Next:
Utah Tech @  Utah
ESPN+

New question. Is Roderick for real?

Welcome Cyclones Fans! Forums Utah Utes Sports Football New question. Is Roderick for real?

Viewing 7 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #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?

    • #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.

      • #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.

    • #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.

      • #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.

        • #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.

      • #14402
        CincyUte
        Participant

        Then what should we call Tavaris Williams?

    • #14400
      ironman1315
      Participant

      I go with WILLIAMS!!! Abs then stab my lance at you.

    • #14422
      2
      89ute
      Participant

      According to Erickson, Roderick is the real deal. He has spoken very highly of him in various interviews.

    • #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.

      • #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.

    • #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.

    • #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.

Viewing 7 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.