Harsin didn’t consider QB change in loss

[Hank2020 3,408]

10 hours ago, eaglenest said:

HE DOES!!!! HOW ELSE TO EXPLAIN IT.....

I just don’t believe he is willing to play anyone that he doesn’t think is best choice at that time for his team. You may not at all agree with his choice but the choice is his to make and live with the outcome.

[johnnyAU 3,745]

18 minutes ago, AUAlumnTN said:

For the same reason that putting new tires on the same station wagon won’t make it go faster. Changing QBs is not a magic cure-all that immediately fixes any and all offensive woes. We lacked a coherent and cohesive game plan and never adjusted to fix that. The offensive line got very little push in the run game. Receivers struggled to get open. The list goes on. Very few QBs in college football are good enough to overcome that many problems in the face of a talented and disciplined defense and I don’t believe anyone on our roster currently fits the description. We lost this game from Tuesday to Friday in the offensive meeting rooms and practice fields

Sometimes it provides something, anything when nothing else is going according to plan. It's not about whether one QB is better than the other. Agreed that all the other items mentioned were the majority of the issue. However, making zero changes when you aren't making any progress at all is a recipe for doing nothing at all.

Even if TJ comes in and goes 3 and out with a couple of bad throws and missed reads, what's the difference? Maybe he actually hits a WR deep and changes the game. Give him that chance. There wasn't much harm he could have done. 

[AUAlumnTN 226]

4 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

Sometimes it provides something, anything when nothing else is going according to plan. It's not about whether one QB is better than the other. Agreed that all the other items mentioned were the majority of the issue. However, making zero changes when you aren't making any progress at all is a recipe for doing nothing at all.

Even if TJ comes in and goes 3 and out with a couple of bad throws and missed reads, what's the difference? Maybe he actually hits a WR deep and changes the game. Give him that chance. There wasn't much harm he could have done. 

The harm done is potentially undermining the confidence of your starter and sending the wrong message to the team. When Bo was benched against GSU, he deserved it. Auburn was playing a less talented team, at home, and the rest of the offense mostly had it together. Bo was the fly in the ointment and he knew it. Benching him then sends a clear and effective message: pull your weight or sit down. 
 

Against A&M, the ENTIRE offense stunk up the joint from OC to RT. Bo’s struggles were not distinct from the rest of the team’s. Benching him here, particularly given his improvement over the last several weeks, sends a different message: you, the QB, will pay for the mistakes of your teammates. Very different message. 

[johnnyAU 3,745]

24 minutes ago, AUAlumnTN said:

The harm done is potentially undermining the confidence of your starter and sending the wrong message to the team. When Bo was benched against GSU, he deserved it. Auburn was playing a less talented team, at home, and the rest of the offense mostly had it together. Bo was the fly in the ointment and he knew it. Benching him then sends a clear and effective message: pull your weight or sit down. 
 

Against A&M, the ENTIRE offense stunk up the joint from OC to RT. Bo’s struggles were not distinct from the rest of the team’s. Benching him here, particularly given his improvement over the last several weeks, sends a different message: you, the QB, will pay for the mistakes of your teammates. Very different message. 

I disagree. You aren't going to switch out the entire offense, but you can change the most important player for a series or two to provide a possible spark. It may just be that the opposing D has to alter their approach just enough given the different skill set. Leaving someone in the game who isn't playing well in an offense that isn't doing anything just because you don't want to upset the QB? Come on. 

[jj3jordan 2,172]

3 hours ago, johnnyAU said:

I disagree. You aren't going to switch out the entire offense, but you can change the most important player for a series or two to provide a possible spark. It may just be that the opposing D has to alter their approach just enough given the different skill set. Leaving someone in the game who isn't playing well in an offense that isn't doing anything just because you don't want to upset the QB? Come on. 

You sir are correct. Changing the tires does in fact make the old station wagon perform better.  Especially if someone else is driving it. aTm was prepared for Bo. They knew how to stop his scrambling. The knew how to make him throw off his back foot. All they had to do was watch the zone read and they had a spy for him and the back. They are not as prepared for TJ. As evidenced by the GA St game, a new guy does provide a spark. Bo had flailed around dropping the ball throwing short hops and missing receivers for almost three quarters. It was time he sat and pondered his future. 

Edited November 8, 2021 by jj3jordan

[AUAlumnTN 226]

40 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

Leaving someone in the game who isn't playing well in an offense that isn't doing anything just because you don't want to upset the QB? Come on. 

There’s a reason sports psychology is becoming such a big field: the mental and emotional states of players and their effect on team dynamics are enormously important to their performance. Especially so with younger players. This isn’t Madden or NCAA. Benching a starting QB isn’t just an Xs and Os decision and the context in which you do it matters. I’m quite certain Bryan Harsin knows that and it was probably a significant factor in his decision making. 

Edited November 8, 2021 by AUAlumnTN

[e808 3,222]

1 hour ago, jj3jordan said:

You sir are correct. Changing the tires does in fact make the old station wagon perform better.  Especially if someone else is driving it. aTm was prepared for Bo. They knew how to stop his scrambling. The knew how to make him throw off his back foot. All they had to do was watch the zone read and they had a spy for him and the back. They are not as prepared for TJ. As evidenced by the GA St game, a new guy does provide a spark. Bo had flailed around dropping the ball throwing short hood and missing receivers for almost three quarters. It was time he sat and pondered his future. 

Respectfully disagree. TJ did play against them last year and I am sure they prepared for him. So to say they weren’t prepared for him or he would catch them off guard isn’t true. Yes Bo didn’t play well but look at the big picture of what they wanted him to do from the jump. The first series told u all u needed to know when he came out throwing. Everyone on this board knows Bo throwing a ton is a recipe for disaster.  I would have like to seen more RPO’s or zone reads earlier. Maybe Bo runs and releases some of that overexcited energy so he can calm down. IJS

Edited November 8, 2021 by e808

[shabby 2,081]

1 hour ago, AUAlumnTN said:

The harm done is potentially undermining the confidence of your starter and sending the wrong message to the team. When Bo was benched against GSU, he deserved it. Auburn was playing a less talented team, at home, and the rest of the offense mostly had it together. Bo was the fly in the ointment and he knew it. Benching him then sends a clear and effective message: pull your weight or sit down. 
 

Against A&M, the ENTIRE offense stunk up the joint from OC to RT. Bo’s struggles were not distinct from the rest of the team’s. Benching him here, particularly given his improvement over the last several weeks, sends a different message: you, the QB, will pay for the mistakes of your teammates. Very different message. 

Considering Harsin already made the switch mid game seems to undermine the whole puking Nix would undermine Nix's confidence. He's already been pulled. He already knows that playing lousy in a game risks getting pulled. Why Harsin felt this game didn't warrant that decision is the unknown. Not wanting to undermine Nix's confidence doesn't seem to be a reason Harsin would latch onto given the history there. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

3 minutes ago, e808 said:

Respectfully disagree. TJ did play against them last year and I sure the prepared for him. So to say they weren’t prepared for him or he would catch them off guard isn’t true. Yes Bo didn’t play well but look at the big picture of what they wanted him to do from the jump. The first series told u all u need to know when he can out throwing. Everyone on this board knows Bo throwing a ton is a recipe for disaster. IJS

This alone makes me wonder why we won the toss but decided to receive. It was a big game, we were the visitor, crowd noise was off the scale, and sometimes players need a few plays into the game to settle down. With our defense clearly better than our offense why not let them go at it first and receive to start the second half. I guess Harsin had his reason.

[AUAlumnTN 226]

1 minute ago, shabby said:

Considering Harsin already made the switch mid game seems to undermine the whole puking Nix would undermine Nix's confidence. He's already been pulled. He already knows that playing lousy in a game risks getting pulled. Why Harsin felt this game didn't warrant that decision is the unknown. Not wanting to undermine Nix's confidence doesn't seem to be a reason Harsin would latch onto given the history there. 

Did you miss the part where I explained why the context was different and therefore the decision was different? 

[fishepa 2,051]

40 minutes ago, AUAlumnTN said:

There’s a reason sports psychology is becoming such a big field: the mental and emotional states of players and their effect on team dynamics are enormously important to their performance. Especially so with younger players. This isn’t Madden or NCAA. Benching a starting QB isn’t just an Xs and Os decision and the context in which you do it matters. I’m quite certain Bryan Harsin knows that and it was probably a significant factor in his decision making. 

Exactly, just ask Ted Lasso.

[au302 2,669]

The problem is our lack of ability to stretch the field. Elko and A&M are smart and talented. They limited the run and took away the hitches and short routes that we love to go to. Dared us to beat us over the top and we couldn't. The one time we called a deep ball it was grossly overthrown. It is what it is.

I would like to see more under center and more play action. Feed the two headed monster and play action deep balls and tight ends over the middle. We simply cannot dink and dunk all the way down the field consistently against top defenses. Imo, TJ can stretch the field with that cannon he's got. Bo is good at rolling out and short throws when he is in rhthym, but he has never been a guy that can stretch the field consistently. Works great when he is in rhythm against poor secondaries, but not good when you face the talented big dogs

[AUAlumnTN 226]

14 minutes ago, fishepa said:

Exactly, just ask Ted Lasso.

[johnnyAU 3,745]

1 hour ago, AUAlumnTN said:

There’s a reason sports psychology is becoming such a big field: the mental and emotional states of players and their effect on team dynamics are enormously important to their performance. Especially so with younger players. This isn’t Madden or NCAA. Benching a starting QB isn’t just an Xs and Os decision and the context in which you do it matters. I’m quite certain Bryan Harsin knows that and it was probably a significant factor in his decision making. 

Bo isn't a Freshman. He's a 3 year starter at this point. He's competitive and wants to win. Telling him he's sitting out a series in order to try and test the D isn't the same thing.

[JwgreDeux 1,279]

On 11/7/2021 at 9:14 AM, Mikey said:

After the 3rd quarter, which was our 5th consecutive quarter with only six points, I'd have made a change at QB just to see if something couldn't be "shook a-loose".  Now I'm not at practice and in the meetings with these guys. It's possible that things that happen there have a bearing on who plays.

Not many seeming to be discussing this fact. Now six quarters with no touchdowns. 

On 11/7/2021 at 9:20 AM, LPTiger said:

On the first fumble, was anyone open downfield?   One of the commentators indicated no.   Who was running the route?  I'm curious. 

Hudson was at the top of the screen (Nix's left) running the deep route. Couldn't see the coverage during the broadcast, but you could see both safeties crash at minimum leaving Hudson in one on one coverage. That is who Nix was looking at when he dropped the ball. 

[e808 3,222]

3 hours ago, johnnyAU said:

Bo isn't a Freshman. He's a 3 year starter at this point. He's competitive and wants to win. Telling him he's sitting out a series in order to try and test the D isn't the same thing.

U missed his point. U are basically singling Bo out when the entire side of the offense played like crap. Anders missed a kick that was a momentum changer. Receivers dropped balls no separation and the play calling wasn’t good either. Are u going to replace all of them as well. The buck doesn’t start and stop with Bo in this game. It just wasn’t meant to be. 

Edited November 8, 2021 by e808

[AUAlumnTN 226]

2 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

Bo isn't a Freshman. He's a 3 year starter at this point. He's competitive and wants to win. Telling him he's sitting out a series in order to try and test the D isn't the same thing.

There’s a reason the saying “if you have two quarterbacks, you have none” exists. The position is unique in its level of responsibility, its perception by the rest of the team, and how it is handled. By benching Bo, even for a series, you are demoting the on-field leader of your offense. That’s a huge deal, not just to Bo but to everyone on the offense. Sitting a QB is never just an Xs and Os decision. 

We came in with a bad game plan against a talented and prepared opponent who took full advantage. Sometimes that happens. Doesn’t always mean benching the QB (or anyone else) is the right decision. 

[au302 2,669]

Shed, Kobe, and Bo were our three lowest PFF performers, in that order I believe. Those three are the top 3 guys in the passing attack all season. That's a problem folks. Harsin needs to send a message. Tell the entire offense that every position is up for grabs this week. Give guys like TJ, Canion, Capers, DD, etc. an opportunity to earn it

[keesler 5,975]

18 minutes ago, AUAlumnTN said:

There’s a reason the saying “if you have two quarterbacks, you have none” exists. The position is unique in its level of responsibility, its perception by the rest of the team, and how it is handled. By benching Bo, even for a series, you are demoting the on-field leader of your offense. That’s a huge deal, not just to Bo but to everyone on the offense. Sitting a QB is never just an Xs and Os decision. 

We came in with a bad game plan against a talented and prepared opponent who took full advantage. Sometimes that happens. Doesn’t always mean benching the QB (or anyone else) is the right decision. 

Situations like this have to be really tough for a coaching staff.  You have a 3rd yr starting QB who's well seasoned in SEC play.  Yet after 3 yrs he still allows his emotions to get to in his head so badly that he's yelling at his players and pouting on the sideline.  His performance justified a change in personnel if only for a series or two so that he could see the field and get some coaching on the sidelines, help him settle down & read the defense.   

I said the same exact things last year, so what do I know?  When a 3rd yr starter is a liability and can't control the emotions or seem to get his head straight, then what's a coach to do?  

[e808 3,222]

10 minutes ago, au302 said:

Shed, Kobe, and Bo were our three lowest PFF performers, in that order I believe. Those three are the top 3 guys in the passing attack all season. That's a problem folks. Harsin needs to send a message. Tell the entire offense that every position is up for grabs this week. Give guys like TJ, Canion, Capers, DD, etc. an opportunity to earn it

The problem with that is we are on the back end of the season. Unless u gonna pack it up and work toward next year. Auburn isn’t completely out of it yet so just gotta move on. Can’t let one loss equal 2

[auburnphan 6,050]

53 minutes ago, AUAlumnTN said:

There’s a reason the saying “if you have two quarterbacks, you have none” exists. The position is unique in its level of responsibility, its perception by the rest of the team, and how it is handled. By benching Bo, even for a series, you are demoting the on-field leader of your offense. That’s a huge deal, not just to Bo but to everyone on the offense. Sitting a QB is never just an Xs and Os decision. 

We came in with a bad game plan against a talented and prepared opponent who took full advantage. Sometimes that happens. Doesn’t always mean benching the QB (or anyone else) is the right decision. 

How was it a bad game plan?  By this I mean tell me what you think the coaches plan was and how that was a bad plan and how you would have done it better.

[AUAlumnTN 226]

28 minutes ago, keesler said:

Situations like this have to be really tough for a coaching staff.  You have a 3rd yr starting QB who's well seasoned in SEC play.  Yet after 3 yrs he still allows his emotions to get to in his head so badly that he's yelling at his players and pouting on the sideline.  His performance justified a change in personnel if only for a series or two so that he could see the field and get some coaching on the sidelines, help him settle down & read the defense.   

I said the same exact things last year, so what do I know?  When a 3rd yr starter is a liability and can't control the emotions or seem to get his head straight, then what's a coach to do?  

It’s a challenge. Yeah, you don’t want to see your third year QB having a meltdown on the sideline but I don’t remember many games where Auburn had as many things just flat out not work offensively as this one. NO ONE on offense had a good day and that includes the coaching staff. Bo may be a third year starting QB but he’s still a hyper competitive 21-year old dude. Playing a game this meaningful and getting your butt kicked THIS badly’s gonna sting a little. 

Edited November 8, 2021 by AUAlumnTN

[AUAlumnTN 226]

1 minute ago, auburnphan said:

How was it a bad game plan?  By this I mean tell me what you think the coaches plan was and how that was a bad plan and how you would have done it better.

My friend, explaining something that is readily apparent to someone who clearly doesn’t actually want to hear it is not the enticing proposition you think it is. 

[AU9377 6,088]

4 hours ago, Hank2020 said:

I just don’t believe he is willing to play anyone that he doesn’t think is best choice at that time for his team. You may not at all agree with his choice but the choice is his to make and live with the outcome.

I think that goes for any coach.

[auburnphan 6,050]

Just now, AUAlumnTN said:

My friend, explaining something that is readily apparent to someone who clearly doesn’t actually want to hear it is not the enticing proposition you think it is. 

can't do it, got it.