New question. Is Roderick for real?

This topic has 12 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by Anonymous.

Viewing 7 reply threads

Author

Posts
- 09/28/2016 at 3:06 PM #14396
  
  GadValleyUte
  Participant
  
  Last week I asked if Tim Patrick was for real and I believe I got an answer on Friday night. Going up against probably the best DB he’ll face he delivered.
  
  This week’s question: Is Roderick a real OC? I had modest hopes going into last year and our lack of offensive diversity disappointed me. I believe the answer was TW1.0 just couldn’t make the reads and throws we needed to open things up consistently. But if I’m honest I am basing that assessment on 2 drives TW2.0 made in one game and comparing those to TW1.0’s failure to make similar reads/throws in his time here.
  
  There’s been a lot of bitching over the years about Roderick as a QB coach and now OC. Were his issues his own or the talent he was working with?
- 09/28/2016 at 3:16 PM #14398
  
  Anonymous
  Inactive
  
  Roderick recruited Wilson and got him to commit. Utah’s inability to coach Wilson is what concerned me. Overall Wilsons decision by his senior season were great but he had so many other issues it was hard to get more diverse with him. I think they did finally figure him out and won plenty of games with him as the qb.
  
  We knock Wilson and Roderick a lot but Utah won a lot of games. I think deficiencies aside we should be pleased with Utah’s successes.
  - 09/28/2016 at 3:49 PM #14405
    
    GadValleyUte
    Participant
    
    So you think he’s for real? He’s got a QB who can make reads and throws and appears to be learning quickly from mistakes without his confidence shaking, and so Roderick’s scheme and play calling will impress us?
    
    Not trying to be difficult just looking for clarification and conversation.
- 09/28/2016 at 3:17 PM #14399
  2
  
  utahpunk
  Participant
  
  SIDENOTE: Can we figure out a new moniker for Troy Williams? I keep reading’TW’ and can’t help but think of Travis Wilson. I understand that you went with ‘TW1.0’ and ‘TW2.0’ to differentiate between the two, but I still had to pause and think about it for a moment.
  
  TWill is what I have been going with.
  - 09/28/2016 at 3:32 PM #14401
    
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    
    I guess Joe is gone so we can just say Williams. TW threw a great touchdown doesn’t confuse me because Wilson doesn’t play anymore.
    - 09/28/2016 at 3:47 PM #14404
      
      GadValleyUte
      Participant
      
      Not only Tavaris, but Marcus is also confusing because he makes so many great plays. We’re in a heck of a situation vis-a-vis names.
      
      That would be great if Troy ended up doing so well that TW = Troy without need for clarification. Nobody wonders what you mean when you say BJ or Alex. If Troy could get there I bet we’d all be ecstatic.
  - 09/28/2016 at 3:34 PM #14402
    
    CincyUte
    Participant
    
    Then what should we call Tavaris Williams?
- 09/28/2016 at 3:27 PM #14400
  
  ironman1315
  Participant
  
  I go with WILLIAMS!!! Abs then stab my lance at you.
- 09/28/2016 at 7:34 PM #14422
  2
  
  89ute
  Participant
  
  According to Erickson, Roderick is the real deal. He has spoken very highly of him in various interviews.
- 09/28/2016 at 8:24 PM #14431
  1
  
  Anonymous
  Inactive
  
  Travis Wilson eventually became pretty good at running the read option, except for short yardage situations. However, his passing game was severely limited by his horrible mechanics. He simply was not accurate much beyond 10 yards and you could forget about anything over the middle. He never stood in the pocket because he was overly confident in his running ability. Once he was flushed from the pocket, his head was typically down, looking to run. He did not have enough speed to blow the ends, but was decent going north south.
  
  The coaches knew what they had and game planned within it. We all expected more, but it simply was not there. There are QBs who can throw receivers open, Travis Wilson was not one of them.
  - 09/28/2016 at 9:14 PM #14446
    3
    
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    
    To be a little bit fair to Wilson the receivers were lazy. Lazy routes because they never expected to get the ball. Combination of things.
- 09/28/2016 at 9:39 PM #14453
  1
  
  ChooseTheRed
  Participant
  
  I’ve been told that the reason Travis’s mechanics were not addressed was because he was learning a new offense every year. Time simply didn’t allow for learning a new offense and working on changing the fundamentals of his throwing motion, etc. Roderick was put in the position where he had to let that go and work with what he had. Erickson has been very positive about Roderick and players really like him and I’ve heard several of them (non-publicly) say that he’s good at coaching (ie, they learned a lot from him). It seems Roderick and Whit can’t quit each other (despite a complicated history) so it seems like ARod has Whit’s vote of confidence as well. Of course, a season with some new talent to “play with” will tell the tale better than any of these anecdotes. Hopefully injuries are kept to a minimum and we finally see that dynamic offense spread across a whole season vs just a flash of a great game here and there.
- 09/29/2016 at 7:11 AM #14472
  2
  
  Anonymous
  Inactive
  
  I am in the camp that it is near impossible to correct the mechanics of the sort you saw with Travis Wilson. He was born throwing that way. It would be like trying to change Shaquille O’neal’s free throw motion: many tried and no one succeeded. I have seen people change tennis strokes. I saw Pete Sampras as a 12 year old go from a two handed backhand to a one handed backhand. He basically disappeared from the Jr tennis circuit for 6 months to make the conversion. I will note that he did not have flawed mechanics with the two hander and the second hand was really there for support. The sidearm delivery that Wilson had would be very hard, if not impossible to change.
Author

Posts