A crushing game last week. We are all this otter.
I watched this game on tape and isolated from what seemed like a generally negative atmosphere on MGoBlog during the game. Also, I forgot to turn off my phone, so the result was ruined at around halftime for me, so I saved myself the stress and nail-biting aspect I'm sure people watching live felt. As such, I came away with a generally more positive feeling about the offense. We seemed to be moving the ball a lot better than we have the last couple weeks (lowered expectations is a wonderful thing). 365 yards, 3.2 YPC and 5.3 isn’t great, but worlds better than recent efforts and a marked improvement. Still, only 9 points in regulation and no 3rd down conversions (3 for 17 overall) is concerning and shouldn’t be glossed over either. We seem to be improving, but not good enough yet to get out of our own way enough to keep drives alive and score TDs.
The following Diary is an attempt to analyze the cause of our abysmal performance on 3rd down conversions by looking at the entire set of downs preceding each one. I attempt to assign blame, much like Brian did in his similarly eye bleed inducing 27 for 27.
Drive 1: 1st and 10 from NW 8 after a promising opening drive
1st down. Gardner sees 9 man front, checks into .... run. Argh. Unblocked defender meets Green at the LOS for loss of 1.
2nd down. Waggle play. I absolutely hate this play call. Gardner does well to get back to the LOS.
What exactly is the plan here?
3rd down. Shotgun 4 wide. Gardner has good protection but bugs out early after his 1st read is covered. Funchess hasn't even made his break yet and appears to be open just as Gardner heads into a defender for no gain.
FG good 3-0 Michigan
Drive 2: 1st and 10 from M 48 after a couple first downs from Funchess and Gallon screens and Green runs up the middle.
1st and 10. I form run. Gardner fakes the quick screen and hands off. Nice hole at the line between Glasgow and Bosch and Kerridge seals the edge. Green pounds it forward for 7. Good play, no minuses
2nd and 3. NW has 9ish in box against 8 blockers. M actually does ok picking up first level defenders but Kerridge doesn't get any push and gets shed easily. D. Smith misses a cutback lane and plows directly into the pile for a yard. There was some space to make a play here I think.
It’s collapsing, but the hole does exist momentarily.
3rd and 2. Michigan does its best Stanford impression and lines everyone up in a bunch. NW responds in kind with everyone in the box. PA with a designed roll out to the right. Right side of line gets caved and Gardner has to redirect 7 yards upfield to avoid it. TFL
Drive 3: 1st and 10 from NW 48 after NW goes 3 and out and punts.
1st and 10. Michigan 3 wide shotgun with Funchess in slot. Gardner looks for Funchess, hesitants and then tries to throw it to him but a defender has gotten into the lane. Lucky for that not to be INT. Pocket also breaks down just as he throws. Gallon looks open downfield later but could just be his defender broke off after the throw. I'm tempted to put this all on NW playing it well, but I Gardner might have been able to make a better throw there. So I guess
2nd and 10. Shotgun with 3 receiver stack on one side and another on the other side. Michigan runs inverted veer. Not really sure what went wrong here. The option man does play this just about perfect, forcing the pull but yet still harassing Gardner enough to prevent him from getting north-south. Perimeter blocking is pretty poor as Gardner is tackled for no gain. I think I'm going with
3rd and 9. NW brings the house because we can't do crap with it in 3 weeks. Gardner nearly gets sacked but gets it off that's batted down. Chesson ran a quick out route and was open for the dump off but Gardner has his eyes the other direction. It probably wouldn't of picked up the 1st down either though. We had a man for every defender here but Bosch gets destroyed and Magnuson and Kerridge didn't do too much better. I know everyone will want me to put this on Borges, but there looked to be a quick outlet but Gardner was looking for more (understandable with 3rd and 10 I guess). I'm going to go
Very short window for Gardner to dump it off, Bosch allows instant penetration.
Drive 4: 1st and 10 NW 41 after a Funchess catch for 1st down.
1st and 10, play action. RB screen to Hayes for 5. Nice play that could've gone for much more with one better block from Bosch. No minuses though, that's a tough match-up for him I guess.
2nd and 5. I form run. Bosch has a tough combo block as the D line slants away from him. Green reads it and cuts behind Lewan but trips over him a bit. Paskorz ID's his block late and has a bad angle, probably because the play wasn't designed to go where Green went. Green falls forward for 3. I dunno, let's go with
3rd and 2. Shotgun, 2 reciever stack with Butt at TE on other side. 2 backs next to Gardner. NW brings the house and Gardner tries to dump it to Green leaking out of backfield. The one LB that stays in coverage reads Gardner's eyes the whole way and almost pick sixes it. Butt is all by himself, no defender within 5 yards. Too bad, blitz pick up was excellent. Snap gets bobbled, FWIW, might have thrown off timing.
Butt is literally hand-wavingly open.
Drive 5: 1st and 10 M29 after a Gallon pitch and catch
1st and 10: Shotgun 3 wide with TE eligible. Bubble screen to Funchess, dropped.
2nd and 10: I form PA, Gallon open on an out route. Throw is dead on but dropped.
3rd and 10: Shotgun with triple stack on the field side. NW blitzes like you’d expect. Michigan actually gets in position to pick this up but the delay by the LB convinces Hayes to help Williams by making a diving attempt at Willams's guy’s feet. To be fair Williams is having a hard time, but com’n. Hayes has to pick the LB up.
You would assume Hayes blocks 44 here.....
...you would assume wrong. No.44, come on down!
Drive 6: 1st and 10 M 15
1st and 10: I form run into 8 man box. Michigan has 7 blockers. Blocking is also a complete mess as Kerridge seems to head to a different hole than the OL is blocking and Glasgow can't get a tough combo block. Green gets swarmed for no gain.
2nd and 10: Play action from I form. NW blitzs 2 LBs and another gets sucked in by the PA, leaving a huge hole underneath. Gallon is wide open for 20 but Gardner puts it too far in front. Gallon gets his hands on it but can't bring it in. Nice play that had potential.
3rd and 10: Surprisingly NW rushes 4 and drops into coverage. Bosch gets chucked like a ragdoll allowing his guy a free run at Gardner. Glasgow looks to be releasing downfield, so the play call was probably a screen anyway. Gardner dumps off to Funchess. Michigan has this blocked well except Magnuson for whatever reason leaves the guy he's engaged with to go help Glasgow. The guy he leaves tackles. WTF.
Magnuson was in good position to block his man (the guy he's got his left hand on) but he’s losing him now because he’s worrying about Glasgow’s guy
Magnuson instead leaves his guy to go block Glasgow, not Glasgow’s guy, Glasgow. The guy he leaves covers and tackles Funchess on the screen pass.
Drive 7: 1st and 10 at midfield on a screen to Chesson and a nice pair of runs by D Smith
1st and 10. I form run. NW only has 7 in the box, but the safeties are in fairly shallow alignment and one tears at the LOS at the snap. Doesn't really matter since Magnuson and Paskorz both get chucked aside and there's two unblocked guys to meet Green at the LOS. Probably wasn't going far based on design and defense.
2nd and 10: Gardner under center in I form with Funchess and Gallon out wide on either side. NW brings a safety blitz and Gardner hangs out coolly in the pocket as the unblocked defender is screaming towards him. Gallon is left singled up so Gardner goes to him. The corner does a fantastic job to undercut the throw. Seemed to be some confusion between Gardner and Gallon, maybe he had to get rid of it early, but I also think he left it a bit short/inside.
3rd and 10: Shotgun with 3 wide to the field side. Michigan rolls the pocket as NW rushes 5 and sends a delayed blitzer. It's picked up well. Dileo is 1 vs 1 and Gardner throws it to him, but a beat late. As a result the defender makes a diving play to knock it away and also runs over Dileo in the process. Borderline PI no call.
Ball is still in the air and Dileo is being run over, looks like PI to me.
Drive 8: 1st and 10 at NW 30 following a couple nice passes and a long Derrick Green run.
1st and 10: Assigning blame can be tricky business but this one is easy. Play action from under center and Schofield straight up gets beat by his guy as he takes a step inside at the snap (WTF?) Sack for 13. Ugh
Where are you going Schofield? Your responsibility is to your right, why are you taking a step left?
2nd and 23: Michigan spreads the field with 4 wide in shotgun. Pass is batted down at the line. Looked maybe ill advised anyway as a LB drops to undercut Funchess's route. Can't tell for sure, so we'll give this one to
3rd and 23: Shotgun with triple stack WRs opposite AJ Williams at TE, FB in backfield with Gardner. Delayed blitz. M has no chance at picking this up since the whole line shifts right leaving a gaping hole for Kerridge to defend and two guys coming through it. He gets neither. Dileo looked open for a hot read, but not sure. This is an RPS- type play, but more of the variety where the opponent does something well as opposed to you doing something stupid.
Drive 9: Michigan 1st and goal at NW 10 following the shankapotamus punt from NW.
1st and Goal: NW has 8.5 in the box shifted towards the boundary side because AJ Williams and Butt next to each other screams run to that side. Michigan runs to that side. Goes about as well as you'd expect.
I think NW might know we’re running left guys.
2nd and goal: Shotgun with 2 stacked receivers to the field side and one to the boundary. Butt motions past the stacked guys. Nice play design leaves 3 recievers on 2 defenders and Funchess is open. But... Michigan rolls the pocket that way to help out the OL and Gardner turfs it because he's on the run and doesn't set his feet. It's actually still catcable, especially for Funchess, but tough.
3rd and goal: Play action I form. Gallon is one on one and Gardner tries to hit him on a fade in the corner of the endzone but air mails it. Wind was probably a factor here and defender had pretty good position.
FG - 6-9
Drive 10: 1st and 10 at NW 13 on a couple nice pass and catch to Gallon.
1st and 10: Freaking waggle. Gardner jukes 2 guys to make something out of nothing for 5, getting plastered in the process. I'm still minusing Borges for the play even though it worked. It worked in spite of the play call not because of it.
Again, what is the plan here? Gardner is running for his life 10 yards behind the LOS.
2nd and 5: Shotgun 4 wide. Gardner looks screen (probably fake) and then gives a delayed handoff to D. Smith who jukes a guy and burrows for 4. No minuses
3nd and 1: Michigan in jumbo package under center with 2 TE and a H-back. Bosch cedes ground at the snap and that's all she wrote. Play design seems borked too since I don't know where Schofield is pulling to and Kerridge seals the edge instead of blocking the point of attack. Thought D.Smith got hosed on the spot as he got back to the LOS but they docked him a yard for 4th and 2 FWIW. Also, gotta question why you don't have Green in this situation instead.
4th and 2: Tackle over, *sigh*. I get the idea here: sucker NW into over playing the left so you can sneak Gardner around right. The problem is it doesn't look like the normal tackle over since you bring in Williams in as a TE on the other side with an extra lineman too. Add in a pulling Kalis and NW has this sniffed out and dead to rights. A couple weak blocks by Green and Magnuson were the cherry on top.
Hoke seems on tilt after going conservative burns him a couple times earlier in the season
Drive 11: 1st and 10 at NW 30, following a (legit) PI on NW. Michigan is running it's 2 min drill and if you want to be technical, they failed 2 3rd down conversions on this drive earlier, but converted on 4th
1st and 10: Shotgun 3 wide. NW rushes 4. God. Damn. It. Schofield. He does his step inside thing when he's got a guys shaded outside of him. I don't get it man. He's not even trying to sell PA or something. I mean come the f*ck on man.
Again Schofield? Your guy is outside of you, what are you looking and stepping inside for?
2nd and 23: Nice play, overthrown. Chesson had a step on his man. Wind a factor on such a long throw. Protection was good. Could maybe question a shot down field when you should be working back into FG range, but that's nit-picky. FWIW
3rd and 23: Shotgun 4 wide, 3 on the far side. Gallon catches it short and in bounds.
Monkey Rodeo FG ties it. Lulz
(OT1: Hey Hey! Michigan converts 3rd and 5 on their way to scoring, the first of the game.)
OT2: Michigan converts another on 3rd and 1. The next one.. not so much
1st and 10: I form PA. Play action does suck up the LBs and leaves Butt 1 v 1. Gardner holds for way too long staring him down, not sure what he's waiting for. Bosch gets beat and forces Gardner to scramble for a loss of 1.I guess Butt can turn his head a little sooner, but this play is there if Gardner gets the pass off.
2nd and 11: Shotgun 3 wide. Butt runs a flat route and Gardner hits him. NW does a good job not allowing YAC. No minuses, par for the course for everyone.
3rd and 8: I form PA again. Again the play action sucks up the LBs. Gallon works a post in front of his corner and Gardner hits him dead on. Dropped. *sigh*
OT3: Gardner scores on 3rd and goal FTW, literally. What’s this feeling? Happiness? No too far… Not sadness? Yes, definitely not sadness.
Gardner comes out with the largest chunk, but I think a lot of that is just the nature of his position. I ding him small fractions of points for not making the exact correct reaction to someone else's screw up. Still, he did miss some key throws, held the ball too long a couple times, and failed to check out of bad plays and/or made bad checks.
Borges is at just about 25% too, which is higher than I initially expected. The waggle plays were just brutal, I just don't see the upside with it. Gardner has to scramble for his life to make a couple yards if he's lucky, usually at the cost of getting lit up. The jumbo package stuff is also frustrating. It might be the right call if you have the right personnel for short yardage situations, but it's beyond clear we don't. In the interest of fairness, I do feel compelled to say Borges made some nice adjustments that helped keep the ball moving at times and kept the blitz at bay except on obvious passing situations. Also, in his defense, some of the minuses were based on the defensive alignment, which he can only guess at when calling the play, but I'm following Brian's convention here for consistency. That said, when Borges's lizard brain took over, it was costly to Michigan in terms of keeping drives alive.
Blocking was next up. There was improvement but consistency was still any issue. When things went bad, they were costly. The sacks left Michigan in deep, deep holes. Even on 3rd and short, basic assignments were missed that cost us the first down on several occasions.
Also, you gotta give NW credit. Their defensive backs were all over our receivers and we were extremely fortunate not to have many INTs, some of the pick six variety. Beyond that, we had some drops and the wind played a factor but those weren't really persistent problems.
So.. takeaways? None really that we didn't know. We have a lot of issues everywhere still. At least we were ending some long drives with screw-ups at times instead of never getting drives going. That's something to build on going into Iowa I guess.
A crushing game last week. We are all this otter.
One thing I don't see mentioned much is that Devin going to the wrong place (dropping too deep, moving left or right) often is causiing a sack or increased pressure. I've seen a lot of times where a blocker has a good block and then Gardner steps too far back or moves in a direction that doesn't let our blocker hold his block. I'm going to do a quick chart from this game to see how often this seems to occur but I think it is significant and i don't see it being addressed-
I think some of that is Gardner not trusting his blocking. It seems like he expects to get hit every time he drops back and then starts moving around too early. Can't really say I blame him though
Thanks for the effort. Appreciate it. It highlighted some of my frustration. But it also makes me question Gardner/Borges even more. Really more Gardner, can he or is he allowed to check off from 8 or 9 men in box?????? i don' think they trust him. Also, he rarely gets past his primary receiver, unless he scrambles. I hope I am wrong, but I think next year Morris has a chance to compete with Gardner.
So your rational is that Al not letting him check out of plays when the box is loaded is to put in a freshman who has shown nothing and cannot scramble nearly as well as DG and will most likely get killed by doing so....great analysis, lets forget the terrible play-calling of dive runs into loaded boxes that go nowhere....lets not run more shotgun, by doing so giving DG more time to read the defense and scramble better, lets just blame DG because he has been hit/sacked more than almost any QB in the country and lets just put in a freshman who had a bad senior season and will not be anywhere near ready to compete
Thank you for putting in this effort. This is like an early preview to the game's UFR later this week
I'm actually looking forward to comparing notes with the UFR. Should be interesting, since I usually fall on the opposite side of the scheme vs execution spectrum as Brian.
Who coaches Gardner ? Borges. Who designs the plays and the (mind boggling) blocking schemes required for them. Borges. (From my understanding Funk just handles the technique of the blocking, not the blocking scheme for a particular play).
So you can go ahead and take 70% of the Gardner and blocking f'ups and put that into borges.
Under that estimation 56.5% of the problem is Borges. That is even before the ball is snapped. That's the problem... that's how you have talent but don't produce.
Also I blame Borges for not benching Gardner earlier and letting Morris mature. Gardner threw about 5 interceptions this game and takes pointless sacks. Watch any other QB at a high level, be amazed at how they throw the ball away or evade the rush without doing their best impression of a headless chicken.
The simple fact is our offense is significantly more talented than Nebraska's, Northwestern's, and Penn State's defenses. Yet we did nothing. That's coaching, that's coaching, that's coaching.
By that logic we could just mark everything Borges, but that makes a pretty boring diary.
Agree to disagree. That would be a great diary.
And don't be silly. I only said 70% of those two categories go to Borges.
There were some points you gave to NW /DnD I think were dubious but you make good arguments so I'm ok with it. Nonetheless we do have to realise Borges's culpability in Gardner's and the blocking performance.
I didn't mean to sound argumentative. I was just making the point that we could argue all day about who's ultimately responsible beyond the top level performance on the field. I tried to keep with Brian's "results based charting" so to speak and look at first order problems instead of getting too deep into the underlying issues with player development and preparation.
Though I did not know the outcome. Also, no lucky shirt or coffee mug: have totally given up. I watched MSU-Nebraska instead: rooting for Nebraska since their fans are nice people (not drunken, sofa burning, car painting asshats).
Somehow watching the game non-realtime with no liveblog or game thread made my experience less stressful ... I only cursed like three times and it was on missed calls by the refs.
Am I crazy? I seriously thought Green's long (longest?) run was on a 3rd down in which he converted first down and quite a bit of change.
That's because (assuming you watched it on television) the run took place during one of the two long in-game interviews promoting the documentary on the 1973 Game and its aftermath. So you are forgiven for not knowing what down it was. They barely acknowledged it happened and didn't show any replays.
Apparently, there is a law that says interviews cannot be conducted while play is stopped -- they must be conducted during plays. Stoppages are for advertisements, not interviews. Even though these were basically advertisements. Harumph.
Ugh, I meant to rant about this in the diary but forgot, but I was screaming at the screen for them get back to the game. It's an INTERVIEW!!!! Show what the guy looks like for 5 seconds and go to audio only while showing the game. Unless the guy is doing magic tricks while they're talking there's nothing to see. BigTen Network was pimping that show really hard all game long and it was beyond annoying by the end.
It's even more forgivable than that; the TV graphic on that play actually said "3rd and 4." (It was, in fact, 2nd and 4.)
FWIW, Schofield's first step on both of his "errors" needs to be inside, as both of those are pretty clear slide protections. It's once the DE engages Schofield that he messes up (Butt doesn't help) and that he doesn't hinge back on the roll out that is hurt. Roll out also hurt by front side blocking by allowing defender to gain leverage up field. RB needs to do better to get outside of him to allow DG to continue his roll out.
On the waggle plays, I'd suggest looking at the failed first down zone runs as well. I honestly don't know the answer here because I haven't rewatched the game, but check to see what the backside defender is doing and see if he is containing DG on those plays or not. If he isn't, the issue could be that the RBs (and probably to a lesser extent, DG) are not pulling off the PA well enough to suck the DE in. (As an aside, remember when I said that running PA to Denard wasn't really a great option for Borges at the end of last season? It's because young or inexperienced RBs aren't good at sucking the ball into their belly and hiding it once it gets pulled out, thus not giving a realistic fake to the defense; these waggle plays are supposed to be hard PA sells, not weak ones like the 3rd down and goal play).
Also, also, on 1st down and goal run to Green, the direction or going to the run aren't the issue. A pure pass puts 3 defenders on 2 at the top of the screen, run has been most successful, run right leaves offense outnumbered, while left right is even numbers (4.5 to 4.5). Problem is the alignment of the defense makes zone stretch a difficult proposition. Ideally, you'd run an IZ (which puts emphasis on the interior, so probably not good idea) or more likely a man blocking play (Iso or Power) that brings an extra blocker over and makes assignment for the center more managable. But checking direction or checking to pass is hard enough, checking to a completely different play in the midst of the game probably isn't realistic for DG at this point. Again, I'd also check the backside DE on this play. My guess is he scraped across and that's why Borges went with the waggle later (trying to exploit that 3 on 2 match up by pulling the gray area defender and making it 2 on 2 with some sort of rub route).
FWIW, Schofield's first step on both of his "errors" needs to be inside, as both of those are pretty clear slide protections.
I thought that too, but the RB on both plays is looking for blitzers in the middle of the line or the opposite side. On the first one he pretty clearly knows right from the snap that that's his assignment but still takes that step and puts himself completely out of position. On the second one, he does seem to think that that's not his guy until it's too late, but with the RB running with the rolling pocket on the frontside how doesn't see pre-snap that if he let's the guy go it's going to be a big problem, especially since with the roll it's now Gardner's blindside.
On the waggle plays, I'd suggest looking at the failed first down zone runs as well. I honestly don't know the answer here because I haven't rewatched the game, but check to see what the backside defender is doing and see if he is containing DG on those plays or not. If he isn't, the issue could be that the RBs (and probably to a less extent DG) are not pulling off the PA well enough to suck the DE in.
So you're saying Borges (may have) saw something on the run plays where the backside end was crashing down to play the run and Borges tried to take advantage later? Good point, I hadn't thought of that. That said though, I tend to agree with Brian here that with Denard and now Gardner, defenses probably aren't going be overplaying the run and ignoring the QB much. Maybe it's like you say we're doing something different on run vs PA that the defenses are keying off of, but still.... every time we run that play we get the same result (outside of goal line and very short yardage situations). Either way, it strikes me as a high risk, low reward play.
Also, also, on 1st down and goal run to Green, the direction or going to the run aren't the issue.
I don't have it in front of me, but IIRC we had single coverage up top. I think Mason actually commented on this during the replay. There might have been other defenders in the vicinity, but do remember just about everyone was playing run on this play so PA fade to Gallon probably could have worked. I'll have to go back and look at the alignment but what struck me about this play was that everyone actually blocked their assignment perfectly for once and there still was an unblocked defender to tackle at the LOS.
Thanks for your perspective, I appreciate the second look from someone that coaches.
As far as Schofield: On the first botched assignment, because Butt is playing off, he may be backside gap responsibility (which is why I said it may fall on Butt as well) while the RB takes a 2 on 1 roll inside to out on the other side. On the roll out, the backside guy can be left unblocked, but then the frontside has to do it's job (they don't) by leveraging the leverage defender (this is on the RB). Once that guy doesn't get sealed DG should just throw it away.
The waggle never worked for Denard because he was the primary run threat, so I never liked running it with him. In the past waggle has seen some success with Gardner, mainly because he's a good runner but not Denard level good (think Steve Young), so defenses will still lapse off him at times. That said, I've always claimed that Denard should have never had a naked boot (no lead blocker) and the more the run game with the RBs struggle (not always the case in this game though) the less Gardner should run naked boots. Because the run game with the RBs had some success, it's hard to tell, and that's why it's important to see what the backside DE was doing on the actual run plays. If he wasn't committing to the RB at all, then there is absolutely zero reason to call a waggle there (late in the game). The time to test that DE and keep him honest was done on the first waggle play (which I suspect the reason for calling it was to test the DE and force him to stay honest on run plays). I suspect the DE was scraping down on the run and that's the reason for the call, but I can't confirm that.
I was talking about drive 9, 1st down that you have pictured above. There is a gray area defender, but because of the twins set, he can defend against those routes fairly easily as an inside and underneath defender (another defender will likely play high and inside leverage, the other some sort of outside leverage to form a triangle on 2 receivers). FWIW, a good pass play out of that formation likely isn't to the WR side. It's a post wheel route off of PA to the TE side (Williams runs a post to draw the one defender inside, Butt runs a wheel). Problem is that Butt isn't great at attacking the ball on fade type plays, and that's a CB lined up on him (rather than a LB like in the PSU game). Down the line, when Butt becomes better at that play, that post-wheel combo off a run game that's working is fairly deadly (not only because the route concept itself is difficult to defend by two DBs, but because the TE releases also sell the run action).
Ah ok, I thought you meant the first drive. The problem I had with the drive 9 first and goal play was NW was pretty clearly tipped to a zone stretch left based on alignment and personnel Michigan was showing, and despite lining up 5 defenders vs 4 blockers on that side, with 4 of those guys outside the tackles we still just run the play into a numbers disadvantage. That just screams check, it doesn't even have to be to pass. I do agree with you that we either A) don't have another play to run out of that look and/or B) Gardner can't or isn't allowed to totally change the play aside from very basic adjustments out of the same look and blocking assignments.
If its a slide left, the RB better get his ass to the right.
This is either an MA on Schofield, and MA on the RB, or the stupidest protection ever designed.
I'll blame this on the RB, as Schofield is a senior with 3 years of starting experience, and I don't think this was the design, because I have yet to see anything this stupid from us yet.
I'll need to read through it again. But on the second drive, isn't the fullback Houma? I know he's only in year 2, but if we're going to recruit FB's (rather than relying on walk-ons), needs to be a thumper. Houma's not there yet, and he's not a huge back in stature. If he's not going to catch passes out of the backfield (I assume that's another reason we recruited him), he's not doing much more than a walk-on right now. Too harsh for a second year player, but expect a little more.
This is what I was thinking when I re-watched last night, and saw some pretty good blocking in spurts.
EDIT: yes, that's Houma
yeah, you're right, it's Houma. I actually have it that way in the scoring section but the text description part is wrong.
I went for expert analysis of this problem here:
and now I understand everything.
Both Funchess and Gallon are left 1-on-1 when NW goes 9 in the box. Funchess covered by a freshman CB who's listed at 5'11", but probably more like 5'9". Just throw it up to him guys, it's not that hard to see this. It's a waste of Funchess' talent to miss this.
Need a sideline check-with-me. Gardner obviously has something stuck in his head from practice, saw NW line up in in something similar to that, and thought this audible was the answer. Too many things on his mind if he's missing this simple fade (or slant, or whatever you want to throw there)
remember "passing is VERY risky". Please re-watch PSU final drive in regulation and OT's to understand "risk v. reward" when we're already in FG range /s
BTW - 100% agree that QB coach MUST take a minumum 70% of QB's negatives. He's been coaching for long enough now that repeated issues should no longer be persistent.
70%. So a player, who has full agency over all of his senses and muscles, is only responsible for 30% of his own play?
This is stupid.
No way should an OC be a reason we didnt get a 3rd down and for it to the reason we didnt get a 3rd down about 1 every 4 times is crazy. The blocking was also rediculous, 20%!!!!, it should be at least 10% and I think lower. I think 25% or Gardner comes with the position. Usually either the QB makes a mistake or hits the 3rd down and since you didnt have any +'s Gardner gets a lot of mistakes.
Shouldn't Magnuson get at least +0.5 for form for the block on Glasgow?
Reshp1, I was going to ask if Gardner has any latitude to audible, but it appears that he doesn't have much, if any latitude to check based on your response to Space Coyote. That is puzzling to me.