Love the myths that have taken root here.

[Chip]

not that i'm expecting a breakdown but i suspect run pass ratio changes as competition improves. i could be wrong. chip posted something about the first plays of bcs vs non bcs (or maybe it was fcs vs fbs... something like that)

It was just first play of the game. I just noticed that RI was the only game that our first offensive play was a pass. Generally meaningless, which is why I indicated as such.

Still, I don't know why Go is getting defensive on this one. What does he think people are going to talk about the week after a loss in which we ran the ball our first 6 plays? One which our OC said before the game that our gameplan was to run right at them and wear them down. One which our HC told his most trusted newspaper writer that our gameplan was to run right at them and wear them down. One which we couldn't move the ball very much on the ground but had a lot of success moving it through the air.

It's a discussion board, and this has made for great discussion, good set of stats being brought in. But still looked at as everyone wanting Marrone fired I guess.

Oh, and from the Just Sayin' department. Two weeks before our game, USF held the Big East's best RB (Pead from Cincy) in check, one of his worst games, while Cincy passed for 389. One week before our game, USF held Rutgers to -7 on the ground (I know RU can't run) and 235 thru the air in a loss.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

It was just first play of the game. I just noticed that RI was the only game that our first offensive play was a pass. Generally meaningless, which is why I indicated as such.

Still, I don't know why Go is getting defensive on this one. What does he think people are going to talk about the week after a loss in which we ran the ball our first 6 plays? One which our OC said before the game that our gameplan was to run right at them and wear them down. One which our HC told his most trusted newspaper writer that our gameplan was to run right at them and wear them down. One which we couldn't move the ball very much on the ground but had a lot of success moving it through the air.

It's a discussion board, and this has made for great discussion, good set of stats being brought in. But still looked at as everyone wanting Marrone fired I guess.

Oh, and from the Just Sayin' department. Two weeks before our game, USF held the Big East's best RB (Pead from Cincy) in check, one of his worst games, while Cincy passed for 389. One week before our game, USF held Rutgers to -7 on the ground (I know RU can't run) and 235 thru the air in a loss.

Good post, like I said, I don't care what the plan is or was but it stunk. Plain and simple., no myth about it. The team has stunk all year minus one game, there is a reason why we barely squeaked by all year. This does not look like year 3 of a solid foundation, it looks like a mess to me and we will have to wait until next year before we can really put a stamp on it one way or the other but I am not a believer in the "flipped switch" process. Again, we lose some decent parts to a bad offense, again we will here about how the O Line is much improved, the running backs are ready to step up, Nassib has taken his game to another level, this time they mean business, etc etc. Like I said, I wonder if over the past 8 years, if there has been a BCS program with a worse offense, I really do. We lose our best RB, are best TE (probably our best receiver here too) and probaly our best lineman in Tiller. That is not good.

I can see spin on 3-4 in the Big East, 2-5 or 1-6, no excuses, no spin for year 3. No injuries really either to speak of. Like I said 7-5 is OK so there is still a shot, again in a really really bad conference. I am one that thinks that right now we are at about the Duke level in the ACC

 

[ImperialOrange]

The problem I was referring to was people sounding off a lot lately about running the ball too much.

We do run the ball too much lately based on what it's getting us. Over the last 3 games we've run 63 times w/ RBs for 219 yards which is just under 3.5 ypc. 23 carries for 78 yards vs USF, 23-64 vs UConn, and 17-77 vs Lville.

Obviously hindsight is 20:20 but we've got a big enough product sample to see what's not working and at this point IMHO we need to try something different. Even if our RBs break through the line, they aren't fast enough to be a threat to score at this point. We run too many plays where max potential is 5 yards vs a first down or a TD. An incomplete 15 yard pass is a better play call than a 1 yard run on first down because you at least open the defense up.

We try to run to set up the pass (pro mentality) where we would be better served to pass to open up the run and get AB the space he needs to be effective. It doesn't always have to be the case but based on our current roster it can't be any less effective.

End rant.

 

[Millhouse]

We do run the ball too much lately based on what it's getting us. Over the last 3 games we've run 63 times w/ RBs for 219 yards which is just under 3.5 ypc. 23 carries for 78 yards vs USF, 23-64 vs UConn, and 17-77 vs Lville.

Obviously hindsight is 20:20 but we've got a big enough product sample to see what's not working and at this point IMHO we need to try something different. Even if our RBs break through the line, they aren't fast enough to be a threat to score at this point. We run too many plays where max potential is 5 yards vs a first down or a TD. An incomplete 15 yard pass is a better play call than a 1 yard run on first down because you at least open the defense up.

We try to run to set up the pass (pro mentality) where we would be better served to pass to open up the run and get AB the space he needs to be effective. It doesn't always have to be the case but based on our current roster it can't be any less effective.

End rant.

21 rushes a game isn't much.

We're pretty pass heavy guys. We have the 28th highest ratio of passes to total plays. (quick excel calc up off cfb stats). Granted a lot of our passes are glorified handoffs to tightends but still...

i shake my head at people who want nassib to throw more.

we're 52% pass. a lot of that might not be by design but it's not all just happenstance

 

[SWC75]

21 rushes a game isn't much.

We're pretty pass heavy guys. We have the 28th highest ratio of passes to total plays. (quick excel calc up off cfb stats). Granted a lot of our passes are glorified handoffs to tightends but still...

i shake my head at people who want nassib to throw more.

we're 52% pass. a lot of that might not be by design but it's not all just happenstance

We'd just like to come out doing what we do best rather than waiting until the second quarter when we're down by a couple of touchdowns.

 

[kingottoiii]

21 rushes a game isn't much.

We're pretty pass heavy guys. We have the 28th highest ratio of passes to total plays. (quick excel calc up off cfb stats). Granted a lot of our passes are glorified handoffs to tightends but still...

i shake my head at people who want nassib to throw more.

we're 52% pass. a lot of that might not be by design but it's not all just happenstance

I don't think it is a run vs pass issue. I think it is a conservative slow down issue vs a more mixing things up issue. I think we did a great job 1st Q vs USC. The style and pace we used was vastly different. Why can we do it vs USC but not UConn? The same can be said of the entire WV game. When we are more willing to open things up we run and pass it a lot better.

IMO one of two things are happening. Either we start off conservative and are forced to open things up because we are down early (most likely). Or in the 1st Q our staff wants to see how the D will play us. Then we attack off of that in the 2nd-4th Q. Either way both aren't working and we need to open things up out of the gate. That doesn't mean we have to pass more. But use 3 WRs more often when we run. Or don't just run between Ts. And if we do pass, make it long enough to pick up a first down.

 

[ImperialOrange]

21 rushes a game isn't much.

We're pretty pass heavy guys. We have the 28th highest ratio of passes to total plays. (quick excel calc up off cfb stats). Granted a lot of our passes are glorified handoffs to tightends but still...

i shake my head at people who want nassib to throw more.

we're 52% pass. a lot of that might not be by design but it's not all just happenstance

23 carries vs USF wasn't alot. The fact that 12 came in the 1st quarter where we didn't score any points and 11 came in the next 3 quarters is my issue. We took the entire first quarter to learn we couldn't run on them for points, and they played the next 3 quarters with the lead and knowing we couldn't run on them for points.
We should be running more plays in general but thats a whole different issue.

 

[Millhouse]

We'd just like to come out doing what we do best rather than waiting until the second quarter when we're down by a couple of touchdowns.

we're 28th in passing play percentage and we're 63rd in passing yards.

maybe they're looking at that and saying, hmmm maybe we're not really so good at passing.

we're 92nd in rushing play percentage and we're 101st in rushing yards.

we run fewer plays than everyone else but that hurts us less in the running game than it does the passing game. it's a function of lower yards per rush multiplied by the number of rushes vs yards per attempt...
makes sense that someone could look at that and say maybe we should run more and pass less. especially since sacks take off yardage from your rushing - not that sacks are a big problem with our instant passing game but it factors in a little - makes rushing avg look worse when you pass this much

big flaw in most people's thinking this week is we're good at passing we should do that.

we're really not good at passing. we just pass more. pick your poison with this sh!tshow on offense

 

[OttoinGrotto]

We'd just like to come out doing what we do best rather than waiting until the second quarter when we're down by a couple of touchdowns.

Yeah.

 

[ImperialOrange]

we're 28th in passing play percentage and we're 63rd in passing yards.

maybe they're looking at that and saying, hmmm maybe we're not really so good at passing.

we're 92nd in rushing play percentage and we're 101st in rushing yards.

we run fewer plays than everyone else but that hurts us less in the running game than it does the passing game. it's a function of lower yards per rush multiplied by the number of rushes vs yards per attempt...
makes sense that someone could look at that and say maybe we should run more and pass less. especially since sacks take off yardage from your rushing - not that sacks are a big problem with our instant passing game but it factors in a little - makes rushing avg look worse when you pass this much

big flaw in most people's thinking this week is we're good at passing we should do that.

we're really not good at passing. we just pass more. pick your poison with this sh!tshow on offense

We've scored 21 TDs passing vs only 9 TDs rushing (2 by Nassib). Shouldn't that count for something?

 

[SWC75]

we're 28th in passing play percentage and we're 63rd in passing yards.

maybe they're looking at that and saying, hmmm maybe we're not really so good at passing.

we're 92nd in rushing play percentage and we're 101st in rushing yards.

we run fewer plays than everyone else but that hurts us less in the running game than it does the passing game. it's a function of lower yards per rush multiplied by the number of rushes vs yards per attempt...
makes sense that someone could look at that and say maybe we should run more and pass less. especially since sacks take off yardage from your rushing - not that sacks are a big problem with our instant passing game but it factors in a little - makes rushing avg look worse when you pass this much

big flaw in most people's thinking this week is we're good at passing we should do that.

we're really not good at passing. we just pass more. pick your poison with this sh!tshow on offense

You actually think that we are better at running the ball than passing it? Most of our good running plays have come after we started going to the pass first. We haven't had dominating opening drives. We haven't worn them down with the run and then gotten big gains because of that. We've done best when we force them to cover the whole field with the pass and then hit them with passes and runs in the gaps. That's what we do best.

 

[SWC75]

I don't think it is a run vs pass issue. I think it is a conservative slow down issue vs a more mixing things up issue. I think we did a great job 1st Q vs USC. The style and pace we used was vastly different. Why can we do it vs USC but not UConn? The same can be said of the entire WV game. When we are more willing to open things up we run and pass it a lot better.

IMO one of two things are happening. Either we start off conservative and are forced to open things up because we are down early (most likely). Or in the 1st Q our staff wants to see how the D will play us. Then we attack off of that in the 2nd-4th Q. Either way both aren't working and we need to open things up out of the gate. That doesn't mean we have to pass more. But use 3 WRs more often when we run. Or don't just run between Ts. And if we do pass, make it long enough to pick up a first down.

And use Bailey as a pass receiver more often, and not just as a dump-off guy. Last year he caught 35 passes for 306 yards (8.7 per catch) and 3 scores. This year he has 19 catches for 114 yards, (6.0) and 0 scores.

 

[Chip]

we're 28th in passing play percentage and we're 63rd in passing yards.

maybe they're looking at that and saying, hmmm maybe we're not really so good at passing.

we're 92nd in rushing play percentage and we're 101st in rushing yards.

we run fewer plays than everyone else but that hurts us less in the running game than it does the passing game. it's a function of lower yards per rush multiplied by the number of rushes vs yards per attempt...
makes sense that someone could look at that and say maybe we should run more and pass less. especially since sacks take off yardage from your rushing - not that sacks are a big problem with our instant passing game but it factors in a little - makes rushing avg look worse when you pass this much

big flaw in most people's thinking this week is we're good at passing we should do that.

we're really not good at passing. we just pass more. pick your poison with this sh!tshow on offense

I think there's probably a little too much big picturing as well though, not that there's anything wrong with it, I love all of these stats. But if we mixed things up a little better to start the USF game, we may win. Worst case, Nassib throws incompletions and the same thing happens. But our first couple of drives were part of a chess match/gameplan that didn't work. When we finally abandoned it, we moved the ball. Should have scored too, but guys dropped catchable passes.

You may think we're not a good passing team, but I also think where a lot of bad passing teams fail is throwing picks. Hasn't been our problem other than one game this year. So do we have more 3 and outs running the ball or passing it, does it matter? What has more upside?

And yes, someone (not you) will mention. We needed to play a lot better on D. We got a gift on the touchback and a couple other USF breakdowns. Play better D and we're not having these detailed discussions. But we also knew going into the year that the D was going to be inexperienced in a lot of areas and the offense was going to have to win us a few games. So that's not much of a surprising concept.

 

[Millhouse]

You actually think that we are better at running the ball than passing it? Most of our good running plays have come after we started going to the pass first. We haven't had dominating opening drives. We haven't worn them down with the run and then gotten big gains because of that. We've done best when we force them to cover the whole field with the pass and then hit them with passes and runs in the gaps. That's what we do best.

we don't force anyone to cover the whole field with the pass.

i think we stink at everything. if you want the run pass ratio to be smoother from quarter to quarter, that's fine with me. but i think people that think we have a good passing game at all are flat out stupid

 

[Millhouse]

You may think we're not a good passing team, but I also think where a lot of bad passing teams fail is throwing picks. Hasn't been our problem other than one game this year. So do we have more 3 and outs running the ball or passing it, does it matter? What has more upside?

i think when marrone looks at the 09 rutgers game, the 10 k state game and the 11 wvu game, he sees more upside rushing

 

[ImperialOrange]

i think when marrone looks at the 09 rutgers game, the 10 k state game and the 11 wvu game, he sees more upside rushing

I hope he's not thinking about the 09 Rutgers game at this point. Paulus and Carter are long gone. We threw alot of picks, couldnt throw past 10 yards sans Mike Williams and had a bull of a RB, it made sense to run in 09.

 

[Millhouse]

I hope he's not thinking about the 09 Rutgers game at this point. Paulus and Carter are long gone. We threw alot of picks, couldnt throw past 10 yards sans Mike Williams and had a bull of a RB, it made sense to run in 09.

and our downfield passing game is so strong today

 

[ImperialOrange]

and our downfield passing game is so strong today

Would love a bigger product sample to find out, it's certainly not worse.

We passed for 4TDs vs WVU and 3 vs K State vs rushing for 2 TDs in each. I don't really care what we do, as long as it nets more points. We don't have DC3 anymore but you wouldn't know it by the play calls.

 

[OrangeinBoston]

Look, SU has no chance of running the ball against any team with a half-decent defensive line. That's because the dancing bears can't run block (not that they're much good at pass blocking either) and because all we have is Ant. At least when we pass there is some hope of moving the ball. That was borne out the last two games.

What gets everybody's blood boiling is that it is obvious and Marrone and his dwarf Hackett don't get it.

 

[Chip]

i think when marrone looks at the 09 rutgers game, the 10 k state game and the 11 wvu game, he sees more upside rushing

With K State and WVU, I would say Marrone sees more upside with balance. Deep pass jump started the offense against K State. WVU was a combo. TEs had the bigger plays (TDs) but WRs played a big part as well.

The question, to me anyway, isn't should we be more of a passing team. It's should we go into a game with the gameplan of we're going to run it down their throat and wear them out. Then start the game with 6 straight runs. We should go into a gameplan to mix things up and keep the opponent off balance, and then consistenly mix things up.

Passing game didn't look great against USF, just ok. But it wasn't because of the QB, and it wasn't because the WRs/TEs couldn't get open. More because of drops and protection breakdowns. First one should be correctable, second one, somewhat correctable (pick up blitzes and stunts better).

 

[Millhouse]

With K State and WVU, I would say Marrone sees more upside with balance. Deep pass jump started the offense against K State. WVU was a combo. TEs had the bigger plays (TDs) but WRs played a big part as well.

The question, to me anyway, isn't should we be more of a passing team. It's should we go into a game with the gameplan of we're going to run it down their throat and wear them out. Then start the game with 6 straight runs. We should go into a gameplan to mix things up and keep the opponent off balance, and then consistenly mix things up.

Passing game didn't look great against USF, just ok. But it wasn't because of the QB, and it wasn't because the WRs/TEs couldn't get open. More because of drops and protection breakdowns. First one should be correctable, second one, somewhat correctable (pick up blitzes and stunts better).

I think Marrone thinks "We throw more than we run overall and the offense stinks overall but our best games are when we run more than we pass. I'm not concerned with what sets up what. We're good when we run more than we pass. Let's set the tone doing that instead."

Those games didn't end up being that balanced. Especially K State.

 

[kingottoiii]

I think Marrone thinks "We throw more than we run overall and the offense stinks overall but our best games are when we run more than we pass. I'm not concerned with what sets up what. We're good when we run more than we pass. Let's set the tone doing that instead."

Those games didn't end up being that balanced. Especially K State.

Again our best moments on O have either been balanced play calling or pass heavy. The WV game was basically over after Phil Thomas' INT to end the 3rd. At that point we had 29 runs and 28 passes. We haven't had one game this year where we looked better on O because we ran more than we passed. Pointing to last year is meaningless. This isn't the same team.

 

[bevosu]

My take on this team is this...and I'm no Vince Lombardi.

I'm glad I'm not coaching this group. From what I've seen (every game) I think the problem isn't play calling, although there are some head scratchers. The main problem is execution.

Dropped passes..dropped interceptions, missed blocks, missed holes, poor punting, poor kick offs..missed tackles, and bad coverage, being out of position on defense.

Throw in some strange passes by Nassib on occasion and sustaining a drive becomes problematic. Our offense starting in decent field position is a rarity...as well as the opponent having good field position way too often.

Part of the execution equation is talent. Mental and physical. These guys are having problems executing basic football plays. At this point it's a mess.

 

[Chip]

I think Marrone thinks "We throw more than we run overall and the offense stinks overall but our best games are when we run more than we pass. I'm not concerned with what sets up what. We're good when we run more than we pass. Let's set the tone doing that instead."

Those games didn't end up being that balanced. Especially K State.

What do you consider balanced? Against K State we called 28 pass plays (Nassib's rushes and sacks weren't planned runs) and 34 runs (I didn't count the 3 plays downing the ball to end the game). 239 passing yards, 259 rushing yards. That's pretty balanced to me. Very surprising that we even passed that much given that A) conditions weren't good, field was wet, B) We had 1 WR with experience and thumbs, and C) K State was the single worst 1A rushing defense, which isn't easy to accomplish.

WVU we rushed it 37 times, called pass plays 37 times (again Nassib not on designed runs). Passed for 249, rushed for 194.

Rutgers 09, yards were even (what I typically consider balanced), but # of plays were heavily weighted toward runs.

 

[Millhouse]

What do you consider balanced? Against K State we called 28 pass plays (Nassib's rushes and sacks weren't planned runs) and 34 runs (I didn't count the 3 plays downing the ball to end the game). 239 passing yards, 259 rushing yards. That's pretty balanced to me. Very surprising that we even passed that much given that A) conditions weren't good, field was wet, B) We had 1 WR with experience and thumbs, and C) K State was the single worst 1A rushing defense, which isn't easy to accomplish.

WVU we rushed it 37 times, called pass plays 37 times (again Nassib not on designed runs). Passed for 249, rushed for 194.

Rutgers 09, yards were even (what I typically consider balanced), but # of plays were heavily weighted toward runs.

ok good point - i was just looking at actual passes.. i remembered nassib as 13 for 21 against K state

but that means that we're even more unbalanced overall - my 52% pass plays doesn't factor in the rushes that were actually passes. so we're even more unbalanced than that.

factor in that we only get 10 plays in a game, a sack and a scramble will bring down the percentage of passes called.