I do think that some issues are bound to come when you have guys trying to learn a new system every year. I also don’t doubt from all the years working with Rhule that Satterfield knows the playbook inside and out. That said just knowing the play designs doesn’t mean that you know when or why they would work.
I do have two areas of concern with Satterfield that became obvious as the season went along:
1) Personnel decisions seemed odd. How do we go games without seeing White while he was leading the team in rushing? If Harris wasn’t healthy why keep running him out there as a number 1 until he’s ready to carry that load? When Brooks disappeared why were we hung up on while spot a guy is designated for? Shouldn’t your key be getting the best players on the field?
2) Play calling. I get that it is a new system but you need to understand what your guys are capable of doing. If you are trying to install a complex system and the guys are struggling then simplify things until they can execute. Don’t put people in a position to fail just because you want something to work.
In the end though nothing in Satterfield’s history says he can be successful. He went from OC/QB coach to OC/RB coach to failed head coach to TE coach to assistant oline coach. He’s been on a pretty steady decline in his career path which isn’t typical for a guy who can turn things around and create success.
Good Points:
1. I know
all of the RBs were injured at one point. It was an obscure reference made during the middle of the season during a press conference. Was it coachspeak? Was it hurt v. injured? Was he covering? Regardless, he said he wanted to go with 2 RBs during the preseason and there was still way too much RB rotation. You can't worry about transfers. Play your best two and the other two can sit and wait for injury/graduation/inconsistency or play another position (slot?).
2. I agree with you. I understand the thought process in a long run to see who can and cannot run the offense and let the numbers work out. As long as you don't lost the team, I can understand it. However, it's hard for the fans to see and I'm not sure this point is accurate. They'll never tell us.
3. After the failed head coach stint, I can understand just taking a job with someone you are comfortable with and then the Asst OL coach is an NFL job so I don't really see that as a failure. I know people having been running around with his yardage numbers at Temple but if you looked deep into the stats and found some offensive efficiency stats, I think you'll see his yards per play were pretty good and they did a lot of taking the air out of the ball when they were up (a Ruhle thing) so the yardage stat isn't very useful unless you don't like the system as a whole, which is a fair argument.
4. I also don't know about his as someone "who can turn things around and create success." He seem like he knows what he's doing plan/scheme-wise but his personality doesn't seem to mesh with the other offensive coaches other than the OL. I also think he panicked during the East Carolina and Missouri games and there was something off during the Clemson game -- Brown would not throw any of the crossing routes (maybe he can't see linebacker if teams constantly zone blitz) and Noland would only throw to Vann (they didn't start moving until they sat Vann and Noland had no choice to throw it elsewhere). In the run game, no stretch plays, no jet sweeps, no wildcat. I don't know if any of these would work but you can build off of it or at least give the defense something to worry about sideline-to-sideline. I'm glad they practiced the White RB throw all week but that was a one-time shot and wasn't very convincing (ran it twice this year and one was almost a game-changing fumble).
In the end, was Satterfield coming here a favor? A transition? A gamble? I have no idea. The Bobo debacle really messed some stuff up. For whatever reason, I just got the feeling here was here for a one-year gig before someone else opened up and he would go back to the NFL after the season. We'll see.
