True. The one criticism I have of the zone-read---or the playaction off the zone-read---is that it (1) takes a long time to develop, and (2) requires the QB to be standing still during that time. The conventional playaction is desireable because it involves the QB moving backward as the handoff is faked, thus mirroring the drop back that provides the QB with some separation from the pass rush. But by the time the zone-read aspect is complete, the pass rush will already be on top of Martinez, forcing him to make a throw under duress. This is avoided if you rely on a conventional playaction or, better, yet a conventional playaction to bootleg. I am telling you, if they roll Martinez out, he will be deadly.
If you watch the playaction passes run by Oregon and Michigan, they do get their QB out of the pocket. The QB fakes the handoff, then rolls out left or right like they would if they were going to run on the zone read, and they have the option of taking off or of throwing it - they're effectively reading whether the cornerback or safety is crashing down on the run, or staying in pass coverage. But the QB is out of the pocket. I've also seen both of those teams run it where it is actually built for just 5-10 yard gains, and it develops pretty quickly.
As far as the pass rush - the fake handoff in the shotgun doesn't take any more time than faking a handoff as you're moving back from center, and in the shotgun you've already got distance between you and the pass rush. You basically just indicted any playaction pass that happens out of the shotgun as being less effective than from under center, but what makes playaction passes effective is setting them up so the defense thinks you're going to run. The only reason the formation matters is because you want the defense to think run. If you want the defense to think zone-read, you better look like you're running zone-read, and not line up under center.
This is where we might disagree a little bit. There are two possibilities: Your view is that opposing defenses, seizing on Martinez's injury, licked their chops and felt encouraged to rush because they knew he was no longer a running threat. The other view is that opposing defenses, watching Martinez melt in the face of any kind of pass rush, felt encouraged to bring the heat on every play.
Now as you consider these two possibilities, let me point out one thing: Cody Green is certainly no where near the running threat of Martinez, and probably isn't even as much of a running threat as an injured Martinez. But all of sudden we put him in the game and Washington's pass rush seems to slow down, or at least doesn't seem to faze Cody. Many, many teams have QBs without anything approaching Martinez's mobility and yet you don't see them taking blitzes on virtually every down.
Now ask yourself: Do you think there was any kind of cause-and-effect relationship between Martinez's hapless performance in the face of OU's pass rush in the CCG and UW's game plan in the Holiday Bow? And if you are a DC going into next season, you are going to bring the heat on Martinez again until he can prove that he can effectively manage it. Healthy or not, the read on Martinez is that he panics in the pocket and is a liability in the face of a blitz. If I'm an opposing defense, I am going to blitz on every down and see what happens. There is at least a 50/50 chance he panics and makes a bad pass for a pick, fumbles, or takes a 9-yard sack. You'd be stupid NOT to.
Of course teams saw that Martinez was vulnerable in the pocket, but that only mattered
after he was injured. Any below-average football fan can see that Martinez is a below-average passer who struggles in the pocket, but any below-average football fan could also see him lighting up defenses before he got hurt. The truth of the matter is that with Martinez hurt and in the game, all he could do was hand the ball off or pass. The option game was gone, the QB scramble game was gone. All you had to do was contain the edges and blitz up the middle, and our offense would fold, because without Martinez, Roy Helu and Rex Burkhead suddenly looked very average, and Martinez is just a sitting duck in the pocket.
You take away Martinez's legs, you take away his game. Saying that he's bad in the pocket, which is what you're doing, is just stating the obvious. But when he is healthy, his legs make up for that on an individual basis and in our system, and he didn't have his legs for the entire second half of the season. Throwing that plain and simple fact out in favor of, "Well, defenses just figured out what to do," is completely insane.
Michael Jordan could smoke me in a one-on-one game, piece of cake. He'd run circles around me, dunk, and I'd probably just try to shoot 3 pointers the whole time in order to ensure I at least got a shot off. However, a couple months later, MJ breaks his leg, and we play again, this time with MJ in a wheelchair, and this time I win. Now did I win because I learned on film that if I drive hard to the basket around MJ and defend his jumpshot aggressively that he's beatable? Or did I win because he was in a frickin wheelchair?
You can talk about SDSU and Texas if you want, you really think their defenses are that much better than Oklahoma State and Missouri? They both had the Texas tape, they knew what to do, they tried to do it, but Watson adjusted and Martinez developed. Washington didn't lose to us in game 1 because they didn't realize that all they had to do was blitz Martinez. They lost because Martinez was running circles around them. In Game 2, Martinez couldn't run circles around them, so all they had to do was stop Helu/Burkhead and watch Martinez flounder in the pocket.
Is Martinez a pocket passer? Absolutely not, and he's never going to be. But in our system, he doesn't need to be and to grade him on that curve simply doesn't make sense, it's out of context.
This is where I feel like some of us need a reality check. Yes, we had a freshman QB who was playing injured. And yes those things are not helpful. But for crying out loud, WE WEREN'T EVEN CLOSE. We scored 1 TD against UW. No offensive TDs against Texas. No offensive TDs against A&M.
I mean, c'mon for crying out loud. The excuses I keep hearing---injury, freshman QB---might explain why we weren't a top 10 offense. But those excuses aren't enough to explain why we were absolutely pathetic on offense down the stretch. Throw out the early season numbers. We were HORRIBLE on offense many, many times this year. Admit it: You winced everytime the offense took the field and were just praying we wouldn't turn it over deep in our own territory. There is a TREMENDOUS gap between "totally anemic" and "dominant," and Martinez's youth and injury are not enough to bridge that gap. Not even close.
Here's what I'd say:
SDSU: Didn't see the game, but understand Martinez generally tried to do too much and limited himself as a result. Without him producing, Helu and Burkhead disappear, as do the receivers for obvious reason. Bad game for a healthy Martinez.
Texas: Muschamp sells out to stop the run, bringing 9 anytime we show zone read. As a result, receivers are running completely wide open. The ball is thrown, hits them in the hands, and falls to the turf. What do you want from Martinez there? Or from Watson, for that matter?
Texas A&M: Martinez starts, gets a field goal on his first drive, and then gets re-injured. The rest of the game, we can't run the zone read option, the play our offense is built around. Martinez can't scramble from the pocket, and he's a poor pocket passer. When Martinez can't produce, see SDSU game.
Oklahoma: See Texas A&M game.
Washington: See Oklahoma game.
Saying that starting a freshman QB who is also injured
might be reason for an offense not to finish in the top 10 is crazy. How many offenses do you know of that finish in the top 10 with a freshman QB? In 2010, there were none, not even one with a
healthy freshman QB.
When it comes to winning national championships you need to get lucky, and a big part of that is keeping your QB healthy. Darron Thomas, Cam Newton, Greg McElroy, Colt McCoy, Tim Tebow, Sam Bradford, etc etc. You're not going to lose your starting QB and stay in the race unless you have Brook Berringer as a backup, which we don't have right now. Martinez went down and that crippled our offense as much as 2008 Oklahoma was crippled by losing Sam Bradford. Thinking that those offenses should just plow straight ahead without so much as a blip simply isn't realistic.
Like I said, there are adjustments that need to be made with our offense, and player development that needs to happen, but right now people have lost perspective and are overreacting.