I'm sorry. You're not going to like that hire at all. We couldn't wait to get him out of Louisville. Despite what numbers will tell you, he held Bridgewater back. He's basically the Todd Grantham of OCs.
Well Teddy Bridgewater loved him so I think the personal relationships will help but he doesn't light up the scoreboard. But you never know maybe at Pitt he re-finds himself.??
He is a great guy and will run whatever offense the head coach wants him to run. Very knowledgeable and the QBs will love him. I see Narg in the same vein as Strong.
The D will win the game. Don't expect a lot of points.
Yes, Shawn Watson will do whatever his head coach tells him to do. Under Charlie Strong, that was basically, don't put the defense in tough situations. So, expect a conservative approach, which can work really well.
The very last game that Strong was at U of L -- the Russell Athletic Bowl against Miami -- when Strong probably knew that he was going to jump to the Texas gig, and Teddy knew he was going to jump to the NFL -- U of L fans saw what could have been offensively. The O opened up, and Teddy threw the ball all over the place, and we had our way with Miami.
That glimpse of fire power, and what could have been, put a sour taste in the mouths of many Card fans.
I think that Shawn will work well with Narduzzi at Pitt, and the personnel that you have recruited (talented running backs, and a pro style type offense) will work well with him too.
So ... in my opinion it's a good hire. But if you are expecting an opened up offense, you will be disappointed.
Has OC experience at Colorado, UL and UT. Was coaching QBs at Indiana. Don't know what to think yet.
Yeah, I don't know what to think either. Strong wanted a ball control offense & so that's what Watson ran here. He was a midseason replacement (promotion) in his first year at OC here. Bridgewater seemed to love him. He's good with QB's & a capable play caller. Don't know if Strong was holding him back in his play calling or if he's naturally that conservative. It was a boring offense but it did help the defense & won games. They would tend to get overly conservative with a lead & that costed us a few games.
(This post was last modified: 02-03-2017 12:58 PM by Lenvillecards.)
(02-03-2017 11:40 AM)krux Wrote: I'm sorry. You're not going to like that hire at all. We couldn't wait to get him out of Louisville. Despite what numbers will tell you, he held Bridgewater back. He's basically the Todd Grantham of OCs.
I disagree. Charlie Strong held Watson back because he wanted to run the ball and control the clock. I think Watson will be a good hire for Pitt, as long as he can fully control the offense.
(02-03-2017 05:31 PM)krux Wrote: He was also the first assistant Strong dumped at Texas, no?
Texas boosters, tired of watching Sumlin at A&M and Briles at Baylor, with explosive offenses, probably pushed that more than Charlie. So I wouldn't read into that too much.
Coach Watson is a quarterback whisperer. Great hire for Pitt. If your coach can do a better job of staying out of his way than Coach Strong you folks will have a great offense.
I agree that Strong held Watson back at UL. In the few games where it wasn't the insistent "run run pass to salvage" then UL did good. Unfortunately STrong is bull headed and determined that defense should be all matters and win. When we would get down late in the game then he would turn Watson and Bridgewater lose to try to save the game -- and many times they did. Bridgewater could have been a much better and more accomplished QB under a coach who cared about offense instead of someone as stubborn as Strong.
(02-03-2017 11:40 AM)krux Wrote: I'm sorry. You're not going to like that hire at all. We couldn't wait to get him out of Louisville. Despite what numbers will tell you, he held Bridgewater back. He's basically the Todd Grantham of OCs.
I blame Strong for holding the offence back. He was afraid to make waves by consistently scoring on opponents with the talent level We had. Strong lost the UCF game by trying to protect the 1st half lead instead of padding it in the 2nd half. One reason He is out at Texas. Watson has the knowledge to be good at Pitt. Time will tell.
I was not enthused about this hire after briefly looking over Watson's resume. Still, I tend to give Narduzzi the benefit of the doubt because he has shown me that he can hire an OC already (success of Canada).
If the consensus is that Watson is a good OC but has been handcuffed by his HC, I don't think you'll see that at Pitt. Under Narduzzi, Pitt has run two completely different offenses and I don't think anybody can argue that Canada's creativity was hampered by the HC.
If you listen to Narduzzi's press conferences, as well, he will tell you that he prefers a smashmouth rushing attack on offense but he also consistently mentions that he wants to be the CEO of the team and he wants his coordinators to be head coaches of their respective units. With the major changes we saw from Chaney to Canada, I really believe he means it.
(02-06-2017 11:08 PM)ndlutz Wrote: I was not enthused about this hire after briefly looking over Watson's resume. Still, I tend to give Narduzzi the benefit of the doubt because he has shown me that he can hire an OC already (success of Canada).
If the consensus is that Watson is a good OC but has been handcuffed by his HC, I don't think you'll see that at Pitt. Under Narduzzi, Pitt has run two completely different offenses and I don't think anybody can argue that Canada's creativity was hampered by the HC.
If you listen to Narduzzi's press conferences, as well, he will tell you that he prefers a smashmouth rushing attack on offense but he also consistently mentions that he wants to be the CEO of the team and he wants his coordinators to be head coaches of their respective units. With the major changes we saw from Chaney to Canada, I really believe he means it.
That's my impression as an outsider also. Just one question: when will Narduzzi get the DEFENSE cranked up?
(02-06-2017 11:08 PM)ndlutz Wrote: I was not enthused about this hire after briefly looking over Watson's resume. Still, I tend to give Narduzzi the benefit of the doubt because he has shown me that he can hire an OC already (success of Canada).
If the consensus is that Watson is a good OC but has been handcuffed by his HC, I don't think you'll see that at Pitt. Under Narduzzi, Pitt has run two completely different offenses and I don't think anybody can argue that Canada's creativity was hampered by the HC.
If you listen to Narduzzi's press conferences, as well, he will tell you that he prefers a smashmouth rushing attack on offense but he also consistently mentions that he wants to be the CEO of the team and he wants his coordinators to be head coaches of their respective units. With the major changes we saw from Chaney to Canada, I really believe he means it.
What we do know about Watson is that he did a great job developing Bridgewater. When Watson took over as OC he was a step up from the other guy but he was horrible so that's not really saying much. We don't know if Strong was holding him back or if it's him but when Louisville did open it up they looked good. Overall I would say that he's no worse than average at play calling but great at developing QB's.