3rd and 7 with 6 min to go

[gabect]

The play no one has talked about yet...

3rd and 7 at Buffalo with 6 mins to go up 7: McEntee completes pass for a 1st down. Next series, Nick Williams plays catch, shake and run and goes in for a touchdown.

Just a quick flashback:

3rd and 9 at Rutgers with 6 mins to go up 7 last year: inside run, punt, Rutgers scores on the next two drives and wins the game.

3rd and 9 at Vandy with 6 mins to go up 7: McEntee throws a pick 6, Vandy gets momentum, wins game with a FG.

Morale of the story, the outcome doesn't make the call "right" or "wrong", it's all about "execution" as Randy taught us. Coach P admitted we "executed better" tonight.

 

[whaler11]

You are right. The pass at Vanderbilt would have been idiotic even if it worked. It's weird how the quality of opponent matters.

 

[gabect]

You are right. The pass at Vanderbilt would have been idiotic even if it worked. It's weird how the quality of opponent matters.

The read was bad, the call to pass wouldn't have been a bad idea if it converted a first down and got us another series... burning another 3 mins. But then again they gave us no reason they could score an offensive TD that night and neither did Buffalo.

 

[whaler11]

With the way Johnny had played that night, just having a pass run through your mind was a terrible thought.

And.. you are completely contradicting yourself in that second post...

 

[gabect]

With the way Johnny had played that night, just having a pass run through your mind was a terrible thought.

And.. you are completely contradicting yourself in that second post...

Not really, just blaming Johnny vs. the coaches. If the play is a pass and you don't see anyone open you don't throw into double coverage...

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Glad to see HCPP was aggressive and hasn't abandoned the pass. UConn was 3rd and 7 because run, run, run is a little too easy to contain when you know that's all they have confidence in.

 

[Sean]

I still don't think we should have passed on that play. We gave Buffalo a chance to pick 6 J-Mac and get the game just about tied. I was cringing the second I saw Johnny drop back, thankfully it worked.

 

[SAMCRO]

Let's see, one game your QB had thrown multiple INT's with several other near miss INT's. The other game he hadn't come anywhere close to throwing an INT. Situations were not apples to apples.

 

[cryjeremiah]

mmmmm..........apples.......

 

[whaler11]

The read was bad, the call to pass wouldn't have been a bad idea if it converted a first down and got us another series... burning another 3 mins. But then again they gave us no reason they could score an offensive TD that night and neither did Buffalo.

Here is your quote from post 1:
Morale of the story, the outcome doesn't make the call "right" or "wrong",

That is the complete opposite of:
the call to pass wouldn't have been a bad idea if it converted a first down

 

[gabect]

Here is your quote from post 1:
Morale of the story, the outcome doesn't make the call "right" or "wrong",

That is the complete opposite of:
the call to pass wouldn't have been a bad idea if it converted a first down

I see now, I thought you were talking about first sentence and second sentence within that post.

Thanks for calling me out, the fact is I was trying to point out the subjectivity of any of our assessments given the situation, opponent, Johnny being hot/cold, defense holding up all game, etc. I can see how it comes across as contradictory but that's the point of the post isn't it? A bad idea can seem "right" if the outcome is positive (see tonight) and vice versa (see Vandy).

 

[Waquoit]

I still don't think we should have passed on that play. We gave Buffalo a chance to pick 6 J-Mac and get the game just about tied. I was cringing the second I saw Johnny drop back, thankfully it worked.

I disagree with this line of thinking. The team is not going to improve playing inside handoff football. It was a safe pass to a wide open guy. If the O ever catches up to the game plan, we might be pretty good.

 

[Nostical]

A call can only be fully evaluated in light of the particular game circumstances. The pass call at Vandy would not have been atrocious had we been trailing by 7 and needed a first down-- even in light of JMacs shaky performance. But up 7 vs an offense that hadn't scored squat since early Q1? Horrible, inexcusable call.
Tonight, JMac was much better with his decisions and accuracy (compared to Vandy). Thus the call was rational.

 

[Waquoit]

Left unsaid was the way Shoemate dropped the shoulder and deliver the hit before going OB. That might have made the difference in getting enough yardage for the 1st down.

 

[Sean]

I disagree with this line of thinking. The team is not going to improve playing inside handoff football. It was a safe pass to a wide open guy. If the O ever catches up to the game plan, we might be pretty good.

There is no such thing as a safe pass with our QB team.

 

[businesslawyer]

A call can only be fully evaluated in light of the particular game circumstances. The pass call at Vandy would not have been atrocious had we been trailing by 7 and needed a first down-- even in light of JMacs shaky performance. But up 7 vs an offense that hadn't scored squat since early Q1? Horrible, inexcusable call.
Tonight, JMac was much better with his decisions and accuracy (compared to Vandy). Thus the call was rational.

this

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

It was also a much, much safer pass play then throwing the ball across the field.

P admitted the Vandy call was a tad too aggressive. Why do we keep bringing this up?

 

[TouchdownHusky]

I disagree with this line of thinking. The team is not going to improve playing inside handoff football. It was a safe pass to a wide open guy. If the O ever catches up to the game plan, we might be pretty good.

And that's the correct assessment. Good post.

 

[Carl Spackler]

You cannot have a balanced offense, with a passing attack and a running attack, if when you are in ideal position to use one or the other, you don't consistently do it.

What we are doing, is being consistent on offense when it comes to building a balanced attack. The offense will not improve if instead of consistent with play calling in high percentage situations with pass or run attacks we don't continue to do it.

One thing I saw in the game, and i think it might have been McEntee's scramble - was the same thing we did against ISU on the lateral and then half-back throw. McEntee was rolling out and then looked back as if to throw - and I guarantee that Buffalo looked at that play on film, and then I think, this is the one where McEntee ran for the first down after faking the throw back.

This kind of offensive play calling and game planning week to week is completely foreign to anyone that grew up on Randy Edsall offensive football.

 

[cryjeremiah]

Left unsaid was the way Shoemate dropped the shoulder and deliver the hit before going OB. That might have made the difference in getting enough yardage for the 1st down.

Yea this is the sort of thing that is hard to notice over the radio. I thought we were Div. 1...... I'm glad 11 of you got to watch it.

(not really directed at you Waquoit, just venting.)

 

[sdhusky]

It's almost like the coaches believe that if you give JM experience, he will get better?

Bizarre, I expected the new offense/philosophy/QB to be perfect from week 1.

Who knew they would get better?

 

[Waquoit]

And that's the correct assessment. Good post.

Now why does this post get 2 "likes" while the original post you agreed with gets no love? This is not helping my inner Sally Field.

 

[gabect]

That's because no one can possibly compete with the love/hate brand tdhusky has built on this board.

 

[CL82]

Waquoit when I see your avatar it looks to me that he's doing the UCONN! --HUSKIES! cheer. Think that is what Munch intended when he painted it?