USC: What Did We Learn

Nebhawk said:
I think your partially correct in assuming that we are showing signs of progression in the right direction. I will counter back with the quality of teams in the Big 10, like a lot of conferences has huge gaps from top to bottom. I think we are going in the right direction, but are we closing that gap between us and Ohio St? I don't think so yet. I think we have closed that gap between us and the likes of Illinois and Iowa some, but not when comparing us to Oregon and Ohio St and Indiana for that matter. Perspective. Indiana progressed from basement to penthouse over night and we still can not get past the 2nd floor yet. So I guess it matters in what you call progress in relation to what your measuring or comparing it too.
Click to expand...
I agree with what you said. I think for me, personally, I so badly want the glory days to come back that I'm cheering for any little improvement like it's a major victory. As fans, we really have been through a lot with this team. It's nice to have something positive, even if it's small, to be happy about.
 
Mavric said:
And, if it was set up so well, we could have .... you know .... called it again later to see if we could get it to work.
Click to expand...

We did, and Lindemeyer missed his block otherwise it also could've been a huge gain. 8 in the middle by Spindler does get out there pretty quick, but Evans gets his guy:
1762197562902.png

I'm not thrilled about how the game was called, don't get me wrong. I do think Holgorsen needs to adjust something with the alert fades when the safety flies up, because those have just been non-competitive throws for 3 weeks. But other than those plays, after rewatching it all seemed coherent. Just not done well enough. Arguably our worst drive of the game was the one where we ran it 3 times.
 
Have we run a TE up the seem all year? I think this would have been the game to pull it out. EJ was running up the middle pretty well and they needed safety help. I think a good PA with any of our TE just running up field would have worked.
 
Husker_In_WI said:
I have defended the playcalling in general, IMO there have generally been good looks and we just haven't always hit them. But I do wish we would try a downfield answer that isn't just a fade. Both Hunter and Key can pull in some highlight reel catches, but it's just such a low percentage throw. I also wish we would play Barney outside some, he has shown the ability to make contested catches and it feels like a waste to just have him running hitches and arrows.

Defensively, I don't really have any issues. We have a bad run defense, but I think there was a calculated decision to continue playing the pass knowing that Riley wouldn't stick with the run when it counted. Holding them to 21 where they needed a dumb PI and a great throw and catch on a reasonably well covered flea flicker should be enough to win. Penn State and Iowa will absolutely run the ball 50 times if they can get away with it so this gameplan won't work again, but it's going to be a totally different plan and I'm hopeful we can slow down their running games when that is our primary focus.
Click to expand...

Good stuff as always.

Ragging on play calling means different things to different people - and generally people probably aren't aware of the various nuances.

When we say that we "got a good look from the play call" for example on a first down fade, that doesn't mean that it was actually an acceptable play call, IMO. Because you also have to take a composite of your own team's success rate on that kind of play throughout the course of the season.

If Raiola doesn't generally put the ball right where it needs to be on fades and you call a lot of fades...then that is objectively a bad play call (in my opinion anyway). It doesn't matter whether you got a good look if by and large he doesn't put the ball on the money.

And consistently, he hasn't. That makes calling a lot of fades pretty dumb. This is just one example for the sake of discussion.

On our first touchdown it was 3rd & 9 from their 14. That's the perfect spot to call a fade - especially when the safety help wasn't tight to that side of the field. But calling it on first down? Not so much.
 
Last edited:
Undone said:
Good stuff as always.

Ragging on play calling means different things to different people - and generally people probably aren't aware of the various nuances.

When we say that we "got a good look from the play call" for example on a first down fade, that doesn't mean it was an acceptable play call, IMO. Because you also have to take a composite of your own team's success rate on that play throughout the course of the season.

If Raiola doesn't generally put the ball right where it needs to be on fades and you call a lot of fades...then that is objectively a bad play call (in my opinion anyway).
Click to expand...

Yeah, at this point I am out on the RPO fades. It's a little tricky because they aren't a playcall (they might be in the red zone), they are an alert so that we don't run EJ straight ahead into an 8-man box with a safety flying up. I like the idea, and against Minnesota while the results were painful Hunter was running by the DBs so I could see it. The past 2 weeks it's been more Key, and no matter who it is they are not getting by the DBs. This play for example was the "right" read to pull it, but we're like 2 for 20 on these with both of them being DPIs.
1762202238531.png
4

There has to be a different adjustment to try, it's just too easy to push them to the sideline - the throw has to have air under it because it needs to be out quick, and they know it won't be an in-breaking route because they have the other safety deep middle. Just shelve these IMO - the idea of having an answer for whatever the defense does is great, but at this point I'd rather live with more called runs and PA shots (although those have gone very poorly at times).
 
Husker_In_WI said:
Yeah, at this point I am out on the RPO fades. It's a little tricky because they aren't a playcall (they might be in the red zone), they are an alert so that we don't run EJ straight ahead into an 8-man box with a safety flying up. I like the idea, and against Minnesota while the results were painful Hunter was running by the DBs so I could see it. The past 2 weeks it's been more Key, and no matter who it is they are not getting by the DBs. This play for example was the "right" read to pull it, but we're like 2 for 20 on these with both of them being DPIs.
View attachment 22851
4

There has to be a different adjustment to try, it's just too easy to push them to the sideline - the throw has to have air under it because it needs to be out quick, and they know it won't be an in-breaking route because they have the other safety deep middle. Just shelve these IMO - the idea of having an answer for whatever the defense does is great, but at this point I'd rather live with more called runs and PA shots (although those have gone very poorly at times).
Click to expand...


Yeah, we've killed plenty of drives by calling the more slow-developing play action pass plays on early downs over the back half of the season.

The irony of the play you highlighted is, on the very next play they have one more guy in the box than the previous play...and Emmett shimmies up the middle for 7 yards on 2nd & 10. lol.

So like, again, what does the composite of our results tell you, Holgorsen?

It tells me that we're not maximizing what we're good at. We're just constantly trying to call a mix of plays to try to situationally catch the defense off guard.

I do agree with your assessment of it being an RPO action where you're trying to punish the stacked box. There's nothing wrong with that at face value.
 
Husker_In_WI said:
Yeah, at this point I am out on the RPO fades. It's a little tricky because they aren't a playcall (they might be in the red zone), they are an alert so that we don't run EJ straight ahead into an 8-man box with a safety flying up. I like the idea, and against Minnesota while the results were painful Hunter was running by the DBs so I could see it. The past 2 weeks it's been more Key, and no matter who it is they are not getting by the DBs. This play for example was the "right" read to pull it, but we're like 2 for 20 on these with both of them being DPIs.
View attachment 22851
4

There has to be a different adjustment to try, it's just too easy to push them to the sideline - the throw has to have air under it because it needs to be out quick, and they know it won't be an in-breaking route because they have the other safety deep middle. Just shelve these IMO - the idea of having an answer for whatever the defense does is great, but at this point I'd rather live with more called runs and PA shots (although those have gone very poorly at times).
Click to expand...


I guess I'm not really sure what makes this the "right" read to pull it. It's a six-man box (albeit with a safety keying) and we have six blockers. It doesn't look to me like DR is reading a defensive lineman to decide whether to pull - all the box defenders are blocked, which should mean give. It looks to me like he sees press coverage and thinks we can win on the fade. So, at best, we're choosing to throw a 50/50 ball.
 
Red Five said:
Click to expand...


No shooting the messenger, I hate these types of quotes. Did he watch the Minnesota game? Doubt he posts this after that one. What about last year's OSU game? Was NU so much better during this season's USC than last season's OSU (?). These are just throw-away comments from people that while tuned into the sport overall, generally aren't very knowledgeable on individual teams.
 
Mavric said:
I guess I'm not really sure what makes this the "right" read to pull it. It's a six-man box (albeit with a safety keying) and we have six blockers. It doesn't look to me like DR is reading a defensive lineman to decide whether to pull - all the box defenders are blocked, which should mean give. It looks to me like he sees press coverage and thinks we can win on the fade. So, at best, we're choosing to throw a 50/50 ball.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a box count, I think he notes the press coverage and then pulls it specifically based on the safety on that side of the field stepping down instead of staying back. But yeah, I like 6v6 up front and EJ one on one with the safety more than I like Key beating a decent corner down the sideline. So maybe Holgorsen needs to re-evaluate the criteria, or Dylan/TJ need to make the decision that a give to EJ is the best option. On this specific one the safety wasn't flying down either, so maybe it was the wrong read. Some of the Minnesota ones looked like actual safety blitzes from depth.
 
Red Five said:
Click to expand...


Still, I wonder how much better we are than the 2021 team that played 6 Top 20 teams (three of them Top 10) winding up with 5 one score losses and 1 nine point loss to #5 Ohio State. I'd say five of those teams were better than this year's USC. I'll take 6-3 of course, but this is one of the more favorable schedules in recent memory.

That Iowa win will feel good though.
 
Husker_In_WI said:
So maybe Holgorsen needs to re-evaluate the criteria, or Dylan/TJ need to make the decision that a give to EJ is the best option.
Click to expand...

This just has to be the punchline of the whole conversation.

If your QB is making the low-percentage decision on RPO's on 1st down over and over and putting us in 2nd & long...stop even calling RPO plays on 1st down as much.
 
Husker_In_WI said:
I don't think it's a box count, I think he notes the press coverage and then pulls it specifically based on the safety on that side of the field stepping down instead of staying back. But yeah, I like 6v6 up front and EJ one on one with the safety more than I like Key beating a decent corner down the sideline. So maybe Holgorsen needs to re-evaluate the criteria, or Dylan/TJ need to make the decision that a give to EJ is the best option. On this specific one the safety wasn't flying down either, so maybe it was the wrong read. Some of the Minnesota ones looked like actual safety blitzes from depth.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure he cares about the safety - at least as far as the run goes. The run is designed to go left and the safety is coming down on our right - basically running himself out of the play. So I think DR just decided he wanted to throw it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top