I don't feel like Beck does enough to prepare for a specific opponent or a scheme. It just feels to me like the philosophy is "this is what we do, and are gonna do every week, regardless of who is lined up". And that manifests itself in game management as a lack of specific adjustments.
I guess I had hoped that we had had something planned for Michigan State, perhaps a wrinkle we hadn't seen. Instead it seemed more vanilla than usual. I don't really like the "vanilla" excuse.... to me it seems like a justification for an inflexible, undynamic game plan.
Beck doesn't seem to ever have a plan B or a plan C when plan A doesn't work... he just hammers plan A again and again, somehow hoping it will force itself to work.
I hope they have the answers for it should we be able to get a rematch.
I agree 100%. The last 2 weeks we have been running the ball, so keep on doing it. We had great field position in the first half and they were keying on Ameer, so why not play action on first down. By 3rd down, there ears were pinned back and they were coming.
I agree as well with both of you...that has been my frustration/venting in other threads too. Beck's primary responsibility is to give the offensive players the arsenal they need to defeat their opponent on any given Saturday. Some Saturday's basic vanilla will work fine, but for a team like MSU, we needed to see more variations of the playbook that leveraged the strengths of our players.
Also, regarding Tommy losing his composure, especially in the 2nd quarter, I would have taken him out for a drive or two and let him regroup and re-focus. I've seen it done many times at the collegiate level, and 9 times out of 10 the starter comes back in and gets the job done. Tommy certainly came alive late in the game, but we needed him to get back on point by the 2nd quarter. That decision to keep Tommy in would fall with Bo and not Beck.