Picture Pages: All It Takes Is One Guy
SITE NOTE: as is traditional during a bye week, the UFRs will be delayed a day, allowing us to ruminate in some more detail on a couple more plays that seem to be representative of larger trends.
Today in Michigan's running issues: an example of how all it takes is one breakdown for an otherwise promising play to end in the backfield. Offense and defense are opposite creatures in this regard. On defense, if you make a mistake it may or may not be punished, because someone can beat a guy and clean up for you, or the offense may not see the open receiver or cutback lane. On offense, an error is going to leave someone free and he will end your play more often than not.
A lot of Michigan's struggles so far have been one-guy breakdowns. This sounds like a promising, easy fix, but it's an unfriendly math problem. When you've got seven guys trying to execute, even if everyone has a 90% hit rate 0.9^7 is a 52% shot at someone not executing. At 95%—each guy doing their job 19 of 20 times—you still have a 30% failure rate.
That's obviously oversimplified; there are different mistakes that can make the difference between an unsuccessful run of three yards and an unsuccessful one of negative two yards. But I've been saying things like "it's just one block away from a big play" for a while now without actually seeing a lot of improvement in that category, and the previous paragraph is one of the reasons why.
Our exemplar is a zone stretch midway through the third quarter. It's first and ten after Drew Dileo extended an out route into the short seam and Gardner hit him. Michigan's in the I; UConn responds with a 3-4 look that has an extra guy hanging off the tight end side on the hash.
UConn did a lot of blitzing from the outside in this game, and this will be no exception. They'll shoot the guy on the hash upfield to be the force player and slant the other two inside, way inside in the OLB's case:
On the snap, nothing much is revealed as no one's made contact yet except Miller, who's underneath the nose tackle already:
That nose tackle is going to end up a long way downfield. I know we're all trying to take Miller's job, but he made a couple of nice blocks on these plays in the second half.
In the above shot, you can see the first steps of the defenders highlighted in the arrow picture coming inside. a half step later Michigan has both adjusted excellently and not adjusted excellently:
Both Glasgow and Lewan have adjusted their flight paths to intersect with the slanting defenders and have successfully made contact that will allow them to shove them past the play and open up a huge hole on the outside of the line, but Joe Kerridge is now trying to hit a gap that is not open.
When he does, he gets whacked.
Now off balance and a gap away from the actual hole, he's unable to block anyone. That's the one guy. When Michigan does this on defense I mention they got a two-for-one and usually good things happen afterwards.
Here bad things happen because Yawin Smallwood is now hanging out in the hole unblocked.
Fitz compounds matters by seeing this, considering a bounce, and then deciding against it, which gives up a couple yards.
Second and twelve blues.
Video
Slow:
Items Of Interest
Well, poop. Michigan blocks this really well on the line, getting both slanters sealed inside and driving the nose tackle back into a linebacker. But once Kerridge gets picked off, this play has a maximum reasonable expectation of about one yard. It only takes one error.
This would take some pretty fast recognition to fix. A lot of zone teams either eschew lead backs or place them in positions such that they, too, have a long path to the hole (think about "superbacks" in spread offenses that start lined up next to the QB). Kerridge is lined up to the playside about three yards in front of Toussaint and his first steps are upfield as he tries to build momentum for a bone-rattling LB block. Toussaint, in contrast, kind of waits and runs lateral to the LOS for a bit, so he has time to see the slant develop and find the hole that is unfortunately filled with one Yawin Smallwood.
Kerridge doesn't have that time. If he's going to make that read presnap he's probably guessing that the OLB is going to attack the gap outside of Lewan, and when that turns out to be wrong he's already committed. I'm not sure he can be any other way when he's lined up so close to the point of attack.
If you're going to do this it almost seems like you'd have to consider Kerridge another lineman and that Lewan should release downfield into Smallwood once the OLB crosses his face, but holy hell is that complicated. Michigan should be trying to make everything as dead simple as possible so they can have uninspiring runs that do pick up some yards.*
So this is a rock paper scissors minus. I don't think Kerridge has time to change his gap, and that gap gets filled by a slant. Even if Kerridge 1) has the option to pick his hole, 2) made a presnap read of the blitzer, and 3) assumed the OLB would slant inside, the OLB is outside of Williams so a one-gap slant takes him outside of Lewan. This puts Kerridge in the right hole. When the OLB goes two gaps over that's when the problems happen.
Toussaint bounce attempt again. Like that Nix play discussed earlier, here Toussaint has grim prospects that he makes a little grimmer by trying to escape. Despite all your rage, Fitz, you're still just a rat in a cage. Here it seems like he has been told that he needs to go N/S and remembers that after his natural inclination. Or he just thinks he can't get outside Williams. Whichever.
It is not an easy decision to bench Jack Miller. The entire world has already benched the guy for the Minnesota game; I'm 50-50 on that. I'm frustrated with him sometimes as well, but here's another loss on which the offensive line appears to be working just fine. He got dumped into the backfield once earlier in this game and struggled in a couple of pass protections (a couple of other pressures that came up the middle were not on him), but I wouldn't be surprised if Michigan soldiers on with their current five guys. Even if they don't, how long is Chris Bryant going to be able to stay on the field?
Also, folks speculating that Michigan might move Michael Schofield back to guard and insert Braden or Magnuson should stop. Miller is not bad enough that switching three spots on the OL and sending a good right tackle back to guard so you can insert a freshman is anywhere near an upgrade. That's a midseason switch worthy of a Rodriguez defense.
*[This is iso's role in the world. It is the DURRR SMASH of run plays, requiring almost nothing other than brute strength and rarely picking up more than three yards, but rarely losing any.]
September 25th, 2013 at 1:52 PM ^
and maybe he's covering the wr on Schofield's side but if not, why wouldn't you audible into a quick pass to that wr? A quick pass to him so that he's moving a bit to the outside and he's one on one with a db.
September 25th, 2013 at 1:54 PM ^
That slant doomed Kerridge and I don't think there's anything you can do about it. RPS to UConn by slanting that guy the way they did. It would be impossible for Kerridge to re-route himself OUTSIDE Lewan. One possible solution is to have Kerridge line up in split backs, even with Touissant. Perhaps then he would have enough time to read the DLline play and change his track to OUTSIDE the slanting DL.
That said, TO ME, the obvious answer here is to audible at the line and throw a quick pass to Gallon out to the right. We have to start softening up these D Fronts. Come on Al. Everyone in football is using the quick pass to the WR as a de facto sweep.
September 25th, 2013 at 2:02 PM ^
The problem is that Kerridge would have to re-route himself because of his path. I do not know how the Michigan coaches are teaching this. But the way I know OZ is the fullback as the same path and same read as the back. Which could be the inside leg of the TE or the outside leg of the tackle. The slant should not have doomed him. He doomed himself in my opinion. But again if the coaches told him that's his guy and he's not reading it then yes there was nothing he could do.
September 25th, 2013 at 2:29 PM ^
We don't know how it's being coached, but Kerridge's block certainly is the problem.
In an OZ, he should not take that angle off the snap. It almost looks like he expected Lewan and Glasgow to leave enough space for a LB to gap them, and that he made that read pre-snap. Based on Fitz's steps, this is clearly a stretch, and Kerridge should be moving move laterally.
Like I said, I have no idea what he was coached to do, but what he did clearly blew-up the play. If Borges coached him to hit that gap, then I would have to believe Fitz should be following him. If not, that's bad play design. If Borges coached him to move further outside and he just made a bad read, that's on Kerridge.
September 25th, 2013 at 2:42 PM ^
The gap that he's trying to run through isn't a gap for zone stretch. To me, it looks like he is running inside zone or Iso, but there is no reason for him to be shooting through what looks like the B gap on outside zone.
As an aside, people talked about where Kerridge lined up. You'll see a lot of teams now in their offset I drop the FB another yard or so to give them more room to read a play. This is essentially a split back position, but you still have your RB in the deep I, kind of taking advantage of elements of both formations.
September 25th, 2013 at 2:05 PM ^
they have the numbers to block the play as called, there is no clear disadvantage in the run so why audible? plus you dont know what that linebacker is doing on the back side, if gallon runs a slant and the lb drops into a zone could be a pick/deflection.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:48 PM ^
it looks like the only one on him is the safety 10 yards downfield. the linebacker nearest gallon is clearly on backside contain as he only glances at him and then pursues the play. i dont see how a quick pass to gallon doesnt get at least 8 yards. its a TD if he beats the safety
i think that is a bigger problem with our offense. the inability to switch out of bad (or into good) plays when the defense sells out to stop the run on first down. if we wont change our play based on what the defense gives us, at the very least we need to be less predictable so that every 1st and 10 defense tees off on the obvious run call
September 25th, 2013 at 2:02 PM ^
Fitz did gain over 100 yds against UConn, and he didn't gain those yards alone. At more than a couple points during the game, the line must have done a few things correctly that created running lanes, which Fitz found. As a contrast with what went wrong on Saturday evening, a few Picture Pages about what went right might be interesting, especially if the right things occurred during plays similar to those depicting the wrong things.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:28 PM ^
Wouldn't a post where "things go right" show the exact same thing except Kerridge going throgh the right hole? I think the whole point of this post is that on nearly every play almost everyone is doing their job, but it only takes one mistake.
September 25th, 2013 at 2:06 PM ^
I have resigned to the fact after 4 games of atrocious blocking all around that the coaches won't even try anything different and we will continue to lead the nation in 2nd and 12s. Gardner will continue taking lots of hits in the pocket, running for his life making mistakes trying to pick up 3rd and longs. :(
September 25th, 2013 at 3:24 PM ^
Then stop posting and watching games. I mean, the season's over for you, right?
September 25th, 2013 at 2:17 PM ^
Watching the slow-mo version, which AWESOME and MOAR please, it sorta looks like Miller is being held when he tries to pass his guy off to Kalis. I can't imagine his balance is so poor that he can't get off that block and get to the LB. If he is being held, is that sorta screwing up what he is going to do and the possibility of a cut back lane for Fitz?
It looks like Fitz is looking to his right at the possible hole and seeing it getting destroyed both my Kerridge taking a hit from the DE, and from Miller starting to go down. Or I'm completely wrong and just imagining things.
September 25th, 2013 at 5:13 PM ^
Keep this up--I'm sure it takes up extra time and obviously takes up extra visual space, but it is helpful for some of us slow learners...
September 25th, 2013 at 2:33 PM ^
I've been hard on Miller, so it is nice to see that the running issues remain a team issue moreso than a player. That said, I still believe the staff will at least try to jostle up the line, if for no other reason than to see if Glasgow can be a more physical presence at center. My big issue with Miller is that he's simply too small to hold up in the offense Borges wants to run, or at least hold up for long stretches, and if he's not a workable fit they might as well see if they can put a bit more beef in the middle. Because while I accept that some of these busts are not on him, a couple of times against both Akron and UConn he was pushed directly back into the pocket or the running lane, and that really can't happen for this team to be successful unless Borges gameplans accordingly.
Smallwood was everywhere this game, and it looked like UConn's DTs were getting good pressure. Is that a product of them being better than we thought, or were these flubs commonplace.
September 25th, 2013 at 2:33 PM ^
double post
September 25th, 2013 at 3:14 PM ^
the real secret is that one of the reasons the run game has been so bad is that the WRs aren't getting any separation. apart from gallon, who has been just meh the past two games, no one else is getting respect. that has allowed akron and Uconn to load the box and bring extra defenders against the run. it doesn't matter how bad the team you're playing is, if there's a free hitter, the run game isn't going to do well.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:30 PM ^
Although they aren't an elite group, they have gotten open plenty so far. The issue is Devin needs to complete those easy passes to wide open wr's.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:47 PM ^
disagree. they're getting barely open, forcing the QB to make perfect throws. i think that's one reason why devin has looked inaccurate. it's harder to make a decent through when you know you need to be perfect.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:42 PM ^
Sure there have been times when Devin has had to make tough throws and run because the WR's weren't open. But you can't deny some of the throws Devin missed in the Akron and UConn games were wide open receivers and they were very short easy throws.
September 25th, 2013 at 5:54 PM ^
i kind of deny that. there weren't many of those. he missed open receives, but they weren't that open. against uconn and akron, our receivers should be able to get more separation. it will only get harder against better secondaries.
September 26th, 2013 at 11:20 AM ^
You should check out Space Coyote's new post on Breakdown Sports.
http://breakdownsports.blogspot.com/2013/09/film-review-looking-at-gard…
If you don't think those guys are open I don't know what else to tell you. This is Div 1 college football, they aren't going to get much more open than that.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:15 PM ^
I remember this play and I'm pretty sure it contributed to the F-bomb count that was tallied up from the Open Thread earlier in the week. At the time, I was haranguing Fitz for stuttering along the line waiting for a hole to open, but that may have been overly harsh. Still, there are times I wish he just recognize that the hole isn't there and just go and get what he can rather than waiting and taking a loss. Of course, then 12 plays later he'll pull off one of his patented backcuts in a phone booth that springs him for 30+ yards and make me look stupid.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:18 PM ^
I'd be curious to see analysis of another Big Ten team running the ball well and see if they are executing their blocks perfectly, or just what IS going on with their success that currently eludes our team. (Hah, maybe Brian can just add that to the already huge heap of content we're getting. Or anyone. I'd do it, but my football knowledge is still incredibly lacking.)
These picture pages have been fantastic and illuminating. The UFR will give us the skinny on how often such mishaps occur. My intuition though tells me that other teams are just as spotty without as many negative plays. Maybe that's what my heart just wants to believe with this team.
Also, I feel like some misdirection would be wonderful. I'd also be curious to see two HBs in the backfield. Norfleet + Toussaint would at least be a change from the predictable stuff we usually run with Norfleet.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:41 PM ^
That's some mighty fine blocking. Even they make mistakes from time to time though. And other teams make them more often than that. But I think Wisconsin is really what you're looking for.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:01 PM ^
Wisconsin is the first one that came to my mind as well as far as where we want to be. Really though I want to compare us to someone who wouldn't think would be so dominant at it.
What about someone like Minnesota? They are generally a baby seal yet they are considerably ahead of Michigan in rushing statistics. I believe they only have one senior on their offensive line and they are killing it rushing the football. Weak opponents disclaimer, but then, we should have same said disclaimer. We're seventh in the B1G in rushing which makes absolutely no sense to me.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:12 PM ^
They were pretty good up front against SJSU, but far from great. It's not a bad look at where Michigan would probably like to be at this point though. They run some similar things offensively (a ton of pistol, but they have true power back that don't threaten the edge at all), so you could get some comparison.
September 25th, 2013 at 5:35 PM ^
Yeah, they run a lot of the stuff Michigan wants to run too.
Ultimately, they have done a fantastic job of player development and have had systematic cohesion for 20+ years. Those are two of our problems.
People in general underestimate the importance of player development. It's a rare five star who can succeed with terrible player development. Recruiting is only half the battle.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:43 PM ^
why we've gotten stuffed so much on our running game, except for the RR era. Michigan's running game, outside that as perceived as trickeration, hasn't changed one iota since the days of Schembechler. If you have watched film of Michigan, dating back to 1969, through the Bo years, followed briefly by Mo-he changed our offensive philosopy but not running game-and then on through Lloyd, nothing has changed. According to our back positioning, even when lined up in the pistol or gun gives the Defense a major advantage because the average fan can guess correctly where we'll run 80% of the time unless it's disguised which, and this is my point, never is. We don't use couters that actually has the rb riding the ball all the way to the los with the qb maintining a firm grasp then the counter back-the designated runner merely taking the ball while three defenders are tackling the fake man that when executed properly is normally good for a minimum of eliminating two defenders merely by being tackled and not capable of tackling the man that will eventually get the ball. Another thing I hate to see is the qb showing the entire stadium the ball from the snap until the ball is handed off on a rb 5 to 7 yards behind the los. Well damn the defense is thinking, I wonder where this sucker is going. I don't care if you grade out at 100 on the OL, there will be always be a defender at the second or third level capable of splitting blocks and beginning the creamitization of the rb that seems to be drawn up by the OC for those purposes alone. ^Also, I don't know who is coaching the qbs, but I have yet to see the inside hand "pull out" executed by our qb where ball is placed in the gut of supposed runner and then the qb pulling the belly hand, along with ball while leaving front hand in the RB's gut in his continuation toward the los. When this is done properly, with ball hidden on the qb's ass, it takes a mighty keen defender to find the ball. These are just some of the things you use until you're at the Bama stage and can go mano mano on defense. We are so far away from that percentages would us throwing the ball on almost every down, and quickly until defenders, including lbers have to hit the curl spot. When this is accomplished, running game stands a significant chance of picking up 5 yds before initial contact. ^Also shown earlier in the week was a double team block by Lewan and Kalis which was completely unnecessary. Taylor, if he gets off on snap count would own the defender, especially on down block, freeing Kalis to complete the crossing pattern picking up the next outside defender. Funk and Al are not using these kids to their strength which, and it's not their fault they inherited a unit that had to be rebuilt, but it is their fault they are not employing tactics that would mitigate the need for perfectly exectued blocks by taking advantage of their more than adequate speed, coupled with deception that by its design and proper execution routinely occupies three defenders thereby gaining the numbers advantage necessary for rushing success. Hell the single wing and the wing T always employed outnumber the defense at point of attack, and it's not surprising to see less talented teams such as the academies and Auburn and Ga. Tech's attacks of just a few years ago average well above the norm utilizing such tactics. Give me a week with that backfield and every fan in the stadium would be looking at the wrong ball carrier while the other has a seven yard headstart on the few remaining defenders who are leaning the other way, more than likely in the unenviale position of having legs crossed at the same time.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:00 PM ^
I'm not sure you do either, and your post gave me a headache.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:00 PM ^
You need some paragraph breaks.
You make a good point about how far our QB runs to hand it off, and how far our RB runs to receive it and then he has to run and find a hole. That's a long time to ask our lineman to hold their blocks, considering our TE situation and interior O-Line
I think defenses can guess where the run is going to go because the number one pick in this upcoming draft is lined up to the left, and even a predictable run over Lewan's butt is probably going to be more succesful than running over Kalis or Schofield. This is no different than what Lloyd did with Hart, running him left 80% of the time over Long, and he ended up setting our all time rushing record.
Also, Glasgow has graded out as our best interrior lineman so far this year. Though that's great, it also helps he blocks next to Lewan. That's the best side of our line. Defenes know this and we don't have a counter for it. Ahhhh.
September 25th, 2013 at 5:01 PM ^
because I've tried everything on this damn formatting to get paragraphs, including the good old-fashioned way of simply hitting enter twice. If you have any ideas, I'd much rather here them than anything to do with football simple to make it easier on the reader. I hate to have to use a symbol to denote a paragraph I would lke to make. ^ BTW, I wish they'd run what you are thinking and that is right up Lewan and Kalis's butt. They aren't doing this nearly enough imo.
September 25th, 2013 at 5:08 PM ^
At work it's no problem with new paragraphs. At home, creating a new paragraph is a pain.
September 25th, 2013 at 6:30 PM ^
or something, then copy and paste it in.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:21 PM ^
I mean it. This line will get its act together. One hundred and twenty yards for Fitz and 60-some-odd for Gardner suggests to me that upward-trending success with line coordination plus a more successful passing game (which in turn further opens the run) will lead to some real success. Minnesota is the next right-sized challenge for the o line.*
Have some patience, gentlemen and good ladies. Brian is a pessimist, but he's pointing to future success.
*By October 12 at PSU the o line should be maturing like fine wine. If that isn't happening, call and I will refund your money.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:13 PM ^
whether you are right or not, we need more posters like you...the whining and constant armchairing gets old, not saying there isn't a place for it, it just gets redundant...guys like you offset the panic of people that mostly don't know what they are talking about because they don't personally know the personel on this team or their exact abilities...
bravo, sir. I hope you are right.
4-0. go blue
September 25th, 2013 at 3:25 PM ^
I'd like to know where the one error is on this play. I mean you covered the fact that it's a very difficult adjustment for Kerridge to get to the preffered hole with the slant so I'm not sure who made an error outside of the bounce/not bounce. I just think this is UCONNs DC calling a perfect slent on the perfect play. If they aren't slanting, Glasgow whoops his guy, Kerridge crushes the MLB, 52 is in the wash and it's Toussaint vs safeties. I just think this is one of those plays where you just say we got beat schematically.
September 25th, 2013 at 3:31 PM ^
On Fitz's indecision, I think what you say could definitely be part of it, particularly that he decided he couldn't get around Williams, but I also think we should give some credit to Smallwood. He reads the play, is in the right position, but doesn't rush upfield so quickly as to give Fitz an opportunity to bounce. A nice one-on-one play in space, makes Fitz commit and then hits him for a 2 yard loss.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:12 PM ^
but what is Lewan supposed to be doing on this play? The play's supposed to go inside of him based on Kerridge's angle, right? So why is Lewan's first step outside on an OLB that is only one yard outside of him? The OLB hardly had to slant to get inside of him and blow the play up.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:51 PM ^
The whole Oline is supposed to step to the left. That's why everyone comes off the snap the way they do. Also, watch Fitz's initial angle to see where the play is supposed to go. The slanting defensive guys forced an adjustment, but because of the momentum Lewan had moving left, he couldn't redirect fast enough to seal to the outside, he did pretty well just not letting the guy slice through the line behind him.
September 25th, 2013 at 4:25 PM ^
not every time, but sometimes we need to evaluate the runner's ability to read the blocking. I am certain everyone here can remember Mike Hart and how he wouldd literally place his hand on the back of Jake Long and simply follow Jake (or other lO linemen) down the field. IMO - Fitz OFTEN leaves his blockers and tries to go outside and he is quickly surrounded be the defense ... leading to a TFL.
I was eager to watch Green develop this year - because of his size he will not "create holes" but will learn the blocking schemes of the Oline and then be a very successful runner (Anthony Thomas & even Biakabatuka) ran more times between the tackles than outside of them during their glory days.
Maybe ... just maybe the line and blocking schemes are not quite as bad as some would have us believe. Have a little faith !
Go Blue!
September 25th, 2013 at 5:22 PM ^
to guard (contrast with suggested Schofield to LG), I am still wondering why we saw Magnuson in the UConn game when there were no other substitutions on the line?
Now that more serious observers of the game such as Brian, Space Coyote, and Ron Utah have pointed out that moving Schofield to guard is a pretty bad idea, I get it. However, it still doesn't explain why we haven't seen more substitutions on the line (or at running back?) when things have bogged down.
September 25th, 2013 at 5:30 PM ^
It's just a package. Magnuson isn't replacing anyone, he's the sixth lineman in short yardage situations. I have to believe he's doing things in practice to earn the right to be the extra tackle on the field.
FWIW I think the only other option would be Braden...I don't think anyone else is ready to play OT yet.
September 25th, 2013 at 7:25 PM ^
When RR was coach, did Brian have posts on what made that offense work? Did he explain how certain plays or calls had success? My impression (similar to a post above) is that Brian spends a disproportionate amount of time explaining how Borges's offense fails. And when Brian does so, he (Brian) has a spread offense in mind as a baseline, a sort of default offense. If that's true, then (a) it's mixing apples and oranges. Borges isn't a pure spread guy, so if he's employing or mixing spread and pro-style concepts or styles, it's not fair to "analyze" and "critique" what he's doing by using a pure spread as your baseline.
Moreover (b) it leads you to miss -- or misunderstand -- what it is that Borges IS doing. SpaceCoyote mentioned in another thread that Borges's offense is actually MORE complicated than a spread offense. There are more wrinkles (options, counters) than available in a spread -- but those wrinkles are often harder to spot. Thus, by "critiquing" Borges's offense as a type of unsuccessful spread offense, it may well be Brian is simply not understanding the offense that Michigan is actually running.
Now this is actually my point. If you assume the spread is "the best" kind of offense to run, then your "analysis" of a spread (say, RRs offense, back in the day) will be more sympathetic -- you'll notice and emphasize its strengths, the way it succeds (when it does). But that might also lead you, when analyzing a WCO or pro-style or whatever, to notice, highlight, and emphasize its failures (FROM the perspective of a stread).
What I'm driving at is this: Hey, Brian? How about some picture pages, how about some long posts dissecting and analyzing how Michigan's offense is succeeding? Give us a front page feature explaining the things they're doing right, how Borges's offense can be explosive (52 points, 41 points, 28 points with several utimely turnovers) and effective. Try to understand Borges with the same enthusiasm and openness that you devoted to RR. In other words, assume that because Borges has coached for 25+ years, he kinda knows what he's doing, so that your job (in your analysis) is to give him the benefit of the doubt. Point out and explain how and why the offense succeeds, when it does, instead of several picure pages explaining why it is (according to some people) such a horrible mess.
September 25th, 2013 at 8:18 PM ^
already
September 25th, 2013 at 9:26 PM ^
September 25th, 2013 at 10:28 PM ^
I just continue to be perplexed when the O-line generally checks out ok and we still can't run the ball. Do other teams just execute that well that they're getting like 0.98^7 or something? Is it because the WRs are not particularly threatening and thus the back 7 are creeping in?
September 26th, 2013 at 2:58 AM ^
That is good Al.
These past two games the percentage of run to pass on first down is so heavily run based leaving us in 2nd and long too often. When were behind the chains it's difficult to get in any sort of rhythm. A run leaves us third and medium to long and a pass lately has resulted in the sane thing.
Calls on first down are so huge. Also with the way teams have been rushing us lately why have we not seen any screens?
My solution is that our identity should be hybrid. We should attack teams early on in games in various manners. See how they defend the veer, the read option, the power, the ISO, a RB screen, etc. throw the ball on first and ten, take your shots on second and very short, stretch the field, QB draws, mis-direction, reverse / occasional gadget play, changing of tempo, formations, formation shifts and motions... The whole nine yards. I feel like we're trying too hard to be pro style when our roster just doesn't quite fit it yet. Teams would have to prepare for a multitude of things and once AL can find a teams weakness he can dial in plays he wants to attack them with.
I really hope we get it in gear offensively because we have the talent to succeed, and we should be getting it done a lot better then we are at present.
Comments