Riley/Langsdorf's Offense is Callahan 2.0

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

 

 

If the coaches call a run play and the QB throws an incomplete pass instead, how do you not hold him in some way accountable?

Obviously there was some sort of breakdown, because even if they truly called a roll-run play, it didn't get conveyed to the rest of the team. Ozigbo thought it was a pass and blows right by the guy he should have blocked and Carter just runs a route after sitting not getting the signal from Tommy to slider over and do the only thing that would give the play a chance of working.

 

Watch the video starting at 2:20:00:

 

Banker comes up to Riley and points at the playclock as it runs under :10 seconds, and Tommy doesn't even get under center until there's :04 left on the playclock. They clearly didn't have enough time to get into position to execute the play. Carter is in position, watching Tommy for the signal to shift, but there wasn't enough time. At that point, Langsdorf and Riley should be fully aware that the play has zero chance of success and should have called a timeout. So sure, if you wanna blame Tommy because he was put into a no win situation, you can certainly have that opinion, even though it's verifiably wrong.

The success of the play comes from RUNNING THE BALL AS CALLED. He didn't even need positive yards because the clock still runs. His one job was to not throw the ball regardless of what everyone else thought was going on.

Again, watch the video. There was obvious confusion, and it sure seems it wasn't conveyed to everyone that this was a pure run rollout play. The play was doomed before the ball was snapped, and it's pretty easy to see why.

 

It's a football 101 example of overthinking a simple problem.

If Tommy knows it's a designed run with the ball in his hands it doesn't really matter where the TE or RB are. Sure you want some extra blocking and protection but it doesn't negate the called run.

 

Which is why I don't think he got that it was a pure run. They can say what they want in the PC, but the video shows otherwise.

 

Edit: Notice Carter with his head turned, waiting for the shift call.

 

 

Put your players in the best position to succeed. That didn't happen on Saturday.

 

I also see Armstrong about to cut up the field until #52 fills the goes to the hole which tells me he was about to run until he changed his mind.

 

Again-The guy with the ball was told to run. The only relevance Carter and Ozigbo have is extra protection.

 

We aren't going to agree. I see things differently than you. I agree to a point that the coaches need to do better but a QB throwing the ball on a run play can't be overlooked.

[True2tRA]

I think the coaches screwed up not calling a simple run play and confusing a simple situation.

 

I blame Tommy for throwing the ball when he was told not to throw the ball.

 

Problem is, Tommy didn't understand WHY he wasn't supposed to throw the ball.

 

Tommy was thinking maintain FG range. Coaches were thinking keep the clock running.

 

Communication is important.

 

 

By the way Saunders, in response to your comment here

 

 

 

Blaming it on the players isn't just wrong, it's akin to blaming them for the defensive failures of the last few years because "they just didn't execute". It's asinine, insulting, and pure bullsh#t.

 

It's not asinine, insulting, or pure bullsh#t. Even with Pelini, Banker, or any coach, the players have responsibility in the process no matter what. The problem with Pelini using the words "they just didn't execute" too many times, was that he was saying the same thing in year 3 that he was saying in year 7. Somewhere things got too complicated or just weren't being taught well enough because our defense wasn't executing on a regular basis for quite a few years. That's when you begin to ask why your coaches aren't doing something to change that. Whether it be recruiting guys who CAN execute the scheme, replacing a coach, changing the scheme, etc. In year seven, with multiple seasons full of defensive melt downs, you expect a coach to begin to understand that it can't just continue to be the players fault.

 

The same will apply to Banker if he doesn't do the necessary things to ensure his defenses success, but 5 games in, he's hardly had the opportunity to do any of those things. He's not even sure who or what he has here yet. He's not familiar with his players, his opponents offense, or any of those key things he needs to evaluate before he can even consider what changes might possibly be made.

 

The players always have ownership in how things go. But when a coach puts his players in a position to fail over and over, for a long period of time, then you begin to blame the coach for doing so.

[True2tRA]

We focus a lot on that one play, but that entire offensive game plan was completely amateur. Any coach or QB that continues to go to the deep ball in that kind of wind is simply not using their brain.

[Saunders]

We focus a lot on that one play, but that entire offensive game plan was completely amateur. Any coach or QB that continues to go to the deep ball in that kind of wind is simply not using their brain.

Yup. At halftime, they should have adjusted the gameplan, but didn't.

[Saunders]

I think the coaches screwed up not calling a simple run play and confusing a simple situation.

 

I blame Tommy for throwing the ball when he was told not to throw the ball.

 

Problem is, Tommy didn't understand WHY he wasn't supposed to throw the ball.

 

Tommy was thinking maintain FG range. Coaches were thinking keep the clock running.

 

Communication is important.

 

 

By the way Saunders, in response to your comment here

 

 

 

Blaming it on the players isn't just wrong, it's akin to blaming them for the defensive failures of the last few years because "they just didn't execute". It's asinine, insulting, and pure bullsh#t.

 

It's not asinine, insulting, or pure bullsh#t. Even with Pelini, Banker, or any coach, the players have responsibility in the process no matter what. The problem with Pelini using the words "they just didn't execute" too many times, was that he was saying the same thing in year 3 that he was saying in year 7. Somewhere things got too complicated or just weren't being taught well enough because our defense wasn't executing on a regular basis for quite a few years. That's when you begin to ask why your coaches aren't doing something to change that. Whether it be recruiting guys who CAN execute the scheme, replacing a coach, changing the scheme, etc. In year seven, with multiple seasons full of defensive melt downs, you expect a coach to begin to understand that it can't just continue to be the players fault.

 

The same will apply to Banker if he doesn't do the necessary things to ensure his defenses success, but 5 games in, he's hardly had the opportunity to do any of those things. He's not even sure who or what he has here yet. He's not familiar with his players, his opponents offense, or any of those key things he needs to evaluate before he can even consider what changes might possibly be made.

 

The players always have ownership in how things go. But when a coach puts his players in a position to fail over and over, for a long period of time, then you begin to blame the coach for doing so.

I agree somewhat, but when posters say things akin to "Tommy lost all 3 games, not the coaches" it's pure BS. It's a new system, there's still trust being created between the players and staff. You're paid millions of dollars to put your guys in the best position to succeed. At times, that clearly hasn't happened, and this play was a perfect example of that. That's my problem with blaming the players at this point.

[NUinID]

DiNardo and Howard Griffith on BTN Live both feel it was a great call. From a run the clock/safe standpoint. I guess it probably was a good call if it works. I do know at the time before the play was ran I wasn't thing boot run. I was thinking give the ball to a RB and get what you can and keep running clock.

 

IMO it was a bad call because it is something they normally don't run, I get that they tagged the play as run only, but as MR said in his PC on Monday, Tommy being an athlete kicked in at that point and he forgot about running and was trying to make a play. Sometime you just get too cute. They ran the same basic play about 8x in a row and then decide late in the play clock to mix it up.

 

TA didn't do what he was suppose to do, but the coaches over complicated by changing the normal play and by being slow to get the play into game. It is the coaches and TA fault, but mostly it is on the coaches for over complicating matters.

[cg_8]

TERRIBLE CALL!!

I actually cannot believe that people actually think putting your OLine in pass protection on a play that you don't want to stop the clock is best. Conceptually that is dumb. If you don't want your QB to accidentally throw the ball, then call a play that sends you OL downfield so your QB knows that he'll get a illegal man down field penalty. It's that simple.

 

Instead, you give college kids the option to throw by giving them the pieces to throw the ball?

 

No Illegal Man Down Field?: Check

 

Eligible Receivers running routes?: Check

 

Your QB with the ball in his hands?: Check

 

I can't fault TA for trying to make a play.

 

But as coaches on a critical 3rd down, 3 TO's and a full array of running plays in front of you?

 

I'm not saying the coaching staff in general is terrible, but for that play, it was absolutely terrible. I still like the direction of the offense and the offensive staff, but that was terrible on the part of the coaches. TA shouldn't have thrown the ball. But hey, give a college kid the ingredients for a party, tell him not to party at all, then see what happens...

[GBRedneck]

 

If the coaches call a run play and the QB throws an incomplete pass instead, how do you not hold him in some way accountable?

 

Obviously there was some sort of breakdown, because even if they truly called a roll-run play, it didn't get conveyed to the rest of the team. Ozigbo thought it was a pass and blows right by the guy he should have blocked and Carter just runs a route after sitting not getting the signal from Tommy to slider over and do the only thing that would give the play a chance of working.

 

Watch the video starting at 2:20:00: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRr0wwA3l84?t=8400

 

Banker comes up to Riley and points at the playclock as it runs under :10 seconds, and Tommy doesn't even get under center until there's :04 left on the playclock. They clearly didn't have enough time to get into position to execute the play. Carter is in position, watching Tommy for the signal to shift, but there wasn't enough time. At that point, Langsdorf and Riley should be fully aware that the play has zero chance of success and should have called a timeout.

 

So sure, if someone wants to blame Tommy (or whichever player) because they were put into a no win situation, you can certainly have that opinion, even though it's verifiably wrong.

 

It's worse than that. They never should have been in a position to need to call a timeout as the playclock is winding down amidst mass confusion. They should have went up to the ref as soon as the playclock started and said, "We want a timeout when the playclock hits :01." Then, get everybody on the same page. Run your play and do the same thing again for 4th down. Worst case scenario would have been Illinois getting one shot at a hail mary/miracle from 75 yards away. More likely, they wouldn't have even gotten the ball back.

 

Not sure how they determined that there was a 99.5% chance of winning when the average 13 year old on Madden would win it 100% of the time.

[True2tRA]

 

I think the coaches screwed up not calling a simple run play and confusing a simple situation.

 

I blame Tommy for throwing the ball when he was told not to throw the ball.

 

Problem is, Tommy didn't understand WHY he wasn't supposed to throw the ball.

 

Tommy was thinking maintain FG range. Coaches were thinking keep the clock running.

 

Communication is important.

 

 

By the way Saunders, in response to your comment here

 

 

 

Blaming it on the players isn't just wrong, it's akin to blaming them for the defensive failures of the last few years because "they just didn't execute". It's asinine, insulting, and pure bullsh#t.

 

It's not asinine, insulting, or pure bullsh#t. Even with Pelini, Banker, or any coach, the players have responsibility in the process no matter what. The problem with Pelini using the words "they just didn't execute" too many times, was that he was saying the same thing in year 3 that he was saying in year 7. Somewhere things got too complicated or just weren't being taught well enough because our defense wasn't executing on a regular basis for quite a few years. That's when you begin to ask why your coaches aren't doing something to change that. Whether it be recruiting guys who CAN execute the scheme, replacing a coach, changing the scheme, etc. In year seven, with multiple seasons full of defensive melt downs, you expect a coach to begin to understand that it can't just continue to be the players fault.

 

The same will apply to Banker if he doesn't do the necessary things to ensure his defenses success, but 5 games in, he's hardly had the opportunity to do any of those things. He's not even sure who or what he has here yet. He's not familiar with his players, his opponents offense, or any of those key things he needs to evaluate before he can even consider what changes might possibly be made.

 

The players always have ownership in how things go. But when a coach puts his players in a position to fail over and over, for a long period of time, then you begin to blame the coach for doing so.

I agree somewhat, but when posters say things akin to "Tommy lost all 3 games, not the coaches" it's pure BS. It's a new system, there's still trust being created between the players and staff. You're paid millions of dollars to put your guys in the best position to succeed. At times, that clearly hasn't happened, and this play was a perfect example of that. That's my problem with blaming the players at this point.

 

Yeah, we totally agree there.

 

There's definitely been some questionable coaching decisions. Mostly in the time management department in my opinion. If we just manage the time a bit better, we have two more wins easily with BYU and Illinois.

 

The fact that we saw it in game one, and are still seeing it now is a problem and I put that on the coaches.

 

I do wish we had some players that understood the game of football well enough to maybe take a little ownership of this thing and handle some of that stuff on their own. Tommy could easily do it. I mean we do run a huddle offense now, so apparently in that huddle, there is just a bunch of guys who kind of know how to play football but don't truly understand the complexities of the game. In all reality, those things end up changing the outcome of games quite often, as we've learned the hard way here lately.

[StPaulHusker]

Anytime someone says that 1 player lost a game is a complete moron.

[74Hunter]

Anytime someone says that 1 player lost a game is a complete moron.

I think we all should agree on this.

[RADAR]

DiNardo and Howard Griffith on BTN Live both feel it was a great call. From a run the clock/safe standpoint. I guess it probably was a good call if it works. I do know at the time before the play was ran I wasn't thing boot run. I was thinking give the ball to a RB and get what you can and keep running clock.

 

IMO it was a bad call because it is something they normally don't run, I get that they tagged the play as run only, but as MR said in his PC on Monday, Tommy being an athlete kicked in at that point and he forgot about running and was trying to make a play. Sometime you just get too cute. They ran the same basic play about 8x in a row and then decide late in the play clock to mix it up.

 

TA didn't do what he was suppose to do, but the coaches over complicated by changing the normal play and by being slow to get the play into game. It is the coaches and TA fault, but mostly it is on the coaches for over complicating matters.

Don't let Saunders know it was a great call, he might crap his pants.

[RADAR]

Anytime someone says that 1 player lost a game is a complete moron.

It seems many on this board are complete moroons

 

I do my best to educate the weak of mind and I will try again here. Pay attention for those that need to. Class is in session.

 

So lets take the premise that no one player can lose a game. Its a bulls#!t idea, but lets play along.

If a player can't lose a game, then conversely,a player can't win a game. So here we go.

 

A basketball player that hits a buzzer beater did not win the game.

A baseball player that hits a walkoff homerun did not win the game.

A punt returner that runs one all the way back on the final possession did not win the game.

A runningback that makes a fantastic run, breaking tackles and scoring the final touchdown of a tied game did not win it.

A defensive back that makes an interception to save a td that would have lost the lead in the final seconds did not win the game.

 

I could go on and on but Moroons sometimes have a hard time with school.

 

So, a receiver that drops a soft pass in his hand in the endzone on the final play did not lose the game.

A running back that fumbles going into the endzone for a game winning score did not lose the game.

A kicker that misses an extra point (Texas) can not lose a game.

A Qb that throws and interception when he could have thrown it away can not lose a game.

A basketball player that has a turnover while driving for a game winning layup can not lose a game.

 

Players lose games all the time, in the pro's it gets them benched or cut and can cost them millions of dollars.

 

I've done all I can here, hope that helps.

[74Hunter]

 

 

Anytime someone says that 1 player lost a game is a complete moron.

It seems many on this board are complete moroons

 

I do my best to educate the weak of mind and I will try again here. Pay attention for those that need to. Class is in session.

 

So lets take the premise that no one player can lose a game. Its a bulls#!t idea, but lets play along.

If a player can't lose a game, then conversely,a player can't win a game. So here we go.

 

A basketball player that hits a buzzer beater did not win the game.

A baseball player that hits a walkoff homerun did not win the game.

A punt returner that runs one all the way back on the final possession did not win the game.

A runningback that makes a fantastic run, breaking tackles and scoring the final touchdown of a tied game did not win it.

A defensive back that makes an interception to save a td that would have lost the lead in the final seconds did not win the game.

 

I could go on and on but Moroons sometimes have a hard time with school.

 

So, a receiver that drops a soft pass in his hand in the endzone on the final play did not lose the game.

A running back that fumbles going into the endzone for a game winning score did not lose the game.

A kicker that misses an extra point (Texas) can not lose a game.

A Qb that throws and interception when he could have thrown it away can not lose a game.

A basketball player that has a turnover while driving for a game winning layup can not lose a game.

 

Players lose games all the time, in the pro's it gets them benched or cut and can cost them millions of dollars.

 

I've done all I can here, hope that helps.

Lol.

 

I think you had better keep the name calling to a minimum, since you have displayed that you have no idea how team sports work.

 

What is the old saying, "it's better to be thought of as an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt," or something to that effect.

 

But by all means, keep throwing players under the bus. Stay classy.

[RADAR]

 

 

Anytime someone says that 1 player lost a game is a complete moron.

It seems many on this board are complete moroons

 

I do my best to educate the weak of mind and I will try again here. Pay attention for those that need to. Class is in session.

 

So lets take the premise that no one player can lose a game. Its a bulls#!t idea, but lets play along.

If a player can't lose a game, then conversely,a player can't win a game. So here we go.

 

A basketball player that hits a buzzer beater did not win the game.

A baseball player that hits a walkoff homerun did not win the game.

A punt returner that runs one all the way back on the final possession did not win the game.

A runningback that makes a fantastic run, breaking tackles and scoring the final touchdown of a tied game did not win it.

A defensive back that makes an interception to save a td that would have lost the lead in the final seconds did not win the game.

 

I could go on and on but Moroons sometimes have a hard time with school.

 

So, a receiver that drops a soft pass in his hand in the endzone on the final play did not lose the game.

A running back that fumbles going into the endzone for a game winning score did not lose the game.

A kicker that misses an extra point (Texas) can not lose a game.

A Qb that throws and interception when he could have thrown it away can not lose a game.

A basketball player that has a turnover while driving for a game winning layup can not lose a game.

 

Players lose games all the time, in the pro's it gets them benched or cut and can cost them millions of dollars.

 

I've done all I can here, hope that helps.

Lol.

 

I think you had better keep the name calling to a minimum, since you have displayed that you have no idea how team sports work.

 

What is the old saying, "it's better to be thought of as an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt," or something to that effect.

 

But by all means, keep throwing players under the bus. Stay classy.

 

I knew you were one of those that never paid attention in class. You should really read it again, you might learn something and I would give you extra credit.