statement and insert our own interpretation of what the speaker meant. Typical message board overreaction.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

disinformation is a staple of the CounterIntel spooks.

 

[MtnBuff]

Every year Hawkins figures out some way to royally screw up this team, this is this years way of making sure that the offense never gets into a groove and performs up to its talent level.

Mark Schlereth, the guy with three super bowl rings and a job analyzing football for ESPN has said that the most critical part of O-line play is the coordination between the players on the field. He stated that the players have to be able to know and feel how their linemates are going to react to a given situation without talking or looking at them. He went on to say that the only way this happens is by a stable group playing together consistently for a period of time.

But I guess Hawk knows more about effective O-line play than a guy who spent a few years in the NFL under some of the best postion coaches in the game.

 

[DBT]

Thanks for clearing that up, lord knows our staff wouldn't want to make any bad decions that would lead to us not winning games.

Whatever, just beat csu .

:lol: Yeah, that sounded kind of like a "Mr. Obvious" statement, didn't it?

 

[DBT]

So, Hawk is akin to a ****ing murdering bastard who tortured women and children and I'm his mouthpiece? Nice analogy, ****wad.

 

[Sexton Hardcastle]

So, Hawk is akin to a ****ing murdering bastard who tortured women and children and I'm his mouthpiece? Nice analogy, ****wad.

Glad to help out. CFB is serious business. :lol:

 

[Junction]

Muchas gracias. Rotation would seem to suggest some set, pre-ordained substitution schedule, no? That they will play doesn't necessarily they will rotate in and out according to some established plan. I could be completely wrong, of course...

Oh, so your interpretation is that we might be planning on rotating these guys at random, without a plan?? I feel loads better now.... :huh:

Dude, that could mean so many things. This is what we do here. We take a statement and insert our own interpretation of what the speaker meant. Typical message board overreaction.

Of course, our interpretation is based on how the OL has been handled under this regime in the past, and with crappy results. But I guess that's just more of our unreasonable Hawk hate, with no basis whatsoever?? OK.

 

[DBT]

Oh, so your interpretation is that we might be planning on rotating these guys at random, without a plan?? I feel loads better now.... :huh:



Of course, our interpretation is based on how the OL has been handled under this regime in the past, and with crappy results. But I guess that's just more of our unreasonable Hawk hate, with no basis whatsoever?? OK.

Yep. That about sums it up. Well said.

 

[rodrigo]

Oh, so your interpretation is that we might be planning on rotating these guys at random, without a plan?? I feel loads better now.... :huh:

No. I don't have an interpretation. I will wait until Saturday to figure out what they mean instead of going Pelini in the dead of the night on Tuesday.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

He is going to be rotating QB's - so I don't see why rotating offensive linemen is such a big deal.

 

[DBT]

He is going to be rotating QB's - so I don't see why rotating offensive linemen is such a big deal.

From my sources, Hawk will have a running platoon and a passing platoon. On running plays, he'll have Cody, Solder, Iltis, Daniels, Miller, and Bakhtiari in. On passing plays it will be Tyler, Dannewitz, Adkins, Stevens, Behrens and Givens. Hawk doesn't believe the Rams will figure it out until its too late.

 

[The Guest]

From my sources, Hawk will have a running platoon and a passing platoon. On running plays, he'll have Cody, Solder, Iltis, Daniels, Miller, and Bakhtiari in. On passing plays it will be Tyler, Dannewitz, Adkins, Stevens, Behrens and Givens. Hawk doesn't believe the Rams will figure it out until its too late.

You always seem so angry at the negative things that Allbuffers post, but they're usually responding to some provocative thing you've written. You might be a genius!

 

[66BUFF]

he murdered the football program and he mentally tortures men, women and children with his boneheaded decisions and you keep blowing smoke up our ass.

analogy works for me

 

[DBT]

You always seem so angry at the negative things that Allbuffers post, but they're usually responding to some provocative thing you've written. You might be a genius!

When I was a kid, I liked to set off fire crackers in red ant hills. It was a blast.