NIU Game thread

[kdog27]

ESPECIALLY if we want to become a pro-style pocket passing offense, which is what I thought our goal was. If we're trying to be a spread dink & dunk offense with the QB picking up yards on the ground, then I will readily agree Schilz isn't our guy, but I didn't think that's what we were looking for.

And here it is again what are we? Has Clawson actually said this is what he wants because it certainly does not look like that is what we are moving towards. When he got here he made it seem like he wanted to move away from the spread but he has done anything and everything but move away from it.


The stupid playcalling, ridiculous formations, and predictability makes this the hardest BG team to watch in my time. While I'm bitching can I have the names on the jersey again. Watched nine games and I still don't know anyones name on defense

[Globetrotter]

Hurley will never play QB in this offense. He doesn't have an arm...period.

I don't care if he's light years smarter, faster, and more athletic than Matt Schilz he can NOT throw the ball well enough for this offense. The only way he plays is if we transition to a zone read offense, and I don't think Clawson wants to do that.

I cringe at the thought of watching him try to throw the ball...I've seen better arms playing drunken football in the parking lot before the game starts. Memories of Freddie Barnes (the QB NOT the WR) keep flying back into my head...

Hambb,
Not sure where you get the idea that Hurley "can't throw"....because he never seems to get the CHANCE to do so.... like any other QB, he needs to have a few series IN A ROW in order to get any kind of rhythm...and I can't recall any game where he's been allowed to throw the ball, including last nite... runs for a 1st down on 1st play, two handoffs to a 3rd string TB, one incomplete pass (that admittedly wasn't thrown all that well)... how MANY passes has he even THROWN this season for you to make that judgement?

I don't think he is the answer but I would like to see him get some meaningful playcalls to know for sure. Can't tell much when the game is over and the calls are dumbed down to handoffs on first and second then throw on third and fourth down when the other team knows it is coming.

I am almost certain Schilz is not the answer.
We may be able to find out whether or not Hurley is the answer with two meaningless games at the end of the year. Then we won't have to try to keep him around for next year if he is not in the QB mix or give him snaps that Stokes, Johnson or Freshman should get in the offseason. Its better for Hurley and better for the program to do this sooner then later.

How have you made this determination that Schilz is not going to be the answer?

Look I'm all for changing QBs. You will be hardpressed to find somebody that feels QB play is more important than I do...I think your entire offense is predicated on QB play.

That being said, I'm not seeing Schilz as definitely not the guy, nor am I seeing him as the biggest issue with our offense. The biggest issue I have with our offense is it being terribly predictable (you can tell from our formation whether it's going to be a run or pass a LARGE percentage of the time). If we're in shotgun it's either a pass play or a delayed draw...Very rarely do we run other runs from that set. If we're under center it's almost certainly going to be a run...very rarely do we run a standard 3-5-7 step drop and pass from that. We also do a terrible job mixing plays. Far too often we'll go run run run or pass pass pass...and rarely mix in play action even if the run has been working. In short I don't see QB as the main thing holding this offense back. Especially since he has shown time and time again that when you put him in a 2 minute offense and let him chuck it around the field he CAN make the throws. And this isn't a case of taking a bunch of easy crap against a prevent either...he routinely eats up yardage 15-20 yards at a time when allowed to play this way.

Moreover, I see a QB that has an arm unlike any we've had at BG...his arm is better than Harris/Omar, even. We've talked about how this system looks like a mishmash of god knows what, but if I understand correctly what we WANT to become (running, vertical passes, playaction, etc), then I think Schilz absolutely can be the guy in this sort of offense.

People are forgetting that he's only a sophomore and has shown improvement from last year to this. He has a big arm, and while not real athletic (nor supremely accurate), he has shown he can make the throws when the coaches ask him to. More importantly, what we have seen from Hurley is NO ability to make those throws. I will readily admit you can only tell so much from playing in garbage time, but I don't think I've seen a single good, crisp pass from him when he has been out there. And it's had little to do with the game situations either; he flat out doesn't have zip and doesn't throw spirals. It's been a pretty small sample size but they haven't been pinpoint accurate either. In short, what I see from him is a pretty big step backward from Schilz in terms of "arm talent".

Personally, I don't have a problem with sophomore QBs making mistakes in the mental aspect of the game. It is expected, and if he can grow from those he has certainly shown the physical ability to play the position. ESPECIALLY if we want to become a pro-style pocket passing offense, which is what I thought our goal was. If we're trying to be a spread dink & dunk offense with the QB picking up yards on the ground, then I will readily agree Schilz isn't our guy, but I didn't think that's what we were looking for.

It could be the offense and the mismatch. Its not that I see a guy with a weak arm or a poor skillset, I see a guy that is making awful decisions. Short passes on 3rd down, passes to guys that are clearly covered, putting the ball in places that his WRs can't make palys... that kind of thing. He does not seem to have the decision making abilty that someone nearing the end of their 3rd year in a program and their second full year starting should have. He looks very uncomfortable in the system. But as you say it could just be an awful system that he is trying to squeeze himself into. Maybe the system and the players around him limit him so much that he is completely uncomfortable. All I know is that I don't see him doing anything that blows me away. And I do see him constantly doing things that frustrate me.

[footballguy51]

ESPECIALLY if we want to become a pro-style pocket passing offense, which is what I thought our goal was. If we're trying to be a spread dink & dunk offense with the QB picking up yards on the ground, then I will readily agree Schilz isn't our guy, but I didn't think that's what we were looking for.

And here it is again what are we? Has Clawson actually said this is what he wants because it certainly does not look like that is what we are moving towards. When he got here he made it seem like he wanted to move away from the spread but he has done anything and everything but move away from it.

The stupid playcalling, ridiculous formations, and predictability makes this the hardest BG team to watch in my time. While I'm bitching can I have the names on the jersey again. Watched nine games and I still don't know anyones name on defense

I understood that we were moving to a pro-style offense. When Clawson came in, we were a spread offense that relied heavily on the short, quick passes and then running ability of the QB. Clawson's first year, he took the talent we had, which was geared for that style, and essentially ran the offense as is. His second year, he integrated some of his offense in. This, his third year, I see more of the pro-style, under center offense than I did last year. The biggest mistake he could have made was to completely change the offense from spread to pro-style. Rich Rod did the opposite up in Ann Arbor, and you saw how poor the offense was. The skill set of the players didn't match the offensive sets, and the entire offense folded. This gradual transition is allowing for players that have been here a while to gradually transition.

Additionally, when is the last time you saw an NFL team that only ran plays from the I? If they are behind and need to throw, they generally go to the shotgun spread offense. Does that mean their offense is a mishmash and has no identity? No. I actually feel that if our offense can obtain the ability to run a mixture of offensive styles, that makes us that much better. If we can line up and run it up the gut, run to the outside, run play-action, throw the long ball, or toss the short quick passes, can anybody game plan to stop it all?

Lastly, after thinking about it, when we ran up the middle, we usually gained yards. I went through the play-by-play on ESPN.com, and we usually had a gain of 3 or 4 yards when going up the middle. Last time I check, a 3 or 4 yard gain up the middle is an expected gain. In fact, string a few of those together and it's a first down. So, how was running up the middle ineffective? The only thing ineffective was Schilz getting hit on almost every passing play, even after avoiding 2 or 3 defenders. NIU was able to get to Schilz on a consistent basis, and Schilz was picking himself up after almost every play. You cannot win a game when your QB has his back on the ground that often.

[kdog27]

Additionally, when is the last time you saw an NFL team that only ran plays from the I? If they are behind and need to throw, they generally go to the shotgun spread offense. Does that mean their offense is a mishmash and has no identity? No. I actually feel that if our offense can obtain the ability to run a mixture of offensive styles, that makes us that much better. If we can line up and run it up the gut, run to the outside, run play-action, throw the long ball, or toss the short quick passes, can anybody game plan to stop it all?

.

Show me some results and I might buy that this works. Clearly it does not. Since starting the year 3-1 and averaging near 40 points we have scored 10, 21, 21, 13, 15, and 14. No surprise we are 1-5 since. This coaching staff makes no in game adjustments or postgame adjustments. Are they that stubborn to think teams don't figure out these silly formations they run? So we run a bunch of formations. Big Woop. That is only an advantage if you run them well.

[footballguy51]

Additionally, when is the last time you saw an NFL team that only ran plays from the I? If they are behind and need to throw, they generally go to the shotgun spread offense. Does that mean their offense is a mishmash and has no identity? No. I actually feel that if our offense can obtain the ability to run a mixture of offensive styles, that makes us that much better. If we can line up and run it up the gut, run to the outside, run play-action, throw the long ball, or toss the short quick passes, can anybody game plan to stop it all?

.

Show me some results and I might buy that this works. Clearly it does not. Since starting the year 3-1 and averaging near 40 points we have scored 10, 21, 21, 13, 15, and 14. No surprise we are 1-5 since. This coaching staff makes no in game adjustments or postgame adjustments. Are they that stubborn to think teams don't figure out these silly formations they run? So we run a bunch of formations. Big Woop. That is only an advantage if you run them well.

I never said we are doing it well, at least not yet, but I certainly would not want us to go to one formation or one set style and try to make it work. Temple is a team that is one-dimensional, and we were able to stop them. A lot of people keep saying that running up the middle doesn't work, but evidence from the previous game shows that it was as successful as running up the middle should be. If you get rid of that dimension of our offense, no team needs to be concerned with up the middle runs, just like we weren't concerned with pass plays from Temple.