2022 Offensive Play

[ColoradoHusk]

3 minutes ago, Undone said:

You're definitely right, @Mavric. If Palmer is led by an extra five yards with some more mustard on the ball it's probably a touchdown.

 

Good decision to throw the deep ball based on the coverage/look, not great execution on the actual throw itself.

Interesting that Whipple went max protect on that play call, and kept the I-Back and TE in to block.  There were only 2 WR's downfield and Alante went back into the flat after being on the circle motion.  I actually think Alante's motion helped draw the safety's eye up to him as a potential run threat, and the safety was no help on the deep pass.

[floridacorn]

The series I think that has gone unnoticed is the 2nd series.  2nd & 8 Thompson holds the ball on a deep post play that was available, they concede on 3rd & 8.  You want to be ultra aggressive taking risks in the 1st half 2 minute and on-side kicking up 11?  OK, don't be ultra conservative up 7 from inside your 10.  

 

It looked like Martin rounded his route off leading to Thompson's first INT.  Leiwer failed to make a clean play on a ball behind him.  Thompson was late on a few throws and threw a few out of round in the game, but I think that 2nd and 8 non throw was probably his weakest moment and that 3rd & 8 call was scared play calling.

[admo]

5 hours ago, Undone said:

 

And you don't have to just go off of a guess or a feeling for how much we passed - we threw it an unprecedented 58% of our plays.   

 

 

Again, Whipple doesn't seem to want to run the ball much to move the chains. Hence why he only called run plays 42% of the time. That is way below our average from last season.

But when Grant got his chances, at least he:

 

-Broke a long one

-Ran one into the end zone from inside the red zone.

-Averaged 5.3 YPC

 

I'm not sure how it matters whether or not Grant gets the 46 yards from the long run doing it that way or chunking that up across 8 different carries (to stay consistent with the 5.3 YPC average that way).

Basically, our players and coaches made mistakes that cost us the game.

We apparently watched 2 different games.  I know you love the 90's but.... NW eliminated the running game fairly well.  Whipple noticed it, just as easily as so many other people did.  That is a reason why you have to throw, especially when you are in 2nd and long or 3rd and long.  We had 7 productive runs from the RB - all game.  Case in point (effectiveness):

 

Grant run for 2 yards
Grant run for 4 yards
Yant run for 2 yards
Yant run for 2 yards
Grant run for 1 yard
Grant run for 8 yards
Grant run for 2 yards
Grant run for 2 yards
Grant run for 1 yard
Yant run for 1 yard
Yant run for no gain (penalty on NW)
Casey run for 1 yard (TD)
WR Palmer run for 12 yards 
A.Allen run for 1 yard loss
Grant run for 8 yards
Grant run for 1 yard (3rd and 2)
Grant run for 2 yards
Grant run for 3 yards
Grant run for 6 yards
Grant run for 3 yards (TD)
Grant run for 46 yards (TD)
Grant run for 3 yards
Grant run for 0 - no gain
Grant run for 5 yards
A.Allen run for 8 yards
A.Allen run for 1 yard
Smothers runs for 7 yards
Grant run for 3 yards
WR Palmer runs for -4 yard loss
 

[Undone]

3 minutes ago, admo said:

I know you love the 90's but...

 

[admo]

90's style - predominantly run the damn ball

 

I like you @Undone and have always appreciated your value and takes.  However, my response to your response was to show you that "running the damn ball" did not work.  Maybe I missed understood where you coming from, but it seemed that way.  My apologies if so 

 

I know you like the old school style preferably.  With play action stuff.  I also know that you are not the super "run the damn ball / power football / option football works" like the duke or Jeremy....... but at the same time, you seem to 2nd guess whatever didn't work - that something else would have (which normally is a heavy running game). My point is that NW and every Big Ten team will game plan to stop our run game, with our pitiful line, and you have to counterattack against what they give you.  Now me, I am "throw the damn ball" guy and have always loved 40-50 passes a game.  Way more fun than 2 yards, 1 yard and 3rd and 7, punt....

 

Sorry if I offended you.  

[Undone]

It seems like Whipple came into week 1 wanting the base offense to mainly be Thompson standing in the pocket on pass plays with 3-4 progressions and scan the field until he finds an open target. This actually went fairly well against Northwestern and Casey had 355 yards in the air. We would have gotten to 31 or 35 points if Garcia Casteneda hadn't fumbled inside the red zone against the Wildcats.

 

Against North Dakota, the offensive line ruined a couple drives by not picking up blitzes and that was enough to take all the wind out of our sails until the 3rd. But, I was really impressed with whoever it was on the staff that decided to just hand the ball off to Grant.

 

I believe that Anthony Grant is a pretty great talent, and I'm hoping that the philosophy changes to making teams stop him and setting up the play action pass. But Thompson has to improve his accuracy when guys are wide open.

 

We're also really missing having a talented tight end out there. We've got at least two of them on the roster but they're both injured. That's really frustrating.

[Mavric]

2 minutes ago, Undone said:

It seems like Whipple came into week 1 wanting the base offense to mainly be Thompson standing in the pocket on pass plays with 3-4 progressions and scan the field until he finds an open target. This actually went fairly well against Northwestern and Casey had 355 yards in the air. We would have gotten to 31 or 35 points if Garcia Casteneda hadn't fumbled inside the red zone against the Wildcats.

 

Against North Dakota, the offensive line ruined a couple drives by not picking up blitzes. I was really impressed with whoever it was on the staff that decided to just hand the ball off to Grant.

 

I believe that Anthony Grant is a pretty great talent, and I'm hoping that the philosophy changes to making teams stop him and setting up the play action pass. But Thompson has to improve his accuracy when guys are wide open.

 

We're also really missing having a talented tight end out there. We've got at least two of them on the roster but they're both injured. That's really frustrating.

 

I'm curious to see how Whipple shakes out.  But I'm not so sure it's quite as obvious as that from the Northwestern game.  I think it ended up that way but we were also doing a terrible job of opening running lanes.  

 

The first play was an RPO that turned into a pass.  The next four plays were two runs and two passes.  But the running game wasn't doing much so we went to the air and got a TD.  On our second possession two of the three plays were runs but they both only got two yards and we punted.  We started out the third possession with three straight runs.  But out of those seven running plays (which got us most of the way through the first quarter), only one of them went for more than four yards.

 

I'm as much of a run the ball guy as (almost) anyone but it was obvious that the running game wasn't getting much done.  So we started throwing the ball more and had success (for awhile).

[Undone]

8 minutes ago, Mavric said:

The first play was an RPO that turned into a pass.  The next four plays were two runs and two passes.  But the running game wasn't doing much so we went to the air and got a TD.  On our second possession two of the three plays were runs but they both only got two yards and we punted.  We started out the third possession with three straight runs.  But out of those seven running plays (which got us most of the way through the first quarter), only one of them went for more than four yards.

 

I can change my mind on my original take based on this, it's pretty convincing.

 

But I'm also looking at at Whip's run/pass ratio at Pitt. It was considerably lower than what we were averaging. To be clear, I'm not saying that's bad at all and at this point I'm completely "scheme-agnostic;" I don't care how we move the ball down the field or get it into the end zone - I just want to go to a bowl game and not be a dumpster fire anymore.

 

My main thesis is to look at what it seems like Grant is capable of doing. I'd like to see more 1st & 2nd downs just be handoffs to him because he's out there getting first downs a quite a bit of individual effort. Do that until you can setup that 1st down play action bomb.

 

The talent at skill positions is all there (outside of just the injuries at tight end). We could still legitimately run rough shod over the rest of the West with better pass protection - but I'm not counting on that part happening at all. I'm just saying that the line could easily come together by the time we play the do-or-die stretch of Purdue/Illinois/Minnesota. If we win two out of those three we are good to go for a bowl and probably wind up getting seven regular season wins.

[Mavric]

6 minutes ago, Undone said:

I can change my mind on my original take based on this, it's pretty convincing.

 

But I'm also looking at at Whip's run/pass ratio at Pitt. It was considerably lower than what we were averaging. To be clear, I'm not saying that's bad at all and at this point I'm completely "scheme-agnostic;" I don't care how we move the ball down the field or get it into the end zone - I just want to go to a bowl game and not be a dumpster fire anymore.

 

My main thesis is to look at what it seems like Grant is capable of doing. I'd like to see more 1st & 2nd downs just be handoffs to him because he's out there getting first downs a quite a bit of individual effort. Do that until you can setup that 1st down play action bomb.

 

The talent at skill positions is all there (outside of just the injuries at tight end). We could still legitimately run rough shod over the rest of the West with better pass protection - but I'm not counting on that part happening at all. I'm just saying that the line could easily come together by the time we play the do-or-die stretch of Purdue/Illinois/Minnesota. If we win two out of those three we are good to go for a bowl and probably wind up getting seven regular season wins.

 

I agree that we'll probably be more pass-heavy.  We have been one of the most run-heavy teams and now not only do we have a new OC but the QB run game has been significantly diminished.

 

Probably also not fair to judge Whipple too harshly for what he did last year with the best QB and best WR in the nation.  Be pretty bad not to throw a lot in that situation.

 

And I do love what I'm seeing from Grant.  A lot of people had forgotten what a really good RB looks like and they had convinced themselves that's what Yant is.

[Undone]

Just now, Mavric said:

And I do love what I'm seeing from Grant.  A lot of people had forgotten what a really good RB looks like and they had convinced themselves that's what Yant is.

 

Yep. We haven't had a guy take inside zones and bounce outside like a Jack Russell Terrier like that since Mo Washington. And I think Grant is probably even better at it than Washington because he isn't as lanky and he seems to hold his center of balance intact when he's dancing around guys like a boss.

 

Watching him make the first linebacker break their ankles just puts a smile on your face!

[Nebhawk]

Run the dang ball.  Yes I think we have to run the ball 60% of the time.  We can't pass block well enough to drop back 40 times per game.  However, if we shorten our passing game to more screens and quick outs I could live with that in place of the run.  Right now we are to downfield oriented in our pass game.  I am not a huge Casey fan at this moment.  I think he is fine QB, but I also think Adrian is or was a fine QB.  I don't know if Casey is a winner, just like Adrian.  Texas was I think either 5-7 or 6-6 last season with him starting.  Kansas beat them in Austin.  He was playing with a bad hand and will give him the benefit. 

 

Grant is a fine back.  He is improvising right now to get yards.  Those outside runs were all his doing.  That won't work against OU or most of the Big 10.  We have to find ways to get better at running or Defense will eat our lunch just rushing 3 or 4.  Northwestern rushed 4 down line players and made us look sad.  OU has team speed on D, they might destroy Casey in first quarter if we dn't have some type of running game. 

 

[Nebhawk]

The true question here is do we improve over the next two weeks on both sides of the ball.  Illinois, Purdue, Minnesota, Iowa and Wisky will improve.  All of our Division foes get better as the season goes.  I personally don't think that Purdue and Illinois are good football teams right now, but will they improve in the next couple of weeks enough to make us look silly when we play?  This weeks game is so important for our mental well being(fans and players) just to see some success on either side of the ball.  If they could manage to route Georgia Southern and play some backups in the second half I think this goes a long ways in how we show up against OU.  If we struggle again, this will leave so much doubt and discontent on the team and in the fanbase I don't see anyway we compete against OU. 

[runningblind]

4 hours ago, Undone said:

 

I can change my mind on my original take based on this, it's pretty convincing.

 

But I'm also looking at at Whip's run/pass ratio at Pitt. It was considerably lower than what we were averaging. To be clear, I'm not saying that's bad at all and at this point I'm completely "scheme-agnostic;" I don't care how we move the ball down the field or get it into the end zone - I just want to go to a bowl game and not be a dumpster fire anymore.

 

My main thesis is to look at what it seems like Grant is capable of doing. I'd like to see more 1st & 2nd downs just be handoffs to him because he's out there getting first downs a quite a bit of individual effort. Do that until you can setup that 1st down play action bomb.

 

The talent at skill positions is all there (outside of just the injuries at tight end). We could still legitimately run rough shod over the rest of the West with better pass protection - but I'm not counting on that part happening at all. I'm just saying that the line could easily come together by the time we play the do-or-die stretch of Purdue/Illinois/Minnesota. If we win two out of those three we are good to go for a bowl and probably wind up getting seven regular season wins.

That all sounds good but forgets to mention a giant problem that is the defense.