As a matter of curiosity, does anyone have any idea If Dawson will work the game from the field or the press box at game time? At WVU he was in the box and Dana was on the field, but Dana called most of the plays didn't he?
Dawson and Game Day
- Thread starter leonpoole
- Start date
He says he has good people he trusts upstairs and he likes to see it the way his QB sees it from the field. And he likes to be face to face wth his offense when the defense is on the field.
I understand wanting to be on the field, but it would seem to be much more easier to read the defense from the upper level. Does Dawson have a man in the booth relaying info to him about the defensive positioning?
probably be Mainord, who was up in the booth radioing down to Brown on the field the last 2 seasons
for a lot of OC's it is much more important to talk face to face with the offense & especially the QB than to have the birds eye view of the all-22
for a lot of OC's it is much more important to talk face to face with the offense & especially the QB than to have the birds eye view of the all-22
He was mostly in the box at WVU because, yes, Dana called most of the plays and so he wanted Dawson in the box to see plays develop. He has said that was the only time he has not been on the field and that is his preference.
I have a preference for the OC in the box, but that usually works best with an offensive-minded head coach. With a defensive-minded coach such as Stoops, I completely understand why they would want Dawson on the field. As long as he has someone in the box he trusts it should work. It's worked okay for Lane Kiffin even though Kiffin's preference is to be in the box.
We have actually discussed this before but he actually didn't call any plays in the traditional sense of the word. He gave Holgorsen options and Holgorsen chose from those about 85% of the time when Holgorsen called the plays. It's just semantics, but it's an important distinction. What we don't know is how many options Dawson gave Holgorsen, at times Dawson has made it seem that he gave Holgorsen 2 or 3 plays to choose from and he would choose one of those. Either way, I don't anticipate him having any problems calling plays at UK.
given that multiple plays can be called out of the same formation and the same play can be called out of multiple formations and the qb can audible out of a play into a different one then it's a wonder that wvu even paid dawson.
There's a lot more to being an OC than simply a playcaller. He was integral in player development and game planning. It's curious why you would think play calling experience is the most important characteristic of an OC. Sure, it's more important on a team where the head coach is a defense guy, but I would argue the other things are more important. But now that you mention it, that reasoning may be why WVU didn't even bother hiring a replacement.
You try so hard and fail so miserably to distinguish calling plays from calling plays. Only a UT fan who likes to spike the conversation with bait on this site would spend this much time trying to convince football people that Dawson did not call plays.
And, tells us the source that says he gave Holgerson 2-3 plays to choose from?
You don't anticipate him having a problem calling plays, because he has done it for the past decade or so.
Defenses like Alabama? 23 points and 365 yards through the air.
Had WVU's defense not given up over 520 yards and tired in the second half, the offense did what it needed to do.
i'm glad he wants to be on the field because that's where an OC should be. Gets to see with his own eyes how the QB is looking. Does he look scared, too excited, things like that. Having him around the offense will enable him to either calm down or pump his guys up.
To me, I think it depends on the kind of offense you run. Old school run to set up the pass, then yeah, up high to see alignments and deep coverage is important. But with ours, quick passes predicated on quick reads, makes sense, to me, to be on the field. Put yourself on the qb level and get a sense of the speed and angles he is seeing.
I'm sure there are examples of this working for both doing the opposite.
I don't anticipate him having trouble calling plays because that's the least important task of an OC, especially in an air raid system where the quarterback frequently checks the plays anyway. Even though he hasn't actually called plays since SFA, I'm sure that he can. First, just because you accuse me of trying to bait people doesn't make it so. I come on this site to discuss football. If I were going to try to bait someone I would do so for something that matters, unlike this where whether he called plays or not (he didn't) has little to no bearing on how well he will do at UK.
Now on to sources: This Dawson interview: My job was this, between every drive when he clicked back on offense I needed to have a plan for him. I would lay out a plan and say, ‘Look, this is the information that we are getting. This is the way we need to attack.' Before every play I would give him a suggestion. I have been around Dana for a long time. There are times he went somewhere else. The percentages of those times were 85% to 10-15%. I would say that 85-90% of the time we were on the exact same page. He needed suggestions because as a head coach he was pulled a bunch of different directions throughout the course of the week or course of the game. My communication with the quarterback after ever series was important and then my communication with the two guys I had working to the right and left of me up in the box, because they were charting the plays and the coverages and what we were doing tendency-wise.
And this interview with Chris Brown (I realized I did pick up the 2-3 language from this interview so take with a grain of salt): There’s a lot of talk, ‘Did Shannon call the plays? Did Dana call the plays?’ I’ll just give you my understanding of how it works. I don’t think it matters. Dana did call the plays, but I don’t think that should hurt Shannon’s (reputation) because the way they did it was — it was very similar to what Dana did when he was Mike Leach’s offensive coordinator but Mike was calling the plays — between every series, Dana would basically ask (his staff) for the two to four plays that they liked and then basically Dana would pick. Then between plays, Shannon would give a suggestion, ‘Let’s run this and here’s why.’
I want him in the booth. The view of the field and defense is completely different and much better up there. Looking at the QB's eyes and reading his emotions can be considered but I think it is much better having the guy calling plays looking down and seeing the alignment and tendencies of the defense. The view from the sideline is the worst in the stadium. Basically half of the field is out of your field of view. If Towles is running off the rails you could always come down to the field and talk to him but I don't think that will happen. Just my two bits.
I would like to see the article that said that Dawson never called a play while at WVA. Never knew his last play call was at South Florida.
I don't think there is going to be a great O-line. I just think it will be better than last year. I also think the D line will struggle. But, I do think there is a potentially explosive receiving corp.
Well pretty much all articles say that he didn't call plays at WVU, if you are defining "calling plays" in the literal sense as I am: the communication from the coaching staff to the quarterback. His last play calling in that traditional sense was at Stephen F. Austin, not South Florida. But, like I have repeatedly said, not calling the plays doesn't mean he isn't capable, it doesn't mean he didn't have a HUGE role in the play calling or in the game planning, or in the player development. It just meant he didn't actually call the plays, though all have acknowledged that he did suggest plays to be called.
In the traditional sense where the OC calls the plays, he calls the plays but the head coach has veto power. After all, he is the head coach and he ALWAYS has veto power. Dawson obviously wanted to be part of that kind of system so that he could build a name for himself. In the system at WVU, Holgorsen was so much a part of his offense that Dawson didn't have much autonomy. He was able to suggest plays, but the actual decision making was left to Holgorsen. Even though they agreed a significant percentage of the time, I don't blame him for wanting the opportunity to control his own offense. I think Dawson is potentially one of the best hires Stoops has made, but time will bear out whether that is true or not.
(1) he called the plays last year
(2) you love to stir the pot over little silly stuff. Probably don't do that on your UT boards.
The interview with Dawson demonstrates that Dawson worked up a recommended plan between series and then provided Holgerson with a call when the series began. Holgerson accepted 85+% of what Shannon presented. Now, if I am a catcher and I call for pitches and the pitcher waives me off 10-15% of the time, there is not one baseball fan in the world with half of a brain that would say I did not call the game.
As far as contention 1 and 2, you can continue to repeat them, but regardless of how many times you repeat them it doesn't make either true.
You went to Chris Brown in an attempt to support your position, because Dawson's own interview did not. LOL
He overwhelming evidence supports both. Why are UT fans afraid?
Actually you don't seem to understand how evidence or truth work. Repeating things over and over again don't make them true. Dawson's interview does not say what you are saying it said. He does not say he called plays. He does not indicate that the final decision was his unless Holgorsen decided to veto. He explicitly states that the final decision was always Holgorsen's, that the QB looked to Holgorsen for the play and that though Holgorsen took his suggestion the majority of the time, about 10-15% of the time, Holgorsen went with something other than Dawson's suggestion.
You seem to be under the mistaken illusion that I am saying this to, in some way, diminish Dawson. I am not. I like him very much and think he has great potential. I don't think his not actually calling the plays diminishes his abilities and if I am right, he will help UK take the next step. I'm not sure why you believe, like several others, that the most important value of an OC is play calling. It's not. His game-planning and player development is far more important.
As to citing Chris Brown, I acknowledged that I had remembered the language fm Chris Brown about 2-3 suggestions and so explicitly stated you should take that with a grain of salt, depending on how much credibility you believe he has. Regardless, I posted the language from Dawson as well which still says he suggested plays rather than called them.
Last edited:
No UK fan would parse this out to this degree. No UK fan would take the following and claim Dawson did not call the game.
"I've been asked that question a number of times," Dawson said. "He was the final (say) in every decision we'd make. My job was this: between every drive, when he clicked back on the offense (on the headset), I needed to have a plan for him. Before every play, I would give him a suggestion. I would say 85-90 percent of the time, we were on the exact same page."
No UK fan would say he hopes Dawson did not call the WVU games because their best year was before Dawson arrived.
This joker pretends to be a UK fan and then acts like the sky is falling because Stoops did not name Towles in the spring. And then he repeatedly parses out the process at WVU to pretend Dawson did not call plays.
This is a process of baiting that tries to stir dissension on opposing fans' web pages. He will fight like hell if you offer even a mild criticism of UT, but the critical comments flow about UK.
Any football fan would try to be correct in their usage of football language. It's not about parsing it out it's about using correct language correctly. And factually speaking I was making the point that it's probably better than Dawson didn't call the plays because factually speaking they were better in the year Dawson wasn't the OC. I'm not being critical in any way of UK. Stoops is, in my opinion, one of the best hires UK has made. It's already clear that he is far superior to Joker and I think he will be the best coach UK has had in my lifetime. I didn't pretend the sky was falling when Towles wasn't named, I said I would have preferred a QB be named but I understand the rationale. Why do you assume that in order to be a UK fan that you can't look at things objectively? I see no reason to be a homer to the extent that I can't rationally discuss football.
You don't like me because I very openly stated that I was also a UT fan. I never attempted to hide that fact. But, even if you don't believe that I am a fan of UK (and that is your prerogative), I have tried to be respectful of everyone. It's not true, but you have your right to believe whatever. Besides, Grumpy is one of the best posters on the board and he is a Georgia fan. I'm sure some don't like him because he is a Georgia fan, but the board would be much poorer without his participation. My only goal has been to contribute to the discussion, not to bait people as you have repeatedly contended. Just because we disagree or because I prefer actual facts, hardly means I'm trying to bait people.
Last edited:
I have coached with OC's that have done both. Some like to be on the sideline because they have a better feel for the game. Not sure there is a right way or wrong way. If they call from the sidelines they will have 2-3 sets of eyes up top. Usually one will be on the front, one on the backers, and the 3rd on the secondary. Even when they are calling from the box they typically have 2 coaches with them looking at the coverages. If your OC is also the QB coach they usually call from the sideline. You are correct the view up top is a lot better than on the sidelines, you are just separated from the emotions of the game.
![[pfftt]](https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/891/1682173.gif "Pfffttt [pfftt]")
Your openness about UT is of no concern to me, until I see you nitpick the crap out of UK and defend every little matter for UT. Just be what you are, stop pretending you are something else just so that you can be critical. Because a UT fan who comes to a UK board to complain about naming QBs and splitting hairs about game calling appears to have a motivation that is distinct from being a UK fan.
I do not see Grumpy pretending to be a UK fan and then getting into the weeds about little crap. If he was, I would have the same issue with him.
Well I'm not on a UT board but if I saw UT fans trying to diminish how far UK has come I would set them straight. And even on this board I have defended Stoops several times against a few negative people. I don't start threads about "nitpicky" things, but I have opinions about UK football, such as: naming a starting QB as soon as possible would be best for the program and that Offensive Coordinators are more than simply play callers.
For someone like you, it would have been better had I never been honest about being a fan of both teams because it colors the way you see everything I post. You see motive where there is none. If I wasn't a fan of UK and if I didn't want to see UK succeed, I wouldn't be here. So, I can't concern myself with someone like you. I've been honest from the beginning and I will continue to be.
That would be difficult, I posted it in one of my very first posts on the site.
Similar threads
