One team made adjustments at halftime and one did not.
- Thread starter nicenez
- Start date
You can run the ball more...and put an extra rb back there for protection.
When you throw the ball 74 times, esp with a frosh, you will have a few errant throws.
If we ran the ball 10 to 15 more times this game, there is a good chance we could have cut down on the turnovers we made today.
Throwing the ball 74 times in a game and not expecting turnovers and sacks is like expecting a flying saucer to land in my yard.
This post was edited on 11/22 4:07 PM by spongebob11
When you throw the ball 74 times, esp with a frosh, you will have a few errant throws.
If we ran the ball 10 to 15 more times this game, there is a good chance we could have cut down on the turnovers we made today.
Throwing the ball 74 times in a game and not expecting turnovers and sacks is like expecting a flying saucer to land in my yard.
This post was edited on 11/22 4:07 PM by spongebob11
This is blasphemy but I kind of agree with sponge here. Your frosh QB is starting to show some cracks--hand it off to our backs to take a load off the kid. Now obviously our backs are going to get arm-tackled for a loss of 2, but if he throws 2 fewer picks because of it, we're still in the game.
I knew this was going to be one hell of a rebuild, and I'm still all in on Leach, but after losing nearly 70% of our games over 3 years, I'm just less in love with how fun and quirky his stubbornness is.--although overall I'm satisfied with the offense, which is his wheelhouse.
But even the fact that I think Leach is human will anger some people, and to those people I say: stop taking f---ing suicide pacts with coaches. There were people in the Woof era who would have killed for him, and now there are folks who would kill for Leach. The sport needs rational, levelheaded fans, not stone cold zombies who have taken blood oaths with strangers.
I knew this was going to be one hell of a rebuild, and I'm still all in on Leach, but after losing nearly 70% of our games over 3 years, I'm just less in love with how fun and quirky his stubbornness is.--although overall I'm satisfied with the offense, which is his wheelhouse.
But even the fact that I think Leach is human will anger some people, and to those people I say: stop taking f---ing suicide pacts with coaches. There were people in the Woof era who would have killed for him, and now there are folks who would kill for Leach. The sport needs rational, levelheaded fans, not stone cold zombies who have taken blood oaths with strangers.
We had so.e nice runs in there.
But even if you run the ball 15 times for no yds and take away 2 or 3 of the turnovers, a bit of a different ball game.
You are flat out asking for turnovers and sacks throwing the ball 70 times..esp with a frosh.
But even if you run the ball 15 times for no yds and take away 2 or 3 of the turnovers, a bit of a different ball game.
You are flat out asking for turnovers and sacks throwing the ball 70 times..esp with a frosh.
622 yards? 30 first downs?.
Good observation dgibbons, for the most part the WSU O-line did indeed dominate the LOS
Re: agree Sponge..........
....we needed to run the ball a few more times, especially on first down. Also...after successful runs why not line up quickly and run it again ? I don't think we ever ran it 2 plays in a row. I think more runs would have helped take the prssure off of Falk.
....we needed to run the ball a few more times, especially on first down. Also...after successful runs why not line up quickly and run it again ? I don't think we ever ran it 2 plays in a row. I think more runs would have helped take the prssure off of Falk.
The QB calls the run plays.
People still don't know how this offense works.
Leach calls a formation with a lead play in mind.
The QB takes the call and lines up and reads the defense. He can change the play to anything he sees out there.
6 in the box? Time to run. 9 in the box? pass. Zone / Man coverage determine the routes and all that stuff. That's how it works in a very very basic way.
It was Falks responsibility to check to the run as it was Halliday's choice to check to the run.
This isn't the old way of running 1 set play the QB goes out there and must run that set play / throw to that set target. That's what Halliday struggled with his first year. He had no idea that he was in control of the offense, and that he had decisions to make based on what the defense was doing. He would just line up throw to a primary target covered or not and it wasn't until later he realized he could check down to pass, check to run etc. etc.
People still don't know how this offense works.
Leach calls a formation with a lead play in mind.
The QB takes the call and lines up and reads the defense. He can change the play to anything he sees out there.
6 in the box? Time to run. 9 in the box? pass. Zone / Man coverage determine the routes and all that stuff. That's how it works in a very very basic way.
It was Falks responsibility to check to the run as it was Halliday's choice to check to the run.
This isn't the old way of running 1 set play the QB goes out there and must run that set play / throw to that set target. That's what Halliday struggled with his first year. He had no idea that he was in control of the offense, and that he had decisions to make based on what the defense was doing. He would just line up throw to a primary target covered or not and it wasn't until later he realized he could check down to pass, check to run etc. etc.
Re: agree Sponge..........
3 yards or zero yards, would have been better than the 8 yard losses from the sacks. Once Falk got pounded he began making more mistakes too.
3 yards or zero yards, would have been better than the 8 yard losses from the sacks. Once Falk got pounded he began making more mistakes too.
Re: agree Sponge..........
The key to the game was Falk's 6 turnovers resulting in 35 ASU points.
The key to the game was Falk's 6 turnovers resulting in 35 ASU points.
ASU was stuffing the run game with 5 in the box.
And let's face it. The people that don't understand this offense simply don't want to. It takes only meager intellectual capacity, so anyone (or just about anyone) that can establish a username as required to post on this website ought to be able to understand the offense.
This post was edited on 11/23 9:33 AM by dgibbons
And let's face it. The people that don't understand this offense simply don't want to. It takes only meager intellectual capacity, so anyone (or just about anyone) that can establish a username as required to post on this website ought to be able to understand the offense.
This post was edited on 11/23 9:33 AM by dgibbons
Re: agree Sponge..........
Falk averaged over 8 yards per pass attempt, even with the picks and some misses on the deep balls. Even when you throw out Falk and Dascalo's rushing stats, the backs were averaging 3.5 yards per carry, with a lot of them getting stuffed right at the LOS. Falk was already dealing with 2nd and long and 3rd and long too often, why guaranty more of them?
Re: agree Sponge..........
Jamal Morrow had one rush for a loss of 3 yards. Outside of that one run, Morrow and Mason had 10 carries for 45 yards with the long run being 13 yards.
again, it was Falk's 5 turnovers resulting in 35 ASU points that were the difference in this game.
Jamal Morrow had one rush for a loss of 3 yards. Outside of that one run, Morrow and Mason had 10 carries for 45 yards with the long run being 13 yards.
again, it was Falk's 5 turnovers resulting in 35 ASU points that were the difference in this game.
Everyone here understands how the offense is supposed to work. That is a copy and paste from his book. We get that.
But Leach is still the head coach... and if we pass the ball 74 times and only run it 14 with a frosh, you are either coaching it or allowing it to happen.
But Leach is still the head coach... and if we pass the ball 74 times and only run it 14 with a frosh, you are either coaching it or allowing it to happen.
Re: agree Sponge..........
Thank you. You just already made my argument for me.
They were already facing 2nd long and 3rd and long with what they were doing all game long(74 passes, 14 runs) and as you just mentioned, Morrow was only averaging 3.5 yds per run.
So if you run more with that average on 1st down (when they are giving you the run), you are in a more managable 2nd down.
Since you like to watch each game 3 times, maybe on the 2nd or 3rd viewing you'll see the series in the second half where we run the ball on 1st down for 4 yds and complete the 2nd down pass for an easy first down.
Very next play, incomplete pass. 2nd and 10 we run the ball for a 8 or 9 yd gain.
"But..but some of our runs got stuffed at the line of scrimage"...well look at what happened on 5 of our pass plays from scrimage!!
Thank you. You just already made my argument for me.
They were already facing 2nd long and 3rd and long with what they were doing all game long(74 passes, 14 runs) and as you just mentioned, Morrow was only averaging 3.5 yds per run.
So if you run more with that average on 1st down (when they are giving you the run), you are in a more managable 2nd down.
Since you like to watch each game 3 times, maybe on the 2nd or 3rd viewing you'll see the series in the second half where we run the ball on 1st down for 4 yds and complete the 2nd down pass for an easy first down.
Very next play, incomplete pass. 2nd and 10 we run the ball for a 8 or 9 yd gain.
"But..but some of our runs got stuffed at the line of scrimage"...well look at what happened on 5 of our pass plays from scrimage!!
Re: agree Sponge..........
Morrow rushed 10 times for 37 yards. He was stuffed one time for a 3 yard loss. 40 yards on 9 carries = 4.44 yds/ carry
Re: agree Sponge..........
That's funny because I was using your figure of 3.5 ypc which you subsequently deleted. Too funny.
That's funny because I was using your figure of 3.5 ypc which you subsequently deleted. Too funny.
Re: agree Sponge..........
Thought the exact same thing Earl...since 2012 actually...its exactly what Oregon does...you just gashed them for 6 yds...sprint to the line and run it again before they get totally set.
You actually give the D a chance to recover and think about their assignments the way we're doing it.
I also like twin backs more ala his UK offense. Last yr we had more more positive plays out of twin backs. Didn't see it much this yr but I think you can do a lot more out of that
Thought the exact same thing Earl...since 2012 actually...its exactly what Oregon does...you just gashed them for 6 yds...sprint to the line and run it again before they get totally set.
You actually give the D a chance to recover and think about their assignments the way we're doing it.
I also like twin backs more ala his UK offense. Last yr we had more more positive plays out of twin backs. Didn't see it much this yr but I think you can do a lot more out of that
Similar threads
