The View From Section 241

[businesslawyer]

I thought really it was a tale of two halfs. The first half I thought the offense was largely successful. There was at least some variation of the play calling. Granted they still ran the ball on 1st down WAY too much.. the second half not so much.

The fact that this offense never seems to be able to take advantage of a short field really is starting to get annoying, not even a field goal most of the time.

I do actually think that PP was calling out GDL when he said the offense lacked a killer instinct... I agree with pretty much everything people have to say, except I'm not going to write of PP quite yet. I just look at the Shane Day and Don Brown hires... those are IMHO very good hires. I hope he can get past the blind spot and make the right move.

"Calling out" GDL to the public is beyond useless. Order him to do something differently or don't. Demote him or don't. But publicly stating that a direct report didn't get it done is not how you succeed in any business.

 

[IMind]

"Calling out" GDL to the public is beyond useless. Order him to do something differently or don't. Demote him or don't. But publicly stating that a direct report didn't get it done is not how you succeed in any business.

I agree... I think that's the frustrating part with PP. He seems to know where the problems lie.

 

[Excalibur]

That's a bad thing? I wish the other guy would try it once in awhile.

This. I disagree with the poster that said there are no running lanes. I see them (though they admittedly don't last long). Often McCombs is just a hair late in recognizing them.

This is also an indictment of the OLine. In the prior system you would almost always see a lineman 5-8 yards downfield taking out a LB when Brown, Todman or Dixon broke a long run. You almost never see it now. What I see now is linebackers running free to plug holes and a running back who doesn't break tackles.

 

[businesslawyer]

first off, biz, you did you. He did a solr usual great job on your analysis. I'm not sure I disagree with too much. I have a couple of thoughts on the game after watching it then rewatching the 1st half on SNY.
1. The offense is really not that bad...when they let it go. When it was operating properly, we did a nice job. Whitmer made some nice throws for decent yardage and even some in critical situations in the 1st half and in the 3rd quarter td drive. When we got the ball around mid-field in the 4th, I fully expected us to continue that approach and maybe score a couple more, at least 1 more. Instead, I don't think Whitmer threw another pass to a wide receiver of tight end the rest of the game. I get being conservative, but there's conservative and there's what we did. If it were politics, our play calling over the last 20 minutes or so of that game were like calling the Tea party a bunch of communists. I mean they were putting 8 and 9 men in the box on first and often put 8 in the box on 2nd down. Maybe a play action pass on 1st down???
I actually thought the bootleg call was an interesting one. Credit the Buffalo defenders with staying home. had they not, Whitmer might still be running. That play either works or it doesn't. When it doesn't it looks horrible.

2. People (not you biz) need to stop complaining about McCombs. When he has space he gains yards. He even moved the pile a few times for an extra yard. He caught passes out of the backfield, and did you see the block he threw on the long td run? His block was the one that really sprung Hyppolite and there was another pass play where he took on the linebacker and pretty much cleaned his clock too. If we had 22 guys who played their positions as well as McCombs plays his, we'd be 5-0.

3. Here's my problem with Don Brown's Mad scientist defense. It is very vulnerable to the big play. And I think with the injuries at defensive end we don't have the pass rushers on the front line you need to really make it work. Pruit is a tackle playing DE. did a solid job generally, had a blocked pass, but I suspect he doesn't have the speed you'd ideally look for in that spot and that has hurt us. And for the second year, our d-backs don't seem to know how to tackle. the hook and ladder play was on example. By the way, that play was a lot like the naked boot. Except it happened to work. Shouldn't have gone for a td if we could tackle, but those plays either work or they don't. Rarely a middle ground. When they work they are brilliant, but if the receiver messes up the pitch and UConn recovers the loose ball buffalo fans are talking about how they were desperate so had to try schoolyard stuff.

4. I had the feeling that like the Maryland game, and I think this resembled it in some ways, Pasquoloni didn't think Buffalo could go 80 yards against our defense. So he and DeLeone just decided that they wouldn't risk anything. run the ball, safe passes if you had to pass, punt them back and play defense. I also think P's old school thinking came into play here. We're up 17. Maybe we get another score, maybe not, but don't "run it up." Of course that didn't account for the other guys making a comeback. And once you get into that rythmn it is sometimes difficult to get back to playing your wide open game again.

I think there are some good thoughts in here. Let me make two points.

1. In your first paragraph, you have put your finger on why I haven't given up on the season yet despite the lackluster effort I think we gave the last two weeks. I do have hope that our O can be close to average if they open it up more and make the other team respect the throw first without turning it over. And I still hope the D can play with the intensity we saw early in the year and dominate people. Will both these happen? I don't know. maybe the smart money is that it won't. But we went 3-4 in conference last year, and I think that entering into conference play this team has way, way more potential than last year's did.

2. I don't see practices and won't second guess personnel decisions where I haven't seen the player on the field enough to be comfortable that I'm not just talking out of my butt. But I am surprised that we're not seeing either Donohue or Vann getting some snaps at SSDE. Both those guys are not much smaller than either Julius Williams or Greg Lloyd was when they were moved to SSDE, both are supposed to be kids who we think are good football players and they are combining for one series at LB between them. Are they not good enough? Is this staff more reluctant than the last one was to let a better athlete who may be 5 or 10 pounds light move to DE because they want size? Don't know.

 

[Excalibur]

2. I don't see practices and won't second guess personnel decisions where I haven't seen the player on the field enough to be comfortable that I'm not just talking out of my butt. But I am surprised that we're not seeing either Donohue or Vann getting some snaps at SSDE. Both those guys are not much smaller than either Julius Williams or Greg Lloyd was when they were moved to SSDE, both are supposed to be kids who we think are good football players and they are combining for one series at LB between them. Are they not good enough? Is this staff more reluctant than the last one was to let a better athlete who may be 5 or 10 pounds light move to DE because they want size? Don't know.

Our entire defensive scheme is dependent on generating a pass rush. As good as Pruitt was (given his limitations) I think they have to make changes to generate a better pass rush, at least on third down so that we don't have to send the house every time. Perhaps the fact that we've played hurry-up offenses the past two weeks has prevented us from tailoring the personnel. Perhaps . . .

 

[freescooter]

Actually biz, on the defensive end situation I have a sense, don't know but a sense, that Pasqualoni and this staff has its "metrics" and they aren't going to put guys in there who they don't think are big enough right now regardless of whether they are superior athletes. Though I'm ot sure that's exactly fair with respect to Pruit. He's a good athlete. I think they would rather use a guy who is "too big" than one they deem "too small" if faced with a choice. So I think the answer to your question is "Yes, they are reluctant to use a better athlete who may be 5-10 pounds too light." Unlike Edsall who didn't have a problem with smaller quicker lines, Pasqualoni and Brown want big and quick, but if they have to sacrifice one they will err on the side of size.

 

[businesslawyer]

Actually biz, on the defensive end situation I have a sense, don't know but a sense, that Pasqualoni and this staff has its "metrics" and they aren't going to put guys in there who they don't think are big enough right now regardless of whether they are superior athletes. Though I'm ot sure that's exactly fair with respect to Pruit. He's a good athlete. I think they would rather use a guy who is "too big" than one they deem "too small" if faced with a choice. So I think the answer to your question is "Yes, they are reluctant to use a better athlete who may be 5-10 pounds too light." Unlike Edsall who didn't have a problem with smaller quicker lines, Pasqualoni and Brown want big and quick, but if they have to sacrifice one they will err on the side of size.

My instinct is the same.-- that a different coach might move a LB into the breach at DE rather than a DT. I don't care as long as I see results. But to date ....