(09-22-2015 09:49 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 01:09 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 10:16 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  If you're going to have Hare running the ball, then he is going to get tackled. How is that different from someone hitting him when he's in the pocket? Which, by the way, already happened earlier in the game.

It's a huge difference. It's why the QB is protected in the pocket. While in the pocket, the QB is looking downfield and has a much harder time defending himself or preparing for a hit. The QB plants his feet to make throws, something they'd never do while running with the ball. It's also why the punter is protected. It's a very vulnerable position to be in.

Once the QB is a runner, they can see and dodge and duck and tuck and such (though there is the sliding nonsense). Lynch never trucked anybody in the pocket.

But rolling out doesn't change that, you still can get blindsided by a defender. I've seen it happen lots of times.

But you still have a better chance of protecting yourself and manipulating your blocking.

The point of this was nothing was working in the passing game. Of Hare's 14 completions, at least 7 were screens and 1 was a tipped pass to Kenny G. The problem wasn't the playcalling. It was the blocking.

(09-22-2015 10:08 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:49 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 01:09 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 10:16 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  If you're going to have Hare running the ball, then he is going to get tackled. How is that different from someone hitting him when he's in the pocket? Which, by the way, already happened earlier in the game.

It's a huge difference. It's why the QB is protected in the pocket. While in the pocket, the QB is looking downfield and has a much harder time defending himself or preparing for a hit. The QB plants his feet to make throws, something they'd never do while running with the ball. It's also why the punter is protected. It's a very vulnerable position to be in.

Once the QB is a runner, they can see and dodge and duck and tuck and such (though there is the sliding nonsense). Lynch never trucked anybody in the pocket.

But rolling out doesn't change that, you still can get blindsided by a defender. I've seen it happen lots of times.

But you still have a better chance of protecting yourself and manipulating your blocking.

Absolutely. The only positive plays NIU had all day were keeping Hare in the pocket, it was the only way NIU was going to move the ball but came with a very very risky pricetag.

(09-22-2015 11:19 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 10:08 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:49 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 01:09 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 10:16 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  If you're going to have Hare running the ball, then he is going to get tackled. How is that different from someone hitting him when he's in the pocket? Which, by the way, already happened earlier in the game.

It's a huge difference. It's why the QB is protected in the pocket. While in the pocket, the QB is looking downfield and has a much harder time defending himself or preparing for a hit. The QB plants his feet to make throws, something they'd never do while running with the ball. It's also why the punter is protected. It's a very vulnerable position to be in.

Once the QB is a runner, they can see and dodge and duck and tuck and such (though there is the sliding nonsense). Lynch never trucked anybody in the pocket.

But rolling out doesn't change that, you still can get blindsided by a defender. I've seen it happen lots of times.

But you still have a better chance of protecting yourself and manipulating your blocking.

Absolutely. The only positive plays NIU had all day were keeping Hare in the pocket, it was the only way NIU was going to move the ball but came with a very very risky pricetag.

There is absolutely zero to indicated NIU was going to move the ball by having Hare stand back there and throw the ball. Zero. The only time they had any success moving the ball was on the ground. Literally. The TD "drive" was three run plays. The FG drive in the second half was almost all ACRB. They had no success throwing from the pocket, on the move, screens, anything.

(09-22-2015 11:26 AM)7 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:19 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 10:08 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:49 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 01:09 AM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  It's a huge difference. It's why the QB is protected in the pocket. While in the pocket, the QB is looking downfield and has a much harder time defending himself or preparing for a hit. The QB plants his feet to make throws, something they'd never do while running with the ball. It's also why the punter is protected. It's a very vulnerable position to be in.

Once the QB is a runner, they can see and dodge and duck and tuck and such (though there is the sliding nonsense). Lynch never trucked anybody in the pocket.

But rolling out doesn't change that, you still can get blindsided by a defender. I've seen it happen lots of times.

But you still have a better chance of protecting yourself and manipulating your blocking.

Absolutely. The only positive plays NIU had all day were keeping Hare in the pocket, it was the only way NIU was going to move the ball but came with a very very risky pricetag.

There is absolutely zero to indicated NIU was going to move the ball by having Hare stand back there and throw the ball. Zero. The only time they had any success moving the ball was on the ground. Literally. The TD "drive" was three run plays. The FG drive in the second half was almost all ACRB. They had no success throwing from the pocket, on the move, screens, anything.

The only time NIU moved the ball all game, Hare was in the pocket, it was painfully clear the rollout were not going to work for multiple reasons. Keeping Hare in the pocket at least gave you a shot, but came with high risk

(09-22-2015 11:34 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  The only time NIU moved the ball all game, Hare was in the pocket, it was painfully clear the rollout were not going to work for multiple reasons. Keeping Hare in the pocket at least gave you a shot, but came with high risk

The only time NIU moved the ball all game Drew Hare completed 1 pass for 7 yards.

(09-22-2015 11:49 AM)UIHuskie Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:34 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  The only time NIU moved the ball all game, Hare was in the pocket, it was painfully clear the rollout were not going to work for multiple reasons. Keeping Hare in the pocket at least gave you a shot, but came with high risk

The only time NIU moved the ball all game Drew Hare completed 1 pass for 7 yards.

Thank you.

Oh god, it's somehow started over again.

(09-22-2015 11:51 AM)7 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:49 AM)UIHuskie Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:34 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  The only time NIU moved the ball all game, Hare was in the pocket, it was painfully clear the rollout were not going to work for multiple reasons. Keeping Hare in the pocket at least gave you a shot, but came with high risk

The only time NIU moved the ball all game Drew Hare completed 1 pass for 7 yards.

Thank you.

"Hare with Time"
http://www.godawgz.com/15_NIUOSU13.avi

3rd and long conversion in pocket
http://www.godawgz.com/15_NIUOSU18.avi

This doesn't even include a 40-50 yard gain NIU would have had if Kenny G gets a toe in bounds.

(09-22-2015 12:03 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:51 AM)7 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:49 AM)UIHuskie Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:34 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  The only time NIU moved the ball all game, Hare was in the pocket, it was painfully clear the rollout were not going to work for multiple reasons. Keeping Hare in the pocket at least gave you a shot, but came with high risk

The only time NIU moved the ball all game Drew Hare completed 1 pass for 7 yards.

Thank you.

"Hare with Time"
http://www.godawgz.com/15_NIUOSU13.avi

3rd and long conversion in pocket
http://www.godawgz.com/15_NIUOSU18.avi

This doesn't even include a 40-50 yard gain NIU would have had if Kenny G gets a toe in bounds.

HE THREW 31 PASSES, GOT SACKED 5 TIMES, AND YOU PICKED OUT TWO PLAYS FROM THE ENTIRE GAME HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

36 DESIGNED PASSES AND YOU PICKED OUT THE TWO PLAYS HE HAD TIME. TWO! OUT OF 36!

(09-22-2015 12:04 PM)7 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 12:03 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:51 AM)7 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:49 AM)UIHuskie Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:34 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  The only time NIU moved the ball all game, Hare was in the pocket, it was painfully clear the rollout were not going to work for multiple reasons. Keeping Hare in the pocket at least gave you a shot, but came with high risk

The only time NIU moved the ball all game Drew Hare completed 1 pass for 7 yards.

Thank you.

"Hare with Time"
http://www.godawgz.com/15_NIUOSU13.avi

3rd and long conversion in pocket
http://www.godawgz.com/15_NIUOSU18.avi

This doesn't even include a 40-50 yard gain NIU would have had if Kenny G gets a toe in bounds.

HE THREW 31 PASSES, GOT SACKED 5 TIMES, AND YOU PICKED OUT TWO PLAYS FROM THE ENTIRE GAME HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

36 DESIGNED PASSES AND YOU PICKED OUT THE TWO PLAYS HE HAD TIME. TWO! OUT OF 36!

LOL Fine, but show me ONE play, uno, a single play that gained positive yards with Hare rolling out (against Ohio State)

None of it was working! That's the point! NIU lost by 7 points and Ohio State had a pick 6 and scored a FG off another pick. Both came in the pocket. If we're making asinine arguments NIU's best strategy to win might have been to literally never throw the ball!

These are estimated stats. Lets say Hare went:

7/8 of bubbles for 35 yards and an INT.
5/14 in the pocket for 45 yards, 4 sacks, and an INT.
0/9 on rollouts for 0 yards, no sacks, and no INTs.

Which one of these is a good option? NONE of them.

You can't throw, you can't block. Period. Stop talking about coaching when you can't block.

(09-22-2015 12:14 PM)7 Wrote:  None of it was working! That's the point! NIU lost by 7 points and Ohio State had a pick 6 and scored a FG off another pick. Both came in the pocket. If we're making asinine arguments NIU's best strategy to win might have been to literally never throw the ball!

These are estimated stats. Lets say Hare went:

7/8 of bubbles for 35 yards and an INT.
5/14 in the pocket for 45 yards, 4 sacks, and an INT.
0/9 on rollouts for 0 yards, no sacks, and no INTs.

Which one of these is a good option? NONE of them.

You can't throw, you can't block. Period. Stop talking about coaching when you can't block.

Not saying it was bad coaching, everyone stayed healthy, all I am saying is a choice was made, that is not even a question. NIU sacrificed production for reduced risk (turnovers/injury).

Production was not feasible. That is the point.

(09-22-2015 12:22 PM)Field Turf Wrote:  Production was not feasible. That is the point.

I am not saying it would have been a cure all, but why go with a play that has less than 0 chance of working as opposed to what has had some limited success for you during the game. And contrary to what people are saying, NIU did block good enough in stretches with Hare in the pocket, the video just shows that. Again, I am not saying its a wrong choice, it was a measured decision.

(09-22-2015 12:22 PM)Field Turf Wrote:  Production was not feasible. That is the point.

YES. I guarantee you NIU wasn't calling rollouts going, oh yeah lets keep Hare upright and have him throw it out of bounds. The logic was the same as it always is with rollouts. You move the pocket, but you shrink the field.

As I posted in the first post, they tried everything the last 6 minutes. They had him in the pocket, they had him on the move, none of it worked.

They were calling plays to try to win the game. You (MD) keep saying they called rollouts to keep Hare healthy. That's not the reason. Did the move him to keep him upright? YES, but in hopes of him having time would allow the offense to function better. Not to keep him healthy.

The fact we're in year 3 of Carey and you're questioning if he was trying to win or keep people healthy is so damn stupid. He ran Lynch 300 times as an offense coordinator and head coach. He wants to win!

(09-22-2015 12:28 PM)7 Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 12:22 PM)Field Turf Wrote:  Production was not feasible. That is the point.

YES. I guarantee you NIU wasn't calling rollouts going, oh yeah lets keep Hare upright and have him throw it out of bounds. The logic was the same as it always is with rollouts. You move the pocket, but you shrink the field.

As I posted in the first post, they tried everything the last 6 minutes. They had him in the pocket, they had him on the move, none of it worked.

They were calling plays to try to win the game. You (MD) keep saying they called rollouts to keep Hare healthy. That's not the reason. Did the move him to keep him upright? YES, but in hopes of him having time would allow the offense to function better. Not to keep him healthy.

The fact we're in year 3 of Carey and you're questioning if he was trying to win or keep people healthy is so damn stupid. He ran Lynch 300 times as an offense coordinator and head coach. He wants to win!

You can't use logic and good sense with MD...just does not work.

I make a lot less frequent stops here these days but it's great to see that MD is still absolutely batshit insane

After watching some of this game again, a couple of more things stood out to me. Part of the pocket integrity with Hare is simply due to his footwork, he really had a tendency to collapse his own pocket by moving up in it awkwardly. Almost kind of like that double clutch people have noticed on bubble screens, he kind of does that in the pocket too and creeps forward. That must make it even more difficult to block when you have a self-imposed collapsible pocket. And second, I don't think it was truly a blocking problem but more of a nobody is open problem, OSU did blanket NIU receivers for the most part.