I haven't heard any discussion on this, but wanted to throw it out. They were talking on TV, for those not at the game, that FIU knew what we were running on offense and were calling out RUN or PASS before each play. I know you have to be able to overcome challenges, but the other team knowing your plays gives a huge advantage in such a close matchup. The thought was that FIU were able to decifer the incoming signals, possibly with the help from Satterfield.

One of the great advantages we got back was being able to call the play for 2 pts on the sidelines and no signals. No it doesn't stop their runs, 4th and 17, etc...but it helps them contain our offense and get Big Mo back on their side.

If they were stealing our plays how come we were kicking their a$$ unmercifully in the first half? that makes no sense to me.

(12-28-2010 09:25 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  If they were stealing our plays how come we were kicking their a$$ unmercifully in the first half? that makes no sense to me.

Half Time adjustments?

(12-28-2010 08:42 PM)UT__Rockets Wrote:  I haven't heard any discussion on this, but wanted to throw it out. They were talking on TV, for those not at the game, that FIU knew what we were running on offense and were calling out RUN or PASS before each play. I know you have to be able to overcome challenges, but the other team knowing your plays gives a huge advantage in such a close matchup. The thought was that FIU were able to decifer the incoming signals, possibly with the help from Satterfield.

One of the great advantages we got back was being able to call the play for 2 pts on the sidelines and no signals. No it doesn't stop their runs, 4th and 17, etc...but it helps them contain our offense and get Big Mo back on their side.

If this were even possible, you would think that Beckman would have had the foresight to see this and switched things up during the 15 practices leading up to the bowl game. He would have had to consider Satterfield would be up to it.

(12-28-2010 08:42 PM)UT__Rockets Wrote:  I haven't heard any discussion on this, but wanted to throw it out. They were talking on TV, for those not at the game, that FIU knew what we were running on offense and were calling out RUN or PASS before each play. I know you have to be able to overcome challenges, but the other team knowing your plays gives a huge advantage in such a close matchup. The thought was that FIU were able to decifer the incoming signals, possibly with the help from Satterfield.

One of the great advantages we got back was being able to call the play for 2 pts on the sidelines and no signals. No it doesn't stop their runs, 4th and 17, etc...but it helps them contain our offense and get Big Mo back on their side.

I had the same thoughts. I actually heard the fiu coaches shouting a few times in the second half on the telecast before the players even got settled before the snap, which seemed odd at the time but makes sense now.

Here's the deal, it's not that they were stealing our signs/signals. The problem is that Satterfield is very familiar with our formations on offense, and the tendencies based on those formations and personnel on the field. He caught on to this and started tipping off the coaches on the sideline. He would scan the field as we got up to the line of scrimmage with our formation. He had a pretty good idea what type of play we were going to run from this, because he instituted a lot of our offense when he was here last year. He would call it down the sideline through his headphones, and then the coaches quickly yelled to the field what was coming.

They even showed Satterfield in the press box talking into his headphones on a play or two while we were lined up at the line of scrimmage on offense. Now, normally an OC is not talking on the headphones when his team is on defense so this even should him relaying what he believed was coming based on the formation.

You can't blame Beckman or anyone else for not changing things up for this game. We are not talking about stolen signals or anything, but Satterfield recognizing the formations. And we're not going to change the formations and offense we run in less than 3 weeks for one game.

As for the announcers saying UT called a couple of timeouts in the 2nd half so that FIU could not steal the signals......that is pure BS and just guessing on their part because they assumed FIU was stealing our signals because they were calling out if we were going to run or pass and were usually successful in their guess. It was all about formation recognition. And as much as it pisses me off that Satterfield did that, I have to also say that he is pretty dang smart to pick up on that and start relaying it down.

FIU had weeks to scour over the video from an entire season of rocket football. I feel pretty confident in saying that they would have a good idea of whether the play was a run or pass based on the formation.

I also tend to think that UT had the same idea about FIU's plays.

Regardless, the players still have to read, recognize and react in a split second and that is what determines outcomes of every play.

(12-29-2010 10:24 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Here's the deal, it's not that they were stealing our signs/signals. The problem is that Satterfield is very familiar with our formations on offense, and the tendencies based on those formations and personnel on the field. He caught on to this and started tipping off the coaches on the sideline. He would scan the field as we got up to the line of scrimmage with our formation. He had a pretty good idea what type of play we were going to run from this, because he instituted a lot of our offense when he was here last year. He would call it down the sideline through his headphones, and then the coaches quickly yelled to the field what was coming.

They even showed Satterfield in the press box talking into his headphones on a play or two while we were lined up at the line of scrimmage on offense. Now, normally an OC is not talking on the headphones when his team is on defense so this even should him relaying what he believed was coming based on the formation.

You can't blame Beckman or anyone else for not changing things up for this game. We are not talking about stolen signals or anything, but Satterfield recognizing the formations. And we're not going to change the formations and offense we run in less than 3 weeks for one game.

As for the announcers saying UT called a couple of timeouts in the 2nd half so that FIU could not steal the signals......that is pure BS and just guessing on their part because they assumed FIU was stealing our signals because they were calling out if we were going to run or pass and were usually successful in their guess. It was all about formation recognition. And as much as it pisses me off that Satterfield did that, I have to also say that he is pretty dang smart to pick up on that and start relaying it down.

Brian, I have to disagree. I thought the offensive pace was extremely slow in the second half except for the one drive when they scored. They were taking way too much time to snap the ball. Why run a no huddle offense if you take so much time to start the play? Reading signals or reading the formation. It does not matter. If you move slow, Beckman and staff gave FIU way too much time to read the play. This is on Beckman and OC. Not Satterfield or Owens. This is Beckman first bowl as a head coach. He will be ready the next time. HOW MANY DAYS UNTIL THE FIRST KICKOFF? Start the countdown.

(12-29-2010 02:51 PM)OldRock Wrote:  

(12-29-2010 10:24 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Here's the deal, it's not that they were stealing our signs/signals. The problem is that Satterfield is very familiar with our formations on offense, and the tendencies based on those formations and personnel on the field. He caught on to this and started tipping off the coaches on the sideline. He would scan the field as we got up to the line of scrimmage with our formation. He had a pretty good idea what type of play we were going to run from this, because he instituted a lot of our offense when he was here last year. He would call it down the sideline through his headphones, and then the coaches quickly yelled to the field what was coming.

They even showed Satterfield in the press box talking into his headphones on a play or two while we were lined up at the line of scrimmage on offense. Now, normally an OC is not talking on the headphones when his team is on defense so this even should him relaying what he believed was coming based on the formation.

You can't blame Beckman or anyone else for not changing things up for this game. We are not talking about stolen signals or anything, but Satterfield recognizing the formations. And we're not going to change the formations and offense we run in less than 3 weeks for one game.

As for the announcers saying UT called a couple of timeouts in the 2nd half so that FIU could not steal the signals......that is pure BS and just guessing on their part because they assumed FIU was stealing our signals because they were calling out if we were going to run or pass and were usually successful in their guess. It was all about formation recognition. And as much as it pisses me off that Satterfield did that, I have to also say that he is pretty dang smart to pick up on that and start relaying it down.

Brian, I have to disagree. I thought the offensive pace was extremely slow in the second half except for the one drive when they scored. They were taking way too much time to snap the ball. Why run a no huddle offense if you take so much time to start the play? Reading signals or reading the formation. It does not matter. If you move slow, Beckman and staff gave FIU way too much time to read the play. This is on Beckman and OC. Not Satterfield or Owens. This is Beckman first bowl as a head coach. He will be ready the next time. HOW MANY DAYS UNTIL THE FIRST KICKOFF? Start the countdown.

I guess that the interception that cost Mizzou the game last night was really Pinkel's fault then...

(12-29-2010 04:01 PM)AquaRocket Wrote:  

(12-29-2010 02:51 PM)OldRock Wrote:  

(12-29-2010 10:24 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  Here's the deal, it's not that they were stealing our signs/signals. The problem is that Satterfield is very familiar with our formations on offense, and the tendencies based on those formations and personnel on the field. He caught on to this and started tipping off the coaches on the sideline. He would scan the field as we got up to the line of scrimmage with our formation. He had a pretty good idea what type of play we were going to run from this, because he instituted a lot of our offense when he was here last year. He would call it down the sideline through his headphones, and then the coaches quickly yelled to the field what was coming.

They even showed Satterfield in the press box talking into his headphones on a play or two while we were lined up at the line of scrimmage on offense. Now, normally an OC is not talking on the headphones when his team is on defense so this even should him relaying what he believed was coming based on the formation.

You can't blame Beckman or anyone else for not changing things up for this game. We are not talking about stolen signals or anything, but Satterfield recognizing the formations. And we're not going to change the formations and offense we run in less than 3 weeks for one game.

As for the announcers saying UT called a couple of timeouts in the 2nd half so that FIU could not steal the signals......that is pure BS and just guessing on their part because they assumed FIU was stealing our signals because they were calling out if we were going to run or pass and were usually successful in their guess. It was all about formation recognition. And as much as it pisses me off that Satterfield did that, I have to also say that he is pretty dang smart to pick up on that and start relaying it down.

Brian, I have to disagree. I thought the offensive pace was extremely slow in the second half except for the one drive when they scored. They were taking way too much time to snap the ball. Why run a no huddle offense if you take so much time to start the play? Reading signals or reading the formation. It does not matter. If you move slow, Beckman and staff gave FIU way too much time to read the play. This is on Beckman and OC. Not Satterfield or Owens. This is Beckman first bowl as a head coach. He will be ready the next time. HOW MANY DAYS UNTIL THE FIRST KICKOFF? Start the countdown.

I guess that the interception that cost Mizzou the game last night was really Pinkel's fault then...

I dunno. I mean, Owens threw the interceptions. But the FIU Defense was all over Owens in the second half. I believe that the signal stealing/formation reading done on the FIU side created a circumstance not in favor of Owens or the UT Offense. Why did the no huddle offense start in the first place? Wasn't the intend to keep running at the defense fast to keep them off balance? UT Offense was slow slow slow at snapping the ball. Too much time for the FIU Defense to read and/or steal the plays. If they needed to slow down to manage the clock or to make sure that the offense had the right play, then stop the no huddle offense. I think it totally sabotaged freshman Owens. Dantin may have managed the pressure a little better due to his experience. But not by much. Owens was hurried up and harrassed in the second half. The head coach manages the game speed and disguising play calling. Beckman's good friend Tressel told him after the Ohio State game that UT gave away their defense play calling everytime. Coach Beckman is still learning to be a head coach. I think he is a darn good one. He just needs to improve his game management skills. UT was the better team. Replace the graduates, fix special teams and manage the game better. Bottom line, I am totally geeked about next year.

We've run the no huddle and let the play clock go down quite a bit this season. When we've done that and been successful no one says anything. When we've done that and not been successful I've seen several posts on here complaining about it and talking about how we need to snap the ball quicker. It's human nature to focus on the negative, and sometimes it construes our perception.

I am not a coach. I just want to understand the thinking behind the strategy.

Is letting the play clock run down in a no huddle offense the right thing to do? When? For what purpose? I do not understand.

How does running the play clock down help when players are in formation and play signals might get stolen? The defense has plenty of time to take an inventory of players on the field and put their people in the right position. If we have let the play clock go down previously and been successful, is that because we played against a coaching staff that was not as sharp as the FIU staff?

Last year Toledo used those huge sign boards with multiple logos. Those were scrapped this year after the Arizona game, that was the second time we heard about teams knowing what was coming (tOSU was the first). If FIU knew what plays were coming, that is at least the third team in the last two years, I'd say the coaching staff has some work to do on disguising our play calling.

Since UT doesn't use the sign boards any longer, I would agree with what Brian said. Satterfield probably knew/recognized potential plays based on formation, not so sure about stealing signals. Having a month to prepare for a bowl game can help you determine teams tendancies. FIU definitely did a nice job of making halftime adjustments.

I would also agree with what OldRock is saying. Utilizing all of the play clock, may have allowed FIU/Satterfield, to adjust to what type of a play they thought was coming, and make pre-snap adjustments.

FIU was definitely athletic and talented. UTs WRs had a difficult time getting open and UTs O-Line had a difficult time keeping pressure off of Owens. Having said that, the biggest question I have for the coaching staff, is where were the screen passes and the short passing game. Adonis Thomas had 2 catches, both in the first half. Using the screen game, could have slowed up FIU's pass rush. I know a lot of people on this board were enamored with stretching the field in the passing game, in my opinion, that got UT in trouble in this game. Owens was not accurate with his down field passes leading to 1 interception and multiple incompletions and the pressure FIU was able to apply, lead to the other 2 interceptions.

Also, something needs to be done regarding punt protection. UT had 3 punts blocked in the last game of 2009 and had 3 punts blocked in the last 2 games of 2010. Something needs to be done to fix this problem.

Waiting does a few different things.

-It allows for the play to be changed based on how the defense is set up, either by popping heads up to the sideline, or a QB audible.
-It helps to tire out the defense. They have to be ready for a snap at any time and the line needs to be in their 3 pt stance.
-Mentally it wears on the players as they could get lulled into a rhythm of running down the clock, and then be pounced on by a series of rapid fire plays.

That's just from my non-football educated mind. I'm sure someone smarter in the game has some more items.

Gang: we can talk about Satterfield knowing our signals(which is hard to do with three signal callers and not knowing which one is the live signal). Chances are he just recognized the formations. All that aside, how often do you win a game when you turn the ball over more than two times. Turn overs were the Rockets demise in the bowl game. It is that simple. Had we not turned the ball over, you might as well take 21 points from FIU. The blocked punt was terrible(seven more points!). We shot ourselves in the foot on this one. Keep in mind this is a young team. They learned alot from this game. We will be stronger in the future and smarter. Please do not rag on the team for this, I am happy with this years results and I look forward to more success. GO ROCKETS!

(12-30-2010 02:37 PM)BusDriver Wrote:  Gang: we can talk about Satterfield knowing our signals(which is hard to do with three signal callers and not knowing which one is the live signal). Chances are he just recognized the formations. All that aside, how often do you win a game when you turn the ball over more than two times. Turn overs were the Rockets demise in the bowl game. It is that simple. Had we not turned the ball over, you might as well take 21 points from FIU. The blocked punt was terrible(seven more points!). We shot ourselves in the foot on this one. Keep in mind this is a young team. They learned alot from this game. We will be stronger in the future and smarter. Please do not rag on the team for this, I am happy with this years results and I look forward to more success. GO ROCKETS!

I was thinking 1 and 5 to start so I'm happy but success breeds the expectation of more success.

I don't recall OSU knowing our formations/plays, but it's possible. Against Arizona there was one guy that said he knew what was coming on some of the plays. He was a LB for Arizona. I did some research on him after the game because I was intrigued about his comments. He said he knew what was coming on certain formations because of the film he studied on us. My research found that he is one of those guys that lives in the film room and he tends to know what is coming against many opponents.

That said, we've been known to know what was coming from the other team as well.....but it's never been publicized here. Many of our players spend a lot of extra time in the film room, and this is where you truly learn the tendencies and formations of your opponent. Most of the time this year when an opponent set up a screen pass, you notice our pass rushers quickly drop back and thwart the play. This is because of studying film and knowing your opponent's tendencies.

As for why you would run the clock down out of a no huddle....it's kind of already been mentioned. One thing we do is line up and act like we are getting ready to snap the ball, but then look to the sideline to see if they want to change the play. This is because the OC in the booth reads the formation the defense is in and if he thinks there is something to exploit he will radio down to the sideline to call another play, which they relay to the players on the field.

Another reason for taking time is just to plain old run more time off the clock. And finally, a third reason is to keep mixing up the speed to which we are snapping the ball. Meaning for part of the time snap it quickly, and then snap it near the end of the clock several times. This keeps the defense from being able to guess the snap count and try to jump the snap.

(12-30-2010 03:25 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  I don't recall OSU knowing our formations/plays, but it's possible. Against Arizona there was one guy that said he knew what was coming on some of the plays. He was a LB for Arizona. I did some research on him after the game because I was intrigued about his comments. He said he knew what was coming on certain formations because of the film he studied on us. My research found that he is one of those guys that lives in the film room and he tends to know what is coming against many opponents.

That said, we've been known to know what was coming from the other team as well.....but it's never been publicized here. Many of our players spend a lot of extra time in the film room, and this is where you truly learn the tendencies and formations of your opponent. Most of the time this year when an opponent set up a screen pass, you notice our pass rushers quickly drop back and thwart the play. This is because of studying film and knowing your opponent's tendencies.

As for why you would run the clock down out of a no huddle....it's kind of already been mentioned. One thing we do is line up and act like we are getting ready to snap the ball, but then look to the sideline to see if they want to change the play. This is because the OC in the booth reads the formation the defense is in and if he thinks there is something to exploit he will radio down to the sideline to call another play, which they relay to the players on the field.

Another reason for taking time is just to plain old run more time off the clock. And finally, a third reason is to keep mixing up the speed to which we are snapping the ball. Meaning for part of the time snap it quickly, and then snap it near the end of the clock several times. This keeps the defense from being able to guess the snap count and try to jump the snap.

Seems to me that Church said something last year about noticing something in NIU's kick formation that he exploited for two blocks. Or maybe I'm confusing that game with another.

(12-30-2010 03:25 PM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  I don't recall OSU knowing our formations/plays, but it's possible. Against Arizona there was one guy that said he knew what was coming on some of the plays. He was a LB for Arizona. I did some research on him after the game because I was intrigued about his comments. He said he knew what was coming on certain formations because of the film he studied on us. My research found that he is one of those guys that lives in the film room and he tends to know what is coming against many opponents.

That said, we've been known to know what was coming from the other team as well.....but it's never been publicized here. Many of our players spend a lot of extra time in the film room, and this is where you truly learn the tendencies and formations of your opponent. Most of the time this year when an opponent set up a screen pass, you notice our pass rushers quickly drop back and thwart the play. This is because of studying film and knowing your opponent's tendencies.

As for why you would run the clock down out of a no huddle....it's kind of already been mentioned. One thing we do is line up and act like we are getting ready to snap the ball, but then look to the sideline to see if they want to change the play. This is because the OC in the booth reads the formation the defense is in and if he thinks there is something to exploit he will radio down to the sideline to call another play, which they relay to the players on the field.

Another reason for taking time is just to plain old run more time off the clock. And finally, a third reason is to keep mixing up the speed to which we are snapping the ball. Meaning for part of the time snap it quickly, and then snap it near the end of the clock several times. This keeps the defense from being able to guess the snap count and try to jump the snap.

I applaud guys who are willing to put in extra time studying film. It just shows their character and willingness to do whatever is necessary to give them and their team a competitive advantage.

Having said this, UT has a young coaching staff. They should take these types of comments and use them as opportunities to grow. I am sure that UT has had competitive advantages against some of their opponents due to film study, but it appears that UT opponents have gained a competitive advantage against UT at times as well.

Sometimes you can have too many different formations. If you don't run enough plays out of a certain formation, it becomes easier for a defense to know what type of play is coming in a certain down and distance. UT might be better served to have fewer formations and to run more plays out of each formation, thus giving to defense more options to have to consider.

(12-30-2010 03:49 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  Seems to me that Church said something last year about noticing something in NIU's kick formation that he exploited for two blocks. Or maybe I'm confusing that game with another.

Yeah he did say that. I believe he said he noticed it on film and then in the game he saw the same thing and was able to exploit it.