WVU had major covid issues for that game, that is what i mean by packing it in. Poor choice of words, but teams with covid issues typically did not play well
Ben Bruns KU Game Recap on Iowa Everywhere
- Thread starter Cfinnerty16
- Start date
The lengths you go to find ways to be negative are sometimes truly astonishing.
130/131 is so so bad. I knew we were bad on ST but I truly didn’t think we were nearly dead last.
Honestly thought punting and kick/punt coverage have been OK so just goes to show how poor the kick game has been.
No kidding. I believe we had 3 consecutive possessions, in the first half, that all ended in interceptions (one that Baylor may have returned for a TD). Then we scored TD's on 3 consecutive possessions in the 3rd quarter. Weird game.
Silas is terrible in pass protection, like shouldn't be on the field bad pass protection.
ULM
Yeah, I totally get trying to keep your QB healthy but this is all over the country. Teams want to use their QB as a running threat but they don't want him to get hit. That'd be great in theory but after a little bit, it doesn't work because people figure out that they won't actually run.
So, you either use it and live with the consequences, or quit spending time on it. It takes quite a few reps away from other stuff that is sustainable.
So for the unknowledgeable, does that mean anyone that runs Cover 4 will eliminate any downfield passes at all? And other than a thousand crossing patterns or WR screens, what do we have to look forward to?
Pain.
Or, our coaches could watch the Niners/Rams game from last night and figure out ways to get X the ball behind blockers in WR screens, or setup some jet sweeps with Noel. Experiment with Rus in the backfield as a blocker on passing downs. I mean, something new.
Or, just go into the game without a healthy Brock, but call the game exactly as you would with a healthy Brock, even with last week's results and a week of practice.
I wonder what the braintrust decides?
I bet they put it all on our defense, and KSU figures out a way to exploit our LBs to keep drives alive.
Cover 4 = 4 deep, each deep defender covers 1/4 of the field. Basically it's don't get beat deep and keep everything in front of you.
The thing with a cover 4 is that if you have route trees that flood as zone, they should be wide open. We didn't see that. We saw long developing crosses across the field which do work, but it was the only strategy used. In addition, KU just kept thier LB's back, waited for the cross to hit and then tackled them for a short gain.
The kid, in general , holds the ball way too long.
We are really slow at things for trying to throw 4 yard passes.
There's two reasons why those don't "work" (at least consistently for us).
We run minimal protection sets with some of the narrowest splits in college football. Teams have figured this out; Baylor used very wide splits to give their ends rushing angles and KU followed suit. Because of those narrow splits, the ends aren't even that wide (narrower than what they would be to angle toward the QB). It puts INSANE pressure for our tackles to get off the ball immediately and create/preserve some semblance of a pocket and that's NOT happening. Dekkers is under pressure in under 2 seconds on a large majority of the snaps.
This means he's needing to throw the ball quickly. The problem is those long developing routes don't work with our protection. When you watch the film many of our guys aren't even IN to their breaks, thus not available targets. It's putting a young quarterback in a position to fail. Considering how poor the schema is Dekkers has performed admirably, though he needs to learn (in this offense) to throw the ball away more,
I'm not sure what games/film Campbell and Manning are watching as it apparently isn't the same as the games I have. We have GOT to put some TEs/blockers on the line to chip the ends and/or widen the splits. We are making it WAY too easy for opposing ends to lineup outside our tackles, angle toward our QB (in a standing stance), and tee off on Dekkers. We also need to give our QB more hot route options. We can't have 5 guys running 3-4 second routes when he has to have the ball out in two. Manning also has WAY too many guys running to the same level of the field. Can we make it any easier for a team to defend 4-5 receivers with minimal defenders? Guys are able to peel off their man and turn every throw into a "double coverage" situation.
Now, in theory, the defensive alignments should/could be neutralized with running at/inside the ends. The offensive line has been abysmal to get any sore of forward push. It's time for the staff to acknowledge the obvious and make proper adjustments. If they don't, it's going to be a VERY ugly season.
Long developing routes have been the problem for many years.
We also run to many slow developing running plays, we've had most success when we run direct fast developing running plays.
Those shallow crossing routes take a long time to develop. If we have enough protection to complete those passes, we should have enough time to complete deeper passes.
So WHY do we use the narrow splits in the first place? Is that to facilitate runs up the middle? Whats the theory for the uninformed?
The narrow splits were heavily utilized over the previous seasons when we we had Kolar, Allen, and Soehner. Essentially putting a hat-on-hat and getting Breece 1v1 with a DB. It was a unique scheme to prepare for with the talent we had at TE and RB as they were all threats in the passing game.
I'm surprised we've seen that 'scheme' as much as we have this year given the attrition of the players mentioned above. The narrow splits (with 2 TE and 1 FB) puts more defenders in a small space which I feel is holding our running game back (at least the last two games) and puts unneeded pressure on Dekkers.
My man.
Personally, I've never understood narrow splits. I suppose it would limit interior DL mobility but otherwise it seems useless. I feel the same about the wide splits as well unless you have an ultra-mobile, ultra-talented line and you're carrying that throughout the entire field.
@ZRF said basically everything I've been trying to say. Essentially, we compress the field. Now, compressing the field isn't always bad if you have the right personnel. As a 49ers/Michigan fan, I've watched Harbaugh do it for years. What you can do with that is add a bunch of gaps in short space, therefore making the defense more shallow and delivering the RB to the secondary much easy. If you're blockers are really good at what they do, this is a nightmare for opposing defenses because you either have to have your LBs play conservative and allow 5-6 yards a lot or you play them aggressively and hope your safeties clean up messes on the regular. To me, our personnel doesn't seem to fit this. I'd much rather we looked at spreading teams out to give our line a chance.
I think for this offense to find success, they have to get more vertical. Route combos need to be much more varied in their level and we're going to have to put some DBs in conflict. Right now, they face no conflict.
