PFF grades the offense against OU

DefenderAO said:
One thing I did see is Rahmir's willingness and effectiveness at blocking.  He looked very good in that phase, not to mention his receiving threat.
Click to expand...


Agreed, and based on what we know of what this staff does with their "how you practice that week determines if you start" policy, it all makes sense that he got in there. He was probably pass blocking like a mad man in practice last week also.

Not knocking that policy at all, by the way.

I think Johnson probably has more acceleration and straight line speed than even Wan'Dale had. If you can spring him open for a pass in the flat he is dangerous.

 
Our playbook has the inside zone play as its core running play. We just can't make that work. When teams these very well coached teams in the West can lay off the run and focus on defending the pass- that is going to be a real problem

Since the blocking is a structural issue that isnt going to be solved quickly with this coaching staff- the solution is going to have to be scheme. We saw some of it on Saturday. The unbalanced formation with Teddy at TE- with the motion man kicking out the EMLOS and the RB leading up for a good old fashioned QB power play. Wisconsin was famous for these overload formations.

 We lined up fairly quickly on those plays as we got near the goal line- the check with me was off. Tempo- formations and scheme will have to be it. Note that most of the time- the check with me PERFECT run play ends up with a 2 yard gain after resetting etc- very frustrating to watch.  Lets see some more orbit motion option- doesnt have to be triple, outside zone. We have yet to see much bootleg action, if we cant run IZ at least boot off of it and get something going the other way. The power with the motion man kicking out the EMLOS has been consistent money- so why not a wham type play further inside?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Undone said:
Agreed, and based on what we know of what this staff does with their "how you practice that week determines if you start" policy, it all makes sense that he got in there. He was probably pass blocking like a mad man in practice last week also.

Not knocking that policy at all, by the way.

I think Johnson probably has more acceleration and straight line speed than even Wan'Dale had. If you can spring him open for a pass in the flat he is dangerous.
Click to expand...
Would love to see him in more wheel route scenarios like Washington would be in.  

 
Nebraska55fan said:
Our playbook has the inside zone play as its core running play. We just can't make that work. When teams these very well coached teams in the West can lay off the run and focus on defending the pass- that is going to be a real problem

Since the blocking is a structural issue that isnt going to be solved quickly with this coaching staff- the solution is going to have to be scheme. We saw some of it on Saturday. The unbalanced formation with Teddy at TE- with the motion man kicking out the EMLOS and the RB leading up for a good old fashioned QB power play. Wisconsin was famous for these overload formations.

 We lined up fairly quickly on those plays as we got near the goal line- the check with me was off. Tempo- formations and scheme will have to be it. Note that most of the time- the check with me PERFECT run play ends up with a 2 yard gain after resetting etc- very frustrating to watch.  Lets see some more orbit motion option- doesnt have to be triple, outside zone. We have yet to see much bootleg action, if we cant run IZ at least boot off of it and get something going the other way. The power with the motion man kicking out the EMLOS has been consistent money- so why not a wham type play further inside?
Click to expand...


Totally agree with your entire assessment. The bold is the crux of the issue and probably the crux of getting to a winning seasons.

To build off of what you've said, I'd probably summarize it all in this way: Frost has to identify what his team is best at executing, not necessarily what his "on-paper" goals are. I think this is difficult to do in the middle of a college football season because:

1. At the college level, some of the players are still learning the game and don't have it all completely down yet.

2. The seasons are just so damn short.

But Scott has to figure it out - and he has to figure it out this week.

 
This is my best guess: I think at some point in the offseason after year 1 or perhaps during the 2019 season, it just finally hit Frost that his "2017 UCF playbook and scheme" wasn't going to quite happen given where his relative talent was that he had to work with, combined with having to go up against stout defenses in this conference.

So he tweaked his plan a bit (which is excellent). I think he started focusing more on the inside zone power run at that point in time. And because it's basically the simplest thing you can run from a training standpoint it made sense.

But our offensive line just isn't man handling guys at all.

 
Nebraska55fan said:
I'm hoping they put Teddy at LT and move Corcoran inside.
Click to expand...
They're kinda running out of time if they want to do this. I would hope in a "win now" season, they would try it before the heart of B1G play. Teddy has one more game left before they decide if they want to redshirt or burn it. Give him the lion's share of the snaps at LT this week, move Turner inside. If Teddy > Turner at LT, and Turner > Piper at LG, stick with it. If it's no real upgrade then ride with Turner. 

 
Hilltop said:
We have run play action all year.  Not sure where this started or came from?  Maybe some 55 followers?  I already proved him painfully wrong on that point and it died for a while.  Bottom line- Nebraska regularly uses play action... In every game... Just like almost every other football team on the planet.  In fact, we have done it pretty well this year.
Click to expand...


Play-action passing by Martinez this year per PFF:

Illinois: 5/11, 96 yards, 8.7 ypa, 31.8% of all passes

Fordham: 15/20, 229 yards, 11.5 ypa, 80.8% of all passes

Buffalo: 4/7, 82 yards, 11.7 ypa, 33.3% of all passes

Oklahoma: 9/11, 172 yards, 15.6 ypa, 33.3% of all passes

Total Play-Action: 27/40, 451 yards, 11.3 ypa, 34.6% of all passes

Non-Play-Action: 38/59, 566 yards, 9.6 ypa, 65.4% of all passes

 
Mavric said:
Play-action passing by Martinez this year per PFF:

Illinois: 5/11, 96 yards, 8.7 ypa, 31.8% of all passes

Fordham: 15/20, 229 yards, 11.5 ypa, 80.8% of all passes

Buffalo: 4/7, 82 yards, 11.7 ypa, 33.3% of all passes

Oklahoma: 9/11, 172 yards, 15.6 ypa, 33.3% of all passes

Total Play-Action: 27/40, 451 yards, 11.3 ypa, 34.6% of all passes

Non-Play-Action: 38/59, 566 yards, 9.6 ypa, 65.4% of all passes
Click to expand...
Do they count the plays where he lazily puts the ball out and the back doesn't really try to sell it as play action?  I know technically it is but it's not fooling anyone.

 
Mavric said:
We've run quite a bit of Wham blocking this year.  That's what we ran against Buffalo for the TD when you tried to say it was a log block.
Click to expand...
 We blocked the EMLOS on that play and the blocker did end up blocking the defender inside instead of kicking out. Technically it is a wham concept, but Im talking about an Inside Wham play. 

 As a RB I read that block- he's getting kicked out is what we want, if he squeezes it, I bounce outside. Many times the motioning player is running right past the EMLOS- not making the block. MUCH easier to make that block with no motion- the inside wham play per the diagram. 

The WHAM, in the diagrams is leaving an interior defender unblocked. The TE/H in essence traps- but the agreed upon nomenclature is Wham. Glad I could help you with that. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We have had games now where our passing game is on point.  What we need to see is that when a team adjusts to take that away, the running game takes over.

IF...we can do that, then that's when other teams have an "oh s#!t" reaction.

For YEARS we have needed to do something that forced teams to take our passing game seriously.  We now have that.  It needs to continue and hopefully the rest will fall into place.

Of course, the line needs to improve also.

 
MyBloodIsRed16 said:
Do they count the plays where he lazily puts the ball out and the back doesn't really try to sell it as play action?  I know technically it is but it's not fooling anyone.
Click to expand...
They do and it is effective.  If defenders have eyes in the backfield and even have to pause for a split second, it gives receivers a step.  This allows Adrian more time than if we ran a long and drawn out play action- which is a bad idea given our O-line performance.  

 
Hilltop said:
They do and it is effective.  If defenders have eyes in the backfield and even have to pause for a split second, it gives receivers a step.  This allows Adrian more time than if we ran a long and drawn out play action- which is a bad idea given our O-line performance.  
Click to expand...
 Adrian is better in the open field than in the pocket- he is pretty good at making a defender miss in space vs in the pocket. This creates more issues for the defense creating a second run threat and gives Martinez additional time for receivers to run the deeper routes. 

 
Nebraska55fan said:
 Adrian is better in the open field than in the pocket- he is pretty good at making a defender miss in space vs in the pocket. This creates more issues for the defense creating a second run threat and gives Martinez additional time for receivers to run the deeper routes. 
Click to expand...
And Oklahoma knew this so adjusted their defense to keep him boxed in the majority of the time.  They also had a spy/delayed rush to disrupt passes outside the pocket.

Not sure why you quoted my post to make this statement though?  

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top