Game observations

[JohnnySwoop '85]

Maybe Coach will say the whole team was FULL METAL JACKET:

3rd down conversions MUCH IMPROVED

Time of Possession 36 minutes to 23...they can't score if they don't have it.

Perfect Red Zone execution. Perfect.

Opponents 3rd Down conversions...2 of 13. Maybe the most telling statistic for improved defense. this had been missing against Akron especially (at least it seemed that way). But a big contributor was what they did on 1st and 2nd down to increase probability of a stop on 3rd....maybe we're getting that "every down is important" mentality back.

And for the record...Hey coaches I never bad mouthed ya'. But I am available to interview for Special Teams asst. How many more XP's missed...for crying out loud keep your head down on the follow through instead of looking up right away so you can watch it go through the posts.

One final tidbit: My father in law was over talking to my wife while the game was on, and he is kind of folksy...he goes "Look at how big that guy must be...he's got a last name like Lichtensteiger spelled out on his back and still has 6 inches of white space on each side of his uniform."

[truth]

i also saw the dline shifting a lot from their original down position. it seemed as if the coaches had MU scouted really well, and the players were able to read the play before the snap. When the line shifted it was to the playside nearly every time.

[Schadenfreude]

... there were two dog play calls from the goal line to set that up, but it all worked out. I don't know why we've abondoned the tried and true direct snap for that situation.

My father hates this play.

I know other teams run it once in a while. What is the advantage of this?

When we put that formation in, it seems to me Gregg Brandon might as well call up the opposing coach on his cell phone and tell him:

"Hey, coach? Gregg here.

"I just want to reassure you that we aren't going to throw the ball and we're not going to run a sweep right or left.

"Here's what we are going to do. See that guy there behind the center? His name is B.J. Lane. We are going to snap the ball directly to B.J., and then B.J. is going to pick a hole between the tackles and try to score."

"Got it? Good."

"It was good talkin' to you. Say hi to the wife and kids. Now get ready."

[Bleeding Orange]

... there were two dog play calls from the goal line to set that up, but it all worked out. I don't know why we've abondoned the tried and true direct snap for that situation.

My father hates this play.

I know other teams run it once in a while. What is the advantage of this?

When we put that formation in, it seems to me Gregg Brandon might as well call up the opposing coach on his cell phone and tell him:

"Hey, coach? Gregg here.

"I just want to reassure you that we aren't going to throw the ball and we're not going to run a sweep right or left.

"Here's what we are going to do. See that guy there behind the center? His name is B.J. Lane. We are going to snap the ball directly to B.J., and then B.J. is going to pick a hole between the tackles and try to score."

"Got it? Good."

"It was good talkin' to you. Say hi to the wife and kids. Now get ready."

As previously mentioned, though, the beauty of that play is that if the defense commits entirely to the run and stuffs the box, there are at least two recievers who are not being covered. We've never seen it because defenses have played conservatively against that play so far, but I would be willing to guarantee that there is an option pass built into that scheme. Perhaps even a backwards lateral to Omar (who is lined up at wideout) and a pass from him. The play really is a work of genius, it just hasn't fully shown itself yet. Plus, it has been very, very successful. I really don't understand why there is so much bitching about it. It's really kind of like complaining about Omar throwing for four touchdowns in a game rather than five in many ways.

[UK Peregrine]

As previously mentioned, though, the beauty of that play is that if the defense commits entirely to the run and stuffs the box, there are at least two recievers who are not being covered. We've never seen it because defenses have played conservatively against that play so far, but I would be willing to guarantee that there is an option pass built into that scheme. Perhaps even a backwards lateral to Omar (who is lined up at wideout) and a pass from him. The play really is a work of genius, it just hasn't fully shown itself yet. Plus, it has been very, very successful. I really don't understand why there is so much bitching about it. It's really kind of like complaining about Omar throwing for four touchdowns in a game rather than five in many ways.

Even if there is no option to pass, it's the modern version of old school football. Take it from someone who was a RB in a wishbone attack back in high school, it is sort of refreshing to have that "cloud of dust mentality" on at least one play. I mean we know we're running the ball, the other team knows we're running, and all you say is try and stop us. We think our line is better than your line and we're going to ram it down your throats and what are you going to do about it. So yeah, I kind of like the formation despite its predictablity.

[San Diego Falcon]

In general, I hate formations that tell the defense exactly what we are going to do. However the direct snap to Pope seems to have had an unusual amount of success given its lack of deception. Why have we abandoned it? Did it stop working and I missed that?

Now the play I hate is 3rd-and-one with Omar under center with one running back. Up the middle every time, and it works probably less than 50% of the time. Why not put a lead blocker in there if we already don't care that the defense knows what's coming? This play seems to have taken the place of the Josh Harris shotgun formation "just run left or right" and hope you make it play we used to always run on 3rd-and-one. I feel better when we have 3rd-and-4 or 5 as opposed to 3rd-and-one.