Predictable my arse. Texas Tech is predictable because they pass often. The difference is that they execute their plays, and they execute them WELL.
Predictable play calling
- Thread starter TedKumsher
- Start date
Did anyone listen to Walters on Saturday?
When we lined up for the final play, either Walters or Eric said, "watch out for the option here."
When we lined up for the final play, either Walters or Eric said, "watch out for the option here."
I for one have never said anything about our predictable play calling, I do not think it is predictable. The only issue I had was not going with the qb sneak up the middle to get into the endzone. The option puts you backwords not forwords six inches is easier than 3-4 yards in that situation, but maybe I am wrong?
Because it had been working for us all game. Not on the goal line though. I heard them say it and thought, as soon as I heard it, "Please God **** NO!" I really thought we'd come out and quick snap a QB sneak. Sometimes predictability isn't all bad. CU had to be planning for the Sneak more than the option. It's just easier to defend on the goal line because you don't have to keep anyone past 3 yards deep.
You'll be the highest ever paid defensive coordinator. Congratulations.
Seriously -- ISU vs. Mizz. When ISU has the ball, pause the TV immediately after the previous play is finished -- BEFORE the offense lines up, and tell me how many times you're correct. And I mean REALLY correct -- not just "pass play". What kind of pass play, what formation, who's the 1st, 2nd, 3rd option.
Then I'll even let you play the tape and see the offense formation. Pause just before the snap. Now you have to have the exact play call correct. "A-Rob quick handoff, left guard pulls over right tackle, A-Rob designed to follow the left guard."
And then try to do it all in real time where you've got 10-15 seconds to predict it and then get the defense set for your prediction.
I thought the same thing. I realize CU has a good DL, but AA is pretty strong and should have been able to push on a sneak, especially if we would have gone in a spread formation.
The QB sneak rarely has anything to do with how much push the QB can get. It's all about the center... Harrell was barely able to get a yard on a sneak without anyone even lined up on the center...
I know, but I didn't want to give our center credit for helping with a sneak as it would probably lie on AAs shoulders to get the yard(s).
The proper play call should have been a QB sneak over left or right guard. We have a QB who is 6’3” and weighs 222 lbs. The ball was literally an inch or two from the goal line. Hind sight is 20-20 but if we can’t pick-up two inches we don’t deserve to win.
Hey guys.........this is starting to look like a thread full of Squawkeye fans. Let's not go there. I'd encourage anyone who can predict 80% of our plays to get a collge coaching job and make some serious coin. :smile:
Last edited:
I don't want unpredictable play calling, seriously. I want to be able to tell the other team we are going to run the play and still run it. I know I'm not asking for much, there is no excuse for us to be not able to predict the next play.
Is it predictable if its successful? Is Missouri predicatable? They will throw the ball. Is TTech predictable? They will throw the ball...
Because we'd had success with it during the game? Because Chiz said MU defense had been pressuring up the middle all game? Because it gave us 2 offensive options depending on keeping or giving? Because he thought it was the right play?
as far as running routes short on critical downs, that is on the receiver. i was always taught, "get to the sticks, unless you are told otherwise." its just football knowledge and field awareness.
as for the GL option, i dont necessarily agree either, but they were banking on the fact taht we had enough speed to get to the pylon, which we did, but we did not have blocking. blocking is what it comes down to. if our OL is getting blown off of the ball, a sneak wouldnt work either. honestly, i would have took mansfield, told him to get a push on ko, and ran an iso right up their rears. but that is what this thread is about, because that would have been a predictable play.
as for the GL option, i dont necessarily agree either, but they were banking on the fact taht we had enough speed to get to the pylon, which we did, but we did not have blocking. blocking is what it comes down to. if our OL is getting blown off of the ball, a sneak wouldnt work either. honestly, i would have took mansfield, told him to get a push on ko, and ran an iso right up their rears. but that is what this thread is about, because that would have been a predictable play.
About the most unpredictable you can get is when you line up the same way time after time after time. Teams that use multiple sets tend to be more predictable because they tend to line up in the set that works best for the play that they want to call. (example: lining up in the "I" when you are going to run, and in the singleback when using play action and shotgun when throwing).
ISU uses allot of sets but they still do a pretty good job of mixing it up. Part of the reason the option was working so well last Saturday is because we were spending allot of time in the shotgun.
Maybe the receivers are running routes wrong! Do you honestly think our coaches, who are at a college level, are calling plays that won't make a first down? Maybe they are thinking of YAC? Think about it.
What we need is a Cy-Bookie on the over/under number of posts complaining about the call. They made the call they thought would work. If it works we prasie if it doesn't we spend the next week armchair quarterbacking on what should have been called. I can't wait until Saturday night when the whiners have something else to bring up.
I think it became easier when they decided to shorten the playbook couple weeks back due to young players.
