The ghosts of P&G

[BillSU]

Yesterday at times and especially when we were 1st and 10 at their 2-3 or whatever, I thought I was watching a rerun of the play calling by Pasqualoni and his sidekick George Deleone. Though not the same plays as P & G it was a repetitive pattern that stopped us.

P & G used this play calling constantly: 1st: RB through the tackle - 2nd: RB through the tackle or QB option 3rd: Pass - 4th: punt because once you have used that pattern of play calling for 2 quarters the other team kind of totally gets it that’s what you’re going to do and they stop us. SB is no pushover with their transfers so they stopped us twice at the goal line. Duh.

Nassib is good but after the RB shoulder to shoulder with Ryan is handed the ball time after time the same thing is going to happen as the P&G show. Spread them out! Go play action! Granted they made yards on that play the entire game but you could almost smell it coming close to the goal line. If you are going to use it use Broyld he showed up big time and can make his own holes. Hackett has to do better than that. And, I agree, kick the field goals and get the points when you have the opportunity.

Unfortunately the ghosts showed up, again. Hope the OC can be more creative than yesterday at Minnesota.

 

[Orangetradition44]

They did win like 65% of their games that way.

 

[GoSU96]

Yesterday at times and especially when we were 1st and 10 at their 2-3 or whatever, I thought I was watching a rerun of the play calling by Pasqualoni and his sidekick George Deleone. Though not the same plays as P & G it was a repetitive pattern that stopped us.

P & G used this play calling constantly: 1st: RB through the tackle - 2nd: RB through the tackle or QB option 3rd: Pass - 4th: punt because once you have used that pattern of play calling for 2 quarters the other team kind of totally gets it that’s what you’re going to do and they stop us. SB is no pushover with their transfers so they stopped us twice at the goal line. Duh.

Nassib is good but after the RB shoulder to shoulder with Ryan is handed the ball time after time the same thing is going to happen as the P&G show. Spread them out! Go play action! Granted they made yards on that play the entire game but you could almost smell it coming close to the goal line. If you are going to use it use Broyld he showed up big time and can make his own holes. Hackett has to do better than that. And, I agree, kick the field goals and get the points when you have the opportunity.

Unfortunately the ghosts showed up, again. Hope the OC can be more creative than yesterday at Minnesota.

Oh Lord

You have got to be kidding.

 

[OrangePA]

So you think this year's offense looks like any of the offenses DeLeone used to run.

I don't think Marrone ran the TE throw back yesterday, did he?

And I don't think he ran the option reverse did he?

The play calling comments get old.

No matter what is run or who makes the call there is always a complaint.

 

[sufandu]

Yesterday at times and especially when we were 1st and 10 at their 2-3 or whatever, I thought I was watching a rerun of the play calling by Pasqualoni and his sidekick George Deleone. Though not the same plays as P & G it was a repetitive pattern that stopped us.

P & G used this play calling constantly: 1st: RB through the tackle - 2nd: RB through the tackle or QB option 3rd: Pass - 4th: punt because once you have used that pattern of play calling for 2 quarters the other team kind of totally gets it that’s what you’re going to do and they stop us. SB is no pushover with their transfers so they stopped us twice at the goal line. Duh.

Nassib is good but after the RB shoulder to shoulder with Ryan is handed the ball time after time the same thing is going to happen as the P&G show. Spread them out! Go play action! Granted they made yards on that play the entire game but you could almost smell it coming close to the goal line. If you are going to use it use Broyld he showed up big time and can make his own holes. Hackett has to do better than that. And, I agree, kick the field goals and get the points when you have the opportunity.

Unfortunately the ghosts showed up, again. Hope the OC can be more creative than yesterday at Minnesota.

You understand the gameplan was kept very vanilla, right? When you play against a team with inferior talent you are supposed to be able to run simple plays and beat them. My disappointment was that we didn't out physical them in those short yardage plays near the goal line, not the play calling.

 

[OrangeinBoston]

You understand the gameplan was kept very vanilla, right? When you play against a team with inferior talent you are supposed to be able to run simple plays and beat them. My disappointment was that we didn't out physical them in those short yardage plays near the goal line, not the play calling.

This was a coaching brain arrest. Hackett-boy and Marrone should know by now that they don't have an offensive line that can overpower the Sisters of the Poor, much less an FCS team, and never under any circumstances an FBS team. To think that they could, and try it 8 times in a row reveals a stubborness, or worse, that is just about inconcevable. For this team to score with this OL requires some creativity, NOT straight ahead bulling.

 

[sufandu]

This was a coaching brain arrest. Hackett-boy and Marrone should know by now that they don't have an offensive line that can overpower the Sisters of the Poor, much less an FCS team, and never under any circumstances an FBS team. To think that they could, and try it 8 times in a row reveals a stubborness, or worse, that is just about inconcevable. For this team to score with this OL requires some creativity, NOT straight ahead bulling.

A coaches job is not always to pick the easiest play. We had the lead and Stony Brook hadn't crossed midfield in the second half. They used the opportunity to challenge their offensive line's toughness. A challenge that was failed miserably. If they don't do it then, when do they do it? The coaching staff knows at some point we'll be in a short yardage situation against a better team. Or we'll have a lead and need to run clock. At some point a football team has to be able to line up and physically beat the guys across from them (look at what stanford did to USC) and the coaching staff is still trying to instill that in our offensive line.

 

[OrangeinBoston]

A coaches job is not always to pick the easiest play. We had the lead and Stony Brook hadn't crossed midfield in the second half. They used the opportunity to challenge their offensive line's toughness. A challenge that was failed miserably. If they don't do it then, when do they do it? The coaching staff knows at some point we'll be in a short yardage situation against a better team. Or we'll have a lead and need to run clock. At some point a football team has to be able to line up and physically beat the guys across from them (look at what stanford did to USC) and the coaching staff is still trying instill that in our offensive line.

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. If you want to challenge your OL, then you have to have an OL that can rise to that challenge. SU's OL is simply not able to do that at this point. Maybe next year, but not now. Don't get me wrong, the OL is serviceable for the first time in a while, and can do what this year's offense requires. But, it can't line up against a solid DL and impose its will.

 

[Dcuse]

Didn't we have like another 600 yard game yesterday? So what in God's name are you talking about?

 

[OrangeinBoston]

Didn't we have like another 600 yard game yesterday? So what in God's name are you talking about?

Read the thread - the 8 plays from inside SB's 5 yard line. They tried to bull their way in, save one badly executed pass attempt, unsuccesfully.

 

[sufandu]

T

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. If you want to challenge your OL, then you have to have an OL that can rise to that challenge. SU's OL is simply not able to do that at this point. Maybe next year, but not now. Don't get me wrong, the OL is serviceable for the first time in a while, and can do what this year's offense requires. But, it can't line up against a solid DL and impose its will.

They weren't asking the OL to impose it's will on a solid DL, they were hoping it could on Stony Brook's.

 

[BillSU]

Oh Lord

You have got to be kidding.

No I wasn't kidding - it was what it was. The OL being the OL, i.e., not able to make a hole for the RB's trying to score. If the coaching staff was trying to prove
our OL could part the Seawolves like Moses it didn't work. BUT, like I mentioned their DL was no pushover. There were some big athletes involved for SB and they were good, obviously.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

OrangeinBoston, post: 358123 said: <br />This was a coaching brain arrest. Hackett-boy and Marrone should know by now that they don't have an offensive line that can overpower the Sisters of the Poor, much less an FCS team, and never under any circumstances an FBS team. To think that they could, and try it 8 times in a row reveals a stubborness, or worse, that is just about inconcevable. For this team to score with this OL requires some creativity, NOT straight ahead bulling.

A coaches job is not always to pick the easiest play. We had the lead and Stony Brook hadn't crossed midfield in the second half. They used the opportunity to challenge their offensive line's toughness. A challenge that was failed miserably. If they don't do it then, when do they do it? The coaching staff knows at some point we'll be in a short yardage situation against a better team. Or we'll have a lead and need to run clock. At some point a football team has to be able to line up and physically beat the guys across from them (look at what stanford did to USC) and the coaching staff is still trying to instill that in our offensive line.

Duh, you do it against USC at mid field

Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

 

[kingtidge]

Yesterday at times and especially when we were 1st and 10 at their 2-3 or whatever, I thought I was watching a rerun of the play calling by Pasqualoni and his sidekick George Deleone. Though not the same plays as P & G it was a repetitive pattern that stopped us.

P & G used this play calling constantly: 1st: RB through the tackle - 2nd: RB through the tackle or QB option 3rd: Pass - 4th: punt because once you have used that pattern of play calling for 2 quarters the other team kind of totally gets it that’s what you’re going to do and they stop us. SB is no pushover with their transfers so they stopped us twice at the goal line. Duh.

Nassib is good but after the RB shoulder to shoulder with Ryan is handed the ball time after time the same thing is going to happen as the P&G show. Spread them out! Go play action! Granted they made yards on that play the entire game but you could almost smell it coming close to the goal line. If you are going to use it use Broyld he showed up big time and can make his own holes. Hackett has to do better than that. And, I agree, kick the field goals and get the points when you have the opportunity.

Unfortunately the ghosts showed up, again. Hope the OC can be more creative than yesterday at Minnesota.

Pasqualoni + George?

P&G?

It's P&D...

And if you think our offense is doing the same, then no one can help you... for you are truly lost...

 

[Halfmooncuse]

[
I don't think Marrone ran the TE throw back yesterday, did he?

No, but SB did! Thank god the TE dropped it.