I apologize to all for the late timing of this. I also apologize if this seems a bit disjointed and choppy. It was written in several different sittings. I should be back to work Thursday morning and able to field questions that night.
First things first. If you choose not to be able to watch the game (for whatever inexcusable reason) don't text me asking for the score (Becher). The Opry isn't even in the same universal context as Notre Dame football and all guilty of such a terrible crime against humanity (not to mention your alma mater) should be drawn, quartered, hung, and shot. Ok, that said, let's move on.
Many of you in the past have "accused" me of being cynical. My analysis of Saturday's game will not change that perception. For those of you who say that our defense is much improved I say false and will give several reasons to support said statement. I'm going to write my comments in four sections below. The first section will be general college football interests around the country. We will then move to offense, then defense, and finally a sort of summary "where do we go from here" section.
Around the Country
For those of you who watched a lot of football Saturday you probably saw the same things I did. Troy Smith is that good. His accuracy is improved over last year. The long ball to Ginn doesn't support that, the post to Gonzalez certainly does. I wouldn't be surprised to see them run away with the game in Texas next week. Their defense didn't lose a beat from last year and improved its overall speed. And perhaps the best thing OSU has going is that Tressel finally loosened up and opened up the offense. He went for the jugular against NIU. Texas also looked very good. But let's remember, NIU and North Texas aren't Georgia Tech. Michigan didn't look very good against Vanderbilt. Henne must get much more consistent if they are going to have a good year. Woodley is a manchild. And last but not least, Tennessee looked pretty good against Cal. Granted, Cal's defensive coordinator is an idiot and their defense can't tackle, but the offensive confidence they needed and got from this game will do wonders for them in the future. It's amazing what a competent QB coach can do for a team. I wish we still had Cutcliffe. It would allow Weis to focus more on the team operations. Finally, I hope we don't have to play FSU or Miami. If anyone watched that game Monday night it wasn't difficult to recognize the undeniable fact that their defenses are light years ahead of anything we have. They are faster, stronger, and better coached. If you think going up against Georgia Tech was tough, these guys made them look like amateurs.
Offense
The first question everyone wants and answer to is "Where the heck is our Heisman Trophy winning QB?" All in all, Brady didn't have a horrible game. He didn't play great, but he spent a great deal of the day on his back too. It's tough, no matter how good you are, to play well when you are constantly being harassed and hit. Why do you think it was such a priority for Weis to get recruits in who could "get after the QB"? To be honest, the offensive showing reminded me much more of the Willingham West Coast short dink and dunk passing game than anything from Weis last year. It was almost like he had no confidence in us. We seldom spread the field, we didn't go deep often, we couldn't run a screen, we didn't use max protection enough, and where was the play action?
It looked like Georgia Tech took a page out of the BYU defensive playbook from last year. Weis tried to use the same type of things to beat it. Tenuta looked well prepared for them. Textbook offensive play calling says that against a multiple blitz package defense you do three primary things. First, you run screen passes and draws to slow the rush. Second, you isolate one on one matches whether it be through quick hitch/arrow routes or deep plays down the field (if you can protect your QB for long enough). Third, you run right at the defense. They seemed to be prepared for the screens, we didn't win the one on one battles on the outside or down the field, and it didn't even seem like we tried to run it right at them. Georgia Tech had a lot of speed on the defensive side of the ball. The thing is, rarely can you be fast and big. Run it down their throat. And why could we handle the multiple blitzing BYU threw at us but not that of Georgia Tech? Has our offensive line play degraded that much? We returned four of the same five from last year, it shouldn't be that much different. Weis threw the ball a lot, just like he did against BYU, and employed a lot of three step drops which is really what you want to do. However, the results were starkly different. Does this mean a fast, athletic defense that blitzes from all over the field is the key to slowing us down? He had better find out, and soon, because everyone in the country is going to watch the game film from this one to understand how to stop us.
Why didn't we spread the field more? Is it because we don't have the receivers or is it because we wanted to protect Brady. If it is the former, we are in trouble. One of the distinct advantages one has in college football is that it is much easier to have five decent wide receivers than it is to have five decent defensive backs. In fact, I would contend that there aren't five decent defensive backs on the same team in the country (certainly we are included in that). Weis said Grimes had secured the third wide receiver spot but I didn't see him out there that much.
This game, at least offensively, really reminded me of Michigan last year. We had a few good plays throughout the game but minus one or two drives we couldn't seem to put it together consistently enough to get something going. Michigan doesn't employ the same type of blitz all the time from anywhere on the field mentality but they do possess a very fast and athletic defense. Let's hope Ron English is too young to understand what Tenuta was doing. Let's also hope Brock Spack wasn't paying attention Saturday because I'm sure he's just waiting for payback on Weis from last year's absolute manhandling.
I guess my primary concern about this game is the following: Did Weis get too cocky? Did he think he had the X's and O's advantage in too large a degree? Has his ability to outwit, out-react, and out-gameplan the opposing defensive coordinators ceased to exist? Or is this just an aberration? Is this simply a combination of a really fast/athletic defense and a very uncommon defensive mentality and strategy? These questions will likely play out sooner than later because Weis really didn't have an answer for what Tenuta was doing on Saturday. I'm also concerned he has let them hear too much how good they are. It didn't look like overconfidence out there on Saturday but it did look like we were too calm, didn't understand the level of effort we would need to win, and didn't play nasty like we are supposed to. It looked like we walked in knowing we were going to win but without the business-like approach we need to be able to win. Weis better go back to the drawing board. The psyche of this team is at a crossroads.
On a better note, the special teams (minus field goals), looked very good. Our return game is improved, Price's punts were excellent, and Zibi hasn't lost a beat (minus not letting it bounce on our own 5 yard line late in the game).
This was one of the most horribly officiated games I've ever seen. It went both ways (the Wheeler hit on Brady wasn't a personal foul) but it hurt us far more than them.
Finally, we looked like a damn junior high team out there will all the freakin' penalties and poor special teams play. I can't believe we had so many penalties and that so many killed big plays for us. That has to stop. It's uncharacteristic of a Weis team and there is no excuse for it. And since when can a Division I football team not make a 45 yard field goal 50% of the time? We had better find an answer to that soon or we will be going for a lot more fourth downs. We also couldn't get our defense out on the field after a timeout. That's almost as bad as a Willingham coached team getting a penalty for illegal participation (12 men on the field) after a timeout two years ago.
It seems like we have found a replacement for Mark May dissing on us. Bob Davie, please stand up. He isn't as obvious, but listen, it's there.
On to the specifics...
Rhema had a great game. He looked really good out there minus that one critical drop on third down (catch the ball with your hands, not your body) and the holding penalty which was a) not a penalty and b) inconsequential to the play. Weis said if they doubled Samardzija McKnight would have a field day and he did. While they didn't double Samardzija they played over and under him all day which shaded that side of the field. One of the few times he was one-on-one Brady found him. The others Brady overthrew him. We need to go to him more down the field. He just catches those unbelievable, shouldn't be caught balls.
Darius had a good game but he missed at least two blatantly open holes that he could have hit and picked up large chunks of yardage. He looks a step slower but that could be because Georgia Tech was that fast. He still consistently proves to be one of the best all around backs in the game.
Schwaap looked good as usual. I'm surprised we are motioning him out wide as much as we are but in practice drills he has looked good catching the ball. He still just lights people up on iso plays despite a few early misses.
Carlson had a good game catching the ball but didn't bring the dominating blocking he has been advertised to possess. Freeman was the other way around. He looked good blocking but not as fleet of foot as you'd like.
The offensive line didn't play well and it wasn't just the freshman. It took us a few games to understand, handle, and play well against zone blitzing teams. Do we have to go through the learning curve all over again?
I will say this for him, Brady is tough. But he was off all night. This was never more evident than when Samardzija ran a simple out route to get a first down, was open, and Brady threw it down in the dirt. He had happy feet all night long...make a damn decision. That is a simple, textbook play, and he has to make them. One would think a Heisman Trophy candidate could. I'm very concerned about how he played under pressure. We don't have the defense to make up for average offensive performances. I'll give him the guts and grit award, that QB draw at the end of the first half took a lot of balls. But it may also not have been the right call since not getting the touchdown would have likely eliminated our chance to score. Compared to the other Heisman Trophy candidates of the day he didn't look good but they all played weak teams anyway. Of course, his statistics weren't that bad and he did come through in clutch situations. It was just that the efficient, poised quarterback we were used to seeing last season was gone. Against OSU Brady looked flustered quite a bit. Between that game and this it seems that all you have to do is apply pressure to throw him off his game.
We didn't have any turnovers, that was a positive.
We didn't use as many three wide sets as I thought we would. Against a team that blitzes from a lot of positions you would like to spread the field. I'm not sure if this was a function of not having wide outs Charlie is comfortable with or he just not wanting to do it. Weis could have wanted to give more protective looks of Brady. This, in and of itself, is puzzling considering he didn't go max protect often.
My primary concern on offense is that we can't seem to move the ball consistently and effectively against athletic defenses. I always believed Weis would have a decisive edge on other defensive coordinators. Granted, that only makes up for so much. You have to have the athletes to go against the other teams and you have to get your players to play to their maximum potential. Once you have those things, you will compete at a high level on a consistent basis. After last year everyone thought Weis was an offensive guru. The last two games (and the Michigan game from last year) lend evidence to the contrary. I'm concerned that after a year of game film defensive coordinators have caught on. It seems unlikely that this is true given his track record in the NFL as being the most unpredictable offensive coordinator, but this isn't about being predictive. This isn't, however, about being predictable. This is about defenses finding a specific type of game plan that Weis can't adjust to. It seems evident to me that if you have a multiple blitzing package, and athletic, fast defense, and are prepared to defend against the screen you can beat us. Not many teams fit into that bill, but the good ones, the USC's, OSU's, etc. certainly do.
We did manage to control the clock and have three (I count the very last one) time consuming and determined drives.
I will say that Charlie did seem to want to use a much more ball control offense in the second half somewhat deflating the offensive numbers. This is probably for two reasons. First, I'm sure he felt the Georgia Tech defense was wearing out. Second, it was probably part of his strategy to keep our defense fresh and Calving Johnson off the field.
Charlie really chapped my hide in his Sunday press conference when he talked about how he didn't try and get the ball into any particular players hands. I understand why he said this. His intention was to impart to the reporter asking the question that he makes defenses defend the whole field and every player he has on offense. That's great. But the bottom line is if you have a Reggie Bush, you find ways to get him the ball. If Munir Prince is as good as advertised Weis needs to find ways, even creative ways, to get him the freakin' ball.
Defense
Despite poor tackling on the outside in certain instances the defense played relatively well. They gave up less than 260 yards and only 140 passing. Couple that with 10 points and the comparison to last year's averages are starkly positive (265 yards per game passing, 132 yards per game rushing, and 24.5 points per game). Even more positive is the fact that the halftime adjustments were very good. We effectively shut Calvin Johnson down in the second half and controlled the game much better. I believe they had less than 70 yards of offense in the second half. Additionally, our defense held them to 2 of 10 on third downs. Do that every game and you're going to win almost regardless of the offensive performance. Finally, we only gave up two really big plays. This is primarily due to better safety play.
That said, let's not go too far. Georgia Tech isn't exactly an offensive juggernaut. There is a reason Calvin Johnson makes tremendous catches, Reggie Ball can't throw. He is inconsistent at best and the team as a whole isn't anything to speak of. Therefore, in my opinion, we shouldn't really draw any conclusions about how good our defense is just yet. This is even more true given the fact that Georgia Tech didn't really try to go to Johnson as often as they should.
On to the specifics...
Our number one priority in the off-season should have been to get pressure on opposing quarterbacks with only the front four. Well, until the latter part of the game we didn't do that. I am particularly disappointed given the fact that all I heard all spring camp was how "the defensive line is going to be turned loose." The only positive I saw was that Maurice Richardson looks to be the outside edge rusher on obvious passing situations we have lacked in the past few years. The guy has a motor, is quick, is physical, and wants to kill the quarterback.
Our linebackers showed flashes of good and bad. We allowed 4.2 yards per carry. This number is somewhat inflated due to Ball's runs but that is another topic of concern. Our LB's, particularly Vernaglia and Thomas (Mitchell), didn't seem to be able to shed blocks and get to the ball and couldn't take on the very few iso plays I saw them run. In fact, Vernaglia and Mitchell looked like our secondary did last year, slow to react to the plays and unsure of what to do given the particular game situations. If I was another team I'd line up three wide in an offset I and run iso off tackle plays all day long. The three wide would get us in nickel and the iso would put the fullback one-on-one with our linebackers. I just can't see us winning that very often. On the bright side, I saw Travis Thomas run down someone from all the way across the field and make a tremendous tackle. Brandon Hoyt, for all of his greatness, would never have been able to make that play. There were times we showed an increase in speed at the position that were very positive for us. The other reason that 4.2 number could be high is because of all the attention we paid to Johnson. Sometimes you just have to pick your poison.
It seemed like, once again, we couldn't handle a mobile QB when he did choose to run. I would have run that inside read option 15 more times if I was Nix. Fortunately for us, he's an idiot and didn't decide to spread us out, run multiple inside reads, QB rollouts, bootlegs, and spread options. It likely isn't in his playbook.
Duke and Zibi played infinitely better in pass support, recognizing play action, and covering the deep ball. There's a good reason they didn't go down field too often. That's mostly because we played the long ball better. I would argue that fewer tackles for Zibi means better play for him. Duke looked dramatically improved from last year. He missed a few tackles on the edge but I think that will improve as he gets used to playing at his new speed and breaks down sooner. The bottom line is that the weight loss looks to be a good move.
What defensive coordinator in his right mind leaves a pure freshman one-on-one with arguably the best wide receiver in the country?
Derek Landri...where are you?
I know Walls is supposed to be good but he looked like a freshman a lot on Saturday. He isn't physical enough to play major college football yet. Just listening to him talk in interviews shows that. He is entirely too timid and doesn't assert himself.
Where do we go from here?
I guess my primary concern is that I heard time and time again how we were better this year than last but it didn't show up on the field. We seemed over-confident and the sense of urgency and business-like approach I was used to seeing all of last year. My biggest complaint of Davie and Willingham is that every shortcoming was accompanied by an excuse instead of a "that's not acceptable" type of approach. Due to that we always played to the level of our competition. Now, everyone has bad days. But was this the case of a bad day or are we simply not as good as we think we are? Weis seemed eerily comfortable with how we played. I'd be all over them, especially our offensive line. We must protect Brady better.
Let's hope we get better and get better fast because we didn't look like the #2 team in the country and the new AP poll reflects it. It doesn't seem like Weis is the type of coach that would get comfortable and relaxed but the evidence Saturday was to the contrary. I don't want to edge PSU, Michigan, and MSU out, I want to flat out beat them.
The bottom line is...we survived.
0 comments:
Post a Comment