Pep Hamilton Candidate For Vanderbilt HC Position

[GoColtsGo5150]

That's a lateral move, why would he come here for the same job? Nice dream pick though.

Then again Norv Turner was said to be interviewed for the Vikings OC whilst he is the OC for the Browns- so it can happen. If Pep leaves- I'd go for Tom Cable or the Baylor OC.

[Bluefire4]

I'm surprised by the response on this thread. I hope this is not serious like when Chris Mortensen said there was interest in Greg Manusky for a head coaching job..

[BOTT]

I'm just sayin. He isn't even that close yet either

Everyone with a brain disagrees

[Superman]

I have no problem with the philosophy that you have to be able to run the ball and stop the run.  I have a problem with the philosophy that makes running the ball the primary offense.

 

I'm not sure where the idea that the Colts wanted the rushing attack to be the primary offense comes from. 

[bavanlan]

I'm not sure where the idea that the Colts wanted the rushing attack to be the primary offense comes from.

The entire season?

 

1-10 Run Formation: Donald Brown for 2 yards

 

2-8 Run Formation: Donald Brown for 0 yards

 

3-8 Pass Formation: Andrew Luck to Coby Fleener for 3 yards.

 

4-5 Punt Formation: Pat McAfee punts.

[ColtsFanMikeC]

“@AdamSchefter: Colts OC Pep Hamilton is a candidate for the Vanderbilt HC job, according to multiple league sources.”

Discuss.

Pep left Stanford as a head coach, which is a much better program than Vandy at this point.  I can't see him taking this position.

[Deathiltis]

Pep left Stanford as a head coach, which is a much better program than Vandy at this point.  I can't see him taking this position.

Um no. Pep was the OC, not the Head Coach.

[Gabriel Alexander Morillo]

Everyone with a brain disagrees

Don't think so. He is not elite and you cannot disagree with that. 

[bavanlan]

I'm not sure where the idea that the Colts wanted the rushing attack to be the primary offense comes from. 

 

http://www.colts.com/news/article-1/Pep-Hamilton%E2%80%99s-offense-will-be-run-first-but-don%E2%80%99t-think-he%E2%80%99s-forgotten-about-the-passing-game/7cb81716-9f3f-475a-8fa6-17766b3e89d8

 

 

 

Earlier this week, Hamilton reiterated that he wants his offense to be run-first, but by no means is he discounting the weapons in the passing game

[Superman]

The entire season?

 

1-10 Run Formation: Donald Brown for 2 yards

 

2-8 Run Formation: Donald Brown for 0 yards

 

3-8 Pass Formation: Andrew Luck to Coby Fleener for 3 yards.

 

4-5 Punt Formation: Pat McAfee punts.

 

Stop it, Bav. 

 

The coaches want to establish the run. They didn't go about it the right way, but the insistence on the run game is so that we have the ability to move the ball on the ground when necessary. Even in the Niners game, they started the game throwing the ball, then started pounding it as the game went on. That's smart football. 

[bavanlan]

I'm not sure where the idea that the Colts wanted the rushing attack to be the primary offense comes from. 

 

http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130816/SPORTS/130819819

 

 

 

“We are a run-first team,” Hamilton said. “We are a power running team and that's well-documented.”

[jskinnz]

The entire season?

 

1-10 Run Formation: Donald Brown for 2 yards

 

2-8 Run Formation: Donald Brown for 0 yards

 

3-8 Pass Formation: Andrew Luck to Coby Fleener for 3 yards.

 

4-5 Punt Formation: Pat McAfee punts.

Sorry Bav, but I don't agree. Even before they went to more shot-gun at the end of the year, they had several games in which they threw to set up the run. Among others, the Dolphins and Jacksonville games early in the year were heavy passing in the first half.

[bavanlan]

but the insistence on the run game is so that we have the ability to move the ball on the ground when necessary. 

 

If you can run the ball, you can run the ball.  You don't need three quarters of practice to be able to run it in the 4th if you need to.

[Superman]

http://www.colts.com/news/article-1/Pep-Hamilton’s-offense-will-be-run-first-but-don’t-think-he’s-forgotten-about-the-passing-game/7cb81716-9f3f-475a-8fa6-17766b3e89d8

 

Quote from that article: 

 

“We feel like it takes a lot of pressure off the quarterback if we can of course run the football and force defenses to pack the box. That’s going to open up opportunities to create big plays in the passing game so it’s a two-fold effect,” Hamilton said.

“The run game opens up the passing game and vice versa so we are hoping that this Sunday night we are going to have an opportunity to go out and execute all the plays that we call on game day.”

 

Pep is not quoted in that article using the term "run-first."

[BOTT]

Don't think so. He is not elite and you cannot disagree with that.

That's not what you said. You said he wasn't that close...which is just foolish.

[Superman]

If you can run the ball, you can run the ball.  You don't need three quarters of practice to be able to run it in the 4th if you need to.

 

I disagree, wholeheartedly. You run the ball all game long if you can, and it makes it easier for you to put the game away in the 4th. Just like the Pats did. They ran with marginal success for most of the game, then gut-punched our defense for 73 yards on one carry. Before that, they were averaging 3.3 yards/carry on 30+ carries. 

 

I'm not endorsing the whole "three yards and a cloud of dust" mentality. But I don't think that's what the Colts coaching staff wants, either. They just want a capable rushing attack, and you can only get there if you work at it. You don't abandon the concept or the goal just because it doesn't work right out of the gate.

[Gabriel Alexander Morillo]

That's not what you said. You said he wasn't that close...which is just foolish.

That's part of what I said, you didn't specify. But how is he close? He had a much easier passing system this year. 

[jvan1973]

Pep left Stanford as a head coach, which is a much better program than Vandy at this point. I can't see him taking this position.

um... no

[bavanlan]

They just want a capable rushing attack, and you can only get there if you work at it. You don't abandon the concept or the goal just because it doesn't work right out of the gate.

 

If you're going almost two months with the same concept without scoring a first half TD and having to change the concept at halftime, then yes, you abandon it.

[coltsfanmilyman]

If you can run the ball, you can run the ball.  You don't need three quarters of practice to be able to run it in the 4th if you need to.

If you have the ability to run the ball, you are going to beat down and wear down the defense.  This is gonna make them bite so much harder when it is a fake, which then will lead into opportunities down the field with Hilton.   

[bavanlan]

If you have the ability to run the ball, you are going to beat down and wear down the defense.  This is gonna make them bite so much harder when it is a fake, which then will lead into opportunities down the field with Hilton.   

 

I'm not saying don't run the ball.  I'm saying: 

 

1) You don't HAVE to run the ball if it's not working; 

2) You don't HAVE to run the ball if passing works better;

3) You don't HAVE to run the ball just to run the ball.

 

Forcing a "run-first" offense (sorry Superman, it's in there quoted by Pep) when it's ineffective is DUMB.

[Superman]

If you're going almost two months with the same concept without scoring a first half TD and having to change the concept at halftime, then yes, you abandon it.

 

That's a different story. I'm right there with you on that. But that's different from saying the coaches want the run to be the primary feature of the offense. They want to have a strong running game. We already know we can throw it for 300 yards, regardless of the opponent, venue, or circumstance. What's holding the offense back from being balanced and consistent is, first of all, the lack of a strong run game.

 

And speaking of the nonsense we dealt with after the Denver game, until after the Bengals game, it's noteworthy that Reggie Wayne was lost and it took time to adjust. I was plenty critical of the gameplans and playcalling during that stretch, but the circumstances weren't ideal. 

[Superman]

I'm not saying don't run the ball.  I'm saying: 

 

1) You don't HAVE to run the ball if it's not working; 

2) You don't HAVE to run the ball if passing works better;

3) You don't HAVE to run the ball just to run the ball.

 

Forcing a "run-first" offense (sorry Superman, it's in there quoted by Pep) when it's ineffective is DUMB.

 

So how do you develop a strong run game? Can you do it without running the ball?

[ruksak]

I would actually like to see Pep replaced. Being totally honest, I don't think his ideas hold up in the NFL.

[bavanlan]

That's a different story. I'm right there with you on that. But that's different from saying the coaches want the run to be the primary feature of the offense. They want to have a strong running game. We already know we can throw it for 300 yards, regardless of the opponent, venue, or circumstance. What's holding the offense back from being balanced and consistent is, first of all, the lack of a strong run game.

 

"Run-first".

 

I too want a strong running game, but we don't need to use it every time, particularly if it's not working.  You don't need to run it for 150 yards per game to have a strong running game, you have one/don't regardless of whether or not you use it.

 

And speaking of the nonsense we dealt with after the Denver game, until after the Bengals game, it's noteworthy that Reggie Wayne was lost and it took time to adjust. I was plenty critical of the gameplans and playcalling during that stretch, but the circumstances weren't ideal. 

 

Two months.  And it's not like we didn't have the answer because we used it in the second half of most of those games.  But no, we're running the ball into a brick wall for 30 minutes.

[bavanlan]

So how do you develop a strong run game? Can you do it without running the ball?

 

You practice it before and during the season.  

 

It's not like NE just became a good running team last week, but from weeks 9-15 Brady averaged over 370 yards passing per game, yet when they needed a good run game, it was there.  You don't have to force the run every week to be able to have it in the playoffs.

[Superman]

"Run-first".

 

I don't care whether we're "run-first," "run-last," "pass-first," or otherwise. Label it whatever you want. Being capable of running the ball is important. And you don't suddenly have a run game without working on it for a long time.

 

I too want a strong running game, but we don't need to use it every time, particularly if it's not working.  You don't need to run it for 150 yards per game to have a strong running game, you have one/don't regardless of whether or not you use it.

 

I disagree. Again using the Pats as an example, they weren't nearly as effective running the ball three months ago as they are now. They've gotten better as the year has gone on, partly because they've stuck with it. It takes time to develop a strong run game, especially if you suck the way we did most of the game. 

 

Two months.  And it's not like we didn't have the answer because we used it in the second half of most of those games.  But no, we're running the ball into a brick wall for 30 minutes.

 

 

I get the feeling you think I'm endorsing the way the coaches handled this most of the season. To be clear, I do not. They really made themselves look foolish for quite some time, and probably cost us some games. I'm on the record here.

 

What I disagree with is the idea that the coaches want the run game to be the primary focus of the offense. I think they emphasized and tried to force the run so much, for so long, because they wanted to stress the importance of building a strong run game. It didn't wind up happening, and they stuck with it for too long, but that doesn't mean it's not important. It's even more important, I think. Doesn't mean they aren't going to use the passing game as the weapon it is. Doesn't even mean that they won't use the pass to set up the run (which is what they did against the Niners). But the run game is a focus, and it should be, until we have a reliable rushing attack. Without it, this team isn't going to reach its full potential.

 

Every time a Colts coach emphasizes the run, this board gets up in arms about how we're wasting Andrew Luck's abilities. It's silly. Nothing will help a young QB more than a strong run game, and no NFL team wins without being able to run the ball effectively. 

[Superman]

You practice it before and during the season.  

 

Just don't talk about it in front of the fans...

 

At what point do you implement this run game? You just hold it in your back pocket until the playoffs?

 

It's not like NE just became a good running team last week, but from weeks 9-15 Brady averaged over 370 yards passing per game, yet when they needed a good run game, it was there.  You don't have to force the run every week to be able to have it in the playoffs.

 

 

Of course. But they didn't just because a good running team from practicing it. They used their run game all season long, and it progressively got better and better throughout the year. We didn't have the same results, unfortunately, but it's still important, and it still needs to be emphasized and focused on until we get good results.

[YOUR GM]

Let him go. I didn't like the hire when we made it.

All we heard about Andrew during his rookie year was how well he grasped the offense for a rookie.

His 2nd year, we heard that they hired Pep because of Andrews familiarity with his system. Was it really that important that Andrew benefit from a familiar/simple offensive system so much that we had to gamble with a first time NFL OC? I don't think so...

My worry was that Pep's offense from Stanford would not be complex enough to keep defenses honest in the pros. I know some of what I don't know and that the schemes in pro football are leaps and bounds ahead of anything these guys do in college.

I want to hire a hot shot OC who is more of an Offensive Head Coach if that makes any sense...

Feel free to chime in.. My posts are still limited.

Ironically, the most innovative offenses in the league in recent years have been college offenses. The NFL has better athletes, that's the only difference. New England, Philly, Buffalo and others are all running college style offenses right now. The quick snap, fastbreak, spread offense is what is trendy right now

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

I disagree, wholeheartedly. You run the ball all game long if you can, and it makes it easier for you to put the game away in the 4th. Just like the Pats did. They ran with marginal success for most of the game, then gut-punched our defense for 73 yards on one carry. Before that, they were averaging 3.3 yards/carry on 30+ carries. 

 

I'm not endorsing the whole "three yards and a cloud of dust" mentality. But I don't think that's what the Colts coaching staff wants, either. They just want a capable rushing attack, and you can only get there if you work at it. You don't abandon the concept or the goal just because it doesn't work right out of the gate.

They the Patriots were physically beating our defense down there were many runs although we stopped them that were VERY CLOSE to being big gainers.There OL was manhandling our DL IMO!

[bavanlan]

Just don't talk about it in front of the fans...

 

At what point do you implement this run game? You just hold it in your back pocket until the playoffs?

 

 

Of course. But they didn't just because a good running team from practicing it. They used their run game all season long, and it progressively got better and better throughout the year. We didn't have the same results, unfortunately, but it's still important, and it still needs to be emphasized and focused on until we get good results.

 

You implement the run game when it helps you win and you put it away when it's costing you games.  You don't go out forcing the run until you need to pass to simply stay in the game.

[Superman]

They the Patriots were physically beating our defense down there were many runs although we stopped them that were VERY CLOSE to being big gainers.There OL was manhandling our DL IMO!

 

They won some battles, we won some battles. I don't think there were any runs that were close to being big gainers before the 73 yarder. They were stopped in short yardage multiple times. Half of their carries were for 2 or fewer yards to that point. Their longest carry was 8 yards. 

[Superman]

You implement the run game when it helps you win and you put it away when it's costing you games.  You don't go out forcing the run until you need to pass to simply stay in the game.

 

I agree. I said many posts ago that they didn't go about it the right way. That doesn't mean that it's not important to improve the rushing attack. And having the coaches talk about improving the rushing attack and how important it is to the team is not the same as making it the primary feature of the offense.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

They won some battles, we won some battles. I don't think there were any runs that were close to being big gainers before the 73 yarder. They were stopped in short yardage and forced to punt two or three times. Half of their carries were for 2 or fewer yards to that point. Their longest carry was 8 yards. 

Manhandled Super take the 73 yarder away they still had what 160 yards running way to much, they beat us down re-watch the game.

[Superman]

Manhandled Super take the 73 yarder away they still had what 160 yards running way to much, they beat us down re-watch the game.

 

I think you should rewatch the game before you tell me to rewatch the game (which I have).

 

To that point, they had 108 yards on the ground, on 33 carries. That's not manhandled. I'm not thrilled with the result, but 3.3 yards/carry against a team that's insistent on running the ball isn't bad. Stopping them for 2 yards or less on 16 of those 33 carries is encouraging. Then they landed a haymaker and everything changed.

[bavanlan]

I agree. I said many posts ago that they didn't go about it the right way. That doesn't mean that it's not important to improve the rushing attack.

 

My offseason FA priorities:

 

1) Center

2) OG

3) CB

4) Maybe a Safety

 

It's important to me to improve it for when we need it, it's just not important to me to do it every game.

 

And having the coaches talk about improving the rushing attack and how important it is to the team is not the same as making it the primary feature of the offense.

 

They've always maintained that's the first (read: primary) option.  I'm glad they want to improve it.  I want them to improve it.  I don't want them to make us a "running team" because I don't think we're as effective as an offense that way.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

I think you should rewatch the game before you tell me to rewatch the game (which I have).

 

To that point, they had 108 yards on the ground, on 33 carries. That's not manhandled. I'm not thrilled with the result, but 3.3 yards/carry against a team that's insistent on running the ball isn't bad. Stopping them for 2 yards or less on 16 of those 33 carries is encouraging. Then they landed a haymaker and everything changed.

don't have to I know what happen 234 yard TOTAL on the ground take away the 70 yarder its called 160 on the ground!! ATROCIOUS we were whipped on the line both OL & DL And somehow stayed close enough to have a shot. When you think of the carries your taking about they get tainted as they had how many TD runs 6 some of which were short yards which lowers the AV. Anyway you slice it manhandled, thats how i saw it!

[Superman]

My offseason FA priorities:

 

1) Center

2) OG

3) CB

4) Maybe a Safety

 

It's important to me to improve it for when we need it, it's just not important to me to do it every game.

 

They've always maintained that's the first (read: primary) option.  I'm glad they want to improve it.  I want them to improve it.  I don't want them to make us a "running team" because I don't think we're as effective as an offense that way.

 

I know they've talked a bunch about the run game. And I see you found the proper quote from Pep using the term "run-first." That's fine. But I really think, if you asked Chuck and Pep and everyone else to point to one game that exemplifies how they want us to play, it would be the Niners game. Everyone remembers that game as us running the ball down their throats all game long, but 11 of the first 14 offensive plays were pass plays. It wasn't until the fourth series of the game that they started really pounding the ball, with five straight run plays. Then the next drive, 7 of the 9 plays were passes.

 

So yeah, I know they keep talking about how they want to run the ball, run the ball, run the ball. But in practice, that doesn't mean they want to run to the exclusion of throwing it. Not if you use that Niners game as a model. I am assuming -- with crossed fingers -- that the staff has learned their lesson about that six week stretch in the middle of the season. 

[Superman]

don't have to I know what happen 234 yard TOTAL on the ground take away the 70 yarder its called 160 on the ground!! ATROCIOUS we were whipped on the line both OL & DL And somehow stayed close enough to have a shot. When you think of the carries your taking about they get tainted as they had how many TD runs 6 some of which were short yards which lowers the AV. Anyway you slice it manhandled, thats how i saw it!

 

That's a "you" problem, sir. 

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

That's a "you" problem, sir. 

Sir I have 0 problem in the words of Andy Reed the game spoke for it self!