Sunday, October 28, 2012

The Recipe...offense

I remember Coach Clawson's first press conference.

He was asked about whether BG was going to run the spread.  He said he wasn't a "system guy."

I liked that.  I always think it is ridiculous that you can hire a guy to be a head coach and he comes in and says "I can only coach one way, so we're going to have to wreck everything for a few years until we get my guys in" (Rich Rodriguez, I'm looking at you).  It seems to me that a guy who is a good football coach should be able to make the most out of what he has and should be able to win more than one way.

Well, you're seeing it.  BG is now playing an offensive attack that is completely different than what it has used in years and is different from what the other successful teams in the MAC are using.  This is a throwback attack that we just haven't seen.  This would have looked good to Doyt Perry.

Coach made the point in his post-game presser....the idea is to outscore the opponent.  And the offense did that, even without the pick 6.

And, to look at the positives first, BG had great success running the ball, and that was without the starting TB, who did not play.  In fact, after Givens was injured, BG was down to its last two TBs (literally, I think there is just one walk on after those guys) and the depth certainly came in handy.

BG's tailbacks had 35 carries for 226 yards.  That is 6.5 yards per carry, and that's good at any level.

Even down to Pettigrew and Hopgood, BG ran the game out in the 4th quarter with brutal efficiency. BG had the ball for 12 minutes in the fourth quarter, snuffing out any hope of an EMU rally.  Those two drives....7 first downs and 3 pass plays.

While I understand we were playing conservatively, I can't find a word for our passing attack that wouldn't be inept.  If I used two words, it would be completely inept.  And if we can keep winning on the recipe, than great, but you worry about how we might need something else and whether it would be there.

On the scoreboard at the Doyt at halftime, they showed BG's leading passer.  It was Jordan Hopgood. The point was not lost on any of us.  For the game, without the trick play, BG got 78 yards passing out of its QB...and won the game.

I think the book is out...UMass blitzed a lot, and it seemed like EMU did as well, and that just seems to put chaos into the whole system.

The fan's inclination is to look at the QB.  And, I don't think we are getting very good play from our QB.  He seems to be inaccurate.  He didn't throw any interceptions and only took one sack, and I guess that's part of what they want, but I can think of several plays that were well developed and open where he either threw the ball wildly or too hard.

In addition, his unwillingness to run is a liability.  In BG's final drive, a TD was wide open by running 15 feet, but he threw instead.  Teams cover us differently because they know he won't take the open run.

I don't care to focus on individual players, but he is the QB and in other games there were moments where I thought he made plays and others where he didn't, but I don't think the play yesterday really even hits the level of being "inconsistent."  I believe the team has made a decision to figure out another way to win.

Now, he played really well against Miami, and that has been the hope all along...that if the running game took some pressure off, we could take advantage of the full box and hit some easy passes and move the ball.  That happened against the RedHawks, but we haven't seen it anyplace else.

It isn't just him.  I don't think our WRs are doing a consistent job of getting open either, but there are plays where we have gotten a guy into space and the ball doesn't get there.

It is a rule of football that the backup QB is the best guy on the team.  I just don't think there is any chance of seeing a switch.  The coaching staff has doubled down on this QB...a number of guys have left because he had the job locked down.  This has been their guy and (let us not forget) we are 6-3.

Also, the one thing we have to do under this recipe is play turnover free on offense.  There is no way--no way--that they are going to put a new guy in who has taken only garbage snaps and have him learn on the job when we are playing under a no-mistake game management strategy.

We do have some time with the bye.  I think we could improve our protection against the blitz, and if we provided airtight protection, we might get better throws.

If we can keep winning with the recipe, that's great.  But, you'd like to have a plan B.


NOEL said...

Who is next on the depth chart at RB? I assume Samuel will be ready for OU and doesn't sound like Givens is as serious as it appeared, but still curious as to who is next in line.

I think that the running game didn't skip a beat without Samuel, but an angle not many have mentioned is how the passing game did without him. Obviously he is a tremendous rusher but he is also a decent pass blocker and seems to be a safety valve for Schilz. I've noticed on many occasions Schilz quickly gets through his progressions to find Samuel in the flat. Not to mention the designed screens to the RB, well I guess I just did mention them.

That Miami game really does seem to be the culmination of how our offense NEEDS to be-- run, run, dink and dunk passes, run, to take the pressure off the QB so the O doesn't have to DEPEND on the QB as much to be successful. With less pressure I would assume some of those finesse passes will be there.

Orange said...

Hey Noel!

The only other RB on the roster is Alex Carter, a true FR from Troy, OH. Presumably a walk on.

Anyhow, I assume that Samuel will be back as well and with the extra time, you'd expect to see Givens as well. I was relieved to see Hopgood run like he did after the long layoff.

Good point about the blocking and the screens. The screen game was ugly yesterday...not that it is too surprising to anyone to see it coming.

Finally, Miami does need to be the model. I have my doubts we can sustain this against OU and Kent--maybe I am wrong, but I think we are going to need a little more balance.