We've placed a lot of blame around from OC to QB to Bohl to phases of the moon. However, thinking back over the years, it does seem that when our back is against the wall the offense clicks more. We've always said that is because the playbook is opened up or whatever.
After watching the game again, I had another thought, what if we are too vanilla in our offensive lineups? During much of the game, we take quite a bit of time pre-snap which gives the defense a good look at our offensive set. We don't do a ton of motion or other things to disguise the set or pending play. Near the end of games, we are lining up much quicker and snapping the ball quicker which gives the defense less time to adjust to their pre-snap read. You typically think of an offense with a pre-snap read but I'm starting to wonder if that time is benefiting the D more than our O?
Offense question
-
ragtimejoe1
- Bronco-Buster
- Posts: 5204
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
- Has liked: 20 times
- Been liked: 129 times
-
LanderPoke
- WyoNation Lifer
- Posts: 11185
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 8:47 pm
- Location: Laramie
- Has liked: 603 times
- Been liked: 240 times
Zero creativity. 100% predictability. This is what we get with Bohl. We still handed it off to a single setback in between the tackles most of the time. Unbelievable. It's getting old.
We got stoned all day at the LOS and Valladay didn't break any of his usual big runs. Vigen and company knew exactly what was coming. 8 and 9 in the box. Every team will do this against us.
We never give different looks. Why not put Valladay and Swen out there at the same time? Never ran an option. Never ran a toss or pitch to try to get to the outside on runs. Only ran one screen I can think of. Outside of the TD catch, basically nothing in the middle of the field. The routes are elementary and long-developing.
tldr: Nothing changed. Same junk, different year.
We got stoned all day at the LOS and Valladay didn't break any of his usual big runs. Vigen and company knew exactly what was coming. 8 and 9 in the box. Every team will do this against us.
We never give different looks. Why not put Valladay and Swen out there at the same time? Never ran an option. Never ran a toss or pitch to try to get to the outside on runs. Only ran one screen I can think of. Outside of the TD catch, basically nothing in the middle of the field. The routes are elementary and long-developing.
tldr: Nothing changed. Same junk, different year.
-
Cornpoke
- A Real Cowboy
- Posts: 1645
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 10:43 pm
- Location: Pinedale, WY
- Been liked: 6 times
Anyone else find it interesting Vigen ran a much more wide open offense. Pistol sets, read options, RPO's, receivers lined up wider. One does have to wonder if Vigen was being hamstrung by Bohl's offensive philosophy.
I'm good for 3!
-
LawPoke
- A Real Cowboy
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:23 pm
- Has liked: 79 times
- Been liked: 90 times
We will continue to face 8-9 man fronts until we prove we can throw the ball consistently. It doesn't take a rocket doc to evaluate the film and see that teams know that the way to beat us is to sell out to stop the run and let the chips fall where they will against our passing game.
IMHO, the only path forward is to use our intermediate passing game (and not the lateral BS that never works for us) with play action to back off the LBs and safeties. It is a basic numbers game - 8-9 guys in the box = too many guys for our linemen to block to maintain any chance at a consistent running game. It requires nearly every OLineman to beat both their guy at the line and then get to the second level and beat that guy - or for our RB to make at least two guys miss. We have to flip the numbers in our favor and the only way to do that is to force some of those LBs, safeties and CBs into coverage - at least 5-10 yards off the LOS.
IMHO, the only path forward is to use our intermediate passing game (and not the lateral BS that never works for us) with play action to back off the LBs and safeties. It is a basic numbers game - 8-9 guys in the box = too many guys for our linemen to block to maintain any chance at a consistent running game. It requires nearly every OLineman to beat both their guy at the line and then get to the second level and beat that guy - or for our RB to make at least two guys miss. We have to flip the numbers in our favor and the only way to do that is to force some of those LBs, safeties and CBs into coverage - at least 5-10 yards off the LOS.
-
LanderPoke
- WyoNation Lifer
- Posts: 11185
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 8:47 pm
- Location: Laramie
- Has liked: 603 times
- Been liked: 240 times
Yup. Sorry, Vigen! Want to come back and be the HC after Bohl is gone?
-
307bball
- WyoNation Addict
- Posts: 2279
- Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
- Has liked: 15 times
- Been liked: 62 times
We are all trying to fit a narrative to what we are seeing on Saturdays. For some time...that narrative had to include Craig Bohl as a good coach. Heck...that is a tough one to dispute, what with multiple championships under his belt, albeit at the FCS level. So how to explain the poor offense? Well....one narrative was that despite Bohl being a good coach, he has been taken in by a snake-oil salesman of an offensive coordinator to the point that his genius was in fielding a defense that could somewhat make up for the offensive shortcomings. I never liked that narrative...I always felt like if Bohl wanted the offense to do something different then the change would have been made. Obviously he wants better results but he seems very content to just keep trying to perfect the system he brought to Laramie.
Despite being skeptical of that narrative...I kind of hoped that it was true since that would mean an offensive uptick in the event that Vigen ever moved on. Now that we are getting some data on what a Vigen-less Bohl team looks like, I am even closer to declaring the above narrative as false.
So what are we seeing? I don't think Bohl is a bad coach. He seems to be a very good leader. Very good representative of the University....but maybe a bad tactician? Maybe he was the guy to get us out of the dregs and build a foundation of a successful program. I mean...He has at least done that. Love the toughness of the guys and the never-quit attitude...but that will only get you so far. I hope he can put the next piece of the puzzle in....and soon.
Despite being skeptical of that narrative...I kind of hoped that it was true since that would mean an offensive uptick in the event that Vigen ever moved on. Now that we are getting some data on what a Vigen-less Bohl team looks like, I am even closer to declaring the above narrative as false.
So what are we seeing? I don't think Bohl is a bad coach. He seems to be a very good leader. Very good representative of the University....but maybe a bad tactician? Maybe he was the guy to get us out of the dregs and build a foundation of a successful program. I mean...He has at least done that. Love the toughness of the guys and the never-quit attitude...but that will only get you so far. I hope he can put the next piece of the puzzle in....and soon.
-
ragtimejoe1
- Bronco-Buster
- Posts: 5204
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
- Has liked: 20 times
- Been liked: 129 times
Chambers was 9-16 for 137 yards and a TD in the second half. If that continues AND fewer 3 and outs, I think the offense will be in ok shape.
One game (the first game at that) is not a sample size.
Eight different players caught a pass, four caught two, two caught three, and one caught four. 56% of our total yards were passing, 44% were rushing.
They are learning a new system, its going to be rusty at first, but the offense will begin to gel come conference play. The strong running game will show it's face again, but it will be coupled with some decent passing plays to keep the defense from stacking the box every time.
Not to mention Chamber's ability to run the ball from time to time and in critical situations.
Eight different players caught a pass, four caught two, two caught three, and one caught four. 56% of our total yards were passing, 44% were rushing.
They are learning a new system, its going to be rusty at first, but the offense will begin to gel come conference play. The strong running game will show it's face again, but it will be coupled with some decent passing plays to keep the defense from stacking the box every time.
Not to mention Chamber's ability to run the ball from time to time and in critical situations.
-
WYO1016
- WyoNation Addict
- Posts: 4416
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:11 am
- Location: Cheyenne, WY
- Has liked: 36 times
- Been liked: 106 times
I agree that the variety in the play calling was a huge step up. Chambers made some really poor decisions, but that can be corrected. I am a bit concerned about the running game. Hopefully we can blow that open this week.
-
WestWYOPoke
- WyoNation Addict
- Posts: 3320
- Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:35 am
- Has liked: 8 times
- Been liked: 8 times
First off, Sean had a bad game... no doubt about it.
Second, I honestly think the offense stayed extremely vanilla with the play calling until they had to step it up in the 4th. Bohl and OC didn't want to show too much and thought they could get away with it. Then late they decided to open it up a little.
I could absolutely be wrong, but I'm going to reserve judgements for a week or two before I start calling for people's heads.
Second, I honestly think the offense stayed extremely vanilla with the play calling until they had to step it up in the 4th. Bohl and OC didn't want to show too much and thought they could get away with it. Then late they decided to open it up a little.
I could absolutely be wrong, but I'm going to reserve judgements for a week or two before I start calling for people's heads.
-
ragtimejoe1
- Bronco-Buster
- Posts: 5204
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
- Has liked: 20 times
- Been liked: 129 times
I'm in the same boat and anxious to see how this weekend goes. I'm not going to lie, though, I'm concerned that Sean is what he is. Mobile QBs that are semi-erratic with throwing is not that uncommon. It will be interesting to see how he progresses, but I'm more than a little worried about his consistent accuracy. Before I get jumped on, I'm not saying what he is or is not. I'm just saying I've seen enough to have a little concern at this point.WestWYOPoke wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:36 pm First off, Sean had a bad game... no doubt about it.
Second, I honestly think the offense stayed extremely vanilla with the play calling until they had to step it up in the 4th. Bohl and OC didn't want to show too much and thought they could get away with it. Then late they decided to open it up a little.
I could absolutely be wrong, but I'm going to reserve judgements for a week or two before I start calling for people's heads.
-
laxwyo
- Bronco-Buster
- Posts: 9500
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:27 am
- Location: Rock Springs, WY
- Has liked: 137 times
- Been liked: 147 times
Agreed. And Sean being a great runner also helped flip those numbersLawPoke wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:39 am We will continue to face 8-9 man fronts until we prove we can throw the ball consistently. It doesn't take a rocket doc to evaluate the film and see that teams know that the way to beat us is to sell out to stop the run and let the chips fall where they will against our passing game.
IMHO, the only path forward is to use our intermediate passing game (and not the lateral BS that never works for us) with play action to back off the LBs and safeties. It is a basic numbers game - 8-9 guys in the box = too many guys for our linemen to block to maintain any chance at a consistent running game. It requires nearly every OLineman to beat both their guy at the line and then get to the second level and beat that guy - or for our RB to make at least two guys miss. We have to flip the numbers in our favor and the only way to do that is to force some of those LBs, safeties and CBs into coverage - at least 5-10 yards off the LOS.
W-Y, Until I Die!