George DeLeone's Wrinkles

[ZooCougar]

George DeLeone has gone on record to say that the wildcat gives our offense a wrinkle that he loves. But really what we have seen is an offense that is truly offensive.

This man is not suffering from a lack of talent, he is suffering from a terrible lack of timing and tactical acumen.

Yesterday his incompetence was on full display. The wildcat, which presupposes that the defense will be caught off guard by a sudden substitution at QB was run after a TV timeout. McCummings sat out there for a good thirty seconds and then ran right into the beaks of the awaiting Cardinal defense. Element of surprise? Nah.

Our best playmakers on offense are our TEs, yeah, really our TEs are our deep threats. I counted one pass to Delahunt.

In our one touchdown drive, he busted out plays that were almost Oregonian. The Louisville defense had no clue what to do. Where did those plays go after that drive? Under DeLeone, pays that work get used once, plays that don't get run repeatedly.

At one point in the second half we needed a first down bad, the defense was ragged and needed every second to recuperate on the sideline. Cole Wagner's foot was on the verge of needing reconstructive surgery. DeLeone lines up McCombs in the FB position in the offset I. He takes the handoff and delivers a first down, creativity after that? Nope.

We have scored a combined 3 points in the second half of all Big East games this season. We scored a combined 6 points against the worst defense in the conference (USF).

Am I being irrational in saying that this is utterly incompetent? I don't think so, the raw data and results seak for themselves. Add to that, this his history repeating itself at UConn. This cycle already happened at Syracuse.

Pasqualoni needs to break the cycle by replacing DeLeone.

 

[uconNYC]

Great victory yesterday, but anyone who watched the game carefully could see there were tons of coaching flaws - especially on the offense.

 

[Nostical]

You nailed it Zoo.

 

[metsfan2323]

Yesterday his incompetence was on full display. The wildcat, which presupposes that the defense will be caught off guard by a sudden substitution at QB was run after a TV timeout. McCummings sat out there for a good thirty seconds and then ran right into the beaks of the awaiting Cardinal defense. Element of surprise? Nah.

Thanks for bringing this up. This had me yelling at the TV. You are correct in calling this incompetent.

The handoff to McCombs last play of regulation was also another sign of madness.

As much as I would like to see the team go to a bowl, if it means GDL comes back I would rather we lose the game.

GDL has to go! He is beyond terrible.

 

[ZooCougar]

I bet nobody in the media even mentions that bit of coaching. We've been complaining about terrible football journalism in this state for years. They are truly half assed.

Thanks for bringing this up. This had me yelling at the TV. You are correct in calling this incompetent.

The handoff to McCombs last play of regulation was also another sign of madness.

As much as I would like to see the team go to a bowl, if it means GDL comes back I would rather we lose the game.

GDL has to go! He is beyond terrible.

 

[jbdphi]

Obviously you are not the only one thinking all of these things. I have to say that I disagree however when it comes to yesterday's game. Firstly, keep in mind that we actually won the game. Could we have wrapped it up well before being forced to OT? Of course but was that a fault of play calling? I don't think so.

Just to put some data into it, let's look at the play calling from the second half which is where the largest complaints stem from.
1st series:
- Incomplete pass to WR
- Run up middle for 4 yards
- Incomplete pass to WR followed by a punt
2nd series:
- Incomplete pass to TE
- Run up middle for 5 yards
- Incomplete pass to WR followed by a punt
3rd series:
- Wildcat rush for -1 yard
- Pass INT (not sure who intended receiver was but Griffin was in the area)
4th series:
- Run left for 1 yard
- Run left for 4 yards
- Incomplete pass to WR followed by a punt
5th series:
- Complete pass to WR for 4 yards
- Run for no gain
- Incomplete pass to WR followed by a punt - this is when Whitmer got knocked out of the game.

Just looking at pass versus run, the play calls seemed to be a decent mix to me. All the run up the middle crap on first down was absent. The play calling did not seem to be "sitting" on a lead or playing not to lose. In fact, I would say that our penchant for passing on first down and in general more indicated the opposite.

Our biggest problem as an offense yesterday is that we completed only 9 passes out of 28 attempts and only 1 out of 8 attempts in the five series above! As you may have seen, many of these were drops or bad throws (particularly the INT). I don't put that on GDL. Could there have been more passes attempted to the TE and the RB? Maybe but you and I have no idea what kind of coverage was being used by Louisville out there. One or two times I really tried to focus on the TE to see what was going on and he was double covered. Maybe that happened a lot because on our WR throws, I didn't see a lot of passes into double coverage. Those safeties were likely occupied elsewhere (i.e. the TE).

Stuff just wasn't working in the second half. Everyone here is obviously overtired of the phrase but plays were not being "executed", particularly in the passing game.

I think everyone here is so sensitized to the play calling from earlier this season that even when it isn't too bad on its face, we automatically come up with alternatives that we would have called that would of course have been successful because we're all so smart, aren't we?

Yeah, we won. On the road. Against a team that had lost one game all year. You can't tell on this board though. This defense played lights out. Special teams (except for Nick Williams) was fantastic. We won enough phases of the game to win the game. If you're dissatisfied that we didn't win every phase of the game, you're entitled to that opinion but I think you're just looking for a reason to be unhappy.

Just my opinion. I'm probably in the minority but I don't blame GDL for his play calling in this game.

 

[SAMCRO]

GDL logic:
Whitmer in the game, who has demonstrated he can throw the ball some, we inter-change the Wildcat.
McEntee in the game, where we were going to run most of the time to drain the clock, we run zero Wildcat.

I'm not suggesting we should have gone all Wildcat in the 4th qrtr, or at all in the game, Just don't understand the logic of using it when your starting QB was getting into a little rhythm, but not using it with your backup QB in the game.

 

[ZooCougar]

Going to respectfully disagree on several fronts.

George DeLeone is the offensive coordinator. The offensive coaches work for him, the offensive line is coached by him, he is responsible for the success and failure of the of the offense. If his receivers can't catch, if his QB can't get clear passing lanes, if his QB throws balls that are hard to catch. It's George DeLeone's responsibilty.

I said this when Edsall was here with Ambrose and Moorhead and I say it now.

Secondly, you are dealing with the wrong set of facts. The fact is that we had plays in the first half that worked, and worked well. George DeLeone abandoned them. The end around with Nick Williams. Passes in the flat to McCombs, passes to the TEs-largely abandoned save one moribund attempt in the second half.

We passed on third and short more times than I care to recount yesterday. On a day where McCombs rushed for over 140 yards we ran low percentage passing plays on third down. This makes no sense.

You know what what? We didn't neccessarily need a TD or even a FG to wrap that game up. Even one or two additional first downs could have been the difference, he couldn't even give us that.

Also, running the Wildcat after the TV timeout is simply inexcusable. To me it's just evidence that George DeLeone has a pattern in his head that he can't deviate from.

Obviously you are not the only one thinking all of these things. I have to say that I disagree however when it comes to yesterday's game. Firstly, keep in mind that we actually won the game. Could we have wrapped it up well before being forced to OT? Of course but was that a fault of play calling? I don't think so.

Just to put some data into it, let's look at the play calling from the second half which is where the largest complaints stem from.
1st series:
- Incomplete pass to WR
- Run up middle for 4 yards
- Incomplete pass to WR followed by a punt
2nd series:
- Incomplete pass to TE
- Run up middle for 5 yards
- Incomplete pass to WR followed by a punt
3rd series:
- Wildcat rush for -1 yard
- Pass INT (not sure who intended receiver was but Griffin was in the area)
4th series:
- Run left for 1 yard
- Run left for 4 yards
- Incomplete pass to WR followed by a punt
5th series:
- Complete pass to WR for 4 yards
- Run for no gain
- Incomplete pass to WR followed by a punt - this is when Whitmer got knocked out of the game.

Just looking at pass versus run, the play calls seemed to be a decent mix to me. All the run up the middle crap on first down was absent. The play calling did not seem to be "sitting" on a lead or playing not to lose. In fact, I would say that our penchant for passing on first down and in general more indicated the opposite.

Our biggest problem as an offense yesterday is that we completed only 9 passes out of 28 attempts and only 1 out of 8 attempts in the five series above! As you may have seen, many of these were drops or bad throws (particularly the INT). I don't put that on GDL. Could there have been more passes attempted to the TE and the RB? Maybe but you and I have no idea what kind of coverage was being used by Louisville out there. One or two times I really tried to focus on the TE to see what was going on and he was double covered. Maybe that happened a lot because on our WR throws, I didn't see a lot of passes into double coverage. Those safeties were likely occupied elsewhere (i.e. the TE).

Stuff just wasn't working in the second half. Everyone here is obviously overtired of the phrase but plays were not being "executed", particularly in the passing game.

I think everyone here is so ****ing sensitized to the play calling from earlier this season that even when it isn't too bad on its face, we automatically come up with alternatives that we would have called that would of course have been successful because we're all so ****ing smart, aren't we?

Yeah, we won. On the road. Against a team that had lost one game all year. You can't tell on this board though. This defense played lights out. Special teams (except for Nick Williams) was fantastic. We won enough phases of the game to win the game. If you're dissatisfied that we didn't win every phase of the game, you're entitled to that opinion but I think you're just looking for a reason to be unhappy.

Just my opinion. I'm probably in the minority but I don't blame GDL for his play calling in this game.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

This man is not suffering from a lack of talent, he is suffering from a terrible lack of timing and tactical acumen.

I am still seeing wide receivers dropping wide-open passes. I am still seeing the O-line let people through untouched. I am still seeing a young QB making young QB mistakes. I still see an RB without breakaway speed in the open field.

I'm not saying the coaching is flawless, but if you think your talent couldn't leave a little something to be desired, then I don't know what to tell you. We apparently aren't watching the same team.

 

[ZooCougar]

GDL logic:
Whitmer in the game, who has demonstrated he can throw the ball some, we inter-change the Wildcat.
McEntee in the game, where we were going to run most of the time to drain the clock, we run zero Wildcat.

I'm not suggesting we should have gone all Wildcat in the 4th qrtr, or at all in the game, Just don't understand the logic of using it when your starting QB was getting into a little rhythm, but not using it with your backup QB in the game.

Great point. This tactic makes no sense at all.

I wish our Journalists would raise questions and make observations this good.

 

[ZooCougar]

I am still seeing wide receivers dropping wide-open passes. I am still seeing the O-line let people through untouched. I am still seeing a young QB making young QB mistakes. I still see an RB without breakaway speed in the open field.

I'm not saying the coaching is flawless, but if you think your talent couldn't leave a little something to be desired, then I don't know what to tell you. We apparently aren't watching the same team.

This is not a good argument for your side. George DeLeone is responsible for all of those things you mentioned.

In addition to not being able to call a competitive game, he can't get his players to perform basic tasks like block and catch footballs.

You do realize he is responsible for everything in the offense soup to nuts. It's not like DeLeone shows up every Saturday and he is divested of the responsibility to prepare.

 

[ZooCougar]

I am still seeing wide receivers dropping wide-open passes. I am still seeing the O-line let people through untouched. I am still seeing a young QB making young QB mistakes. I still see an RB without breakaway speed in the open field.

I'm not saying the coaching is flawless, but if you think your talent couldn't leave a little something to be desired, then I don't know what to tell you. We apparently aren't watching the same team.

Secondly, with talent that isn't top end. That's all the more reason why we need a state of the art OC who doesn't waste plays and puts our guys in the best position to compete at an elite level. That means playing to our strengths, he plays to our weaknesses.

And this bit about not having talent is wildly overstated, McCombs was All Big East, didn't he win some kind of award last season? Don't the NFL Scouts love our Tight Ends?

Your argument does not compute.

 

[jbdphi]

Going to respectfully disagree on several fronts.

George DeLeone is the offensive coordinator. The offensive coaches work for him, the offensive line is coached by him, he is responsible for the success and failure of the of the offense. If his receivers can't catch, if his QB can't get clear passing lanes, if his QB throws balls that are hard to catch. It's George DeLeone's responsibilty.

I said this when Edsall was here with Ambrose and Moorhead and I say it now.

Secondly, you are dealing with the wrong set of facts. The fact is that we had plays in the first half that worked, and worked well. George DeLeone abandoned them. The end around with Nick Williams. Passes in the flat to McCombs, passes to the TEs-largely abandoned save one moribund attempt in the second half.

We passed on third and short more times than I care to recount yesterday. On a day where McCombs rushed for over 140 yards we ran low percentage passing plays on third down. This makes no sense.

You know what what? We didn't neccessarily need a TD or even a FG to wrap that game up. Even one or two additional first downs could have been the difference, he couldn't even give us that.

Also, running the Wildcat after the TV timeout is simply inexcusable. To me it's just evidence that George DeLeone has a pattern in his head that he can't deviate from.

Thanks for being respectful (completely serious). I agree with your first sentiment. If the offense isn't performing, I think GDL needs to go so we can find someone else who can make it work. My pet peeve was the complaint about play calling, specifically in the second half. The Nick Williams jet sweep? We did try it in the second half and it was stuffed. My only true play call complaint in the second half was the very last play in regulation. Should have been a kneel down but I'm not going to go apeshit over one play call (I know others strongly disagree).

I completely agree also about how just an extra first down or two would have made all the difference and avoided OT alltogether. Whitmer had a horrible day and so did Nick Williams who seemed to be targeted more than any other receiver. Players make one or two more plays on offense and this isn't an issue. I saw issues with execution, not play calling. But at the end of the day, if the players cannot execute the offense that the OC wants to run, you need to change OC's because they obviously don't get what their players are capable of and need to change tactics. GDL doesn't seem capable of that.

 

[ZooCougar]

We may both be right here.

But I just look at this season. We have an offense that is routinely more successful in the first half than it is in the second. We have 3 points total in the second half of all Big East games combined this season. It's not being intellectually lazy to skip to those two points and not look at how we got there to render judgement on George DeLeone.

George DeLeone's offense does not have a good second act. Defenses make adjustments, but I think DeLeone does too, but his adjustments are often for the worst.

Thanks for being respectful (completely serious). I agree with your first sentiment. If the offense isn't performing, I think GDL needs to go so we can find someone else who can make it work. My pet peeve was the complaint about play calling, specifically in the second half. The Nick Williams jet sweep? We did try it in the second half and it was stuffed. My only true play call complaint in the second half was the very last play in regulation. Should have been a kneel down but I'm not going to go ape**** over one play call (I know others strongly disagree).

I completely agree also about how just an extra first down or two would have made all the difference and avoided OT alltogether. Whitmer had a horrible day and so did Nick Williams who seemed to be targeted more than any other receiver. Players make one or two more plays on offense and this isn't an issue. I saw issues with execution, not play calling. But at the end of the day, if the players cannot execute the offense that the OC wants to run, you need to change OC's because they obviously don't get what their players are capable of and need to change tactics. GDL doesn't seem capable of that.

 

[RedSoloCup]

Just a quick question to you both... what is your take on GDL's offensive philosophy?

I watch the work done, and wonder if he is only tactics with no guiding strategy.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

Secondly, with talent that isn't top end. That's all the more reason why we need a state of the art OC who doesn't waste plays and puts our guys in the best position to compete at an elite level. That means playing to our strengths, he plays to our weaknesses.

And this bit about not having talent is wildly overstated, McCombs was All Big East, didn't he win some kind of award last season? Don't the NFL Scouts love our Tight Ends?

Your argument does not compute.

First of all, the whole "DeLeone is responsible for everything" argument. Okay, sure, I guess. But in reality, you can't fit a square peg into a round hole. I know some people who are just never gonna be able to run a 4.5 40 no matter what you do to train them. Some kids just aren't gonna be all-conference.

Second of all, yeah, McCombs had a good year last year. But it was hardly one for the ages. His YPC was not earth-shattering, and his selection had more to do with our ability to run him into the ground 30 times a game or the lack of competition than our world-beating talent. I don't see too many pro scouts calling for McCombs to bail to the NFL early, no offense to the young man.

Yeah, we have great TE's, that's... something.

But it all starts in the trenches. And between our inexperience/smallness on the O-line and our injuries on the D-line, we have serious problems controlling the line of scrimmage. And it's hard to win ballgames that way. You may put that all on GDL's shoulders, and that's your prerogative. But I personally believe there is plenty of blame to go around, both on the field and on the sidelines.

 

[jbdphi]

I

Just a quick question to you both... what is your take on GDL's offensive philosophy?

I watch the work done, and wonder if he is only tactics with no guiding strategy.

I think his strategy is situational. In previous games (I.e. Buffalo) GDL talked about having a defence that was playing great and that the offense's role at that point was to not make mistakes and give the other side any more help than necessary. It's a strategy that wasn't very popular here for sure but it was a strategy. We saw something similar with Temple.

I didn't see that against LVille. He was trying to get first downs and seemed to take a lot of risks given how Whitmer was throwing.

In terms of overall offense (non-situational) he seems to want the ability to use either the run or the pass to generate yardage and first downs. Obviously he hasn't been very successful there. We have not had a single game this year where both our running game and passing game were effective concurrently.

Just my thoughts. Time for bed. Been a long (and good) day. I'm in such a better mood when we win.

 

[ZooCougar]

Just a quick question to you both... what is your take on GDL's offensive philosophy?

I watch the work done, and wonder if he is only tactics with no guiding strategy.

I think that if there is a guiding strategy, then it isn't a very good one and he doesn't understand what needs to be done to shape conditions so the strategy will work.

Using that Wildcat on it's own doesn't work. Using it when it isn't a surprise is low percentage.

When you have an offense like ours, there is one thing that will ensure that we punt on every posession. Third and Long. That means that we can't give up a lot of sacks, we can't have crippling tackles for loss in the Wildcat, we need to run slants and quick outs to get to third and manageable. There is less time for the QB to get sacked, and those are high percentage pass plays. You may only get 3-4 yards a pop but it discourages the blitz and keeps the defense honest.

Due to sheer math and probability you will get more first downs.

Secondly, how many times did we try for intermediate to long passes on 3rd and 5 or better yesterday? I just went through the play by play on ESPN and I roughly counted at least 5 times, all incomplete. Five opportunities at a manageable third down distance that were pissed away.

http://espn.go.com/ncf/playbyplay?gameId=323290097&period=3

 

[huskypantz]

I saw some very basic things that concerned me, such as not using play action in the mid-4th quarter. UL was fully committed to the run, we needed to use that to our advantage. I also saw some horrible passes, dropped balls and missed blocks.

 

[ZooCougar]

First of all, the whole "DeLeone is responsible for everything" argument. Okay, sure, I guess. But in reality, you can't fit a square peg into a round hole. I know some people who are just never gonna be able to run a 4.5 40 no matter what you do to train them. Some kids just aren't gonna be all-conference.

Second of all, yeah, McCombs had a good year last year. But it was hardly one for the ages. His YPC was not earth-shattering, and his selection had more to do with our ability to run him into the ground 30 times a game or the lack of competition than our world-beating talent. I don't see too many pro scouts calling for McCombs to bail to the NFL early, no offense to the young man.

Yeah, we have great TE's, that's... something.

But it all starts in the trenches. And between our inexperience/smallness on the O-line and our injuries on the D-line, we have serious problems controlling the line of scrimmage. And it's hard to win ballgames that way. You may put that all on GDL's shoulders, and that's your prerogative. But I personally believe there is plenty of blame to go around, both on the field and on the sidelines.

You say that you can't put a square peg in a round hole. Yet he tries this every Saturday. I think we even saw him run Whitmer out of the wishbone against Temple.

We don't need guys to run 4.5. We need guys to get 4-5 yards. If we just did that then numerically the whole calculus changes. It gets harder to make those 10 yards when you waste downs.

We have enough talent to make 4-5 yard gains in short passing and running situations. You do not need a gamebreaker to do that.

 

[ZooCougar]

I saw some very basic things that concerned me, such as not using play action in the mid-4th quarter. UL was fully committed to the run, we needed to use that to our advantage. I also saw some horrible passes, dropped balls and missed blocks.

How about audibles? I heard we actually did that once yesterday.

Calls at the line can be really helpful, QBs can even audible to change protections at the line of scrimmage based on what the defense is showing. Edsall let DJ and Bones do that, but P and D won't let Whitmer do this?

 

[Srqhusky]

This was a team that can be thrown on and we didn't come close. They gave up some points this year via the pass by non bcs schools. None the less it was a awesome victory and reality is its not going got change with one game left. But can we be waiting to explode beyond 24 points. I say we r due

 

[ZooCougar]

This was a team that can be thrown on and we didn't come close. They gave up some points this year via the pass by non bcs schools. None the less it was a awesome victory and reality is its not going got change with one game left. But can we be waiting to explode beyond 24 points. I say we r due

We scored 6 against USF, the worst defense in the conference.

 

[ZooCougar]

Just a quick question to you both... what is your take on GDL's offensive philosophy?

I watch the work done, and wonder if he is only tactics with no guiding strategy.

Okay, I thought about the question again, and here a more complete answer. I turned to the Desmond Conner fanboy piece that inspired the title of the thread, and DeLeone offered up a great quote.

http://articles.courant.com/2012-09...120906_1_rennick-bryan-hillhouse-high-wildcat

"The response to that is very simply, does the fact that the defense has to defend the wildcat pass game, the wildcat run game, along with a base offense with Chandler ... does that help Chandler or hurt Chandler?" DeLeone said. "In my mind that helps Chandler because they have so much to defend, maybe they can't spend an inordinate amount of time defending our play-action pass game, defending our normal run game, so, in my mind, it adds value.
"How much we use it and when we use it? That will be on a week-to-week basis. There's a lot to defend. And we played a team, that to me, knowing the history of Phil Elmassian [UMass defensive coordinator who coached with DeLeone and coach Paul Pasqualoni at Syracuse], he's a high-pressure coach. The fact that they were vanilla defense, all we did I think helped Chandler.

So basically his guiding strategy is that mixing things up as he does will overwhelm the defense because they can't possibly prepare for the diversity of the onslaught.

Well, it hasn't worked like that now has it? Why is that?

Because DeLeone has set a predictable pattern. The defensive coordinators we play against are not stupid, and let's face it, most of the stuff we run, whether it is Wildcat or otherwise is used by nearly everyone else. It just isn't fooling anyone.

 

[RedSoloCup]

Thanks guys... this has been helpful with your perspectives... I try to learn more about the game and how it is managed and played each year, this has been a great year for me to focus on coaching and preparation as well as O-line play.