After last year's offensive debacle, Tanner Lee has come under some criticism and Eric Price has been tarred and feathered by Tulane fans.
The concerns are legitimate, and I'm certainly not guaranteeing a turnaround, but in the case of Lee, I still expect a dramatic turnaround and in the case of Price I'm not convinced he is the problem with the offense.
The main reason I'm more positive about Lee than others and less certain of Price's incapability than others comes from talking to them. Lee gets it. He's one of the sharpest guys I've covered and appears to have the perfect demeanor (combination of confidence, team-first attitude and analytical nature) to be a good college QB. I also saw him look really good in the preseason last year and in the Tulsa game up until his final throw, from which point he regressed for the rest of the season (Houston game excepted).
I also enjoy talking to Price. He comes across better than Dan Mullen did when he was Florida offensive coordinator (I'm still surprised by his success at Mississippi State) and also appears to get it. The difference, of course, is Price's long track record, which is quite ugly since he left UTEP and his father after the 2007 season. I understand the skepticism, and if Tulane does not improve dramatically on offense this year, the writing will be on the wall. The product on the field has been bad in all three of his years at Tulane.
Here are the statistics for Price's offenses in his nine years as a college offensive coordinator:
1) UTEP 2004: The Miners were 42nd in total offense (393.6), 11th in scoring (35.8) and 26th in pass efficiency.
Comment: UTEP went 8-4. The scoring average was that high because the Miners forced 30 turnovers.
2) UTEP 2005: The Miners were 31st in total offense (422.7), 35th in scoring (31.8) and 33rd in pass efficiency.
Comment: UTEP went 8-4 and was productive again on offense. Price clearly was comfortable working with his dad.
3) UTEP 2006: The Miners were 39th in total offense (370.4), 38th in scoring (27.3) and 18th in pass efficiency.
Comment: UTEP went 5-7, but the offense did not drop off dramatically, still ranking in the top 40.
4) UTEP 2007: The Miners were 36th in total offense (422.8), 26th in scoring (35.6) and 31th in pass efficiency.
Comment: Despite going 4-8, the offense was quite good, posting highs for yards in Price's four years and almost posting a high for points.
After leaving to coach in the NFL with Kansas City for a year, Price's last five years in college have been abysmal statistically.
5) 2010 Memphis: 117th in total offense (285.0), 119th in scoring (14.4) and 86th in pass efficiency.
Comment: Hampered by a horrendous head coach and questionable talent, Price did nothing to help the Tigers, who finished 1-11 and ranked fourth-to-last in yards and 2nd to last in scoring. Not good.
6) 2011 Memphis: 116th in total offense (274.2), 115th in scoring (16.2), 109th in pass efficiency.
Comment: Ugh. Really no improvement whatsoever on a 2-10 team, with Larry Porter and his entire staff being shown the door after two years.
7) 2012 Tulane: 109th in total offense, (319.5), 97th in scoring (21.4), 95th in pass efficiency.
Comment: Tulane had a few prolific scoring games with Ryan Griffin winging the ball around the field. Given one of the worst offensive lines ever, I can't fault Price for those numbers.
8) 2013 Tulane: 115th in total offense (311.8), 90th in scoring (24.8), 108th in pass efficiency.
Comment: With an excellent defense helping it out, the offense should have been significantly better and Tulane could have won 10 games instead of 7. The OL remained a huge issue, and Montana's shoulder injury hurt, too.
9) 2014 Tulane: 107th in total offense (346.8), 121st in scoring (16.0), 122nd in passing efficiency.
Comment: It was bad, just bad. With good running backs and a somewhat functional offensive line, Tulane would have been better with even a semblance of a passing game. Didn't happen. A redshirt freshman QB and a gaggle of true freshman receivers never were on the same page, and Lee regressed rather than improved during the year.
So in his last five years as a coordinator, Price's teams have finished 107th or worse in yards, 90th or worse in scoring and 86th or worse in pass efficiency. That's incredible, so I understand the intense frustration.
But I still think he can work out at Tulane, with this year a make-or-break season. No one could have been successful with the offensive line he had in 2012. The offense was too conservative in 2013 (CJ admits he had a hand in that, trying to win with defense) but also was hampered by awful QB play after Montana, who was not that good to begin with, hurt his shoulder. Last year there were too many young players at wide receiver, making Lee's first year as a starter difficult.
Price's offenses put up good numbers at UTEP. Yes, he was working for his father, who had a good offensive mind. Yes, the game has changed, and Tulane's unwillingness to incorporate modern spread elements has drawn plenty of criticism. Still, with the running backs he has to work with and the offensive line almost certainly better than in his first three years and Lee entering his second year as a starter, the tools to succeed are there.
He did pretty well at UTEP (not great, but good) when he had the tools to succeed. And again, he simply comes across much better than, say, Dan Dodd.
I'm not saying Tulane definitely will improve dramatically on offense this year, but I think it's possible. We'll see.
The concerns are legitimate, and I'm certainly not guaranteeing a turnaround, but in the case of Lee, I still expect a dramatic turnaround and in the case of Price I'm not convinced he is the problem with the offense.
The main reason I'm more positive about Lee than others and less certain of Price's incapability than others comes from talking to them. Lee gets it. He's one of the sharpest guys I've covered and appears to have the perfect demeanor (combination of confidence, team-first attitude and analytical nature) to be a good college QB. I also saw him look really good in the preseason last year and in the Tulsa game up until his final throw, from which point he regressed for the rest of the season (Houston game excepted).
I also enjoy talking to Price. He comes across better than Dan Mullen did when he was Florida offensive coordinator (I'm still surprised by his success at Mississippi State) and also appears to get it. The difference, of course, is Price's long track record, which is quite ugly since he left UTEP and his father after the 2007 season. I understand the skepticism, and if Tulane does not improve dramatically on offense this year, the writing will be on the wall. The product on the field has been bad in all three of his years at Tulane.
Here are the statistics for Price's offenses in his nine years as a college offensive coordinator:
1) UTEP 2004: The Miners were 42nd in total offense (393.6), 11th in scoring (35.8) and 26th in pass efficiency.
Comment: UTEP went 8-4. The scoring average was that high because the Miners forced 30 turnovers.
2) UTEP 2005: The Miners were 31st in total offense (422.7), 35th in scoring (31.8) and 33rd in pass efficiency.
Comment: UTEP went 8-4 and was productive again on offense. Price clearly was comfortable working with his dad.
3) UTEP 2006: The Miners were 39th in total offense (370.4), 38th in scoring (27.3) and 18th in pass efficiency.
Comment: UTEP went 5-7, but the offense did not drop off dramatically, still ranking in the top 40.
4) UTEP 2007: The Miners were 36th in total offense (422.8), 26th in scoring (35.6) and 31th in pass efficiency.
Comment: Despite going 4-8, the offense was quite good, posting highs for yards in Price's four years and almost posting a high for points.
After leaving to coach in the NFL with Kansas City for a year, Price's last five years in college have been abysmal statistically.
5) 2010 Memphis: 117th in total offense (285.0), 119th in scoring (14.4) and 86th in pass efficiency.
Comment: Hampered by a horrendous head coach and questionable talent, Price did nothing to help the Tigers, who finished 1-11 and ranked fourth-to-last in yards and 2nd to last in scoring. Not good.
6) 2011 Memphis: 116th in total offense (274.2), 115th in scoring (16.2), 109th in pass efficiency.
Comment: Ugh. Really no improvement whatsoever on a 2-10 team, with Larry Porter and his entire staff being shown the door after two years.
7) 2012 Tulane: 109th in total offense, (319.5), 97th in scoring (21.4), 95th in pass efficiency.
Comment: Tulane had a few prolific scoring games with Ryan Griffin winging the ball around the field. Given one of the worst offensive lines ever, I can't fault Price for those numbers.
8) 2013 Tulane: 115th in total offense (311.8), 90th in scoring (24.8), 108th in pass efficiency.
Comment: With an excellent defense helping it out, the offense should have been significantly better and Tulane could have won 10 games instead of 7. The OL remained a huge issue, and Montana's shoulder injury hurt, too.
9) 2014 Tulane: 107th in total offense (346.8), 121st in scoring (16.0), 122nd in passing efficiency.
Comment: It was bad, just bad. With good running backs and a somewhat functional offensive line, Tulane would have been better with even a semblance of a passing game. Didn't happen. A redshirt freshman QB and a gaggle of true freshman receivers never were on the same page, and Lee regressed rather than improved during the year.
So in his last five years as a coordinator, Price's teams have finished 107th or worse in yards, 90th or worse in scoring and 86th or worse in pass efficiency. That's incredible, so I understand the intense frustration.
But I still think he can work out at Tulane, with this year a make-or-break season. No one could have been successful with the offensive line he had in 2012. The offense was too conservative in 2013 (CJ admits he had a hand in that, trying to win with defense) but also was hampered by awful QB play after Montana, who was not that good to begin with, hurt his shoulder. Last year there were too many young players at wide receiver, making Lee's first year as a starter difficult.
Price's offenses put up good numbers at UTEP. Yes, he was working for his father, who had a good offensive mind. Yes, the game has changed, and Tulane's unwillingness to incorporate modern spread elements has drawn plenty of criticism. Still, with the running backs he has to work with and the offensive line almost certainly better than in his first three years and Lee entering his second year as a starter, the tools to succeed are there.
He did pretty well at UTEP (not great, but good) when he had the tools to succeed. And again, he simply comes across much better than, say, Dan Dodd.
I'm not saying Tulane definitely will improve dramatically on offense this year, but I think it's possible. We'll see.
