Offensive Playcalling
I know this may not be a popular thought. I know plenty of people will thing "who cares? we won the game!"
However, I just rewatched the EMU game and haven't been more upset at the offensive playcalling, especially in a blowout win in...well, maybe in my lifetime.
I was critical of Borges after the ND game, saying that he has not called plays to get Denard in a rhythm all season. Particularly early in the game. He's been BRILLIANT at figuring out the defense and calling plays later in games. I think the numbers prove this thought.
Now I'm going to discredit any plays called inside your own 5 yardline, there is only so much you can do there. But where are the quick slants? the bubble screens? the short rhythm throws to get the QB in sync and the WRs involved. Where are the throws that Oklahoma have been making a living off of for YEARS?! Now do we run that offense or have that personnel? Heck no. But that doesn't mean you can't run some of the same plays.
To me it just seems so obvious because it's two-fold. Not only do you get Denard and the WRs involved and in rhythm...you also loosen up the middle of the defense so that your RBs get more space to operate (or Denard in the run game). As much of a genius as Borges is claimed to be, what is the reasoning for not doing this?
The most frustrating drive for me was actually our first touchdown drive. Denard has a beautiful long run to flip field position, and then we run him like 5-6 times in the next 6-7 plays! #1 let the kid get a breather, #2 don't get the kid hurt, #3 get others involved, #4 this is EMU! why are we wearing down our QB vs. EMU!? and #5 they have 8 guys in the box!
So I ask, was anyone else disappointed and frustrated? Was anyone else hoping to establish a short passing game against EMU and SDSU that we could combine with the deep throws from ND? I'm not saying we need to be the Air Raid offense, I would've just liked to have seen Denard get the "Lloyd Carr - he's a freshman QB treatment" and have a bunch of short throws that gets the ball in the hands of the playmakers and allows them to get involved and make plays early.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^
I don't necessarily disagree with the OP, and there's always room to critique the playcalling. But you have to expect relatively vanilla playcalling on both sides of the ball vs. a club like Eastern. I would imagine Borges & Hoke saw it as an opportunity to "work on shit" a little bit.
Still, I'm not sure I'd even bother working on shit at this point. It's fairly clear that the personnel on this offense are most efficient & comfortable (not to mention EFFECTIVE) running the spread... so you know, run the spread and junk. Aaron Shea be damned for a couple seconds. Once you have the proper personnel to line up and smash fullback facefirst into linebacker, have at it. Right now isn't the time to force a square peg into a round hole, and I think Borges & Hoke understand that.
There's no reason you can't run the spread and be a little more careful with the football. There's no reason you can't run the spread and you know, play actual defense. There's no reason you can't run the spread and win games.
If Hoke & Borges are smart, they'll stick with somewhat of a hybrid set up even through B1G play.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:25 AM ^
The BTN announcers mentioned several times during the game that during their game-prep with Borges that he said calling runs for Denard could be "intoxicating."
Maybe he was drunk.
/s
September 19th, 2011 at 11:37 AM ^
September 19th, 2011 at 11:57 AM ^
I agree with the Diary completely. It seems futile to have Denard pass in the pocket. He can't see the field over the lineman! If he's passing in the pocket it shoud be quick throws (like last year) and if you want to go deep then role him out where he can see the field better and create something if there's nothing available.
And I don't understand why we're running him so much up the middle. I would very much favor running him on the edges where he can run out of bounds more.
Denard is not a good pocket passer. Period. It is up to the coaching staff to realize this limitation and modify the play book to suit his strengths.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:29 PM ^
These are division 1 athletes who've been playing football, even non spread option football, for the better part of 5-8 years(if they didnt play any junior/rocket).
This constant refrain about what they cant do is just frustrating as all hell to me. This is not brain science, hell its not even like asking my drummer to play guitar.
Same thing with Denard. The continuous droning on about how he shouldnt be under center or be asked to make certian passes. WTF?? is he not the quarterback? did we allow our team to become such a hot house flower that the players can simply be excused by saying that they "can't" in regards to what are fundamental and rudimentary actions that are being carried out coast to coast on a weekly basis.
I"m sorry but I refuse to act as if asking Denard and the rest of the offense to simply execute the plays is somehow wrong or incorrect for the coaches makes me cringe. We're not asking any of them to make 50yd field goals or perform with the band. Its fucking football, lets please stop making excuses for everyone, especially Denard, and hold them accountible.
if you cant run an effective or at least semi effective off tackle right out of an I formation for positive yardage then go home, or go play against guys your size/skill. We dont need any hot house flowers with a resume of stats and excuses. We need football players.
Over the next 3 games its time for the players to do their share and execute what the coaches call. The coaches have shown a willingness and aptitude for accomodating what this group of players are "used" to doing as we all hoped and expected that they would(learning from the folly of the previous staff). This should be a 2 way street and we are not being unreasonable to expect it from this group of football players.
Rant over