The punt formation

MiamiBando · Post by **MiamiBando** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:19 am

I'm not worried about Blocked Punts.... it's the bedamned fieldgoals and extrapoints I'm worried about.

If it weren't for those, Miami'd have beaten CMU, and maybe NIU...

Bleeding Orange · Post by **Bleeding Orange** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:31 am

This needs to stop. We need to stop ripping on this formation because the fact of the matter is that there are a LOT of schools using this shield formation, and most are successful with it. Any of you who have Gameplan know exactly what I am talking about.

So, why are we seeming to have so much of a problem with it? Simple - the three guys in our shield. I have no idea who they are off the top of my head, but watching the broadcast of the OU game, it is absolutely clear that the problem is that these guys are BACKING UP in order to gain leverage on their blocks when rushers come through. The problem here is that it is cutting down on both the ammount of space and time that Fry has to get a punt off. If you watch other teams that use this formation, their shield blockers are MOVING UP to meet the blocks, thereby maximizing the space and time their punters have to get kicks off.

There is not a lot wrong with this system. It is simply how our shield blockers are performing within it that has been the problem. What they are lacking is confidence - confidence in their ability to block. Brandon does not need to change this scheme - he may need to change the players in it. What is wrong with putting a couple of O- or D-lineman in as shield blockers? They certainly aren't an integral component of the coverage unit...

doughash · Post by **doughash** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:53 am

Michigan used this formation a couple years ago and had many of the same problems the Falcons are having. It cost them a game at Iowa. Winovich is one of the 3 guys, he is calling out the signals. It seems it can be an effective formation but also seems to be a much higher risk for a block or an affected kick. I prefer lining up and kicking from a regular formation like most teams do.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 9:49 am

Fact - this formation has cost teams more games in its short existance than a standard formation.
Fact- Bgsu has had more bad, blocked punts since we went to it

Fact - if have GP and watch the games of the teams that use it, there is always reference to the #'s of bad blocked punts that team has had that season.

It is a bad formation, as any time you give one to two robbers a free run at a stationary target, the target will be the one in jeprody.

But as before
this team will keep riding this dead horse untill it truely kicks them in the ass, and sadly it will.

Bleeding Orange · Post by **Bleeding Orange** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:13 pm

MACMAN wrote:Fact - this formation has cost teams more games in its short existance than a standard formation.
Fact- Bgsu has had more bad, blocked punts since we went to it

Fact - if have GP and watch the games of the teams that use it, there is always reference to the #'s of bad blocked punts that team has had that season.

It is a bad formation, as any time you give one to two robbers a free run at a stationary target, the target will be the one in jeprody.

But as before
this team will keep riding this dead horse untill it truely kicks them in the ass, and sadly it will.

Fact- I think you're wrong.

Fact-

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:18 pm

We did win, right?

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:20 pm

BGDrew wrote:We did win, right?

Yup -- doesn't change the fact that the punt formation needs to be taught and executed correctly or thrown out. As is, it's just like Joe Table -- somewhat effective but a heart attack every time.

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 3:13 pm

I remember a time when a Win was a happy time, evidently it's just another excuse to bitch about something else.

If we win the MAC will people still be insulting us? I think not.

BGGrad01 · Post by **BGGrad01** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 4:50 pm

BGDrew wrote:If we win the MAC will people still be insulting us? I think not.

If we beat USC by 4 TDs, people would still complain about running an off tackle play with 2 minutes to go instead of throwing the ball down the field.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 5:02 pm

BGDrew wrote:I remember a time when a Win was a happy time, evidently it's just another excuse to bitch about something else.

If we win the MAC will people still be insulting us? I think not.

A win is always a happy time. But wins shouldn't result in complacency. I think that is what's caused this program to take a step back this year. We've been winning and we've become soft.

We can always improve even if we're undefeated and I think changing the punt formation would be a great way to start.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:12 pm

Metz wrote:Nate made some tremendous punts. He can really drop some bombs in if he gets blocks.

Nate really punted well yesterday. And the Kent punter did a heck of a job as well. Way to go Nate...when we needed big punts at the most crucial times, he delivered.

Punt coverage was EXCELLENT. 1/2 on FGs....3/3 on XPTs. Best Special teams play of the season, IMO>