Hoke: Nebraska players "wrong" about offense predictability
November 11th, 2013 at 7:32 PM ^
You refer to slide protections as being "high school level". What makes it that much easier than gap protection? What are a few things teams will do to attack a slide protection?
November 11th, 2013 at 7:43 PM ^
Basically you're just sliding a gap over and taking the man that tries to come through that gap and then the RB takes the gap away from the slide. This often leads him to have a DE or a more dangerous player.
Man blocking schemes tend to be 2-on-2 blocking scheme, where two players will work through a DL to a LB. It's not quite that simple, but two blockers will always take two defenders and pass on between one another, so on and so forth. If they move two gaps over then they'll pass on to the next 2 blockers and pick up whoever is coming over their direction, etc.
This is more complex. You have to be quicker with your reads and assignments. You have to have better chemistry between players to know how to take and release, etc. But it does allow you to match up a player on your RB better, such as giving him a safety or a smaller LB or a player that has a tendency to drop in coverage so the RB can leak out. Michigan has tried to run these schemes but hasn't been able to so has switched back to a slide protection, gap blocking scheme.
November 11th, 2013 at 4:16 PM ^
Brady was surprised by each play call. He expected POWER on every down.
November 11th, 2013 at 3:50 PM ^
November 11th, 2013 at 3:55 PM ^
And they can't run the ball. Thus, Nebraska never has to try to cover up their glaring weakness (run D) because Michigan sucks at running the ball worse than Nebraska sucks at defending it.
November 11th, 2013 at 4:04 PM ^
They stacked the box more than Michigan State did and routinely had their safeties flying up the field in run support. It's not like they lined up in nickel sets the whole game.
November 11th, 2013 at 6:43 PM ^
And Purdue, Wyoming, Indiana, FCS School X have great offensive lines. Gotcha.
For reference: Wyoming entered the year with 3 players who had started a college football game, one of who had started only one game. So two players with real experience. They have a single senior and only one 3-star player who is not a true freshman.
November 11th, 2013 at 6:46 PM ^
They probably don't have great OL. It's probably better than Michigan's. What, exactly, is your point you're trying to make? If it's that Michigan's OL isn't good, then yes, that's exactly what I've said. Or are you saying there is a different reason that Michigan is so bad relative to the other teams that have had more run success?
November 11th, 2013 at 6:48 PM ^
You say that Michigan's "terrible offensive line" is the problem.
You're acting as if other teams do not have terrible offensive lines with lack of skill and experience.
If we believe that the coaches know what they are doing recruiting this boils down to a lack of coaching which is on Funk and Borges, preseason identification of a sound offensive strategy with a limited offensive line which is on Borges and playcalling which is on Borges.
I'm arguing against your insane opinion that Al Borges has had a good year and called great games from Penn State on.
November 11th, 2013 at 6:55 PM ^
I didn't say other teams don't have experience. I've claimed the OL coaching hasn't been good enough. I've also said there are youth issues. Funk coaches the OL (Borges does not). I get it, you want them to run the spread. You want them to run a completely different offense then they want to run or that they're transitioning to. You want them to be the Indiana coaching staff. But that's not how things work. They are trying to get to where they want to get with their players. They've tried to implement things within their scheme to take advantage of their players (inverted veer, veer option, zone read, QB power counter). They probably thought the OL would come along faster than they did (a reasonable assumption considering I'm pretty sure coaches don't believe they suck at their job). I'm pretty sure they thought they would be decent enough to run the ball a bit and pass off that. When they found out it wasn't sound they simplified the playbook. They've done a lot of things people have asked them to do, and none of those things worked.
And I never said Borges called a great game plan in any game besides ND (which when I watched again, it was a good game plan that DG bailed out terrible OL play, but you can't hide bad OL play). I never said he's had a good year. In fact, it's far from it. Look at the offense, does it look like a good year. But you have not once, outside of your desire for Michigan to be Indiana's offense, made a single argument for what should be done. I'm trying to use logic to argue against the illogical. It's an unfair debate. But you'll continue to make up things and twist things and troll. That's great.
November 11th, 2013 at 7:21 PM ^
1. Your wording makes it seem like you are not only defending Borges, but lauding his gameplan.
2. I did make suggestions. With your infinite wisdom, you told me it was impossible for Michigan to add any tempo to their offense because you can't change schemes midseason even with a bye week. You know, even though they added Tackle-Over. I also suggested abandoning a useless player in having a RB on the field for a player designated to do a useful job, which you just disregarded.
3. You've made the argument that Borges has improved his QB play over time, which has not been the case whatsoever.
4. So Borges has nothing to do with the offensive line? Odd, considering its part of the offense.
Can't wait for next week's 100,000 word epic on how Al Borges is the only man alive who could improve Peyton Manning's footwork.
November 11th, 2013 at 7:52 PM ^
Where? Where am I arguing something that we have not been arguing about?
November 11th, 2013 at 8:10 PM ^
That's not what a strawman argument is
November 11th, 2013 at 11:46 PM ^
Let me rephrase: We're arguing the same things we've been arguing. I'm not bringing up anything new you haven't said or implied through your writing. So where is the straw man? Where is this new stand I have you taking that you haven't already taken?
November 12th, 2013 at 12:28 AM ^
And keep putting words in my mouth that I never said. I answer your questions and you ignore it and ask the same question implying I gave an answer I didn't (such as when I said I didn't think Borges called a great game on one thread and then the very next post said that I was lauding him when I said directly I didn't think he was great). Then you act like you're refuting me, I bring up more points, and you make grandiose claims like "I can't see the big picture". Then you point out other others and act like I think I'm "Bill Walsh" and yada, yada, yada.
When I make actual points and try to explain how practice schedules, schedules in season, actual practice sessions, etc, go (because I've seen these things, yes, from D1 college programs, I've seen these things first hand) you ignore them and repeat the things I said above.
November 12th, 2013 at 12:58 AM ^
Keep on doing what you're doing Space Cowboy. I for one really appreciate your level headedness and logic.
November 11th, 2013 at 7:05 PM ^
Every week you go out of your way to excuse Borges. Are you related to him or something?
November 11th, 2013 at 7:12 PM ^
I have yet to try to defend something that has some validity outside of "I have a different opinion". But when people use terrible logic or talk out of their ass, I call them out on it. Such as a bunch of people claiming things are predictable, then the two people that actually stepped out and tried to answer the five 1st and 10 plays I showed above (to their credit, at least they tried unlike the others that skipped it and just tried to call me out more) are 50% as far as predicting if a play was run or pass, despite already seeing every single one of these plays two days ago.
November 11th, 2013 at 9:33 PM ^
Apparently they felt really good about this game, because it was the only game they were prepared for all year!
November 11th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^
everyone knows when:
-Norfleet enters game --- reverse / handoff
-Green enters game --- run
-1st down -- run w/ blitz incoming
- 2nd down -- run w/ blitz incoming
- 3rd down -- max protect pass
November 11th, 2013 at 2:16 PM ^
He wants his playbook back before anyone else reads it.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:21 PM ^
No, second down is the play action that gets Gardner destroyed before he has time to throw. Everything else is accurate.
November 11th, 2013 at 8:27 PM ^
When Denard enters game against Ohio State - run.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^
November 11th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^
I don't really care what he says publicly. He's been a coach speak guy since day one. I appreciate not throwing anybody under the bus, but at the same time I really hope he's cracking skulls behind the scenes.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:14 PM ^
Totally agree. How would it help for him to acknowledge issues with play calling publicly? The only thing it would do is estrange his staff. That doesn't really seem productive. I'm good with the coach speak. What I'm not good with is the actual play calling.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:15 PM ^
There's a difference between throwing someone under the bus and acknowleding an opponent knowing what you're doing before you do it. He could have simply said if two opponents in a row have said that they've known what we're going to do, then we as coaches need to make sure that doesn't happen again.
Also, its not throwing someone under the bus if they've already been run over by the bus.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^
November 11th, 2013 at 2:18 PM ^
Lou Holtz.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^
We scored 13 points and it was obvious to everyone in the stadium what plays we were running.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:10 PM ^
November 11th, 2013 at 2:10 PM ^
November 11th, 2013 at 2:15 PM ^
apparently
November 11th, 2013 at 2:12 PM ^
November 11th, 2013 at 2:12 PM ^
Nebraska 2011 was a game that was called GREAT. I think that came close or broke a record for RPS+. Must have been talking about that film.
November 11th, 2013 at 4:16 PM ^
Happier days.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:13 PM ^
How can he possibly argue that? If the opposing defense said it was predictable and they obviously blew everything up, then it was predictable. What is there to argue?
November 11th, 2013 at 2:15 PM ^
Hoke: "Nuh uh"
Nebraska defender: "Yuh huh"
Hoke: "Nuh uh"
Nebraska defender: "Is so"
Hoke: "Is not"
Nebraska defender: "Is too"
Hoke: "I know you are but what am I?"
November 11th, 2013 at 2:29 PM ^
you are glue...........infinity...........
November 11th, 2013 at 2:30 PM ^
You lost me after Hoke stopped communicating in caveman sounds.
November 11th, 2013 at 4:17 PM ^
Brilliant.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:15 PM ^
I dunno, I think it's just coach speak. It's pretty obvious the defense knew what was coming - heck, I knew what was coming from my living room. Hoke probably just doesn't want to throw anybody under the bus in public, which is admirable. I'd expect he's having different conversations behind closed doors.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:27 PM ^
Come ON man you really don't mean that do you? You are definitely one of most favorite posters but for Hoke to say Nebraska really didnt know the plays that were coming is almost comical. No...it IS comical.
It's like when my 9 year old "hides" something in his hand and says "guess which hand dad" and I can see it sticking out between his fingers. If I told him "Tommy - I can see which hand you're holding it in" and he tells me "no I cant". What do you say then?
Virtually the entire board now agrees Borges tips his plays. The opposing team coaches say Borges tips his plays. The opposing team players say Borges tips his plays. Commentators doing the game say Borges tips his plays. The results on the field would seem to indicate that Borges tips his plays.
Yet our HC doesnt think Borges tips his plays. I dont even know anymore......
November 11th, 2013 at 2:41 PM ^
I think you just misunderstood what I said, or maybe I just didn't communicate my thought clearly. But my point was basically "just because Hoke said it doesn't mean that's what he really thinks."
My reasoning is really the same as yours: the results on the field are so obviously bad, there can really only be 2 explanations for Hoke's comments:
1) He really is oblivious to what's going on and has no idea what to do or how to fix it (in which case, the team is really screwed), or
2) He's painfully aware of the reality of the team on the field, but doesn't want to create further drama by throwing people under the bus in public.
I think it's very reasonable to think that he would have a different message to the coaches/team in private than the message he gives to the media/public.
Hopefully that makes a little more sense. Basically, I don't disagree at all in the general consensus on UM's play; I just don't think Hoke truly believes that the playcalling is OK.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:48 PM ^
Sadly my friend I'm going with #1. He's oblivious to what's going on.
November 11th, 2013 at 2:59 PM ^
As I've thought about it more, I think there could be a third explanation: what if he's so concerned with creating an identity for the program (THIS is who we are, and so we're going to continue doing things THIS way, no matter what, because THIS is who we are dagummit) that he's driving the program into the ground right now. If that's the case, could that end up being a positive in the long run? I really don't know. On the flip side, if that's the case, is it possible for him to make adjustments to maximize the abilities of the team right now, and still maintain a semblance of their identity?
I really don't know. I can't argue with you. I suppose the main thing keeping me from going off the ledge is the assumption that there's no way he got to where he is now by being that incompetent. But it's really frustrating and disappointing to see this team regress over the course of the season. I didn't have very high expectations for this team coming into the season (I've been expecting 8 wins), and still am not expecting much until 2015, but man, this sucks right now.
November 11th, 2013 at 3:16 PM ^
"But it's really frustrating and disappointing to see this team regress over the course of the season." It's one thing to want to do Manball, even knowing we have young o-linemen. most fans would be ok with struggles early but continued improvement as the season(s) moved forward. however, this offense/o-line is regressing. the evidence continues to pile up that these offense coaches, at a minimum, aren't getting the job done and moving in the right direction; but in reality, they are boderline incompetent.
November 11th, 2013 at 10:01 PM ^
I actually think it is #3. I don't think he could have had success anywhere by being that clueless. My hunch is that he has decided it is time to run the offense as a power running team with his offensive line recruits. RR made that move in year one so that it would not delay the migration to his system. I think Hoke has decided to do the same in year 3 with his recruits.
I could be wrong, but I don't think he wants to teach his line recruits a different blocking scheme right out of the gate. It's the only thing that makes any sense to me. I believe that is why he is defending Al Borges. Because Al Borges is following his lead!