A number on here alluded to this pre-season, but the OL play for me was the biggest question going into the season, then QB play. This whole year was a series of inconsistent OL play leading to/compounded by inconsistent QB play. The inconsistency of the OL also hurt the running game big time. I know I know, the always next year comment, but I'm looking forward to an experienced O-Line with whomever is the QB. Then a mobile QB will be the next step that can run when needed and make a big time play.

You're 100% correct, but nobody here can see past their own frustration and impatience.

The biggest mystery to me this year was why the coaches didn't stick with the OL that had their best performance against Bama. They reverted back to the previous OL group immediatley the next week. Why not stick with what worked?

It was a little worrisome that we didn't seem to improve much on Oline towards the end of the season. Hopefully we get missed assignments ironed out over the off-season and have some guys get stronger as well.

I agree with OP. It's super hard to have a good season in the SEC with 4 new starting offensive lineman, 2 of which are true freshman. Then, add a first time starting QB, pressed into action after the first string QB goes down… then the new QB gets banged up and is trying to finish the season with a hurt ankle, knee, and shoulder…

Succession planning fail and when #58 is your LT you're already compromised..

NattyOrBust said:

---

You're 100% correct, but nobody here can see past their own frustration and impatience.

---

Yep boils down to exactly this. And why a dual threat is really critical right now while we build the depth and experience at O line. At least a QB with wheels can offset some of the weaknesses on O line and even WR position IMO. That also assumes we have a legit dual threat who is consistent and is very good under pressure. Haven't seen that QB on the field this season unfortunately.

Reason why a lot of us on this board need to start preparing for unknowns next year at QB. Could be another year of a young and experienced QB trying to learn the ropes. Jimbo isn't one to make a QB change after naming his starter. But hopefully by Game 4 or 5 there is immense real game development at QB. O line should be drastically better next year but you need to mitigate those concerns with dual threat. If a guy can't significantly improve from season beginning to season end, we better have a replacement ready to roll. Absolutely unacceptable to be in this same QB situation next year.

sincereag said:

---

The biggest mystery to me this year was why the coaches didn't stick with the OL that had their best performance against Bama. They reverted back to the previous OL group immediatley the next week. Why not stick with what worked?

---

Only thing that makes sense is promises that were made from the transfer portal.

I'm totally speculating but this could be the danger of the portal with upperclassman. You make a promise then they don't pan out. You sit them then risk them running their mouths and hurting your chances of landing another transfer.

Seems as if the coaching staff could have figured out the QB situation over the time that Mond was the starter. Calzada isn't the reason for the season results. It is the coaching staff. They failed to develop a rotation at QB to follow Mond. Isn't the first time this happened at any program. But the coaches knew Mond was moving on sooner or later and they didn't prepare Calzada or any other candidate to come in and take the program to the next level in the SEC, just as the coaching staff failed to develop the O-Line.

The biggest disappointment of this season has to be the receiver play. The number of drops our receivers had would kill any team drive!! That's #1 IMO! Miss St pretty much uses dink and dunk passes as their running game. That's how important all those drops are regardless of the yards gained (if that makes sense). So many points/yards were left on the field. Moving the ball is so much easier on 2nd and 5 or 3rd and 2 if the receivers could just catch the ball. They also slide when it isn't necessary! We can't complete a pass to a WR by leading him to make the catch and continue down field! They either drop it, or slide.
JMO

Corn Pop said:

---

sincereag said:

---

The biggest mystery to me this year was why the coaches didn't stick with the OL that had their best performance against Bama. They reverted back to the previous OL group immediately the next week. Why not stick with what worked?

---

Only thing that makes sense is promises that were made from the transfer portal.

I'm totally speculating but this could be the danger of the portal with upperclassman. You make a promise then they don't pan out. You sit them then risk them running their mouths and hurting your chances of landing another transfer.

---

IMO the O-Line decisions came down to Experience. Our transfer Lineman had a lot more SEC experience than those that "Granted" played well against Bama. FULL STOP.
As an Fan, I know there were plenty of flags that came from that position, but it's supposedly the HARDEST position to play on the O-Line. That tackle has not only the DE to protect against, but also that Blitzing LB or DB. Believe this was a RISK decision, not a Portal Commitment decision.
On the other hand, we had a true FISH learn on the Fly and Do well at Right Tackle. Strong Chance that he flips to the Left Side Next Year.

We will need to replace 2 on this O-Line, assuming 55 goes Pro. Green made some huge blocks this year. But OMO we've got better back-ups at Guard.
In general, I thought out O-Line progressed pretty well this season. Our later issues were when we no longer had NUMBERs in the Box. LSU was going to Stop the Run and Make Zack beat them. Ditto Ole Miss. We'll need to improve in that Secondary / Slide blocking assignments.

Receivers IMO is a place where we need BIG STEP UP's. I don't recall ANY 50/50 balls that went our way. Maybe a 85 catch, but not many. The Receivers struggled with Zack's velocity, even on those where they should have made the catch. (Those 3 yds lasers in the backfield, I'll put on the QB, but the rest....)

QB Development ???? - Jimbo's system needs a thinking QB. Not just an athletic QB. Perhaps that is where King had an advantage, being a coach's son, and more mobile. Mobility is also important, knowing the defense is VERY Important. I don't think the Mond playing time was that detrimental to QB development. Coaches MUST play their best 11 and Get the WIN TODAY. You can't play for next year.

Biggest issue next year, just might be finding replacements on the Defensive Fronts. We're losing quite a few DL's and a couple of LB's. And we need some SPEED, maybe some Height too, in the Def Backfield, I'm tired of our DB's trailing the opposing receivers after getting beat!!!!!

The offense as a whole was very inconsistent this year. RB makes the list due to the when do we run Spiller vs. Achane discussions.

OL
QB
Receivers
TE
RB

Upperdeck Critic said:

---

Seems as if the coaching staff could have figured out the QB situation over the time that Mond was the starter. Calzada isn't the reason for the season results. It is the coaching staff. They failed to develop a rotation at QB to follow Mond. Isn't the first time this happened at any program. But the coaches knew Mond was moving on sooner or later and they didn't prepare Calzada or any other candidate to come in and take the program to the next level in the SEC, just as the coaching staff failed to develop the O-Line.

---

They prepared for King to take over after two off seasons to learn the system. They also prepared by having a Junior as a back up qb. Despite his struggles, our back up QB is one of the best backups in the country. Baring a horrible call by the refs this past weekend, we beat Bama and are playing for our 10th win in a bowl game. I think they did just fine.

Next year, next year, next year.
Creeps this petty pace from annum to annum.
To the last stich of recorded time.

sincereag said:

---

The biggest mystery to me this year was why the coaches didn't stick with the OL that had their best performance against Bama. They reverted back to the previous OL group immediatley the next week. Why not stick with what worked?

---

Yep, I don't understand why 58 was ever a starter, let alone the starting left tackle

Only thing that I can think of is that Jimbo expects the transfer portal to play a big role for us in the future, and he wanted to be able to point & say "58 transferred here & became our starting left tackle"

OL play is the main reason for the offensive struggles this year. We all knew it would take some time to develop the guys, but the LSU was an embarrassment. They got worked over. Bigtime. Dunno what you do from here, but Henson has his work cut out for him. Signing 5 K Banks might go a long way..

Upperdeck Critic said:

---

Seems as if the coaching staff could have figured out the QB situation over the time that Mond was the starter. Calzada isn't the reason for the season results. It is the coaching staff. They failed to develop a rotation at QB to follow Mond. Isn't the first time this happened at any program. But the coaches knew Mond was moving on sooner or later and they didn't prepare Calzada or any other candidate to come in and take the program to the next level in the SEC, just as the coaching staff failed to develop the O-Line.

---

Stupid post. The plan was for King with Calzada as QB2.

As for the OL, it wasn't planned to have a true fish OC. Still the OL improved over the season.

Vs. Pig, State and Ole Miss the OL played well enough to win if we had better QB play.

Upperdeck Critic said:

---

Seems as if the coaching staff could have figured out the QB situation over the time that Mond was the starter. Calzada isn't the reason for the season results. It is the coaching staff. They failed to develop a rotation at QB to follow Mond. Isn't the first time this happened at any program. But the coaches knew Mond was moving on sooner or later and they didn't prepare Calzada or any other candidate to come in and take the program to the next level in the SEC, just as the coaching staff failed to develop the O-Line.

---

Well... they did.... then he got hurt....

Spyderman said:

---

OL play is the main reason for the offensive struggles this year. We all knew it would take some time to develop the guys, but the LSU was an embarrassment. They got worked over. Bigtime. Dunno what you do from here, but Henson has his work cut out for him. Signing 5 K Banks might go a long way..

---

Our running game struggled primarily because LSU was in an eagle front on almost every possession. When they got out of the eagle look in the 3rd Q, our running game immediately picked up.

It's hard to run the ball on the interior against a team that has athletes if they are committed to that front. Against teams that we could overwhelm (Mizzou, SC, even Alabama's defensive front to a degree) and get a running game going, our offense was at its best. Otherwise, it was always a grind.

For the above reason, we actually had a lot of open looks in the passing game and our oline did a fair job in pass protection. Unfortunately our passing game is not consistent enough at this point to take regular advantage of the kind of look LSU gave us (same look Ole Miss presented as well).

I think because of the capabilities of our offense, Jimbo was content to be patient and allow the game to be won/lost by our defense. Obviously we can argue both sides of that strategy.

As relates to Zach, I don't think has physical capabilities were the elements that held us back. He actually was about average with accuracy and undoubtedly had arm talent to make some throws that most can't. In that regard, for a first-year guy, I thought he did pretty well. What I think we missed more than talent, was the ability to manipulate the offense at the LOS (which, after 5 years, Mond was good at). We seemed to get into a lot of bad running plays, and some passing plays, that an experienced QB would get us out of. Mond was an under-appreciated part of why we had such a consistently strong running game last year.

Regardless of anything else that happens in the offseason, I think this element of game management, whether its Weigman, King or Calzada will be the thing that improves us the most.

Nailed it IMO.