Do we really need Johnson on the field?

[Katmendo]

The question got posed in the game thread, and I thought it merited some discussion.

My own opinion is that, given the obvious inability to consistently throw the ball, the staff has made a commitment to the running game, generally, and the Wildcat specifically.
For some really obscure reason, the staff have elected to keep Johnson on the field during this transition to the wildcat formation. But, I feel like that the negatives of doing so outweigh the positives.
1st: Why keep him on the field? I can see two reasons for doing so, but neither is particularly reasonable.
-1: If you go hurry-up, you prevent the defense from being allowed time (by rule) to make substitutions on the play. This seems like good strategy, but for the fact that UK doesn't do a hurry-up offense. Think about it. We just don't. They get to the line, call a few things out, then look at the sidelines, then run a play. Even when they don't look at the sidelines, they STILL don't actually run a hurry-up. So,... no reason.
-2: It keeps him on the field so you have the threat of a trick pass play, or a switch to a conventional passing formation, moving him back behind the center. Sounds like good strategy, again, but.... why exactly are you running so much Wildcat? Oh, yeah, that's right. It's because your starting quarterback can't throw an accurate pass from the LOS to 25 yards out. So, again, it's like bluffing in poker with your cards facing outward. You're trying to threaten that you MIGHT just pass it, and the other team already knows that even YOU know you can't throw the ball. So, IMO, just no reason.

2nd: Why replace him on the field?
-1: Quite simply, he becomes a hole on the offensive production when he's on the field. He's terribly poor at throwing the ball, he's not very good at running the ball (despite puzzling and rather unsupported credit to his 'athleticism'), he's simply not a functional blocker, and he's not a receiver. In other words, it's a 10 on 11 play in almost every respect. You're having success, but how much of that can attribute to him being on the field. IMO, very, very, little.
-2: You could put another lineman, tight end, or receiver out there, and get someone more capable of contributing to the play. A dedicated blocker, a blocker who can catch, or an athlete that can run and catch, maybe making for reverse opportunities.

Johnson's stats just don't support him being on the field, IMO.
He's thrown 166 passes, completed 93, with 4 INTs, and 7 TDs.

He rated as the 12 quarterback in productivity in the SEC, and the numbers are not even respectable.

As far as his much ballyhooed "Athleticism", he's rushed 63 times (some of which are sacks credited as rushes) has gained 242 yards, and lost 129, an average of 1.1 YPC, and has one touchdown. *1*. In fact, he's last in the SEC in rushing. DEAD LAST. Chad Kelley of Ole Miss is a better rusher. You know, the guy who is a passing QB? Who doesn't get credited for his "athleticism?"

Even if you take away the lost yardage, he's only average 3.8 yards per carry. Folks, those about fullback number with regards to production.

Then there's this issue, Turnovers. Johnson has fumbled the ball *9* times and lost 5. He's gotten 4 interceptions (Though the one last night should be credited to Badet).
8 touchdowns and 9 turnovers? Call it 8 due to the Badet failure. 8 TD vs 8 TO? Pretty hard to justify, IMO.

I'm not saying he shouldn't play, because he's the only QB we are going to use, but if you're going to go to and focus on a dedicated running game, and particularly the wildcat, it makes more sense to get a more capable performer on the field, regardless of whether it;s run, catch, or block.

Thoughts?

[40bill]

I believe he is the best chance UK has. After Barker went down, I don't think there is any way Hinshaw and Gran would NOT have asked Mark Stoops to pull Hoaks red shirt if he was remotely ready to play. They are trying to build a program as well as make it to a bowl. There is no evidence that Barker will be able to return OR if he does will be granted a second ( medical this time) redshirt year.

[Katmendo]

To clarify, my question is the necessity of Johnson during these running plays. If we're going to run the wildcat, and we are, and he's not going to be involved in the play, and he's not, then why not just commit to what the other team knows you're going to do, and bring in someone who can contribute to the play?
You can still put Johnson back in when you might want to pass, or want to run it from a play action or passing set, but there's no reason to have him step out to a wide receiver position during the wildcat. He makes one less receiver, rusher, and blocker.

[SBCatMan]

First, as I mentioned a week ago, we are becoming overly dependent up on the wildcat. Situationally, or as a change-of-pace, it can be, and has been, extremely effective. Last night, its overuse cost a game. Secondly, we have used Johnson to throw off the wildcat (vs MSU for a TD) and on the double-reverse last night. Eventually, you HAVE to give the defense something else to think about. Good defenses -- such as Georgia's -- will eventually adapt. Unfortunately for us, they adapted at the most inopportune time.

[George]

First, as I mentioned a week ago, we are becoming overly dependent up on the wildcat. Situationally, or as a change-of-pace, it can be, and has been, extremely effective. Last night, its overuse cost a game. Secondly, we have used Johnson to throw off the wildcat (vs MSU for a TD) and on the double-reverse last night. Eventually, you HAVE to give the defense something else to think about. Good defenses -- such as Georgia's -- will eventually adapt. Unfortunately for us, they adapted at the most inopportune time.

My thoughts exactly while watching last night's game. Furthermore, we don't have much (if any) variation in play calling out of the Wildcat. I thought the whole reason for running the formation was to confuse and surprise; not much of a surprise to a defense when we direct snap it to Snell for the fifth time in a row.

[Blue Heaven]

My thoughts exactly while watching last night's game. Furthermore, we don't have much (if any) variation in play calling out of the Wildcat. I thought the whole reason for running the formation was to confuse and surprise; not much of a surprise to a defense when we direct snap it to Snell for the fifth time in a row.

But they can't stop it. Trust me, I HATE the wildcat. Nothing says "we are inept at passing" then that formation. When the defense and the whole world knows what you are going to do and you still can't stop it? Hey, if it ain't broke don't fix it. There is a reason we run it and that says a ton about the QB's we have on the team. Saying all that, I hope Johnson is not the starter next season. If we are to take the next step, then we need a qb to keep the defenses honest. We have good WR's but they can't be used correctly. Listening to the KSR postgame last night, someone said Stoops was hollering at Gran to stop the wildcat and pass the ball. I feel his pain a bit.

[Westtncat]

After Georgia called a timeout they stopped it. They forced us to kick a field goal and won the game. I not convinced that even a touchdown would have won that game seeing the ease in which they drove the ball down field on the next drive but it would have been nice to see.

[Owllycat]

I think all players are good and play to their ability. You play as a team together not as an individual so unless a player is playing very bad then yes you need every player you have. Face it much as I would love to see the Cats win every match some teams are just better than us in certain areas. So there is no point to go pick out certain players or coaches and say thats why the Cats lost this one or that one.

[George]

But they can't stop it. Trust me, I HATE the wildcat. Nothing says "we are inept at passing" then that formation. When the defense and the whole world knows what you are going to do and you still can't stop it? Hey, if it ain't broke don't fix it. There is a reason we run it and that says a ton about the QB's we have on the team. Saying all that, I hope Johnson is not the starter next season. If we are to take the next step, then we need a qb to keep the defenses honest. We have good WR's but they can't be used correctly. Listening to the KSR postgame last night, someone said Stoops was hollering at Gran to stop the wildcat and pass the ball. I feel his pain a bit.

If they couldn't stop it, how'd we not score a TD on that drive?

[SBCatMan]

On the last series, UGA had to defend only nine yards of turf. Not only did they know WHO would run the ball, they knew WHERE he would run it. Every run was off right guard. Snell is very, very good Make no mistake about that. But, he seemed to be gassed, and every run was to the right interior of our offensive line. First down? OK. But, when that failed to gain, having the ball snapped to Johnson would at least make Georgia THINK about maybe, just maybe, something else was coming.

Also, I think when we tied it with the FG, half the house knew we were doomed. We were either going to lose or go to OT. Conversely, UGA had no pressure. They knew they were either going to win or go to OT. And, they only needed a FG to do it. Additionally, i think the FG took some of the life out of our defense, because they knew as much. OTOH, if UGA is behind by four and KNOW they need a TD to win and realize that failure to do so means a loss, well, I just think the dynamic of that final drive is totally different. So much so, that I think if we had 4th and 2, I may have gone against the book and went for the TD. Worse case scenario puts UGA at their own 2 and we still have two Time Outs. But, the second down play virtually forced a pass on third -- a virtually sure-failure fade route, which left us no rational option other than to kick the FG.

[Lighthouse]

After Georgia called a timeout they stopped it. They forced us to kick a field goal and won the game. I not convinced that even a touchdown would have won that game seeing the ease in which they drove the ball down field on the next drive but it would have been nice to see.

Your so right, and the change they made worked. Their DT's and DE's were spaced about 4-5 feet apart before the TO. When they lined up after, the 4 down linemen were much closer together and therefore more difficult to block. We didn't adjust.

[Blue Heaven]

If they couldn't stop it, how'd we not score a TD on that drive?

Because we drew up a play that never works on any level. Watched the SEC Now guys when I got back last night and they said the same thing. I would like to have seen a well executed pick/rub play for the passing score. Anything but a fade. And to Baker of all people. If we are gonna run that play, why not put Ross in there? Or Bone? HUGE targets. How about Benny throwing a pass out of the wildcat? How about any play but a fade.

[Matt Dillon]

Anyone that thinks the wildcat, or any play for that matter, can't be stopped is kidding themselves. If we rely as heavily on the wildcat Sat., as we have been, we'll be lucky to get two touchdowns from it.

[George]

Because we drew up a play that never works on any level. Watched the SEC Now guys when I got back last night and they said the same thing. I would like to have seen a well executed pick/rub play for the passing score. Anything but a fade. And to Baker of all people. If we are gonna run that play, why not put Ross in there? Or Bone? HUGE targets. How about Benny throwing a pass out of the wildcat? How about any play but a fade.

Point being, we went to another play (the fade) because UGA stopped Snell and the Wildcat. The play you're talking about wouldn't have been necessary if the Wildcat were unstoppable, as you previously stated.

[Lighthouse]

Something that has been bothering me. We saw clearly CS saying to Cran, something like we need to score, throw it. UGA had that play covered, and I wonder if they saw the same thing we did. CS needs to be more discrete in that area.