not a single play in the red zone saturday run by our offense

[retro44]

never would have thought it would be possible against a pitt defense...that fact is very disturbing.

this weekend has the makings of a very boring game, unless Williams breaks a bunch of long runs.

 

[Millhouse]

never would have thought it would be possible against a pitt defense...that fact is very disturbing.

this weekend has the makings of a very boring game, unless Williams breaks a bunch of long runs.

maybe don cornelius and jerome smith should fall down at the 2 yard line

we're so terrible in the red zone anyway, it's a good thing we got the big plays

 

[retro44]

a dead man might have a better chance in the red zone

maybe don cornelius

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

never would have thought it would be possible against a pitt defense...that fact is very disturbing.

Under FHCDM, people complained about a lack of big plays. On Saturday, our two touchdowns came from 35 and 42 yards out.

Statistically, this is a problem, and it exemplifies my issues with George McDonald's offense. How many things need to go exactly right for a long play to break?

On a run, it's Correct blocks + fooled defenders + a favorable defensive scheme + enough speed/vision/smarts to take advantage. For a pass, it's all of those factors + an accurate throw. It becomes exponentially more difficult to complete a 20 yard pass versus a 10 yard pass, a 30 yard pass versus a 20, etc.

Big plays are great, and they an incredibly important part of the modern game of football. But teams like Alabama, Oregon, and Baylor have success because the ball keeps moving forward in 8 or 9 yard chunks.

McDonald's offense moves the ball forward in 3 or 4 yard chunks, if we're lucky, and that forces long throws and bad decisions on third-and-long. Our OC refuses to play the odds, and while the yards look great on a stat sheet (2nd most average yards in a decade! Yay!), it reflects an inability to move the ball with any consistency.

 

[Millhouse]

Under FHCDM, people complained about a lack of big plays. On Saturday, our two touchdowns came from 35 and 42 yards out.

Statistically, this is a problem, and it exemplifies my issues with George McDonald's offense. How many things need to go exactly right for a long play to break?

On a run, it's Correct blocks + fooled defenders + a favorable defensive scheme + enough speed/vision/smarts to take advantage. For a pass, it's all of those factors + an accurate throw. It becomes exponentially more difficult to complete a 20 yard pass versus a 10 yard pass, a 30 yard pass versus a 20, etc.

Big plays are great, and they an incredibly important part of the modern game of football. But teams like Alabama, Oregon, and Baylor have success because the ball keeps moving forward in 8 or 9 yard chunks.

McDonald's offense moves the ball forward in 3 or 4 yard chunks, if we're lucky, and that forces long throws and bad decisions on third-and-long. Our OC refuses to play the odds, and while the yards look great on a stat sheet (2nd most average yards in a decade! Yay!), it reflects an inability to move the ball with any consistency.

What in the world are you talking about?

Baylor has more big plays than anyone i've ever seen

Oregon too

Bama would if they didn't always start their drives with such great field position
http://www.cfbstats.com/2013/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category30/sort03.html

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

What in the world are you talking about?

Baylor has more big plays than anyone i've ever seen

Oregon too

Bama would if they didn't always start their drives with such great field position
http://www.cfbstats.com/2013/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category30/sort03.html

I'm talking about statistics. Yes, Baylor, Oregon have big plays. But they rarely try for the home run ball, and their offenses are so good, big plays are bound to happen.

Syracuse relies on big plays because ? We play a high-risk, high-reward offense because we have to- because the bad play calling and poor execution stops the team dead in its tracks. So instead of chipping away, 6 or 7 yards at a time like those top offenses do, we move the ball a couple of yards and keep working ourselves into situations that minimize our chances of success.

 

[Millhouse]

I'm talking about statistics. Yes, Baylor, Oregon have big plays. But they rarely try for the home run ball, and their offenses are so good, big plays are bound to happen.

Syracuse relies on big plays because ? We play a high-risk, high-reward offense because we have to- because the bad play calling and poor execution stops the team dead in its tracks. So instead of chipping away, 6 or 7 yards at a time like those top offenses do, we move the ball a couple of yards and keep working ourselves into situations that minimize our chances of success.

this is crazy talk. baylor throws deep ALL THE TIME

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

this is crazy talk. baylor throws deep ALL THE TIME

Yeah- but do they RELY on it like McDonald does? They have the scheme, the speed, the QB, O-Line, and the unpredictably to usually make it work. We have none of those things. It's not a huge risk for them to make those efforts because they can still get first downs in other ways.

 

[retro44]

There were plays in the second half where we ran 3 receivers all deep and were well covered and the only person in the middle of the field was a ref. and no defenders.

Pitt's D. knew our plays before we ran them.

What good is all these formations when the end results are always the same. We run the same routes that are easily defended out of these formations all the time

 

[Millhouse]

Yeah- but do they RELY on it like McDonald does? They have the scheme, the speed, the QB, O-Line, and the unpredictably to usually make it work. We have none of those things. It's not a huge risk for them to make those efforts because they can still get first downs in other ways.

i am resisting the urge to hit caps lock yes yes yes yes they rely on it