Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Intellectual_Brutality Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 890
Joined: Dec 2017
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Rice Owls!
Location:
Post: #721
RE: Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
By the way, we've generally blamed Bloom's stubbornness re: "pound the rock" as the major cause of poor performance.
But in this last game my sense was the playcalling was just fine, and execution was the problem. If Pitre doesn't fumble in the red zone, if we make a FG...
Agree or disagree?
11-15-2021 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Legend
*

Posts: 26,416
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 382
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #722
RE: Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
Pitre fumble. Bogus holding call taking back another touchdown. If both of those don't happen, perhaps it's a different game.

But Constantine threw a couple of horrid picks, which led to easy scores. And I got the sense that WKU could have scored a lot more if they had been so inclined.

So no, I don't think we were ever realistically in that game. The defense had a few breakdowns here and there, and Zappe picked them apart for quick scores over and over again.
11-15-2021 10:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 72,287
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 2280
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #723
RE: Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
(11-15-2021 10:17 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  By the way, we've generally blamed Bloom's stubbornness re: "pound the rock" as the major cause of poor performance.
But in this last game my sense was the playcalling was just fine, and execution was the problem. If Pitre doesn't fumble in the red zone, if we make a FG...
Agree or disagree?

I'm reminded of a quote from Sammy Baugh, after his Washington Redskins (then the name) lost the NFL championship to the Chicago Bears, 73-0. Early in the game, a Washington receiver dropped what appeared to be a sure TD catch. Baugh was asked what he thought the score would have been had the receiver made the catch and scored. He replied, "73-7."
11-15-2021 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 36,263
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 989
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #724
RE: Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
(11-15-2021 10:17 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  By the way, we've generally blamed Bloom's stubbornness re: "pound the rock" as the major cause of poor performance.
But in this last game my sense was the playcalling was just fine, and execution was the problem. If Pitre doesn't fumble in the red zone, if we make a FG...
Agree or disagree?

The play calling was better.

It's impossible to not note to the above though that if we're throwing 50 times a game, every game since the start of the season... (the same, aggressive play calling) that these fumbles AND the interceptions happen less frequently... if for no other reason but that we would likely bench, reduce playing time, or increase practice time for the players who had these tendencies (if they are tendencies).
11-15-2021 11:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Intellectual_Brutality Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 890
Joined: Dec 2017
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Rice Owls!
Location:
Post: #725
RE: Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
(11-15-2021 11:50 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(11-15-2021 10:17 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  By the way, we've generally blamed Bloom's stubbornness re: "pound the rock" as the major cause of poor performance.
But in this last game my sense was the playcalling was just fine, and execution was the problem. If Pitre doesn't fumble in the red zone, if we make a FG...
Agree or disagree?

The play calling was better.

It's impossible to not note to the above though that if we're throwing 50 times a game, every game since the start of the season... (the same, aggressive play calling) that these fumbles AND the interceptions happen less frequently... if for no other reason but that we would likely bench, reduce playing time, or increase practice time for the players who had these tendencies (if they are tendencies).

^ that's a good point.

Overall though, maybe we don't win this game no matter what, but in this instance the playcalling wasn't the culprit. Perhaps Bloom is learning something. Perhaps...
11-15-2021 12:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 36,263
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 989
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #726
RE: Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
(11-15-2021 12:34 PM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  
(11-15-2021 11:50 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(11-15-2021 10:17 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  By the way, we've generally blamed Bloom's stubbornness re: "pound the rock" as the major cause of poor performance.
But in this last game my sense was the playcalling was just fine, and execution was the problem. If Pitre doesn't fumble in the red zone, if we make a FG...
Agree or disagree?

The play calling was better.

It's impossible to not note to the above though that if we're throwing 50 times a game, every game since the start of the season... (the same, aggressive play calling) that these fumbles AND the interceptions happen less frequently... if for no other reason but that we would likely bench, reduce playing time, or increase practice time for the players who had these tendencies (if they are tendencies).

^ that's a good point.

Overall though, maybe we don't win this game no matter what, but in this instance the playcalling wasn't the culprit. Perhaps Bloom is learning something. Perhaps...

To me it was more like coaches coaching for their jobs. 'What they think' or 'whom they want to be' goes out the window and they take what they can get....

but that is the entire point as far as I'm concerned. Sure, I'd love to pound the rock and control the clock.... shorten the game, control the ball and play sound defense... plus, hit all the FGs we need to save drives and be constructive in our punt teams... but that isn't who we are/what we can do/what is working.

If its taking this long to get to this point then they/he haven't learned the lesson... and as soon as they can, they will revert to trying to be 'whom they want to be' and not continue to 'do what is working'.

Can you learn from it?? Of course... but the 'stubbornness' represented by 4 years of futility is a powerful message. To not know that 'winning' by being whom you are and not whom you want to be makes getting to be 'whom you want to be' easier is IMO, telling.

MAYBE we were just successful because it wasn't expected. We threw when the charts said we would have run... and then of course later, they've called off the dogs.
11-15-2021 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 72,287
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 2280
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #727
RE: Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
(11-15-2021 11:50 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(11-15-2021 10:17 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  By the way, we've generally blamed Bloom's stubbornness re: "pound the rock" as the major cause of poor performance.
But in this last game my sense was the playcalling was just fine, and execution was the problem. If Pitre doesn't fumble in the red zone, if we make a FG...
Agree or disagree?
The play calling was better.
It's impossible to not note to the above though that if we're throwing 50 times a game, every game since the start of the season... (the same, aggressive play calling) that these fumbles AND the interceptions happen less frequently... if for no other reason but that we would likely bench, reduce playing time, or increase practice time for the players who had these tendencies (if they are tendencies).

Play calling is execution. Play calling is calling the play that you can execute well enough to pick up the necessary yardage. Generally speaking, on first down, any play that picks up 5 yards is a good call, on second down, any play that picks up half the yardage you need for a first down is a good call, and on third down, any play that picks up a first down is a good call. Within that structure, you need some calls that manipulate the defense so that other calls will work. For example, in Hat's triple, he had to throw the ball far downfield occasionally to keep the safeties from jumping the option.

So if you are looking at, say, third and 5, the inventory of plays that you have to choose from are those that have a reasonable chance to pick up 5 yards, against the defense that you expect. If you don't get the defense you expected, then you have to improvise. The point is that the better you execute, the more plays you will have that give you a shot to pick up 5 yards, and the more varied and creative your offense can be. So play calling is dependent upon execution.

One thing I like about RUOwls's passing game is that his approach really emphasizes execution, and that opens the playbook to a lot more options. On third and 5, if you stress a defender properly, you get your 5 yards, plus the chance of a breakaway touchdown. Hat's option was build on basically the same theory, only in the running game. In Mike Leach's book, there is a summary of a fascinating discussion that he had with Barry Switzer, where they agreed that the Wishbone and the Air Raid were basically the same offensive philosophy. You create space and you get the ball to a back or receiver in that space. As a rugby coach, that is the basis for all rugby offense, so that's probably why I like those concepts so much.

That gets us back to scheme. And scheme works better if it fits what your talent can execute. Forcing athletes into a system that does not fit them (square pegs into round holes) obviously reduces their ability to execute. So you end up running more plays that are poorly executed because your players lack the ability to execute. That's not to say they are bad players, more that the scheme doesn't fit what they do well.

Bloomgren's "pound the rock" Stanford offense requires big, strong, athletic linemen who can pancake defenders and protect passers, a stud running back or two, and a big, strong pocket passer.
1) We can get big linemen, but the ones we get don't seem to be particularly strong or athletic; we can also get smaller, athletic linemen, so a system that fits those kinds of linemen would be better. I heard a comment repeated from Baylor's OC Jeff Grimes during the game against OU the other day. He has previously been an o-line coach at Auburn, LSU, Virginia Tech, and BYU. He said this was the best o-line he has ever had--not as big as any of those others, but more athletic so he can do more with them. I don't think we can get Baylor quality o-linemen, but I do think we would do well to move in that direction. I still like Fred's approach of recruiting lots of d-linemen (who tend to be smaller, quicker, and more athletic) and moving some of them to offense. Fred was also trying to find a dominant d-lineman, and figuring that more numbers gave him a better chance, but that unfortunately never happened. Ken also recruited smaller and more athletic linemen for the flexbone, and he had several moves back and forth to the other side of the ball, both ways.
2) We can get plenty of decent running backs, as well as receivers (both WR and TE), but not the dominant one. So a scheme that moves the ball around to a lot of different ball-carriers (like Flexbone, Air Raid, Run-and-Shoot, or RUOwls's West Coast passing offense) seems to make more sense.
3) We have struck out repeatedly for the big, strong-armed pocket passer. I still think that my be the hardest piece of the "pound the rock" puzzle to find. What we can get there is the outstanding HS QB, probably more runner than passer (at least not a pocket passer), that the P5s tell him, "Come here and we will make you a safety," but he really wants a shot at QB. Best case, we get another Bert Emanuel; worst case, we get a safety who can start for a P5.

So you design a scheme that your athletes can execute, you practice execution, execution, execution, and then when you are looking at third and 5 on game day, you have a lot more choices, and that makes play calling less predictable and more effective.

Suppose we design a scheme around a small but quick and athletic o-line, spreading the ball around to a number of RBs, TEs, and WRs, and a running QB who can throw and distribute the ball among them (basically a basketball point guard). That's not "pound the rock," nowhere close. It's probably somewhere between what Dinger and Fred did and Hat's triple.
(This post was last modified: 11-15-2021 12:52 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
11-15-2021 12:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 36,263
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 989
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #728
RE: Gamethread: Rice Owls @ WKU Marshmallows
I'd say it differently, numbers....

If you're trying to shorten the game/pound the rock/control the clock... THEN play calling is execution and all that you note. This was Hat's downfall at the end when the defense faltered. He couldn't execute any better on offense (60 points and 500 yards) but the defense couldn't make a stop

If you are taking what the defense gives you and they are giving you the deep ball (as an example, and essentially what WE do a lot of) then they are giving you the lower percentage play and execution doesn't have to be as exact. You can hit it just once every 3 downs or so and 'win'. If you can threaten that and then come underneath (early on, we did a roll out to a single wide-out running a post/corner... and then threw to a drag route underneath which was a HOME RUN play to the TE that we could have run all day long.) and if they cover that, the QB (assuming he can run) takes off.... and now you throw in the option to 'give' the ball to the fake going the other way... THEN you have an offense... If they adjust by keeping a safety back and letting the corner stay on the underneath route, you adjust by running a post to the middle of the field.... and if they adjust to that, you fake the run and then rather than boot back, you simply stop and pop to the same side as the fake.

Yes, that is execution as well, I get it... but my point is that 'perfect' execution is a requirement of 'pound the rock'. Fumbles, dropped passes, missed blocks, reads or throws, penalties... all KILL that offense.... not to mention the defense.
11-15-2021 02:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.