what went wrong

Mean'n'Green07 · September 18, 2005

Some basic questions

1. Why doesnt jamario get the ball more

2. Why is it we have a QB who cant hit the broad side of a barn

3. Did our O-line think every play the blocking scheme was for a screen?

September 18, 2005

1. Why doesnt jamario get the ball more

>> Check it out man. Cobbs only had 17 carries. The offense couldn't do anything. Not even when Thomas carried it.

2. Why is it we have a QB who cant hit the broad side of a barn

>> Hall even had a hard time with that. The coaches learned what Hall could and couldn't do and worked with it. I want to see the play call at least try something ... that maybe could work. A WR toss to Branch isn't going to get it done. Never. Ever.

3. Did our O-line think every play the blocking scheme was for a screen?

>> I think so.

gksmith · September 20, 2005

I don't have the exact stats, but in the last 4 years UNT did not throw the ball much anyway.

I was shocked on the games Hall threw more then 15 times in a game.

Dickey is a "Run first" coach. That isn't bad. Nebraska made a living for decades on that. The bad part of being a running team is if you get behind, it is hard to catch up running the ball.

Travis · September 20, 2005

The majority of the passes that were thrown in the Tulsa game were just little tosses to the side in hopes that they would get some yards after catch. We tried very little down field. And twice we got picked off when we did. It would be nice to have a QB that can throw it somewhere further than the line of scrimmage. It would be nice to have some plays designed to do that as well. Especially when there is 1 on 1 coverage.

Cerebus · September 20, 2005

It would be nice to have some plays designed to do that as well.
←

I'de just like to point out that even at North Texas, there is usually more than 1 reciever running a pattern at a time.

So even if the ball doesn't get thrown deep, that doesn't mean the play wasn't designed to try and get the guy running deep the ball.

Monkeypox · September 20, 2005

The majority of the passes that were thrown in the Tulsa game were just little tosses to the side in hopes that they would get some yards after catch. We tried very little down field.
←

And these plays are nonsense in our offensive scheme. You only throw those little passes when they're playing off and respecting your passing game. When they've got nine in the box and playing your WR tight, throwing a screen pass or a swing pass is a negligible gain waiting to happen. It's counter-productive to our offense. We HAVE to be able to hit wide receivers down the field to make them pay for playing it tight. If your QB can't PHYSICALLY make the throws, then you're in trouble to begin with.

MeanGreen61 · September 20, 2005

Some basic questions
1. Why doesnt jamario get the ball more
2. Why is it we have a QB who cant hit the broad side of a barn
3. Did our O-line think every play the blocking scheme was for a screen?
←

Cerebus · September 20, 2005

"What went wrong" is that the scheme to overload our zone run, which several teams have used against us in the pass (Air Force, Memphis, USM) is now being used by EVERYONE.

I'll try and write some more on this after I get out of work tonight.

Travis · September 20, 2005

"What went wrong" is that the scheme to overload our zone run, which several teams have used against us in the pass (Air Force, Memphis, USM) is now being used by EVERYONE.
I'll try and write some more on this after I get out of work tonight.
←

perhaps a new scheme then, eh?

Monkeypox · September 20, 2005

perhaps a new scheme then, eh?
←

now you're just being silly.

FirefightnRick · September 21, 2005

I think we should throw to the tightend more. Since 2002 we have thrown to the tightend exactly 69 times for 1037 yards. During those years we had one of the best sets of hands in Andy Blount but we only threw to him 53 times in four seasons inlcuding 1 time the entire 2002 year. Blount averaged two catches per game those three years.

As we continued to throw to him more our offensive production went up substantially. He had 22 catches for 415 yards in '03 and 30 catches for 427 yards in '04. I know he had that one catch in '01, possibly more, but I cannot find the stats for that year. But the point is, the more we used him and the other tightends(Gardner, Muenchow, Davidson) the more yards our offense produced. In 2003 our tightend position averaged 2 catches per game but had 19 yards per catch. I know our system is to get them to creep up to hit them deep once or twice a game, but it's time for that thought to go. We have seen three straight games now where the defense knows what is coming. Our tightend, Davidson currently has one catch for 6 yards. Yet we got to watch Tulsa's tightend run all over us all night long. Since Meager has a tough time with the deep ball I would utilize the tightend more on the shorter range passes.

Did anyone hear Johnny Quinn's interview Monday night?

He mentioned one of the things he and (I assume he was talking about his reciever counterparts) the guys must continue to work on and get better at is their blocks downfield and when our young QB's do get them the ball they will know he and the guys will catch it. Here' s one of the most talented recievers we have had since probably Troy Redwine and he's got to go out and worry about run blocking? It just doesn't sit well with me. I'll never accept it. I'll never accept the fact we have this much talent and speed and 4 veteran linemen and tightends to boot and we can't produce any better than what I have seen the past two weeks.

If you go with our single tightend set, Muzzy and Quinn split wide, bring SPJMO and the Emerald Express together in the backfield, send one back in motion, send the tightend out on a route of any kind off the line, YOU GET:

6 defenders in the box for the other back to deal with facing a base 4-3 defense. 6 MINIMUM! Not 9. When one back goes in motion either a LB or the extra corner must come up to cover, and right there the advantage goes to US. If they roll over the safety to help on either side then the tightend and one reciever is single covered. Again, advantage US.

I thought this was what we were going to see this year? I thought this was why we were to be so excited with all the hype having these two backs in the same backfield? Surely the national media didn't chose to cover NT so much this year to just see history made or to see if we would try to power run against 9 men in the box.............AGAIN?

Put the ball where they are not. Give them something to worry about instead of running straight at them trying to prove your system works when it isn't. Sure, if either back can break it in the first half and keep them honest, ok. But once it's not working, change. We saw first hand in the N.O. against Southern Miss what happens when you don't change and adjust.

There's no way with NT having those two backs we should only be averaging 200 yards a game against the two teams we played. No way.

Just my 2 cents.

Rick

Edited September 22, 2005 by FirefightnRick

keith · September 21, 2005

Is it insane to have Cobbs AND Thomas in the backfield at the same time and then send Patrick in motion. I mean someone has to leave the "box" and follow him, don't they? Either you spread out the D a little for JT or you get Patrick in man coverage in the flat.

Keith

*Edit: Added my reply before I read the entire thread and now see that you said pretty much the same thing Rick. I mean this isn't rocket science, is it? We were supposed to have an "explosive" offense this year. Use the weapons we have and it just might be.

Edited September 21, 2005 by keith

FirefightnRick · September 21, 2005

Is it insane

No, it's common sense. See Auburn's 2004 National Championship season as a reference.

Rick

Edited September 21, 2005 by FirefightnRick

Coach · September 21, 2005

Good receiver blocking downfield = big plays. I don't have a problem with Quinn's comments. If he feels as though if they had done a better job blocking there could have been better production, then I am glad he is aware it needs to be worked on.

I don't know why it shocked everyone Saturday that our offense looked like that. It has not been a well rounded effective offense for a while. If it were not for Jamario making huge plays out of nothing, last year would have been abysmal. Remember the FAU game, or the second half of Baylor? That was last week. Unless things change (schemes, players stepping up), expect more of the same..that is, until we dominate the vaunted ASU defense and Coach Dickey wins Coach of the Year again.

FirefightnRick · September 22, 2005

I understand that, and really, what else is he going to say? His job is to block down field in this system. You can block downfield till you've blocked up a house and it does you no good when your running back is averaging only 2.8 yards per carry and never gets to the point where your bocking in the first place.

Rick

Edited September 22, 2005 by FirefightnRick

centex eagle · September 22, 2005

you have to be able to throw the ball and throw it better than we have in the past. Good teams can stop a great running attack with only a fair or poor passing game. Hall was a good looking leader, but even that passing was not enough to beat the big boys and their athletes. Look at out of conference games over the years.