Retarded Punt Formation Must Go!!!!!

[aaronBG10]

I said the same thing when i watched it happen. There is absolutely NO BENEFIT FROM THAT FORMATION. It does not get your guys down the field any quicker, it does not fool other teams it just makes you look stupid.


that formation is kind of like modern art....it may look different/pretty but it still SUCKS!

[Falconfreak90]

I agree....that formation may be good to pull off a fake as we did last night but other than that? It sux. Go back to the traditional formation. Give the young Rojas a chance to get comfortable back there.

BEAT BUFFALO!!

[hammb]

First of all, I do agree with Flipper. Watching Rojas in the scrimmage last week he was very hit or miss with his kicks, even just kicking around. The kid has talent, but we must remember he's a freshman. Even at kicker kids sometimes take awhile to get used to college ball.

As for the formation, I'm no fan of it at all. I think it sucks, and adds extra variables that are tough to account for. What's more, I'm a firm believer in the NFL having the best football minds in the country. If the thing was any good there would be NFL teams using it.

That being said, I don't fully blame the formation. It is just as much poor execution as it is a poor formation. Other teams have used that formation with effectiveness, and it worked. Even more telling is what happened last week in the scrimmage. Our first punt with 11 on 11 we ran out of the traditional punt formation (which I was pleased to see). Well a guy came around the end and nearly intercepted Rojas' drop he got back there so quick.

We are just getting poor execution on special teams all around, the formation doesn't help, but I think it just gives us something more obvious to bitch about and gloss over the real issue.

[BGSUFootballFan]

I agree with the point of the formation not being the real problem. As much as I hate the formation and think it leads to more pressure on the punter, it still could have worked. We didnt execute like we needed to on ST's and that showed. However, I do wish we would use a more traditional punt formation, because I believe it is much more simple to execute. Somehow I just have a feeling the players weren't excuting a normal punt formation properly and so the coaches panicked too soon and went with the goofy formation we saw last night. I know it has been a staple at BG over the past few years, but I also think that Brandon would use a normal punt formation if he thought it would work. Whichever one we decide to go with (I'm praying for a normal formation) I hope we STICK WITH IT no matter what, and spend A LOT MORE TIME practicing and executing out of it properly. I also think for the time being we should go for it on the majority of 4th and short, because our OL should be so dominating over the remainder of our schedule (minus OSU) and we also have a beast in Winovich to lower his head and get extra yards!

[MACMAN]

The punter isn't the problem. No one can get off a decent kick in one second. When the opposition is in your face as you're receiving the snap you are going to punt it bad. Spread = five hundred record at very best (unless our offense in conference is so stellar that we never have to punt the ball )

the kid punts as well as a three leged greyhound runs a race. give him the needle and move on.

Ill use a paint ball gun on the spec teams coach, as that is about as an effective, humane killing tool as his punt formation is.
not a bad idea...pet the jerk with paint balls every time they line up in that formation...or we could just ask Ford to film thier next comercial on the super duty here, and show them moving his house to Toledo, since his punt formation and choice of kickers seem to best benifit Toledo and other Mac schools...i wonder if they are covering part of his pay check?

[Bleeding Orange]

the kid punts as well as a three leged greyhound runs a race. give him the needle and move on.

Alright, I'll assume that you are referencing Rojas here, and based on that assumption, I will take umbrage with your assertion (please correct me if I am wrong).

I actually just had this conversation with my father this evening. Based on Rojas' kicks in the game last night, he was really down of the kid. But, I pointed out to him that he never really got a chance to kick the ball without either one of his defenders, or one of the punt rushers bearing down on him. He was rushed on every kick and never really got the chance to just kick the thing the way he is capable of. I will say this, though, there did seem to be some hesitation on Rojas' part when punting, but from what I saw it was not enough to compensate (in terms of an explanation) for the pressure that he was being subjected to.

Now, we can sit here in hindsight and call this punt formation "retarded" or any other pejorative adjective that we can come up with, but we saw the benefit of this formation when we successfully pulled off the fake on fourth down. While the primary philosophy of this formation is that by spreading out the line, and consequently the rush, our players can get down the field faster because the rush isn't concentrated between the hash marks, the secondary philosophy is that it gives the up-backs more holes to run through on a fake than with a traditional formation. If you think about it, with a traditional formation and a traditional fake, the direct snap goes to the up-back who is expected to run to the outside to gain yardage. This gives time for the rush to pinch around the corners and cut off the anticipated route of the runner. But, with this "retarded" formation there are four or five potential holes that the up-back has the option of running through. I'm certainly not trying to defend this formation, but rather, find a tangible reason as to why it is desirable to our coaching staff.

That being said, and as some of you have non-specifically alluded to already, our problem with this formation is execution. I said this last year and I will say it again - our execution problem lies in the three defenders that are lined up in front of the punter. If you watch a tape of the game last night and pay attention to these three positions, you will notice that rather than anticipating and moving forward to meet the rush, these three players are moving backwards and essentially succumbing to the rush. When these blockers move backwards before the rush even gets there they are only cutting down the space with which the punter has to work, and they are putting themselves in a position to be pushed back with greater ease by the rush because of their already established backwards momentum. Now, please understand that I am not trying to implicate the players in question as I have certainly never really paid much attention to who they are specifically (actually, I would be interested in knowing who they are just out of curiosity if anyone is able), but it doesn't really matter who they are. The fact of the matter is that these guys are not being coached to meet the rush and, whether they realize it or not, they are panicking the moment the ball is snapped given the philosophy of this formation.

If this formation is to be effective, the players in the "wall position," as I like to call it, damn well need to know their specific role in the overall calibration of the play. I hope you'll forgive my use of terminology in this post as I do not profess to be a football expert and generally just make terms up. Still, I think my observations have some merit.

[Flipper]

I gotta tell you...I'm not fan of labeling things "gay" or "retarded" or any other nasty adjective. I had a brother who was gay...he was a great guy and my family misses him terribly. There's barely a day that goes by that I don't think about him and thre impact his death had on us.

Frankly, when the term "gay" is tossed around as an insult it pisses me off...I don't like the value judgement behind it.

Similarly,,,the term "retarded" is a nasty, offensive term for the learning disabled. I can't imahgine that anyone with a learning disabled family member or friend would appreciate coming here and seeing that term bandied about.

i'm really not trying to single anyone out and I didn't want to change anything anyone posted because I don't think it would be fair to censor anyone. I'm really not trying to moderate based on mmy snsibilities

I simply ask that you try to be a bit more aware of your language and the connotations some of the words we use carry.



(BTW...I'm aware that my liberal use of the term "Homo" seems completely contradictory. I'm not unsympathetic to that POV...I've always thought the term "homo" was so stupid and cartoonish tha it was more of a reflection of my intellectual shortcomings than anything else. In the interest of being consistent.....I will now reitre the word from my lexicon)

[Falcon Fanatic]

I gotta tell you...I'm not fan of labeling things "gay" or "retarded" or any other nasty adjective. I had a brother who was gay...he was a great guy and my family misses him terribly. There's barely a day that goes by that I don't think about him and thre impact his death had on us.

Frankly, when the term "gay" is tossed around as an insult it pisses me off...I don't like the value judgement behind it.

Similarly,,,the term "retarded" is a nasty, offensive term for the learning disabled. I can't imahgine that anyone with a learning disabled family member or friend would appreciate coming here and seeing that term bandied about.

i'm really not trying to single anyone out and I didn't want to change anything anyone posted because I don't think it would be fair to censor anyone. I'm really not trying to moderate based on mmy snsibilities

I simply ask that you try to be a bit more aware of your language and the connotations some of the words we use carry.



(BTW...I'm aware that my liberal use of the term "Homo" seems completely contradictory. I'm not unsympathetic to that POV...I've always thought the term "homo" was so stupid and cartoonish tha it was more of a reflection of my intellectual shortcomings than anything else. In the interest of being consistent.....I will now reitre the word from my lexicon)

Nice post Flip!! Your use of the word "homo" probably equates with the use of the word "gay" by the teenage population. I hear it DAILY in high school whenever some kid thinks something is dumb or doesn't agree with it. "That's so gay!" I now know how they intend the meaning, but being old school, I sometimes say "You mean it's happy?" I usually get a very confused look in return! I also have to confess to using the word "retarded" too loosely. Being in special education...that makes it MUCH worse!!! My usual use of that word is when I am pissed or highly annoyed about something and refer to the situation as being "f--ing retarded" along with several other choice and colorful words. Your post has given me pause for thought. I, too, will retire (or make a REALLY honest attempt to) that word from my lexicon....though when I am pissed....all bets may be off.....

[Peregrinner]

I gotta tell you...I'm not fan of labeling things "gay" or "retarded" or any other nasty adjective. I had a brother who was gay...he was a great guy and my family misses him terribly. There's barely a day that goes by that I don't think about him and thre impact his death had on us.

Frankly, when the term "gay" is tossed around as an insult it pisses me off...I don't like the value judgement behind it.

Similarly,,,the term "retarded" is a nasty, offensive term for the learning disabled. I can't imahgine that anyone with a learning disabled family member or friend would appreciate coming here and seeing that term bandied about.

i'm really not trying to single anyone out and I didn't want to change anything anyone posted because I don't think it would be fair to censor anyone. I'm really not trying to moderate based on mmy snsibilities

I simply ask that you try to be a bit more aware of your language and the connotations some of the words we use carry.



(BTW...I'm aware that my liberal use of the term "Homo" seems completely contradictory. I'm not unsympathetic to that POV...I've always thought the term "homo" was so stupid and cartoonish tha it was more of a reflection of my intellectual shortcomings than anything else. In the interest of being consistent.....I will now reitre the word from my lexicon)

Thanks for that, Flip! I thought the same thing when I saw the title of the thread and was wondering if anyone had said anything.

That said, the crappy formation has to go and the poor execution needs to be remedied or we're going to give up quite a few points on special teams this year.

[cbjhack]

Nuff said.

Ditto.

So should the punter. Whatever happened to recruiting All-American or near All-American punters to BG?

[TG1996]

So should the punter. Whatever happened to recruiting All-American or near All-American punters to BG?

Easy killer. Rojas is a freshman, and was touted as one of, if not the top punter in the country coming out of HS. I'm willing to bet that nerves played a big part of his performance, and the formation might have done something too. As was noted before, the kid was booming them in warmups, high and far and straight. The potential is there, it just has to come through in a game situation. I think we should give him more than one game against a Big Ten opponent before we even THINK about chasing him out of town.

[cbjhack]

I am not suggesting that we "chase him out of town." Just making a point that the punting game sucked and that under previous coaches, we had good punting and field goal teams. We had two All-Americans in the 90's that played on good teams, and a couple of near All-Americans. Sure things have changed, but I would think that the punting game would be one of your most important positions, especially with playing in the varying weather that can be found in BG.

[MACMAN]

the kid punts as well as a three leged greyhound runs a race. give him the needle and move on.

Alright, I'll assume that you are referencing Rojas here, and based on that assumption, I will take umbrage with your assertion (please correct me if I am wrong).

I actually just had this conversation with my father this evening. Based on Rojas' kicks in the game last night, he was really down of the kid. But, I pointed out to him that he never really got a chance to kick the ball without either one of his defenders, or one of the punt rushers bearing down on him. He was rushed on every kick and never really got the chance to just kick the thing the way he is capable of. I will say this, though, there did seem to be some hesitation on Rojas' part when punting, but from what I saw it was not enough to compensate (in terms of an explanation) for the pressure that he was being subjected to.

Now, we can sit here in hindsight and call this punt formation "retarded" or any other pejorative adjective that we can come up with, but we saw the benefit of this formation when we successfully pulled off the fake on fourth down. While the primary philosophy of this formation is that by spreading out the line, and consequently the rush, our players can get down the field faster because the rush isn't concentrated between the hash marks, the secondary philosophy is that it gives the up-backs more holes to run through on a fake than with a traditional formation. If you think about it, with a traditional formation and a traditional fake, the direct snap goes to the up-back who is expected to run to the outside to gain yardage. This gives time for the rush to pinch around the corners and cut off the anticipated route of the runner. But, with this "retarded" formation there are four or five potential holes that the up-back has the option of running through. I'm certainly not trying to defend this formation, but rather, find a tangible reason as to why it is desirable to our coaching staff.



Ok you sy it all in the begining here...A punters only job is be able to punt well under said presure, he cant hack it right now, yea he can learn but at what price, bench him and let him learn on Practice time, not game time. his whole motion is slow, he recieves the snap, pauses as if to ppostion the ball, extends his arms, takes a wiclk slow and overly long stride and kicks...with no leg speed of extension, two key reasons why the ball on gets 2 feet of air and goes 25 yards.
It should all be one smooth quick motiong, you know that, we all know that, we have all seen it tomany times. hes just not a punter yet, and may never be based on what I saw and have seen. We should just have an open tryout right now! and get some one in there who can get it done.
The formation of course does not help him at all, the formation is reliant upon a good punter who can get the ball off.

[Bleeding Orange]

I can't believe anyone is willing to throw this kid under the bus after only one game. That may be the most "Internet Guru"-ish thing I have ever seen posted on this board.

[Warthog]

I can't believe anyone is willing to throw this kid under the bus after only one game. That may be the most "Internet Guru"-ish thing I have ever seen posted on this board.

Agreed. I can't fault the kid for anything until I see him punt from a normal formation.