"We had a good scripted first drive," offensive coordinator Scot Loeffler said after Tech's 31-33 loss to Boston College. "We were overloaded in the box and we kicked some non-verbals out and completed balls we need more of that."
"There are times that we throw out a bubble and its a run play called and it turns into passing yards, when really thats an extension of the run game," receivers coach Aaron Moorehead said a few weeks ago.
During my re-watch of the Boston College game I counted 21 Tech offensive plays that featured screen action. I'm not in the huddle, the meeting rooms or the booth seated next to the coaches. However, based on the quotes above, and from watching Tech's "screens" all season, I can only conclude these are "packaged plays". That is to say, a run play with the option for the quarterback to throw a screen.
This play is probably called something like "Inside Zone Read Bubble". It's an inside zone read run packaged together with a bubble screen. Defensive end Kevin Kavalec (No. 93) is the unblocked option man.
Before the snap there are 6 Boston College defenders inside the box, and a seventh (No. 5) that's more than likely a run-first defender. More importantly, Tech has 3 receivers to the top of the screen and BC has just 2 defenders in coverage within 5-6 yards.
Michael Brewer can do one of three things on this play:
- If Kavalec crashes Brewer can pull the ball and run for what he can;
- If Kavalec stays wide Brewer can hand off to Sam Rogers;
- Brewer can throw a bubble screen to Isaiah Ford.
Given Tech's 3-2 advantage to the top of the screen, recent struggles running the ball and Boston College's bigger defensive front, Brewer probably made the decision to throw the screen before the snap. Although the defense doesn't know any better. It's a 4-yard gain, maybe more if Stanford throws a better block, but it took advantage of a matchup and kept the Hokies on schedule.
I know all of the "screens" are evoking the ire of Hokie Nation, but they don't bother me because the option to run is there. Marshawn Williams' touchdown run was an inside zone seemingly packaged with a bubble screen. However, this time there are just 6 defenders in the box, and Tech's at even numbers at the top of screen.
Pay attention to Byrn. He steps back like he expects the ball and Stanford looks to block. Even if it's a predetermined run, the Boston College defenders across from Willie and Josh are frozen. (And if you missed the pancakes Jonathan McLaughlin and Augie Conte served up, rewind the play.)
The next play is an outside zone read with a bubble screen.
Boston College is lined up in a 6-man, 30-front and a seventh defender pops into the box late. Tech has a 2-1 advantage to the bottom of screen. Brewer flings the ball to Cam Phillips, who makes the BC safety miss one-on-one, and gains 5 yards.
On the very next play, that safety Phillips made miss is cheated up closer to him. It's a 6-man box so Tech goes run and Sam Rogers picks up 5 yards and the first down.
Again, note the screen developing at the bottom of the screen. Phillips cracks the defensive back and Hodges sets up to receive the ball.
Last one. Tech's got a 2-1 advantage to the bottom of the screen and there a six Boston College defenders in the box.
This is a defensive look a good running team might pound the ball against, but instead Tech (an average at best running team) takes its chances with Bucky Hodges in space. It's a 9-yard again.
The effectiveness of plays packaged with screens / had screen action varied. Passes averaged 2.55 yards (4 , 0, 4, 5, 9, 6, 0, 1, 1, -2, 0), runs averaged 2.8 (8, 1, 5, -2, 3, 0, 5, 3, 4, 1).
There's no substitute for a smash-mouth running attack, but Scot Loeffler is trying to find a rhythmic way to keep his offense ahead of the sticks and control the clock. Again this season, this time due to injuries, Loeffler is in a position where he doesn't have a lot of options at tailback. The offensive line took a step forward last season, but hasn't this one. Furthermore, Michael Brewer cannot take the pounding Logan Thomas did, so inverted veer is an afterthought. He does, however, have Ford, Phillips and Hodges, freshman playmakers that he's using to compliment the ground game.
Comments
As has been said, it's hard to argue with trying to get your young playmakers some space to work, I just wish it was used to open up the downfield passing a little more. All these successful screens you showed were in the first 16 minutes of the game. If we can't throw the ball downfield and we can't run the ball then they don't have to respect them. Feels like we fell in love and kept forcing them.
perfectly succinct and totally agree +1
Totally agree. We run it too often and try to force it too many times.
Considering VT was able to stretch the field vertically more in the BC game maybe it was used to open up the downfield passing more. If VT uses these screen options to keep the LB's and/or nickel from cheating inside off the slot receiver then the defense either has to:
a) allow VT to run against 6 in the box or,
b) commit a safety to defending the run
In either case, VT should enjoy a matchup advantage that allows them to better execute in the run game or stretch the field vertically. If they are successful taking what the defense gives them then it should open up the complimentary component of the offense. The challenge has been successfully executing when the numbers allow for it (I know, captain obvious).
When VT is running against a 6 man front they have to be successful and stay ahead of schedule. When the defense brings a safety down into the box they need to be able to hit a decent percentage of those throws over the top and make the defense pay (and by pay, I mean they need to start taking a few of these to the house).
Honestly, I think that's Lefty's dream offense. A decent inside run game mixed in with screens to suck the defense in, then hit them with play action down the field. The main reasons that isn't working this season (in my opinion) are #1 the OL can't protect Brewer long enough for deep passes to develop; #2 Brewer's arm strength may not be quite enough to get the ball down there with some zip; #3 the OL the OL the OL. Those overthrown deep balls we keep seeing aren't an arm strength issue, Brewer is overthrowing his receivers because he has to throw sooner than he wants and/or he can't step up in the pocket because it's collapsing.
I know a lot of folks are less than pleased with Lefty's offense this year, but don't make the mistake of thinking that you're seeing this offense because this is what the coaches want. This is the coaches trying to make lemonade out of our lemons, but hardly represents the ideal Loeffler offense. I don't think they are capable of throwing more downfield passes but simply choose not to. I believe that our downfield passing stinks, and the coaches are trying to find another way to keep the chains moving.
The only problem I have with this offensive attack is that Brewer never keeps the ball. Brewer has to at least keep it a few times (if given the opportunity) to at least make the defense respect him keeping the ball. In the second video from the bottom Brewer would have been left one on one with a safety that came crashing down to the line of scrimmage. This already gives Brewer an edge because the safety has a tough angle to deal with.
TL:DR Brewer needs to keep the ball sometimes when given the opportunity on the read option to keep the defense honest.
At first glance it would seem you are right, but when you slow the play down and see what Brewer is seeing you will realize he is making the correct decisions most of the time. You should refer to this video and jump to the 7:10 mark. It relates directly to the argument you are trying to make.
I encourage every one to watch this video who is struggling to grasp some of the ideas behind our offensive strategy and also their other videos because they do a terrific job illustrating some of the same basic concepts that we incorporate in our offense.
Respectfully, I disagree. Tech ran plenty of zone reads against Pitt, Miami and Boston College. I can't remember Brewer keeping on many, if any, of them, yet I was shocked to see the optioned defensive end almost always respect his ability to pull it and run.
Moreover, I am one of those who suspects Brewer has been playing through injuries since the OSU game, and that's part of the reason he has struggled. The fewer hits he takes, the better.
I just took the time to watch the offense's first half. I came away with a few takeaways.
1. Sam Rogers had multiple mistakes in pass protection.
2. A little better blocking on the screens would go a long way.
3. Brewer made the correct read on all but maybe one of the packaged plays.
4. Start of the 2nd Quarter, 2nd red zone opportunity, and 3rd down. A pick play for Byrn is ran and Brewer looks at him, hesitates, and tucks the ball. If Brewer throws it, Byrn walks in for 6.
5. 10 min left in 2nd we encounter a 4th and 1 at just beyond midfield. We switch into the I-formation and are stuffed after Wade Hansen gets blown up at the point of attack. I'm okay with sticking with the package play, or running a play action pass out of the I to a leaking Rogers, Malleck, or Hodges, but I was confused with our decision to run behind Conte and Wade Hansen who had just entered the game a few minutes before.
Agree on all points
"1. Sam Rogers had multiple mistakes in pass protection."
I was wondering if anyone would point that out. I saw one play where he had 2 guys coming in, took a look at the inside guy (which takes priority if forced to take a choice), then inexplicably focused on the outside guy who actually had a tackle there to take him, and Rogers ended up getting no one. Brewer? He got drilled by the inside rusher. Totally inexplicable fail.
"4. Start of the 2nd Quarter, 2nd red zone opportunity, and 3rd down. A pick play for Byrn is ran and Brewer looks at him, hesitates, and tucks the ball. If Brewer throws it, Byrn walks in for 6."
I never got a good angle on that, but I believe it is possible that Brewer did not get a throwing lane there and was worried about a deflection. He definitely saw Byrn and just thought better of making the throw.
You're correct on #4....Brewer had two big lineman in his face and couldn't see Byrn and the LB clearly. He hesitated and tried to step around but got caught
That was the only reasoning I could come up with myself. Bottom line is the play call was good and the recievers ran the route to perfection. I remember watching from the stands and told my buddy next to me to watch for Bucky to go to the corner and for Isaiah to do a quick in rubbing off of his butt. I watched that side of the field and that's exactly what happened. My other buddy pointed out Byrn jumping up and down because he was so open. Good play call, need to get the ball out.
I bet that's a ball he throws in the first four games of the year. He's been brow-beat about the interceptions and it has made him hesitant on balls like this. The UNC interception was the last straw, I think.
To me, that's the change in the offense. Not some lecture about running the ball from Shane. We got to a point where Brewer was making too many mistakes and was told to quit or he would be benched. He then became very hesitant and the play calling became much more conservative. The OL play also had the bottom drop out at this same time and RB's got hurt. It has been a perfect storm.
But I don't want to go back to Brewer The Gunslinger either.
I think what happened there was Sam realized he had to stop two rushers, so he decided to hit the outside guy and rely on The Look to stop the inside guy. The inside rusher must have looked away just as Sam gave him The Look. If he had made eye contact he would have stopped in his tracks.
Not to mention, on the 4th and 1, wasn't Wright in for that play? Idk, maybe we haven't seen enough of Wright to form an opinion, but I would rather see Marshawn (I guess because I know what I am getting).
Wright was in on that play, but the offense was running up tempo so he remained in the game. But let's not forget Wright is listed as #2 fullback. He carries a load as well.
Yeah, you're right. About the tempo, did we take a timeout there or slow it down. One thing I think the staff and this team needs to get better at is trusting the tempo. A lot of times it seems that when we go up tempo and get into a rhythm, as soon as we get to third down play we take a timeout or slow it back down to make sure we call the right play. On one hand, I like this, gotta make the right play call, but on the other hand, teams that run the up tempo well, don't slow down even on important plays. Gotta trust your players and your scheme to execute. I hope we get better this.
That's why I suggested we stick with the packaged zone run-bubble screen. That seems to be our "Bread and Butter" now anyway. I'd much rather take what the defense gives us for a triple option than try to go to the I-formation, which we never run and run behind Conte and Hansen against one of the best front sevens in FBS.
An average of 2.55 yards per play is what sticks out to me. I suck at math but I know that doesn't equate to getting first downs
This and the screen yardage disappeared (if the yards list Joe provides is in the order that the plays when the screen pass was the option selected) for the last 5 or 6 times. Seems BC adapted and we had to go away from that.
How come we don't mix that in with some inside bubble screens? I see so many of those these days. If you did that with Hodges as the receiver or with him as a lead block to a Ford, Byrn, or Parker - might help keep the defense honest for longer in the game.
Great detailed analysis like this is why I love TKP. Y'all make me learn so much and it helps me appreciate and understand the action on the field so much better.
Do you remember seeing any screen packages when we were stuck inside the 5? Obviously they were a huge part of the gameplan, but I'd think you can't throw a screen to a receiver 3 yards deep in your end zone. One missed block or an aggressive corner and it's a safety
"We had a good scripted first drive," offensive coordinator Scot Loeffler said after having eight days to prepare this drive only to have his offense call timeout before the first play from scrimmage.
Play clock malfunction. The clock Brewer saw was at zero so he was trying to avoid (another) penalty. Should have been an official timeout.
Riiiiiight. Next thing I know, you'll be telling me we successfully landed on the moon multiple times and Ebola is not a cause for concern in America.
Are you OK?
No. It looks like I picked the wrong week to simultaneously quit amphetamines, sniffing glue, smoking, and drinking.
Wait a minute, moon landings, Ebola.... are you telling me that Ebola came from the moon??
I was in the East stands. Brewer called timeout and immediately pointed at the clock by the north end zone (the one in front of him). I looked and it was on 0. I looked at the clock by the south end zone and it said 25. Fortunately we didn't really need that timeout.
From the west stands I couldn't see the one stating 25 but knew there was no way in heck there should have been 0 on the other.
Watching these video clips, I've realized that it's not the screens themselves that I can't stand, but it's how slow they develop. I didn't realize until reading this that many of our screens are zone reads, and I think it's the play-action (or the read itself) that allows opposing DBs to realize that it's a run/screen play, and they crash the LOS.
I want to see screens that get the ball to the receiver ASAP, no sweeps, no reads, no gimmicks. The bubble screens where the receiver is already mid-stride moving towards or away from the QB are even more effective, because it takes less time to advance the ball. So many of our screens (including most included in this post) just seem to take too long for the ball to advance past the line of scrimmage.
I think you've made a really good point. The screens are too slow to develop, so when it looks like we have a 2 on 1 advantage out wide at the snap, by the time the ball is pulled out of the zone read and thrown out to receivers, a safety or linebacker has had plenty of opportunity to run up and make a play on the receiver almost immediately after catching the ball. It would be nice to get a receiver moving forward, even at an angle, the ball gets there instead of moving strictly sideways or standing still.
It would also be nice to get an extra blocker out there from the OLine, who wouldn't draw coverage.
A big guy isn't beating a safety to the point of attack. Just sayin. I'm not fundamentally opposed to running some tunnel screens, but they just haven't worked this year, and have even resulted in one pick-six, so I think for the time being at least, the OL won't be involved in WR screens.
You right. We're better off swinging Rogers or Malleck out wide to block, which we do for some of our existing screen packages.
I was thinking this also, but if the TE or FB went out to block then they would also bring their defender with them (assuming the defender knows his responsibility). That's the only reason I mentioned a lineman.
That's another good point, but that would require it to be a 100% screen, not a read play, so you aren't taking a blocker away. I think because the read play really is a run play at heart with an option to abort and throw, you aren't going to get that lineman to run out there. In theory, we would hand the ball off 2/3 times, since the play is geared more towards the run.
Yeah I was assuming there was no read on the play. If its called a screen the whole way then the QB should be able to get the ball and throw it before the defender gets to him. I'm just throwing ideas out there. I just don't like seeing the receiver catch the ball, turn, and see one blocker and two defenders.
On each of the Bubble Zone-Reads in the OP, the inside or outside zone run is ran to the field, and the bubble is ran to the boundary. I would like to see them flip this every once and a while. Because the bubble screen is being ran to the boundary, the Inside defenders do not have as much ground to cover in pursuit of the receiver.
In that scenario, 1 blocker and 2 defenders, it is the receiver's job to make his man miss. One receiver worries about setting and keeping his block on his man, the one that receives the ball just has to beat his guy. As with any skill position, you must have the ability to beat your man 1 on 1, otherwise, calling your number will always result in minimal gains. Fortunately, Bucky, Byrn, Phillips, and others have proven the ability to make the first man miss one way or another.
1) People always say that, but the guys on defense are on scholarship too. Isn't Foster's defense predicated on our DBs making an open-field tackle? I wouldn't run a play if it's success was dependent on breaking a tackle. Most passes are designed to either challenge the defense's ability to cover a specific area with limited numbers (Smash route), or use misdirection to gain a spatial advantage (double-move, button-hook). Even running plays are designed more for numerical advantages than physical dominance (Power, read-option).
2) I think The_Oki_Hokie is advocating for either a called bubble screen or a pre-snap audible. The read takes time and gives the DB/S time to react to the motion of the WR. If the screen is thrown straight away the unblocked defender doesn't have time to react and there is a higher probability of a big gain. This assumes that we wouldn't run the play without a numbers advantage already (2 on 1, 3 on 2).
If you wouldn't run a play that is dependent on breaking a tackle, I doubt you would ever run the ball. It's not always numerical advantages in the run game. Also, a screen is not a big gain play, especially a bubble screen. Perhaps a RB or tunnel screen looks for larger gains, but a bubble screen hopes to gain between 4 and 10 yards. As said previously, it's an extension of our running game and you don't run the ball hoping for 15. Can the plays break open for larger gains? Absolutely, but the foundation of the play is for a 4-10 yard gain.
Exactly. Marshawn Williams wasn't put in the lineup because he counts as 2 people and automatically provides a numerical advantage. Sometimes you've just gotta beat the guy across from you.
I would argue that Power, inside zone, outside zone, veer, IV, and the traditional option are designed to either be run away from an unblocked defender or to move blockers to create a numerical advantage. If everyone does their job blocking, the play will be successful (defined as keeping the offense on progress, not a large gain) by the time the first defender gets to the RB. If a tackle is broken, that's a bonus. I doubt we are calling those plays thinking the RB will get popped at the LOS and need to break a tackle just to gain positive yards.
I won't argue regarding those specific plays, but my point is that you have 11 men on offense against 11 men on defense. In the most general explanation of the game, you are responsible for 1 person on the other team. Whether you outrun him, juke him, or run him over, you must beat your man. If you are on the Offensive line, you must block your man. If you are on the DL, you must beat your block. Each person has a 1 on 1 matchup they must win for the play to be effective.
I wonder how difficult it would be to run these package plays as pre-snap audibles rather than play-action. That seems like it would make every screen more effective, without making the runs any less effective. But there must be a trade off.
precisely
Along the same lines, I feel like when Marshawn runs an outside zone, it is too slow to develop and/or he is too slow to make the read and get north./south. It just seems to take him to long to even get up to the line of scrimmage before the play starts breaking down. Some of that is on the O-line and receiver blocking, but some of it is on the fact that Marshawn is not as versatile as Trey and Shai are in that respect. Trey was killing the outside zone runs towards the end of last year and even had a few in the UNC game this year.
Trey looked similar to Marshawn in the earlier part of last season. It takes time to learn which hole to hit and when. Shai did have a knack for it that was more advanced than either Trey or Marshawn's at the same point in their careers though.
Yeah, I'm no expert, just going off my gut feeling and what I have learned from TKP. Thanks for the confirmation/further explanation. Hopefully Marshawn has a few good games to finish out the season, so he can go into the offseason on an uptick and with confidence. I think the run game returns against Duke, and we see more consistency from the team across the board.
I'm not as optimistic that the run game will return since, as French has pointed out, the OL is a bit worse this year then it was last year. I think the OL will play hard but with JMcGlock possibly out it could be a long day for the run game. I think Marshawn will continue to get better though as it seems that reps are about the only thing that helps with making the correct read quickly.
I do, somehow, think we will beat Duke, but I can't really point to anything over than my optimism and perhaps homerism :).
I'm trying my best to stay optimistic this season; it's hard. Even though we are a young team, I just think they will be extra motivated to beat Duke, maybe even disrupt their chances of winning the Coastal 2 years in a row. Aside form the Pitt game, we've played pretty well on the road.
Have a turkey leg for staying optimistic. Not that anything about this team has been "normal" but normally we play better as the underdog and spoiler. The BC game showed some signed of life for the O so hopefully they carry that over.
Trey could be back by Wake Forest.
I read that and I hope he is. In the limited snaps he got I thought he looked the best of the backs (as he should having a year in the system under his belt). I think he could be a shot in the arm and hopefully can pick up where he left off against YOU!VA the following week.
With our history of playing players before they are truly ready to return and thus prolonging and often permanently hindering their healing, I for one hope he doesn't play against Wake Forest.
We have a history of this? Can you elaborate?
Not asking to be an ass, asking because I'm unaware of this being a thing.
I don't know how much of a thing it is either but we do know that Facyson played with a stress fracture for part of last season which carried over to this season
Specifically people like Tariq Edwards and Brandon Facyson come to mind immediately. While Tariq played most of last season, he certainly was not the same player and I believe some of that can be attributed to his recovery time they allowed. I realize injuries are specific to the person, but the trend of similar injuries back to back, such as JC Coleman getting ankle sprain after ankle sprain last year where I think he never healed from the prior one before aggitating it again, is concerning. I am not a doctor and I know nothing about bone healing timeline, but he's going to get hit in the area of his clavicle and I imagine it's still a delicate area at the moment.
Gotcha. It's a tough balance between what the trainers are telling you and what the player is telling you. A lot of recovery depends on how well the guys say they feel so I'm not sure this is all on the training staff.
As for Trey, WF puts him at 7 weeks and the original prognosis was 6-8 weeks so it's not like he's coming back early.
I have a hard time with initial timelines though. Remember, Maddy was supposed to be 4-6 weeks. Everyone thought he would be back, but I had a feeling right away that he was done for the season. I just couldn't see a Defensive Lineman with a knee injury coming back and playing significant amounts of time in less than 8 weeks.
Maddy said they tried a smaller procedure first to try to get him back this season and then decided to go for the full one and end his season. His timetable was optimistic but I don't think there was any foul play there.
I find it hard to believe that they are putting fake recovery timetables out for the players and pushing them to return sooner (at least not more than any other team). It's also not like the players are saying "hey I really don't want to get back out there", they are pushing to get back as soon as possible too.
I think you misunderstand me. I think the recovery times they list for players have always been far too optimistic. I don't suggest that they are fake by any means. I think each of them have "recovered" from their injury in the time frame given, but they aren't recovered enough to play. Just because you can walk on a sprained ankle and can even run after a week or 2, it doesn't mean you are ready to start making sharp cuts and take hits without expecting some sort of lingering effect.
I did misunderstand you. I thought you were starting to go down some conspiracy path.
Not at all, though I do question the quality of our medical staff. Too many major injuries and many nagging injuries to overlook. Not a conspiracy, just a lack of quality and based upon his rants on Twitter, I think French would agree.
I think that's a fair question. Recovery does seem to be a bit...off for us. I wonder if that's more a factor of location (being in SW VA with no medical school) in that we don't have a lot of top doctors around.
I hope he's 100% and pissed off at lolUVA.
Him, and 52 other guys.
It is nice to learn that the screens come out of a read with multiple options rather than just being called and run no matter what the defense gives you. Also, thinking of the screens as an extension of the run rather than an attempt at a large chunk of yardage makes more sense.
I saw Josh Stanford miss 2 blocks in those clips. The first clip he just runs into the DB doesn't even get his hands out to block him.. That's on him because his defender ends up making the tackle .. Even if Stanford shield his man to middle of the field that's a 8 yard play instead of a 3 yard play.
Not picking on JS5 but that's not the type of effort I want to see from a guy who stepped away and now has been gracefully let back into the starting line-up. I also saw maybe 5-6 total missed blocks by him this game..
I wonder how effective JC Coleman would be as a screen blocker...
Multiple shots fired?
My first thought was "Blows up in our face."
BOOM Corect ding ding ding!!!!!! and the gif is fully dipped!!!!!
Couldn't agree more. His effort on that play you are describing baffles me. You would think he would want to prove himself after being off the team, and that effort was just unacceptable. I know I refer to Chip Kelly a lot, but his offense is absolutely admirable. He once said, "We're not going to throw to ya, if you're not going to block on the perimeter." For this offense to work, the WRs have to block on the perimeter, and block well.
What I saw is Stanford engaging for only the initial contact, then leaving the defender. He (and the other WRs blocking) need to stay engaged until the whistle blows.
This. For reference see Teller, Wyatt and the trail of pancakes he leaves in his wake.
Agree, and that is weird, because last year we were praising Moorehead with how his receivers had taken to blocking and staying engaged. I think part of it is the strength of Phillips and Ford isn't quite there, and even if initial contact is strong, defenders may be having an easy time shedding their blocks. This is definitely an area that should improve next year as they add strength.
Similar thing happened on that holding penalty he had against Pitt (I think it was Pitt, or was it Miami?) Receiver runs right into him before he even gets his arms up, so Stanford ends up with his arms around the defender and the hold is called.
It seems like we are so focused in getting 3.4 yards per play to stay on schedule that we lose the opportunities for 20 yard plays. I'm a ball control guy but without some kind of big play threat, we are playing against redzone defenses all day.
And the coaches always say something along the lines of, "we gotta get the run game going to open up the down field passing." I always hate to hear that answer, but I have to believe, especially after reading all the coverage on this site, that if the O-line improves and the run game can be more consistent, then the offense will really start to click, be balanced, and we will be able to get Ford and Bucky behind their secondary more frequently. As frustrating as it is to say, it always seems to hinge on continued maturity/growth from our backs, a healthy Trey Edmunds, and a much improved O-line. I just want to stop talking about what it will take for it to happen and finally see it happen!
Joe,
How about analyzing Tech's most successful and least successful plays all year. Also perhaps from which formation?
ie: inside zone out of a 3 WR 1 TE netted us 100 yards at 10 plays or or something like that.
Thanks!
i know it's just an example but averaging 10 yards/play on the inside zone would have me feelin' some kinda way.
Least successful formation is kick return. If every ball taken from the endzone that didn't get to the 25 is recorded as a negative play, we are averaging about -8 per play.
Reading Andy Bitter's report on the weekly conference call...Shane is a tape recorder for Dad.
I disagree.
This may have already been mentioned, if we're gonna keep running the screens the blocking by the receivers has to get MUCH better. And don't throw a screen to a guy that is outnumbered on his side!
Brewer has missed many opportunities to step into the pocket when the rush comes. Although our OL is garbage he needs to take advantage of those opportunities
great article. without being in the booth with loeffler this puts me a bit at ease to some of the play calling. When people, and sometimes me, start screaming at the tv as to why we are running so many screens it's nice to see an explanation. Take what the defense gives you. As long as Brewer is making the right calls in that situation I'm ok with it, although I'm ready for the OL to get their act together so we can pound the ball more effectively and then hopefully stretch the field some.
Geno Smith is dead last in the NFL in yards per attempt. At 5.88. To give some perspective on how poor of a choice it is to call so many of these screens