I don't think the offense's problem is lack of playmakers

[Millhouse]

This is SU's ranking in plays greater than 10 yards, 20, 30 etc the last 4 years. We're not bad at getting big plays. Our problem is medium plays. This is just another way of saying what we already know, the passing game stinks.

I should've divided each bucket by number of games played because some teams have played 6, very few have played fewer. it's conservative, we might actually be doing better this year. if i do it by game, we're 70th in 10+, 38th in 20th+

ordinary 10-20 yard passes are a failure. that's scheme and coaching, not playmakers

 

[RF2044]

I respectfully disagree. Now that the OC has been dismissed, we'll see whether the only thing holding back the offense was play calling [which is what I believe you're hypothesizing].

I'll give you credit for repeatedly beating this drum, but I think you are significantly overestimating the skilled offensive talent on this team. Significantly. Oh Lord

 

[Millhouse]

I respectfully disagree. Now that the OC has been dismissed, we'll see whether the only thing holding back the offense was play calling [which is what I believe you're hypothesizing].

I'll give you credit for repeatedly beating this drum, but I think you are significantly overestimating the skilled offensive talent on this team. Significantly. Oh Lord

give me a team with good playmakers from last year and lets see if it's reflected in the numbers. your choice

if this approach doesn't tell you anything about playmakers or lack thereof, it should be reflected in the data.

 

[javadoc]

View attachment 27453
This is SU's ranking in plays greater than 10 yards, 20, 30 etc the last 4 years. We're not bad at getting big plays. Our problem is medium plays. This is just another way of saying what we already know, the passing game stinks.

I should've divided each bucket by number of games played because some teams have played 6, very few have played fewer. it's conservative, we might actually be doing better this year. if i do it by game, we're 70th in 10+, 38th in 20th+

ordinary 10-20 yard passes are a failure. that's scheme and coaching, not playmakers

View attachment 27453

A little confused - does the current ranking for 90+ mean that we are 15th in the country for plays of 90 yards or more?

 

[HeaterCuse22]

I respectfully disagree. Now that the OC has been dismissed, we'll see whether the only thing holding back the offense was play calling [which is what I believe you're hypothesizing].

I'll give you credit for repeatedly beating this drum, but I think you are significantly overestimating the skilled offensive talent on this team. Significantly. Oh Lord

I actually think what he was saying is Hunt is not good.

 

[RF2044]

I actually think what he was saying is Hunt is not good.

Given that Hunt is responsible for connecting on a bunch of deep passes that skew the data and make it look like we have a big play offense, I don't believe that's what he's saying.

 

[Millhouse]

A little confused - does the current ranking for 90+ mean that we are 15th in the country for plays of 90 yards or more?

no, low numbers is good, high numbers is bad. cfbstats counts the plays and ranks the teams in order. It gets goofy at 90+ because only 14 teams have 1 of them, so some syrfan.com flag football team could say we're tied for 15th

 

[Millhouse]

Given that Hunt is responsible for connecting on a bunch of deep passes that skew the data and make it look like we have a big play offense, I don't believe that's what he's saying.

hunt is bad despite completing a decent number of long passes. the problem is hunt and mcdonald completing ordinary passing downs

we're pretty good across all buckets at running the ball. http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category31/sort06.html

spread to run works. it's just that when we need to throw the ball, we can't do it and when we should just keep running, mcf***it decides to throw (WAIT THREW PAST TENSE YESSS) behind the LOS into coverage because of a ridiculous desire to "extend the run game"

 

[GoSU96]

View attachment 27453
This is SU's ranking in plays greater than 10 yards, 20, 30 etc the last 4 years. We're not bad at getting big plays. Our problem is medium plays. This is just another way of saying what we already know, the passing game stinks.

I should've divided each bucket by number of games played because some teams have played 6, very few have played fewer. it's conservative, we might actually be doing better this year. if i do it by game, we're 70th in 10+, 38th in 20th+

ordinary 10-20 yard passes are a failure. that's scheme and coaching, not playmakers

View attachment 27453

I've been saying this for weeks. Since CMU they have done a much better job of getting the ball down field.

Yardage isn't that big a problem. It's efficiency. What happens in key spots. Stories about McDonald freezing, seeing that clown show with two reverse option passes in the redzone, the cratering on 3rd down, that is coaching.

Convert on 3rd down three or four more times a game, make a couple of more plays in the redzone and things are much better. They won't be great, but it will be functional and 20pts won't be such a barrier.

 

[Millhouse]

I've been saying this for weeks. Since CMU they have done a much better job of getting the ball down field.

Yardage isn't that big a problem. It's efficiency. What happens in key spots. Stories about McDonald freezing, seeing that clown show with two reverse option passes in the redzone, the cratering on 3rd down, that is coaching.

Convert on 3rd down three or four more times a game, make a couple of more plays in the redzone and things are much better. They won't be great, but it will be functional and 20pts won't be such a barrier.

i was thinking of your posts and i think retros post about the receivers running predictable routes

 

[RF2044]

I've been saying this for weeks. Since CMU they have done a much better job of getting the ball down field.

Yardage isn't that big a problem. It's efficiency. What happens in key spots. Stories about McDonald freezing, seeing that clown show with two reverse option passes in the redzone, the cratering on 3rd down, that is coaching.

Convert on 3rd down three or four more times a game, make a couple of more plays in the redzone and things are much better. They won't be great, but it will be functional and 20pts won't be such a barrier.

All of which would get us to an average rate of production. What is required to take the next step?

Hint: playmakers that the team doesn't currently have. That includes at QB.

Compare us to Maryland, ND, and other teams--our lack of speed and explosiveness on offense is glaring. I think people must not watch enough CFB.

Whether PTG occasionally breaks off a 65 yard TD run or we complete a meaningless 40 yard pass is irrelevant if it doesn't lead to points. We need to recruit players capable of finishing drives--of taking a 40 yard pass to the house instead of getting downed at the 3. We also need to execute better. Play calling is certainly also part of this equation. Hence, why I've been pointing out for weeks that the issues on offense are multi-dimensional. But to say that are playmakers are adequate to take that next step--no.

 

[Millhouse]

All of which would get us to an average rate of production. What is required to take the next step?

Hint: playmakers that the team doesn't currently have. That includes at QB.

Compare us to Maryland, ND, and other teams--our lack of speed and explosiveness on offense is glaring. I think people must not watch enough CFB.

Whether PTG occasionally breaks off a 65 yard TD run or we complete a meaningless 40 yard pass is irrelevant if it doesn't lead to points. We need to recruit better. We also need to execute better. Play calling is certainly also part of this equation. Hence, why I've been pointing out for weeks that the issues on offense are multi-dimensional. But to say that are playmakers are adequate to take that next step--no.

i'm on board with needing better play makers to be better than average.

we're below average in yards and way below average in points. we could be average right now without stupid playcalling. average offense, slightly above average defense is an ok good year.

instead we're staring a really bad year in the face.

 

[javadoc]

...
Compare us to Maryland, ND, and other teams--our lack of speed and explosiveness on offense is glaring. I think people must not watch enough CFB.

It is also glaring on defense, in how we react to explosive guys on the other side. It often seems that our defense has no idea how to handle them, presumably because we don't practice against it and can't prepare properly.

 

[Millhouse]

It is also glaring on defense, in how we react to explosive guys on the other side. It often seems that our defense has no idea how to handle them, presumably because we don't practice against it and can't prepare properly.

here's the defensive stats. the defense is fine. they've given up 2 60 yard plays. one was the idiotic uncovered bubble. i'm blanking on the other. maybe that was because an explosive player

all the explosive players on other teams aren't having that many medium to big plays

go through the buckets. they're fine

http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/defense/split01/category30/sort04.html

 

[GoSU96]

All of which would get us to an average rate of production. What is required to take the next step?

Hint: playmakers that the team doesn't currently have. That includes at QB.

Compare us to Maryland, ND, and other teams--our lack of speed and explosiveness on offense is glaring. I think people must not watch enough CFB.

Whether PTG occasionally breaks off a 65 yard TD run or we complete a meaningless 40 yard pass is irrelevant if it doesn't lead to points. We need to recruit players capable of finishing drives--of taking a 40 yard pass to the house instead of getting downed at the 3. We also need to execute better. Play calling is certainly also part of this equation. Hence, why I've been pointing out for weeks that the issues on offense are multi-dimensional. But to say that are playmakers are adequate to take that next step--no.

Here's where you are wrong.

Essentially the all the same players on offense less Smith and Macky. Added Ishmael, healthy Flemming, Phillips, Custis to the mix.

Running yardage about the same. Passing yardage up. Total yardage up. Sacks allowed improved. Long yardage "chunk" plays significantly improved.

Scoring dropped from 98th to 1o5th, Passing , about the same at 108th, 3rd down dropped from 80th to 11oth.

The playmaker thing is so overused. They are making plays. What they aren't doing is winning key downs. That's coaching.

 

[RF2044]

here's the defensive stats. the defense is fine. they've given up 2 60 yard plays. one was the idiotic uncovered bubble. i'm blanking on the other. maybe that was because an explosive player

all the explosive players on other teams aren't having that many medium to big plays

go through the buckets. they're fine

http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/defense/split01/category30/sort04.html

So now the only indicator of defensive performance is medium to big plays?

What are explosive players on other teams doing? They're gouging us for 7 yard plays most downs, a la ND.

I think this is an example of focusing on the wrong aspect of the data. I don't disagree that our defense is relatively decent. Our philosophy is to get a lot of pressure on QBs, which we're good at despite not having classic pass rushing DEs. What we lack--to javadoc's point above--is depth and athletic ability at key positional units, such as the secondary.

Again, the goal isn't to approximate average.

 

[Millhouse]

So now the only indicator of defensive performance is medium to big plays?

What are explosive players on other teams doing? They're gouging us for 7 yard plays most downs, a la ND.

I think this is an example of focusing on the wrong aspect of the data. I don't disagree that our defense is relatively decent. Our philosophy is to get a lot of pressure on QBs, which we're good at despite not having classic pass rushing DEs. What we lack--to javadoc's point above--is depth and athletic ability at key positional units, such as the secondary.

Again, the goal isn't to approximate average.

you are being pretty difficult here. where did i say that's the only indicator of defensive performance?

javadoc said "It is also glaring on defense, in how we react to explosive guys on the other side. It often seems that our defense has no idea how to handle them, presumably because we don't practice against it and can't prepare properly."

if there is a glaring problem of having no idea how to react to explosive guys on the other side, wouldn't you expect that to show up in longer gains?

 

[RF2044]

Here's where you are wrong.

Essentially the all the same players on offense less Smith and Macky. Added Ishmael, healthy Flemming, Phillips, Custis to the mix.

Running yardage about the same. Passing yardage up. Total yardage up. Sacks allowed improved. Long yardage "chunk" plays significantly improved.


The playmaker thing is so overused. They are making plays. What they aren't doing is winning key downs. That's coaching.

"Scoring dropped from 98th to 1o5th, Passing , about the same at 108th, 3rd down dropped from 80th to 11oth."


No, they are't making plays. See above.

Coaching might help iron out some of the kinks. But the OP's title says: "I don't think the offense's problem is lack of playmakers." The scoring and third down conversion numbers suggest otherwise.

They added a healthy Flemming. BFD. I'd like to think that Ishamel / Custis are steps in the right direction, but right now they're true frosh who are performing inconsistently. None of these guys would be confused with Stephon Diggs. Both Maryland and ND had numerous players that we couldn't match up with--which offensive players on our team can you make the same claim about?

 

[RF2044]

you are being pretty difficult here. where did i say that's the only indicator of defensive performance?

javadoc said "It is also glaring on defense, in how we react to explosive guys on the other side. It often seems that our defense has no idea how to handle them, presumably because we don't practice against it and can't prepare properly."

if there is a glaring problem of having no idea how to react to explosive guys on the other side, wouldn't you expect that to show up in longer gains?

I swear I'm not being difficult--I just disagree with the absolutism of your premise.

Not necessarily. The goal is to exploit mismatches. If teams can gouge us for 6-8 yards per play on sustained drives, then they don't have to swing for the fences.

And against certain teams, that's exactly what we've seen. PSU last year had a 2nd round pick WR who killed us in the second half. Just killed us. Maryland turned a screen pass into a 90+ yard TD. ND exploited mismatches all game long. NW had guys wide open all game long last year, and a pair of QBs who picked us apart. Etc. etc. etc.

I'm not trying to impugn the defense. By and large, they are tough and they compete. I think our schemes are sound. But it seems pretty apparent that we don't have a great secondary to match up wtih some of these guys, let alone shut them down. As "good" in general as the defense is, we struggle in coverage--especially against studs.

How do we go from good to great? Answer: we recruit better players, and utilize better depth.

 

[eddie in nc]

I swear I'm not being difficult--I just disagree with the absolutism of your premise.

I'm not trying to impugn the defense. By and large, they are tough and they compete. I think our schemes are sound. But it seems pretty apparent that we don't have a great secondary to match up wtih some of these guys, let alone shut them down. As "good" in general as the defense is, we struggle in coverage--especially against studs.

How do we go from good to great? Answer: we recruit better players, and utilize better depth.

And how do we do that? By winning games against our peer group with the talent we do have and competing with the better teams out there. Look, we all know we don't have as much talent as most teams out there so we have to be smarter, more consistent, in better physical shape, and capitalize on our strengths. These things are all coaching. Shaf proved he can do that with a defense. He played QB in college so lets hope he can figure out how to lead that on the offensive side of the ball. We need to play better to get the recruits to notice.

 

[Millhouse]

I swear I'm not being difficult--I just disagree with the absolutism of your premise.

Not necessarily. The goal is to exploit mismatches. If teams can gouge us for 6-8 yards per play on sustained drives, then they don't have to swing for the fences.

And against certain teams, that's exactly what we've seen. PSU last year had a 2nd round pick WR who killed us in the second half. Just killed us. Maryland turned a screen pass into a 90+ yard TD. ND exploited mismatches all game long. NW had guys wide open all game long last year, and a pair of QBs who picked us apart. Etc. etc. etc.

I'm not trying to impugn the defense. By and large, they are tough and they compete. I think our schemes are sound. But it seems pretty apparent that we don't have a great secondary to match up wtih some of these guys, let alone shut them down. As "good" in general as the defense is, we struggle in coverage--especially against studs.

How do we go from good to great? Answer: we recruit better players, and utilize better depth.

if we are so scared of getting beat by playmakers that teams can just gouge us 6-8 yards at a time easy, that would also be reflected in the data. It's just not. They'd be worse than 51st in the country in YPG if that were the case

 

[RF2044]

if we are so scared of getting beat by playmakers that teams can just gouge us 6-8 yards at a time easy, that would also be reflected in the data. It's just not. They'd be worse than 51st in the country in YPG if that were the case

Again, it comes down to what your expectations for the program are. 51st in the country is OK. And stats normalize the more data that you have to evaluate.

But go back and watch the Notre Dame game and let me know how our defense stacked up against a top 10 caliber team. We've got a long way to go.

The defensive schemes are sound. The coaching is pretty good. But we lack top end talent, which was apparent when we played a top end offense.

Not convinced? Let's see how the defense holds up this weekend against another elite team. I hope that they hold their own, but I'm fairly certain what we're in for.

 

[Millhouse]

Again, it comes down to what your expectations for the program are. 51st in the country is OK. And stats normalize the more data that you have to evaluate.

But go back and watch the Notre Dame game and let me know how our defense stacked up against a top 10 caliber team. We've got a long way to go.

The defensive schemes are sound. The coaching is pretty good. But we lack top end talent, which was apparent when we played a top end offense.

Not convinced? Let's see how the defense holds up this weekend against another elite team. I hope that they hold their own, but I'm fairly certain what we're in for.

florida state will probably get 500 yards like they do most of the time

we agree that we need more playmakers to be top 10 caliber.

we don't need more playmakers to be a hell of a lot better than we currently are

 

[nzm136]

I don't think that our problem is a lack of talent. It's a lack of discipline and execution. That will take a year to fix (if not more).

 

[RF2044]

florida state will probably get 500 yards like they do most of the time

we agree that we need more playmakers to be top 10 caliber.

we don't need more playmakers to be a hell of a lot better than we currently are

That's your opinion. Here's mine: our current talent base is improved over where it was 5 years ago. It seems on par to what is needed to get the program to the 7 win level, but not much more. If that's the goal, then we're where we need to be with recruiting / playmakers on both sides of the ball.

When we've played top 10 teams these past two years--Clemson, Florida State, Notre Dame--the talent gap has been extraordinarily large [no surprise there]. In at least two [and arguably in all three] of those games, we looked competely overmatched. The only way to close that gap and get into the top 25 is to enhance the talent base top to bottom. The class of 2014 and the class of 2015 we're currently amassing have been steps in the right direction, but the ND game [and probably this Saturday's game] demonstrate that we still have a long way to go.

And yes--improved execution will help, too.