texas am passing game

[upperdeck]

Play calling is an art. I dont think our guy has it down yet, nor do we have the athletes that the Baylor, Texas AM, Oregon schools do that we want to be like. high octane offenses.. But people think these offenses just attack down field all game long. I made a comment that A&M threw 75% bubble screens.. an exaggeration for sure but no different than the comments that all SU did was throw bubble screens every play.

So I went back and watched the first half against South Carolina, they scored 31 pts. I didn't bother with stats on when the plays were thrown but you can assume that bubble screens will be thrown less in bad down situations. Also A&m ran 2 types of plays I call bubble screen, the run the normal one we used but also run one where the 2 rcvrs drive and the 3rd runs a late curl underneath about 3-4 yds down field. still a screen in my book. I used 5 yds but in reality they either threw under 2-3 yds or over 10..

1st drive. 4 of 6 under 5 yd

bubble screen
bubble screen
fake bubble post route
completed behind line to rb for loss
underneath screen 2 yd pass to rb
pass down middle for TD

drive 2. 3 of 6 under 5 yd
1 yd pass
scramble pass
scramble pass
fake bubble slant pass
3 yd pass
short inc pass

drive 3. 1 of 2 under 5 yd
fake bubble backside slant
bubble screen

drive 4. 5 of 7 under 5 yd
bubble screen
bubble screen
fake bubble slant
shallow curl
shallow slant
scramble
shallow slant

drive 5. 3 of 6 under 5 yd
bubble screen
deep curl
2 yd pass to RB
bubble screen
scramble throw away
post

drive 6. 6 of 10 under 5 yd
screen
scramble
2 yd pass
bubble screen
bubble screen
bubble screen
curl
corner route
scramble 3 yd pass
corner route

22 of 31 thrown under 5 yds down field over 66% of the time not attacking down field. And thats if you assume the 5 scramble throws were meant to go deep and they could also have been short routes that were covered. 14 bubble screen patterns. Almost 50%.. So no not 75% but way more than people realize.

Success means you can run your offense as you want. failure make it look like ours did. If you dont run well teams dont move the safety and the same for bad bubble screens. Its not the play calling its the execution. If you can run bubble screens that work then you can run the fake bubble, stop and goes and the other deep routes as well.

Better plays make it look better. Baylor lost the QB and the top 2 rcvrs last night and looked dead running the same plays against an Avg Team. same plays , bad results. when you remove half the game plan things dont work, you dont set plays up you dont move the chains you dont wear the other D out and you tire your own..

 

[SoBeCuse]

Great post. I am just so confused why they didn't run the backs more when Wilson came in. Prior to the run debacles near the goal line that is. Instead he was running around and a couple times I was praying he wouldn't get crushed.

Either the execution on all the bubble screens we ran over and over was terrible or these aren't the athletes that McDonald and syracusefan.com think they are. Hard to fathom this stuff working on better teams. Very interested to see what happens against the Chippewas.

 

[upperdeck]

I agree, why we had Wilson running at all was beyond me, but we ran so poorly in almost all phases of the running game who knows what he was seeing that he kept the ball. I wish we were back in the days of the toss sweep out of the I, but we sound like we dont even practice that any more.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I agree, why we had Wilson running at all was beyond me, but we ran so poorly in almost all phases of the running game who knows what he was seeing that he kept the ball. I wish we were back in the days of the toss sweep out of the I, but we sound like we dont even practice that any more.

I hear ya. I was still so happy (Trojan alum) seeing USC run that good ole play all day on Fresno St. Even with a newer system with Sarkisian, who has been there before, they ran that exact play you mention out of the I a bunch.

 

[ORANGEsPHK]

I agree, why we had Wilson running at all was beyond me, but we ran so poorly in almost all phases of the running game who knows what he was seeing that he kept the ball. I wish we were back in the days of the toss sweep out of the I, but we sound like we dont even practice that any more.

To me this was a glaring symptom of McDonald not being able to adjust - he had his game plan and he stuck with it and it seemed part of the game plan was to keep the opposing D thinking about a QB keeper. The problem was (1) it wasn't working and (2) Wilson is not a running QB.

I hope McDonald learns to adjust during the game depending on what the opposing D is giving him. I agree with some of the posters that said George appears to be in over his head with the play calling. Hopefully it will come in the next few weeks as I thought he improved towards the end of last year.

 

[Crusty]

To be fair to MCD, having two completely different types of QBs is difficult when you have game planned against a 3-3-5 where one of your critical weapons is a QB running. Installing a game plan takes the entire week and running plays that have not been "installed" is really not an option. He handled Wilson well especially during the opening drive of the 2nd half. Austin got a little rattled with the press coverage and McD had to mix it up a bit. All in all not much else he could do.

Bubble screens. My understanding of a bubble screen is that the wide out turns and runs toward the QB while a TE or slot blocks the CB. If the WR is not heading towards the QB it is a different type of screen pass. Someone correct me if I am wrong. That said, the OC runs the plays that have the best chance of success based on what the D is willing to give him. We will and should throw screens to Broyld all day if they are going to let us have them. The problem is that when they take those away we have to be able to go down field and we have not been very good at that - yet.

This will change. Custis got open a couple of times and Ishmael clearly runs nice routes. I think he had some first game nerves as he missed a couple I thought he could have caught, but he is going to be a good one.

I think we are going to see big improvement as the season unfolds.

 

[Full_Rebar]

One thing that A&M and others do with screens, is get players moving upfield. It seems as though SU is throwing to stationary players too often and even if they make the first guy miss the defense is able to cut the angle.

It would also be nice if they used Estime as WVU did Austin- jet sweeps, delayed screens, etc. to get him into space with forward momentum.

 

[CuseCrew08]

Does TAMU have the other wr's block the guy in front of them or run a deep route?? I noticed on all our bubble screens the other wr's were just blocking the guy in front of them limiting the ability for deep throw fakes

 

[Oakland]

Those teams/coaches know how to use those screens. After watching SU's offense for the last 2-4 years, it seems we do not. Great for our coaches to try something new that is hot, but after failing at it for years, go to something you know. And if you can't implement something that works, move aside.

Play calling is an art. I dont think our guy has it down yet, nor do we have the athletes that the Baylor, Texas AM, Oregon schools do that we want to be like. high octane offenses.. But people think these offenses just attack down field all game long. I made a comment that A&M threw 75% bubble screens.. an exaggeration for sure but no different than the comments that all SU did was throw bubble screens every play.

So I went back and watched the first half against South Carolina, they scored 31 pts. I didn't bother with stats on when the plays were thrown but you can assume that bubble screens will be thrown less in bad down situations. Also A&m ran 2 types of plays I call bubble

drive 3. 1 of 2 under 5 yd
fake bubble backside slant
5
2 yd pass
bubble screen
bubble screen
bubble screen
curl
own..