• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!

Coaching

W

WyomingAg

Well-known member
I have to say I have been disappointed in the coaching decisions this season.

The play calling for the majority of the season has been crap. It started out like crap again today, with the usual first down sweep for a loss of yards. But then actually improved at the end of the first quarter till the fourth quarter. Then terrible play calling again at the end of the 4th quarter. Why are we running the ball on 2nd and 12 with 3 minutes left in the game down 10? They really thought the usual sweep, this time for 3 yards, was the best possible play with 3 minutes left in the game down two scores.

Then we have the timeout situation. We leave two timeouts in the 1st half by kneeling out the clock while behind in the game, taking all the momentum out of the crowd. I realize there was a slim chance that we would get far enough to get a field goal, but to just concede its a losing strategy in my opinion. How much would 3 points have helped us in the final 10 minutes of the 4th quarter? Then we waste two timeouts mid-4th quarter just because of a bad spot. Down by 10 or 17 at that point, there is no reason to waste timeouts you are going to need.

Then we have the team preparation. We come out in the game and immediatley have multiple false starts, illegal substitutions, and look unfocused. We clearly need to change the way we prepare before a game because we looked like we didn't even want to be there at the beginning of this game.

In my opinion this loss falls squarely on the shoulders of the coaches. I found I was scratching my head at numerous play calls and decisions in this game as usual.
 
WyomingAg said:
I have to say I have been disappointed in the coaching decisions this season.

The play calling for the majority of the season has been crap. It started out like crap again today, with the usual first down sweep for a loss of yards. But then actually improved at the end of the first quarter till the fourth quarter. Then terrible play calling again at the end of the 4th quarter. Why are we running the ball on 2nd and 12 with 3 minutes left in the game down 10? They really thought the usual sweep, this time for 3 yards, was the best possible play with 3 minutes left in the game down two scores.

Then we have the timeout situation. We leave two timeouts in the 1st half by kneeling out the clock while behind in the game, taking all the momentum out of the crowd. I realize there was a slim chance that we would get far enough to get a field goal, but to just concede its a losing strategy in my opinion. How much would 3 points have helped us in the final 10 minutes of the 4th quarter? Then we waste two timeouts mid-4th quarter just because of a bad spot. Down by 10 or 17 at that point, there is no reason to waste timeouts you are going to need.

Then we have the team preparation. We come out in the game and immediatley have multiple false starts, illegal substitutions, and look unfocused. We clearly need to change the way we prepare before a game because we looked like we didn't even want to be there at the beginning of this game.

In my opinion this loss falls squarely on the shoulders of the coaches. I found I was scratching my head at numerous play calls and decisions in this game as usual.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your opinion on the playcalling in the 2nd half. The option read that ACS gave to AA everytime in the 1st half payed big dividends once ACS started running it on the read. Then it opened up AA on some big runs. Couple of TD's on the option read because we took some lumps early in the game. ACS probably should have taken it a couple of those times in the 1st half. We lost on big plays on play action passes. Our DL did well and we didn't need our DB's biting on the playaction. Our CB's didn't get great help down the field. ACS's pick hurt quite a bit, but we had it until a great call by SDSU on 2nd and short. That's what happens when you get good yards on 1st down. Wish we could have done something after the onside kick. I feel we are still a better team in the league, losing 3 close games to AF, BYU and SDSU. Last year could have easily been the same as this year, but we won a lot of close games.
 
I actually liked the offensive play calling today. The zone read can work if ACS makes the right choices like he did today. The D play calling is what I am frustrated with today. I wish we would blitz instead of giving the qb six seconds in the pocket, no type of coverage can cover wr's for six seconds.
 
I disagree with your opinion on the playcalling in the 2nd half. The option read that ACS gave to AA everytime in the 1st half payed big dividends once ACS started running it on the read. Then it opened up AA on some big runs. Couple of TD's on the option read because we took some lumps early in the game. ACS probably should have taken it a couple of those times in the 1st half. We lost on big plays on play action passes. Our DL did well and we didn't need our DB's biting on the playaction. Our CB's didn't get great help down the field. ACS's pick hurt quite a bit, but we had it until a great call by SDSU on 2nd and short. That's what happens when you get good yards on 1st down. Wish we could have done something after the onside kick. I feel we are still a better team in the league, losing 3 close games to AF, BYU and SDSU. Last year could have easily been the same as this year, but we won a lot of close games.
Click to expand...

I liked the play calling overall better today. But honestly how are we trying to win running the ball on a 2nd and long with 3 minutes left in the game down by 10. And yes, the read option worked better today some of the time, but it killed us in the 1st quarter again and we were lucky to keep it within 6 during that time. After 9 games and it only working 2 out of 36 quarters, I would much rather seeing us pass the ball at the end of the game down by 10 than run it. I also have to disagree that we are a better team in the league because we lost close to AF, BYU, SDSU. We were also destroyed by TCU, and Utah, automatically putting us in the bottom half. Call me uninpressed losing by 10 at home to SDSU, I'll consider us a better in the league when we start winning games without miraculous 4th quarter comebacks, and actually showing some fight against the top teams.
 
We need to actually blitz more. The few times we did, their QB was quickly pressured and threw bad passes. We stuffed the run, but those long passes killed it. So did those PIs that were called that looked questonable to me, as I didn't even see any contact made on them. Might have been my position in the stands, but that's me. I guess we'll go 5-7 this year.
 
My guess is 4-8. I think we drop one more this season. Don't know who, but I think we slip up against one of them
 
WyomingAg said:
My guess is 4-8. I think we drop one more this season. Don't know who, but I think we slip up against one of them
Click to expand...
Of the remaining teams, only CSU has shown signs of life, but got steam rolled by all teams not named UNLV and Idaho.
 
Offensive line is still a problem for this team, as are dumb penalties. This comes down to coaching and discipline. Playcalling was good today, the team really seemed to know what they were doing.
 
The disasterous play call was putting ACS in the shotgun with 1st and goal from the 1! Whoever made that call should be hung by his nuts from the flagpole.

Other than that, I thought the play calling was pretty good. The onside kick to start the second half was a great call. I think the problem is execution. We have the makings of a world class group of bullfighters on the offensive line. Ole!
 
I think the play calling was better today than any other game. Who would have thought, throw the ball towards the end zone instead of sideways and score points. I do hate that once again we don't bother trying to score at the end of the first half. A couple screens or other low percentage turnover plays and who knows, maybe we break one. That is playing not to win.
 
I liked the play calling overall better today. But honestly how are we trying to win running the ball on a 2nd and long with 3 minutes left in the game down by 10. And yes, the read option worked better today some of the time, but it killed us in the 1st quarter again and we were lucky to keep it within 6 during that time. After 9 games and it only working 2 out of 36 quarters, I would much rather seeing us pass the ball at the end of the game down by 10 than run it. I also have to disagree that we are a better team in the league because we lost close to AF, BYU, SDSU. We were also destroyed by TCU, and Utah, automatically putting us in the bottom half. Call me uninpressed losing by 10 at home to SDSU, I'll consider us a better in the league when we start winning games without miraculous 4th quarter comebacks, and actually showing some fight against the top teams.[/quote]

When the D is expecting you to pass you try a run, just like WYO did against byu in the fourth with the herron run. It works and it doesn't . 50/50 chance.
 
When the D is expecting you to pass you try a run, just like WYO did against byu in the fourth with the herron run. It works and it doesn't . 50/50 chance.
Click to expand...

When the clock has 3 minutes left, and you only have one timeout and have 50 yards to go and then have to score a second time, the only chance you have to win is using as little time as possible. Running the ball keeps the clock running. Even with the defense expecting pass we should be trying to pass to keep time on the clock. It might be a 50/50 chance on the play, but the chances of winning the game down by 2 scores and running the ball with only one timeout and little time on the clock are much worse. I would rather see us play to win then cover the spread and lose close.
 
bladerunnr said:
The disasterous play call was putting ACS in the shotgun with 1st and goal from the 1! Whoever made that call should be hung by his nuts from the flagpole.
Click to expand...

This.
 
WyomingAg said:
When the D is expecting you to pass you try a run, just like WYO did against byu in the fourth with the herron run. It works and it doesn't . 50/50 chance.
Click to expand...

When the clock has 3 minutes left, and you only have one timeout and have 50 yards to go and then have to score a second time, the only chance you have to win is using as little time as possible. Running the ball keeps the clock running. Even with the defense expecting pass we should be trying to pass to keep time on the clock. It might be a 50/50 chance on the play, but the chances of winning the game down by 2 scores and running the ball with only one timeout and little time on the clock are much worse. I would rather see us play to win then cover the spread and lose close.
Click to expand...

And you get exactly what happened at byu, four batted down passes in a row. I take it you must not coach. Because if you did you'd understand the relevance of a two dimensional offense. And how to use that as quickly as possible while going by what the def gives you.
 
No I'm not a coach. I do realize the relevance of a two-dimensional offense. But you do realize that running the ball uses clock? I take it you disagree with the rules of football which say the clock runs more when you run the ball and less when you pass the ball. Hence, when you are ahead you "run the clock out." Thats the whole reason we tried to run the ball more against the top rated teams to shorten the game because running the ball keeps the clock running. I may not be a coach, but I understand when you run the ball the clock runs.

How exactly did running the ball help us in time management to try and win the game. You are right if I was a coach needing two scores, with one timeout, and only 3 minutes to go I would not be calling running plays which eat up tons of clock especially since we do the double play calling where the offense gets a new play at the line of scrimmage. So after that run the clock keeps going. We line up, don't hike the ball, use some 20 seconds to call a new play. How is that trying to win?

You already pointed out in the BYU game that we ran a running play and it worked to get a score, but that was earlier in the 4th quarter. In that the game the clock was still a factor at the end of the game, hense the need to only pass at the end of the game. Are you saying you would have rather had our running offense which is rated at the very bottom of Division 1 football, try to run it on that 4th down play where the pass was batted down? At least at BYU since we were only passing the ball at the end of the game we had a chance to win with a good pass. This game we didn't even have a chance to win because the clock didn't have enough time left anyway.
 
WyomingAg said:
How exactly did running the ball help us in time management to try and win the game.
Click to expand...

Well, you heard the commentators. "If Herron stays outside a little bit longer instead of making that cut - he's still running." With other words, I'd say that play call was a good one - execution wasn't.
 
WyomingAg said:
No I'm not a coach. I do realize the relevance of a two-dimensional offense. But you do realize that running the ball uses clock? I take it you disagree with the rules of football which say the clock runs more when you run the ball and less when you pass the ball. Hence, when you are ahead you "run the clock out." Thats the whole reason we tried to run the ball more against the top rated teams to shorten the game because running the ball keeps the clock running. I may not be a coach, but I understand when you run the ball the clock runs.

How exactly did running the ball help us in time management to try and win the game. You are right if I was a coach needing two scores, with one timeout, and only 3 minutes to go I would not be calling running plays which eat up tons of clock especially since we do the double play calling where the offense gets a new play at the line of scrimmage. So after that run the clock keeps going. We line up, don't hike the ball, use some 20 seconds to call a new play. How is that trying to win?

You already pointed out in the BYU game that we ran a running play and it worked to get a score, but that was earlier in the 4th quarter. In that the game the clock was still a factor at the end of the game, hense the need to only pass at the end of the game. Are you saying you would have rather had our running offense which is rated at the very bottom of Division 1 football, try to run it on that 4th down play where the pass was batted down? At least at BYU since we were only passing the ball at the end of the game we had a chance to win with a good pass. This game we didn't even have a chance to win because the clock didn't have enough time left anyway.
Click to expand...
You make some good points, but hear me on this. When you have success running the ball (which we did today) you use that late in the game. If the D has a pass heavy coverage out on the field, your chances of moving the ball down the field are worse than what we did today. One thing you know as an OC is that you have plenty of ways to stop the clock. Be it a timeout, run out of bounds, incomplete pass, first down or even a spike. You know that three minutes is an eternity. And if the D is expecting a pass, then why be labeled a bad OC and throw into their coverage and risk a turnover. Surprise them with a run, even 3 yards will get them to come up a bit into the box, which opens up your passing lanes again. It's common sense. Unless you're Air Force who only runs or some team like Texas Tech who only passes but excels at the one dimensional offense then you need to use your entire arsenal on the field. If you want to do nothing but pass when we're already down, you better get Vic Koening back, because he specialized in that...And we know his success rate, don't we?
And no, being the OC that I am I would have passed on fourth down at BYU and hoped for the best. I was stating that I would not have run four passes in a row.
 
Just a few too many mistakes. They did a great job stuffing hillman, but looked like they forgot sampson and brown are two of the best receivers in the conference. The first play i knew it was sampson's first long td, and i saw it coming. they brought gary into the box, and there was no one back there, and for all the things Pro does well, he does bite hard on play action a lot of the time. The other big problem was field position. sdsu scored 20 points on drives that started inside wyoming territory, and 2 of them were inside the 20, and that doesn't help at all. Despite the loss, for me, this looked like the most complete game wyoming has played all year. They just didn't make enough plays. Hopefully they finish the season strong by winning out, which is definitely possible. They need to remember how to win, and get some confidence back heading into the offseason.
 
Asmodeanreborn said:
WyomingAg said:
How exactly did running the ball help us in time management to try and win the game.
Click to expand...

Well, you heard the commentators. "If Herron stays outside a little bit longer instead of making that cut - he's still running." With other words, I'd say that play call was a good one - execution wasn't.
Click to expand...

Actually didn't hear the commentators, was at the game. But at the game it didn't look like that play could go much farther than it did. I was actually happy when Herron and Alexander made the cuts to go up field this game, because usually they try to go too far outside and lose yards. At least today they seemed to make better cuts and actually get positive yards.
 
WyomingAg said:
No I'm not a coach. I do realize the relevance of a two-dimensional offense. But you do realize that running the ball uses clock? I take it you disagree with the rules of football which say the clock runs more when you run the ball and less when you pass the ball. Hence, when you are ahead you "run the clock out." Thats the whole reason we tried to run the ball more against the top rated teams to shorten the game because running the ball keeps the clock running. I may not be a coach, but I understand when you run the ball the clock runs.

How exactly did running the ball help us in time management to try and win the game. You are right if I was a coach needing two scores, with one timeout, and only 3 minutes to go I would not be calling running plays which eat up tons of clock especially since we do the double play calling where the offense gets a new play at the line of scrimmage. So after that run the clock keeps going. We line up, don't hike the ball, use some 20 seconds to call a new play. How is that trying to win?

You already pointed out in the BYU game that we ran a running play and it worked to get a score, but that was earlier in the 4th quarter. In that the game the clock was still a factor at the end of the game, hense the need to only pass at the end of the game. Are you saying you would have rather had our running offense which is rated at the very bottom of Division 1 football, try to run it on that 4th down play where the pass was batted down? At least at BYU since we were only passing the ball at the end of the game we had a chance to win with a good pass. This game we didn't even have a chance to win because the clock didn't have enough time left anyway.
Click to expand...

Unless you are running routes to the sidelines, a 7 yard rec uses as much clock as a 7 yard run. I was happy with the calls. Under a minute is definitely sideline routes unless you have more timeouts. I thought we had plenty of time to move down the field without passing every down. It worked well, why not run it when they are thinking pass? In the end, it didn't come down to one play really. We got burned down field by some serious WR's. We scored enough points to win most games but today. Maybe we can blow out the final three teams and go into the offseason on a high note.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top