Page 1 of 1

Ron Antoine

PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2006 9:56 am
by BestOfBreed
What does everyone think? He seems to be a good hire but there isn't much info on him.

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2006 12:11 am
by Eyes of Old Main
I'm not that versed on how often or how successfully coaches can switch their positions of focus, but it seems that a former WR and WR coach would have trouble adjusting on short notice to coaching RB's, especially in our system which employs so much timing and misdirection.

I'm sure Coach Antoine will be a good hire because Coach Ayers has been doing this long enough to know what he's looking for, but I would wonder about the mental transition between the positions. I feel certain everything will be alright, but as anemic as our offense was at times last year, I certainly hope everything works out. Time will tell...

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2006 10:06 am
by walliver
Maybe we are going to do that "p" thing this year where the quarterback throws the ball at people, I think it's called "passing". :D

I assume in coaching that the ability to "coach" is probably more important than the ability to play the position.

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2006 11:47 am
by Ruckus
Don't forget Wade Lang, holder of several Wofford rushing records and outstanding playing performance as rb v. Clemson in '81, is control of the offense and is hands on every day with those backs. Sometimes, the best players don't make the best coaches. Palying ability doesn't always equate to coaching ability.

PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2006 11:34 pm
by Eyes of Old Main
I certainly wouldn't be upset if a few more passes were mixed in. I've been saying that Wofford's running game would be more effective with 10-12 passes per game instead of 3-5 for 15 years. If that's the effect this has, then I'm very happy. If not, I'm sure the ability to coach is there or Coach Antoine would never have been hired. I just hope there isn't a learning curve with regards to all our unusual sets and misdirection.

PostPosted: Sat May 13, 2006 5:18 pm
by walliver
In the late 90's (the early I-AA era) I remember a lot more passing, especially downfield passes set up by the run.

The problem with our current passing attack is that there only sems to be one receiver (occasionally two) running a pattern. With our spread lineup there should be the poosibilty of multiple receivers. With our current schemes, interceptions are almost as common as completions.

PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2006 9:39 am
by BossTerrier
walliver wrote:In the late 90's (the early I-AA era) I remember a lot more passing, especially downfield passes set up by the run.

The problem with our current passing attack is that there only sems to be one receiver (occasionally two) running a pattern. With our spread lineup there should be the poosibilty of multiple receivers. With our current schemes, interceptions are almost as common as completions.


We passed then because of Travis Wilson, perhaps the best passing quarterback we've had in the I-AA era. I think the play calling all depends on the talent of the quarterback.