USC game. What did we learn

Mavric said:
To be fair, Rhule's explanation was that they had a fake punt called but USC stayed in their safe defense so they called timeout to not run the fake punt.  Then they decided to just go for it so that's why they sent the offense back out there.  But then they got a look from USC's defense that they didn't like they play they had called so they just decided to take the delay and punt.

So it definitely looked like a s#!tshow but that explanation does make sense, to me at least.
Click to expand...


While the explanation is logical, its still malpractice.  Can't blow two timeouts in a one score game in 4th quarter cuz you're scared. 

 
Packerhuskerfan said:
We are getting to the point that I didn't see one throw on Saturday by DR that HH couldn't have completed and we know HH wouldn't have slid short on that 3rd down.
Click to expand...
This is where I am at.  Really haven't seen those early season throws since the game against CU.  @Mavrichas posted stats on 2 games showing passes of 10+ yards, the first I remember was 1-10 and this game was 2-10....HH can throw that poorly as well, but he can run.  We'd be back to the "grips, read, rip, or run" offense, but we had 4 to get one and failed and still lost 1 score games....This year?  6 to get and 1 and still failing that and losing 1 point games.  No way Wisky would expect HH to roll out this weekend....WTH not. 

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
Given that USC sniffed it out the first time, you go back out with two plays called in anticipation of the different looks USC might give you. Again, I'm no expert but I think that's what good coaches do. Explanation makes sense, but only if you don't trust anyone in your offense to read and react. At some point we have to outwit the other coaches. 
Click to expand...
I completely agree with this.

Also, maybe be prepared on the initial fake punt call and realize that taking the delay is better than burning the TO.  That said, when you don’t use your remaining TOs to actually save clock near the end of the game, what difference does it make. 

 
Didn't watch the game, but I've seen enough to know even if the no call PI on the last play resulted in a TD, Rhule wouldve kicked the XP and not went for 2. 

 
3gunhusker said:
I liked what Bonner did.  he can be used like Deebo Samuel...throw him in at half back, WR,  motion him all over.  
Click to expand...
Loved what Bonner did as well.  Would also like to see him have opportunities beyond the LOS.  Because when he gets the ball and starts running with some steam, he's a load.  DBs don't want to deal with that.  Even safeties as well.  And he's way smoother with his feet than Dowdell.  

 
A little bit of interesting context from Butler on the radio show. He talked a lot about the challenges of balancing simplicity and ease of execution against making things less clear for offense, specifically with college kids and not full-time pros.

He didn't outright say this was the case for all of the coverage busts, but mentioned sometimes having two coverages called and which one we run depends on the offensive look. To me that's more than just the standard coverage checks everyone has, and it sounds like against USC that was an issue a few times. The answer is the DBs have to communicate better, and maybe we call multiple coverages less. But it's not like a guy just blanked on the defense being signaled in - still bad from experienced guys, but maybe a little more understandable. We're trying to be too smart, and 11 guys running a less optimal defensive call is better than 10 guys running the "right" one.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top