The suggestion on the why Porter is so great thread, is that Porter can block better in passing situations. If that is the case, it's just a matter of Warren picking up a skill set adequately for him to become the starter, because NO ONE is arguing Porter is in any way better at actually running the ball.
I don't think it is so much Warren's blocking technique as it is his inability to read the defense, which is a malady that has plagued our QBs for years. Please understand, I am not pro Porter, anti Warren, but rather pro healthy QBs and completed passes. The best and most consistent blocker on this team is Andrew Beck, who I want moved back to RB if he recovers.
Here' Herman's exact statement on why there wasn't more Warren (click the video to pause at any time): This is just wrong on several levels (as others have stated) and it doesn't take Mensa-level thinking to figure out why. It's just plain stooppid. Also, notice, there's no mention of an eye laceration during this explanation of underutilizing Warren. Remember three weeks ago Herman announced the he and he alone would do all speaking and interviewing for the team – that no coaches would be heard from. Obviously, he changed his mind (or someone changed it for him) because, for the past two weeks, both the OC and DC have had PC's. Hopefully, Herman will adjust his cognitive reasoning on Chris Warren's use.
That was a non-answer. He's dancing. Covering. I just hope that he is a big enough man to concede that they wasted a critical asset last night and that he will make an obvious adjustment going forward.
So if Warren ran the ball 25 times and we lost by 3 TDs would people be happy? Am I speculating? Yeah and so is everyone else. We almost won a game no one gave us a chance to. And people want to *****.
There's a $5 word which describes your condition ... involves inability to correctly analyze a situation. First:I wouldn't ever be happy with a loss Second: warrens number of carries is irrelevant to the feeling anyone would have in victory or defeat. Third: it's clear coach has a similar problem with analysis when stating 4 carries at 3.8 avg is a failure.
I agree with most of what you said except on the QB. That kid looks like a fighter. He reminds me of a young Mayfield or Colt. He's imperfect but you don't doubt his fire or his fight. I thought he took the reigns.
That's not what he said. He was talking about post-game interviews, and that's exactly how it's played out. In fact, I've seen at least one writer tweeting about not getting access to the coordinators. Man, we really need a game this weekend because a week and a half of this is going to be brutal.
If he ever does block, I'll be pleased to assess his ability. When the ball is snapped, he has no idea where the LBs and safeties are. That is on the coaches, who have not taught him to read the defensive schemes.
The reason nobody gave us a chance is because we got dogstomped by a mediocre Maryland team on opening day.
Perhaps ... but it was still a foolish call. It'd be more appropriate if it's late in the game and number of possessions to points behind require it. Warren messed-up on missing that block ... so for that 1st possession error ... restrict him to 4 carries? Yeah ... nose ... spite ... face. discipline the guy during the week and coach him up on blocking ... right?
ouch, that looked pretty bad, and honestly if that was all the time I'm all of a sudden on the side of the coaches. Don't know how often it happens but I do know when he was in on one of the qb TD carries against SJSU I did watch him completely remove the LB out of the play. But I confess I do not consistently watch him block (or not).
LOL!!! That was even worse than I recalled! When I saw that during the game I didn't notice that he actually side stepped to avoid contact with #42. After seeing that, maybe Coach Herman has been too lenient with Warren. If I'm the coach, that play gets you a seat on the bench. IMO just as bad as consistent lack of ball security.
SHAARK, I missed the one to which Nash is referring, but I have yet to see him pickup a LB or DB or DL missed by the OL. He simply cannot read the defense. I am not putting that on him, but rather the coaches not teaching him. He is clearly the best we have, so teach him over the next 2-3 weeks. His practice should be limited to running scout team offense and learning to pick up the blitz.
If the problem is that Warren can't block on pass plays, why not put both Warren and Porter in on most downs, so the defense has no clue if it's going to be a pass or run. Seems that would offer a lot of options.
Look at the talent and production of our RBs, and then consider the depth and talent of our WRs. Has John Burt played yet? Duvernay remains our fastest WR, and rarely sees the field. I enjoy the four wide set.
I hear ya. Just spitballing here since it ain't going to make a difference on what happens anyway. But if the fear by TH is that having Porter in will signal pass to the opposing DC, why not confuse them by having 2 backs? Eh, what do I know, not much.
Maybe he did, but I'm still not totally convinced of it. You don't sidestep a person you're supposed to block unless you misunderstood the play and thought you were to go out or thought the pulling guard/tackle has the assignment, etc. Only the coaches and players know for sure what the assignments were.
Have to wonder if he understood that the question had to do with Warren's carries against USC and not vs SJS. Or maybe he is being deliberately obtuse. Certainly the staff is quick to abandon the run (except for QB runs) and go to the pass. http://www.hookemplus.com/2017/09/18/where-was-texas-rb-chris-warren-iii-against-usc/
Sometimes I find Bohls funny. http://www.hookemplus.com/columns/bohls-tom-herman-lot-chew-longhorns-near-upset-usc/
