Did anyone else feel like the play calling on offense was very vanilla yesterday?
Ever since Tennessee, we've seen some very clever plays and French has pointed out how some of these play calls keep the defense off balance...
Vs Tennessee, we saw things like fake qb power and throw the jump pass to Rogers over the top
Vs BC, we showed speed option then threw to the flat for a couple TDs
Vs ECU, we showed speed option and threw a counter screen to McMillan for a TD
Vs UNC, we showed flanker screen to marshawn, then faked qb run to the other side, then threw to a wide open Isaiah in the end zone (incomplete)
...yesterday against Syracuse, I don't remember seeing any of this sort of clever play calling designed to keep the defense off balance. Seemed all we ran was read option or have Jerod stand in the pocket and throw. The play calling reminded me of the Liberty game in how vanilla it was.
Anyone else notice this? Do we think the scouting report on Syracuse defense was so bad that Fuente thought we could be that vanilla and score easily? Didn't want to show Miami too much?
Comments
Hadn't given that much thought. One thing that stood out to me was TMAC eating up yards on our first TD drive and then we stopped going to him. I don't understand that.
For the sake of my sanity I like to think there was a strategy behind that, such as keeping Tmac fresh, tire them out with a more of a bruising runner in Rogers.
That being said, I love Rogers but he never looked like the right RB against Syracuse. We needed speed, not bruising two yards. A little disappointed we did not see some throws to Rogers which is where his strength lies.
Hrm.
Fair. Was not saying Tmac can't run through people. But Rogers doesn't have his speed and so (to my unsophisticated eyes) tends to be more of a lower your shoulder and run into (and sometimes through) defenders type of runner.
I have enough faith in Fuente to think there was more to it than just giving Rogers reps for the sake of reps.
Is it just me, or did it feel like Tmac didn't have the speed and elusiveness in the 1st half. That's how I felt.
He looked terrible in the first half. Looked completely different in the 2nd half. I remember one pitch in the 1st that I thought he'd break for a huge play and he ran so timidly and almost just expected contact and went over. Didn't want to see him again the rest of the game after that one. Glad he got back on track in the 2nd half.
Travon carried the ball 9 times the entire game. 7 of those carries were in the 2nd half (5 on the first drive after halftime). Not sure how you can assess his first half performance when the guy only totes it 2 times. On that single drive alone, he provided more of a spark than any of the other backs did the entire game.
FTFY
Also, to further drive your point home, he gained 32 yards on 5 carries that drive.
That drive is how I like to football.
Frank, is that you?
It's very easy to assess how he looked in the first half running the ball. Watch the two carries again...
Like I said he looked much better in the 2nd half. Your last sentence isn't saying much considering how poor our rushing game has been all year.
You have a unique ability to judge performance based off of two isolated carries on a single drive in the first half. Hat's off to you. Perhaps you see things that I'm missing. Of all the backs, I just happen to see one guy who appears to jump off the screen more than anyone else. Sure it's not every play; it's never going to be every play. I know Fuente said in his presser that he isn't worried about the carries thing, but to my untrained eye, there's clearly something different (probably speed, yep, it's speed) about the offense when Travon plays. It seems logical to me to get him more run.
Again re-watch those two plays and ask yourself if you would have kept feeding him more carries? I'm not unique, by any means, in that assessment. He obviously either self-corrected or got some motivation at half-time and we saw a different guy.
I have to think that having Rogers in the game was because he is more effective in the passing game (blocking & receiving) and that his rushing attempts were called to keep Syracuse from just keying on the pass when he was in the game. If that was the case, though, then we ran him far too much. He was getting nothing via the run and every time we called a 1st or 2nd down rush with him, we would have been better off trying something else to get the defense off-balance.
Syracuse wasn't biting on any of our counter plays. Like the reverse pitch call after a few jet sweeps. Syracuse defense did not get baited at all. This was also in part because we couldn't even run the ball north/south.
I agree. I am not a big fan of the "jet sweeps". Just another fancy hype for the end around type of play. Once in a while, as a change of pace or "trick' type play, it might be nice to run. However, seems we run it fairly often. Just seems it takes to long to develop. Definitely did not work against Syracuse and as much as we are running it, I doubt other teams will bite. Miami definitely will not.
If you're not down with the jet sweet, you're in for some disappointment in the Fuente era. It's one of his bread and butter plays, and it sets up a lot of other plays we run.
The whole point of getting them to bite is that there is a threat of the play working if you don't put effort into defending it. You have to be able to call their bluff.
I don't mind any running play jet sweep or otherwise as long as we run block. Which we suck at so.....
THIS^^^
Something has to be up with Travon.. He barely played in the 1st half then the team has a great drive with him pounding the rock opening holes and gashing them for yards.
Yeah Sam needs to carry the ball a couple times to keep the defense honest. However I would have ran that same exact play set as the TD drive we had until they stopped it.
Cuse didn't stop going to the well so why did we?
I was thinking the same thing during the game.
This offense is based on using the same set over and over while running different plays in order to confuse the defense and get them out of position.
It sure didn't seem like we were doing this with regularity. I am interested in seeing French's analysis.
As much as they proclaim otherwise, I have a suspicion that the coaches may have been looking ahead to Miami.
I actually noticed that we had the Cam jet sweep play that got us a fair chunk of yards, that turned into a QB run the next time that got us a fair chunk of yards, that was a screen play the thrid time we ran it that was one of our touchdown plays. Our offense looked a bit trimmed down, largely they played it well, and we didn't execute.
The offensive play calling was an issue by itself. I'm moreso curious about our defensive scheme. Why on Earth were our corners continually playing 6-7 yards off the receivers? Syracuse took advantage of that all game long and was a big part of why they converted at least 4 4th down tries.
Um...because they converted on a 4th and 5 down to our one yard line (crap call, but still). Also, they got two early TDs on long plays. Our defense reeked of that last couple drives by Matty Ice back in 2007.
Bud also refused to bring any pressure. I think he called blitzes like 3 or 4 times (I don't actually know, it just felt like that). We rushed 4 DL or 3 (i.e. Ekanem dropping into coverage). QB had alllll day to throw the ball on each down. It was the least aggressive defense I've seen from us all year.
Haven't had a chance to review the game thread. Noticed a series in the first half where Bucky, Ford and Sam were all on the sideline. Any thoughts on that?
I didn't notice that exact series, but I did notice where our playmakers seem to spend an inordinate amount of time on the bench in the first half. I can only chalk that up to the staff initially seeing this game as an opportunity to spread out the reps and then only realizing the mistake in that once we were down two scores.
Ultimately, a part of me feels that everyone on the team (from coaches on down) saw this game as a cakewalk and our playcalling, substitutions and overall intensity reflected that in the early going. They seemed to have no motivation and no intensity at the beginning of the game. That's on Fuente.
Agree so much about early game intensity. The silence in the stadium hurt us big time imo. Often playing in front of a loud opposing crowd is better than a library because the team still feeds off the noise and crowd energy. Guys looked like they were just waking up from a nap...
Definitely wasn't silent in the 4th.
I was thinking we needed more speed in that game, Henry, Ford, travon, etc...
I'm soooooo with you! Man I was screaming this after the first couple of drives in the 1st qtr. I think our two best runners didn't run the ball enough! Especially Tmac. I do believe the level of focus that was needed to go and win in the " house of horrors" wasn't there. I blame the coaches on that one. We will be fine though. Go Hokies!
I'm wondering if the coaches started prepping for Miami next week (due to the short week) and didn't prep for Syracuse enough. I always hate when we play a Thursday night game after a non-bye week - I almost think that both the NCAA and NFL should require a bye the week before a Thursday night game, but I digress... I said it in another thread, but watching the game, it looked like we failed to establish the run early, and then the coaches just had no idea how to adjust. Need to see improvement against Miami.
We just seemed flat for a good portion of the game. In all three phases of the game we looked good at times and pretty bad at others. And this is definitely the first game where play calling and coaching can be fairly criticized. While disappointing, not entirely surprising. It's been a great start to the season, and going 11-1 just wasn't in the cards, but the Coastal can still be ours.
All that said, I thought the Bucky TD and the subsequent 2pc were very creative and well executed plays similar to what we've seen in the red zone early in the season. It just wasn't consistent throughout the game like we've grown used to over the previous three games.
The team responded after UT. Let's hope they respond after SU!
I agree with all the comments. Syracuse supposedly weak on run defense. We never tried to exploit this. I will get slammed for this, but I think we should have slowed the game some in our possessions. THEY RAN 100 PLAYS!!! Even if they average a measly 4 yards a play that's, let's do the math, 400 freaking yards.
I loved the constant strategy of running for 0-1 yards on 2nd and long, every freaking time.
Reminds me of the 2012 Florida State game. That offense was easily the worst one I had ever seen at Tech.
And the 2012 russell athletic bowl was the worst game in the history of modern football
Wake Forest 2014 is the worst. That game was a close second though.
Unfortunately I remember the RAB game, but I cannot recall playing WF in 2014.
Nah. Wake was a nice meme and all, but the athletic bowl neither team cracked 200 yards, more punts, lower completion percentages, 7 fumbles just by VT (somehow only lost one), more interceptions, less first downs, lower yards per attempt, lower yards per carry. Our leading rusher on the day was Martin Scales who got 14 yards on 12 attempts. We finished the day with 3 yards on 39 attempts. Rutgers only touchdown was on a botched snap by us that they recovered in the endzone. We racked up 14 penalties.
I know the double shutout seems like the worse game, but by all accounts this was truly a masterpiece of shit.
And many of those 0-1 yard runs on 2nd and long were up the middle using Sam. We needed more Travon, more Marshawn and less Sam. Rogers has many skills but he is not your go-to running back. Can we let one RB establish some rhythm?
I really think Fuente needs to move Rogers back to fullback. That way we can have him and either TMac or Marshawn in the backfield at the same time.
Aside from the play calling, it just seemed like there were a lot
of missed opportunities. There would be a real nice play set up,
then something would happen like the pass would get tipped
or the throw would be long, etc.
I took little exception to the play calling. There were maybe a couple of calls I questioned in the moment, but by and large it felt like the issues were executional rather than schematic.
Do we have any former/current coaches that call plays on TKP? I'd really love to get insight into how plays are selected and the rationale behind some of this.
Does NCAA football count? Because if so I will run the same option play over and over again. And when they commit an extra CB to the RB's side I throw a bubble screen to the unguarded WR. I'd say about 90% of the time it works every time.
while I'm really tempted to say yes, thats gonna be a no....
about 90% of the time it works every time.
Are you the ghost of Yogi Berra?
Anchorman reference:
I was surprised on our first two or three third and longs in the first half, we either ran the ball or one time threw a WR screen to Ford. I remember thinking it was a weird play call each time. I guess the coaches thought they could surprise Syracuse with that, but it never worked.
I am asking this out of ignorance (not intending to be critical). It seemed to me that our jet sweeps tended to be to the short side of the field. Is this intentional? Or was I just imagining it?
My wife says I need to post here rather than yell and scream at the TV during the game and rant and rave to her after the game. So I am posting to let you all know I am super disappointed in our offense on Sat.
We gave up 31 pts to a high powered offense - so be it. Really needed to score more. I thought Juice and Travon both looked good in limited touches.
I'm glad I'm not the only one upset because if you heard her say it, I would come off as "irrational"...
I was at a wedding, so watched intermittently during the whole "Do you take this woman", "I pronounce you man and wife", but I feel like with the exception of the two big plays and a few missed opportunities on our end and a few untimely penalties, we didn't play awful, not amazing, but still should have and could have escaped with a win with a poor effort.
Which is encouraging to a degree.
This week's film review will focus on the defense. I am planning on doing a macro-look at the offense during the bye week, as since the bye the offense hasn't looked quite right. Center and right guard and skill position blocking are problems. The running back rotation is frustrating me because the backs don't look comfortable. Rogers needs to settle into the HBack role full time, because right now he is missing a bunch of blocks (especially when he is asked to block at the second level.) And, at some key moments, I didn't like seeing the personnel grouping of Peoples-Rogers with Ford and Hodges rather than Cam Phillips on the field. Peoples made one heck of a catch at one point, but in the flow of the offense you want a polished dependable receiver.
Most significantly- I have said since the season started that at some point Jerod Evans would need to win a game from the pocket with the drop back passing game. While he had some very nice throws, Evans missed several wide open throws and forced some other throws into tough spots. Syracuse sat back and forced the Hokies to be efficient underneath the zone and Evans wasn't efficient enough. Much like Ohio State, the Hokies and Evans need to throw the football when they are ahead of the sticks and out in front. The quality of the passing game takes a huge step backwards on 3rd and 6 or more situations.
ruh roh
When I said early in the season that teams were eventually were going to challenge Evans to beat them because his downfield arm isn't a big threat, I was largely disagreed with.
I also worry now that - like LT - way too much is being put on his plate and eventually something has to give.
I was at the game and commented to the person beside me "wtf is Peoples doing there on that pattern?" when he caught that ball.
It also made no sense to me that with narrow line splits and DEs pinching in to contain Evans, they seemed to run a lot of delays and slower developing run plays inside the tackles that played right into the hands of a Syracuse team that was gambling with nothing to lose -- especially deep into the second half.
Problem isn't downfield throws, it's being decisive and efficient in the mid-range. Long balls have seemed to be pretty effective so far.
Agree with the last two sentiments though.
Disagree. He was and has been particularly efficient with 5-15 yard throws. He was probably about 65% on those throws vs Syr.
Nobody likes to hear it but he's neither very accurate nor gets a lot of velocity on his downfield throws. Syracuse in particular - with nothing to lose and everything to gain - was especially willing to take on this risk-reward scheme and was daring him to beat them with medium to long passes. And easily missing a wide-open Ford deep only emboldened them.
I thought Josh Jackson was the best looking passer during the spring game...and I think the future at QB is bright. I believe when Jackson has a year (or two) of this offense under his belt and has some experienced players to work with we're going to be scary good offensively....until then I think the coaches are trying to do the best with what they have
and let's not forget that these guys have only played 6 games in this system..tons of room to grow. They've shown flashes but inconsistency was going to be a problem this year and everyone knew it coming in. We've seen that and really it's kind of surprising how surprised everyone is at it. I wouldn't be shocked if we gash a few more teams and then lay another egg or two before this season is done.
From what little I've seen of Jackson, I like his arm.
Don't get me wrong, I like Evans. I just think, like almost every QB, he has his weaknesses and teams are going to try to exploit them.
His fumble in the 4th Qtr seemed like a consequence of putting too much on him. There was no reason for him to not get out of bounds and stop the clock. But when you're forced to wear a cape, you feel like you have to live up to it.
As long as the Hoos are a gash and not an egg......