Why does it seem that Cubit goes away from something thats working before it stops working? I.E. The shorter passing game being shelved for deeper out routes? Three straight 12 yard fade routes to the endzone before tossing a batted interception? Curious... seems like the short dink/dunk routes were moving the chains and the running backs were getting seams. Just wondering why this seems to be a continual trend with Cubit offensive calling? Am I alone here?
(09-05-2011 11:02 AM)flushtheherd Wrote: [ -> ]Why does it seem that Cubit goes away from something thats working before it stops working? I.E. The shorter passing game being shelved for deeper out routes? Three straight 12 yard fade routes to the endzone before tossing a batted interception? Curious... seems like the short dink/dunk routes were moving the chains and the running backs were getting seams. Just wondering why this seems to be a continual trend with Cubit offensive calling? Am I alone here?
I have thought the same thing myself Flush. I am wondering though if Saturdays corner end-zone passes were more about reads at the line. "If the match-up is there, go with it" kind of thing. I generally agree that if something ain't broke, dont fix it.
The fade routes were a good call and the right read. If our receivers didn't get mugged we'd have had 2 TDs off of them.
Mattison adjusted as the game went along going with more blitzes and playing tighter on the line to limit the quick passes. That's why the fade routes were single coverage with the WMU receiver usually having the Michigan guy beat without interfering.
Western countered with longer pass routes but didn't keep a back in for blocking purposes. I went back and watched some of the plays where Carder got hit and almost all of them had the back going out on a pass route and he didn't or couldn't check down in time. They needed to throw some screens or draws or even a shovel pass but kept dropping back instead. Bad adjustment.