Some long-winded thoughts...

[PhatOrange]

Don't disagree with you there but it isn't going anywhere and the problems isn't as much the play call but the formations, Hunt reading it correctly and the execution. Brolyd could be the worst I have ever seen blocking on the bubble, he's beyond bad. James Harden does a better job of getting in front of somebody than he does

2 issues I see with it.

1) we take to long to throw it out there and cant expect the WRs to hold the blocks more than a few seconds.
2) it seems we have two blocking WR's in the play bringing more defenders into the area. Its also hard to run against tighter coverage.

and are we throwing them to WR's or other positions? Custis caught 1 or 2 last week.

*I noticed on one CMU replay the camera clearly showed that when we threw a guy out to take a screen their LB immediately closed on the play. There was no hesitation from him at all. So we're doing something wrong when the LB isnt hesitating to leave the middle underneath. Conversely they threw a bubble and our LB bit on the fake handoff. I think they got 8 or 9 as a result and our guy barely got to the los.

if we're going to throw them then we have to keep people honest. If it's really viewed as a run then they need to average 4 yards a carry and not 1. I'd be curious to know what our yards per catch/carry are on bubble screens.

 

[GoCuse08]

Agree about Custis. He was being covered by undersized LBs or safeties in the CMU game, it was a huge mismatch if they threw it to him downfield. Throwing it to him at the LOS negated his size advantage and emphasized his relative lack of quickness compared to the little ones the Chips had in coverage.

Broyld often has a size advantage too and is good in the air...don't think I have ever seen them throw a fade to him in the red zone.

Things that make you go hmmmm.

This x1000...was driving me nuts every time they threw to Custis on a bubble screen. His strengths aren't being used appropriately...if they keep throwing bubble screens to him instead of using him downfield where he has a mismatch advantage my head might explode.

 

[Orangello]

Agree about Custis. He was being covered by undersized LBs or safeties in the CMU game, it was a huge mismatch if they threw it to him downfield. Throwing it to him at the LOS negated his size advantage and emphasized his relative lack of quickness compared to the little ones the Chips had in coverage.

Broyld often has a size advantage too and is good in the air...don't think I have ever seen them throw a fade to him in the red zone.

Things that make you go hmmmm.

I'll add to this that we should be using Custis on the TE seam route every game. As Tom notes, against CMU he was almost always matched up against an undersized LB or safety. That is exaqctly what you want as the TE is able to turn or cut in front of the smaller defender who is unable to get in front of the TE. If the defender misses the tackle or is shed, you have a good shot at a TD especially in a Cover 2 defense. The key is having the TE start the route slighty wide then cut hard to the middle of the field. Think Gronko and the Pats Rail Route here. Instead, McD is having Hunt throw to the TE quickly at the LOS negating the one on one mismatch in space you want/need to create when you have a physical speciman like Custis. Same thing for Slashton.

 

[TheCusian]

This x1000...was driving me nuts every time they threw to Custis on a bubble screen. His strengths aren't being used appropriately...if they keep throwing bubble screens to him instead of using him downfield where he has a mismatch advantage my head might explode.

Might be a bit early for us to know what Custis' strengths are. He's played two games and caught 3 passes.

 

[Rocco]

The other point with bubble screens that more people need to understand is that, of those 11 run, the majority of those were likely a check call made at the line scrimmage. The bubble in the spread is often a "tag" play call - meaning that a play is signaled in and Hunt has the option (and is taught) to check to the bubble if he sees X number in the box (1st read typically). The underlying concept of the Spread, like it or not, is to show that you will attack the D on the outside if they load the box.

The other wrinkle to the bubble we saw at CMU that hasn't really been talked about is that there were a couple of plays where Hunt went through with the zone read run option, pulled the ball (did not handoff to RB), read the playside DE as he was running down the line, and then threw the ball to the WR
who would have been/still is the bubble screen target. Hunt can run or throw on those calls as well.

I understand on the check call, but the personnel isn't there IMO. Ben Lewis should not be receiving a bubble check down. A different check needs to be in place with different personnel.

Can we start a thread just for uniforms and bubble screen? the problem with the screen is the execution, it is horrendous. It is terrible, subpar MAC teams use it all the time. Yet here we just scream we need more playmakers, etc. Much like Lemon and Sales weren't fast enough, strong enough, etc.

It's a pretty basic play, you don't need track stars to run it. You need speed to break it 80 yards not 7-9 yards. The blocking is horrendous in it and obviously they are tipping their hand somehow as to when they are going to run it, pretty clear to see that. Sure I reduction in the number of times it's called would help but it's part of everyone's offense who runs similar O. Do people not watch other games around the country?

You may not need top-end speed to run it, but you need guys that aren't getting caught from behind by LBs. The blocking is atrocious, no question.

 

[Millhouse]

The other point with bubble screens that more people need to understand is that, of those 11 run, the majority of those were likely a check call made at the line scrimmage. The bubble in the spread is often a "tag" play call - meaning that a play is signaled in and Hunt has the option (and is taught) to check to the bubble if he sees X number in the box (1st read typically). The underlying concept of the Spread, like it or not, is to show that you will attack the D on the outside if they load the box.

The other wrinkle to the bubble we saw at CMU that hasn't really been talked about is that there were a couple of plays where Hunt went through with the zone read run option, pulled the ball (did not handoff to RB), read the playside DE as he was running down the line, and then threw the ball to the WR
who would have been/still is the bubble screen target. Hunt can run or throw on those calls as well.

i think what you're describing is how most teams run bubble screens but I don't think that's how we do it.

if Hunt is seeing that the WR outnumber the defenders and it's simply an option toss, then we have the worst blocking WR in the world because the screens get blown up as if the defense outnumbers us over there. it's hard to tell from TV whether that's the case but I really doubt it.

or maybe hunt can't count, I doubt that too.

i think they're designed plays but I can't know that.

 

[Millhouse]

Agree about Custis. He was being covered by undersized LBs or safeties in the CMU game, it was a huge mismatch if they threw it to him downfield. Throwing it to him at the LOS negated his size advantage and emphasized his relative lack of quickness compared to the little ones the Chips had in coverage.

Broyld often has a size advantage too and is good in the air...don't think I have ever seen them throw a fade to him in the red zone.

Things that make you go hmmmm.

fades are the worst! this makes me like McDonald for a second or two

 

[eddie in nc]

2 issues I see with it.

1) we take to long to throw it out there and cant expect the WRs to hold the blocks more than a few seconds.
2) it seems we have two blocking WR's in the play bringing more defenders into the area. Its also hard to run against tighter coverage.

and are we throwing them to WR's or other positions? Custis caught 1 or 2 last week.

*I noticed on one CMU replay the camera clearly showed that when we threw a guy out to take a screen their LB immediately closed on the play. There was no hesitation from him at all. So we're doing something wrong when the LB isnt hesitating to leave the middle underneath. Conversely they threw a bubble and our LB bit on the fake handoff. I think they got 8 or 9 as a result and our guy barely got to the los.

if we're going to throw them then we have to keep people honest. If it's really viewed as a run then they need to average 4 yards a carry and not 1. I'd be curious to know what our yards per catch/carry are on bubble screens.

Could it be that their linebackers are taught to read their key and go and ours are peeking in the backfield too much? I would assume that our linemen are taught to have the same first step for either the bubble or the run but maybe not.

 

[007]

i think what you're describing is how most teams run bubble screens but I don't think that's how we do it.

if Hunt is seeing that the WR outnumber the defenders and it's simply an option toss, then we have the worst blocking WR in the world because the screens get blown up as if the defense outnumbers us over there. it's hard to tell from TV whether that's the case but I really doubt it.

or maybe hunt can't count, I doubt that too.

i think they're designed plays but I can't know that.

just to clarify, Hunt is most likely counting the number in the box to check to bubble and not the number of defenders on the WR. there are other checks to, but this is unusually the first.

I think the issue lies more with technique and talent, and not play calling or scheme.

Your point about blocking is a good one. From what I can tell, the WR trys to engage the defender similarly to how the OL would pass protect - hands up, punch and control. They typically just get thrown aside after initial contact. My personal opinion is that this should be a cut block on the outside.

The WR is also supposed to run an arc or bubble route at the snap. Not sure that always happens or is run correctly. Then again, GM might have a different philosophy on that.

Finally, I am not so sure we have the WR talent to be real effective running the play. But that is secondary. You need to show the willingness to attack on the perimeter out of the spread.

 

[Faegan]

I think with Custis they might just be giving him a few easy passes to get his feet wet.

 

[TheCusian]

Seems like a fundamental misreading of what we are trying to do. These bubble screens are built to gain 4-7 yards. Ben Lewis, Custis - anyone should be able to catch it and take it 4 yards. It's not about taking it to the house with Estime every time it's called. As others have said its a presnap read based on who is in the box. Not personnel driven - it's dependent upon the defense.

 

[tep624]

Agree about Custis. He was being covered by undersized LBs or safeties in the CMU game, it was a huge mismatch if they threw it to him downfield. Throwing it to him at the LOS negated his size advantage and emphasized his relative lack of quickness compared to the little ones the Chips had in coverage.

Broyld often has a size advantage too and is good in the air...don't think I have ever seen them throw a fade to him in the red zone.

Things that make you go hmmmm.

For the life of me I can't understand why we don't use Custis like Rutgers used Brandon Coleman. Throw it over the middle to him and downfield and let him use his size/strength advantage to outplay defenders. Throwing screens to him and then keeping Hunt in at the end of the game were the two headscratchers for me in the CMU game.

 

[TheCusian]

For the life of me I can't understand why we don't use Custis like Rutgers used Brandon Coleman. Throw it over the middle to him and downfield and let him use his size/strength advantage to outplay defenders. Throwing screens to him and then keeping Hunt in at the end of the game were the two headscratchers for me in the CMU game.

I don't think you're wrong... But it has only been two games with limited snaps.

 

[SUFan44]

Seems like a fundamental misreading of what we are trying to do. These bubble screens are built to gain 4-7 yards. Ben Lewis, Custis - anyone should be able to catch it and take it 4 yards. It's not about taking it to the house with Estime every time it's called. As others have said its a presnap read based on who is in the box. Not personnel driven - it's dependent upon the defense.

The problem is we rarely even get 4-7 yards out of the play. The majority (without doing in-depth research) are losses or minimal gains.

 

[anomander]

Don't disagree with you there but it isn't going anywhere and the problems isn't as much the play call but the formations, Hunt reading it correctly and the execution. Brolyd could be the worst I have ever seen blocking on the bubble, he's beyond bad. James Harden does a better job of getting in front of somebody than he does

I feel this is part of the problem relying on the bubble screen as an extension of the run game. Wouldn't you want to run behind your experienced offensive line who's primary job is to block, instead of counting on a wr to block? Plus it seems like we force the bubble screen when it's not there.

 

[Rocco]

Seems like a fundamental misreading of what we are trying to do. These bubble screens are built to gain 4-7 yards. Ben Lewis, Custis - anyone should be able to catch it and take it 4 yards. It's not about taking it to the house with Estime every time it's called. As others have said its a presnap read based on who is in the box. Not personnel driven - it's dependent upon the defense.

That may be the intent of the play, but it is the wrong thinking. We have playmakers that can make big plays and we're not utilizing them correctly. 4-7 yard gains don't get recruits or fans excited.

 

[TheCusian]

That may be the intent of the play, but it is the wrong thinking. We have playmakers that can make big plays and we're not utilizing them correctly. 4-7 yard gains don't get recruits or fans excited.

I agree. I just think you take 4-7 yards on your bread and butter running plays, you take the same for your short passing game. The problem is when that's all there is. I think it's starting to open up and we'll see some more exciting mid-deep throws, ala that big catch from Ishmael in the first half last weekend.

 

[TheCusian]

I feel this is part of the problem relying on the bubble screen as an extension of the run game. Wouldn't you want to run behind your experienced offensive line who's primary job is to block, instead of counting on a wr to block? Plus it seems like we force the bubble screen when it's not there.

Problem is when there is 8 in the box. You only get 5 linemen. I think if a team decides to play 8/box to stop our run and then plays off of our WR's - you see tons of bubbles.

The thing we had the most trouble with last year was 7-8 in the box and CB's playing up on our WR's daring Hunt to pass over the top without
getting separation. So Hunt running was our best option. Offense sputters. The best thing from last week was all the slants and middle of the field throws. If we could hit on a few deep balls - everything gets easier.

 

[upperdeck]

you have to do something well. right now we dont do anything well. if we start running better the bubbles will work, of we start running the bubbles better then running will work. until we do one or the other its just a grind out and hope the big play happens. we have run bubble left , bubble right , but we get so few yards we still struggle to get the first down. if you go 7-8, 7-8 then run it at pace it becomes much harder to stop. add in the fact the no team fears any of our speed guys so the safety never has to keep an eye out for the deep ball and the corners can play press or play off and recover. I think if Estime is the speed than he needs to get outside more and we need to hit the deep ball. but he has avg hands like AB does and they have to play slot and get easier catches. we need one WR to step up and be a threat to open the field.

 

[Full_Rebar]

I hope the offensive coaches develop some plays to take advantage of the strengths of our players. The "pop pass" examples from syracuse.com were scary to see. It almost looked like sandlot football and while the surprise factor is important, it shouldn't be the offensive players surprised to see where the ball is going.

The coaches need to find ways to get PTG, Erv, Estime and Ashton in space, in positions where they can succeed. As others have mentioned, we have a good run-blocking, veteran OL and we are relying on receivers to block to spring our guys. I realize the staff hasn't shown all their cards, but hopefully we see some jet sweeps for Estime and Erv, some 2-back formations with PTG and Erv/McFarlane(I love the wheel route against college LB's), and slants/rub routes with Estime and Ashton on the same side.

 

[Rocco]

I agree. I just think you take 4-7 yards on your bread and butter running plays, you take the same for your short passing game. The problem is when that's all there is. I think it's starting to open up and we'll see some more exciting mid-deep throws, ala that big catch from Ishmael in the first half last weekend.

They have barely even tried to throw deep yet. I'm sure we will see calls this weekend that we haven't seen yet. I am confident that the younger WRs on this team can get behind the coverage and do some damage. A lot comes down to Hunt having the patience for the play to develop.

 

[Orangepace]

I'm of the opinion that since CMU was basically, although not technically, Hunt's first game, they still had to see how he handled the bubble. I also think that after the safety early in the second half that McD went one more aggressive drive and then switched to ball control mode because there was no real threat of losing after that. I think it was too early to do so, but after the 8 minute mark in the 3rd quarter the play calling was 22 runs v. 12 passes. Of those 12 passes, 6 were screens. So adjusted play calling would be 28 runs v. 6 passes. The gameplan was winning out over that period though, so why divert? I actually don't hate the way he called it from the 8 minute mark in the 3rd quarter on. I'd rather he didn't show the full offense at that point because there really wasn't a need to.

 

[Millhouse]

Why throw a bubble screen here? Makes no sense. Loss of three. First drive. I highly doubt this is a read by hunt. This one is not due to poor wr blocking. I wish I weren't so tired would love to do this for every screen

 

[Fjoinkay]

Looks like T-Hunt's default level is higher than where he played at last year which is nice to see. He also has plenty of room for growth which is exciting. I think one growth edge he has is the reads he makes before and after each snap. Watching the CMU game I wondered at times how much discretion T-Hunt actually has on some plays because he looked like he made up his mind before the snap and ended up throwing without reading. A few plays were left on the field. I'm optimistic that he's primed to grow into better reads. I think the CMU film will be a nice tool much more so than the Nova film for obvious reasons. I think this offense has a chance to frequently chunk and hum.

 

[syr02esq]

The other point with bubble screens that more people need to understand is that, of those 11 run, the majority of those were likely a check call made at the line scrimmage. The bubble in the spread is often a "tag" play call - meaning that a play is signaled in and Hunt has the option (and is taught) to check to the bubble if he sees X number in the box (1st read typically). The underlying concept of the Spread, like it or not, is to show that you will attack the D on the outside if they load the box. The other wrinkle to the bubble we saw at CMU that hasn't really been talked about is that there were a couple of plays where Hunt went through with the zone read run option, pulled the ball (did not handoff to RB), read the playside DE as he was running down the line, and then threw the ball to the WR who would have been/still is the bubble screen target. Hunt can run or throw on those calls as well.

That would be the triple option that RG3 perfected at Baylor.