The Citadel Postgame

steebu

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
625
The offense has been painful to watch, but TO and Lucas to an extent, is exactly who were thought they were. We are trying to beat a bunch of full house with pocket 3s. Patenloathe hasn’t helped at all but it’s tough with the pieces we have

Set mining with lower pocket pairs is a ... oh, wait, that's a different discussion.

I've only gotten through the first half of USF and am hoping to get through the rest of it and the Citadel game to summarize my thoughts, maybe even do a video if I have time. But what *is* funny is that we were doing a lot of the things people were saying we weren't ("WAI NO SLANT ROUTE?!! WAI NO WR SCREENS?!1!!1). We even ran the triple option several times ...
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
10,800
Last year, iirc, Tobias ran a lot of zone options. We still have the speed option in our playbook, iiuc. However, I don't think we run enough perimeter option stuff now. It allows the opposing D to crowd the box.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I've seen difficulty with blocking on the edge of the line and the perimeter. I don't think we were outracing any of those guys or getting good enough blocks outside to spring anyone. I also think we should have a perimeter running game; I just don't think we're doing what we need to in order to have one.

which puts use back in the same spot, the coaches would have to have open minds and change the play calling even if we went that way.

The issue I have with TO running in this system, aside from his passing, is we aren't comparing apples to apples. In the triple option TO had 3 backs any of which he could have handed off to or pitched it to and any of which were serving as lead blockers when he ran. In the RPO he has one back, harder to decoy the defense.

When we ran the triple, we had one back blocking, the B-Back going up the middle, and an option of the trailing A-Back or the QB--basically, two other backs as options. We ran it occasionally, but there was usually just one running back option. You can also run the triple out of a single-back set using either a slot receiver or other motion receiver as the second running back option. UCF does it and other "RPO" offenses do run the occasional triple. We have the same number of blockers. You can have just as much deception out of these formations, they just don't have the same symmetry or the same checks based on defensive alignment.

More often you see the run-run-pass option, including the bubble screen as the pass option, out of an RPO.

I realize I'm abusing the "RPO offense" term like people abuse the "triple option offense" term, but I'm just going to go with it.

A well executed flexbone is wonderful to watch. So is a well executed RPO based offense. We're not executing well in several dimensions.
 

bravejason

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
307
Finally got around to looking at the stats. GT offense was better than what it looked. They only ran 46 plays, had to do it in a smidgeon over 18 minutes, and did so to the tune of 6.5 yd per play. I think that’s pretty good for a team executing a brand new offense.

Similarly, the team was probably better than it looked defensively. Citadel ran 75 plays and consumed nearly 42 of clock to do so. There was some bad defensively, of course. Citadel went 4/4 on 3rd & 2 and 3rd & 1 and had one 4th down conversion. I know it’s tough to stop that offense in short yardage but I’d hope that you stop at least one short yardage attempt for that many tries. That means Citadel went 4/12 on 3rd & 3 or longer. 33% is normally very good, but when those were all long conversions, maybe that isn’t so great.

The killer for me was the series with the three unsportsmanlike penalties. Citadel is at 2nd & 9 from their own 26, gets stopped for 3rd and long and then GT’s penalty fixes their down and distance problem and moves the ball for free to near mid-field. The defense again puts Citadel in 3rd and long and again uses a penalty to solve Citadel’s down and distance problem and freely moved the ball to GT’s half of the field. From inside the red zone Citadel chop blocks and then throws an interception. Now GT should be sitting pretty at mid-field except the third penalty comes in and erases the interception return and half of the chop block penalty yards. So instead of great field position, GT effectively starts from a touchback. While Citadel never scored on that series, GT’s defense spent a lot of extra time on the field and wrecked three opportunities for good field position. Offensively, GT quickly went three and out on the ensuing possession. Ugh.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
10,800
@bravejason I'm glad you're trying to put a good face on this, but there are some other stats that weigh against it.

While 6.5 ypp is generally good, but (a) it's against a lower division team and (b) our efficiency wasn't good. Maybe without the sacks and tackles for loss, we'd have been good. Here are the game stats: https://www.espn.com/college-football/matchup?gameId=401112452 and https://www.espn.com/college-football/boxscore?gameId=401112452 .

We were 3-9 on third down, and 0-1 on fourth. That's OK if you're otherwise converting first downs, but we weren't. We got four first downs in the first half, and six in the second. They outgained us 350 yards to 301.

Citadel had 3 sacks and 6 tackles for loss. We had 1 and 4 (and our defense was on the field twice as long, so should have had more negative plays). Lucas Johnson had a QBR of 43 and Tobias Oliver had a QBR of 74 against a team with a physical disadvantage in the secondary.

In engine terms, we've got a V8, but only two cylinders firing.
 

Technut1990

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
960
@bravejason I'm glad you're trying to put a good face on this, but there are some other stats that weigh against it.

While 6.5 ypp is generally good, but (a) it's against a lower division team and (b) our efficiency wasn't good. Maybe without the sacks and tackles for loss, we'd have been good. Here are the game stats: https://www.espn.com/college-football/matchup?gameId=401112452 and https://www.espn.com/college-football/boxscore?gameId=401112452 .

We were 3-9 on third down, and 0-1 on fourth. That's OK if you're otherwise converting first downs, but we weren't. We got four first downs in the first half, and six in the second. They outgained us 350 yards to 301.

Citadel had 3 sacks and 6 tackles for loss. We had 1 and 4 (and our defense was on the field twice as long, so should have had more negative plays). Lucas Johnson had a QBR of 43 and Tobias Oliver had a QBR of 74 against a team with a physical disadvantage in the secondary.

In engine terms, we've got a V8, but only two cylinders firing.

I’m not a Tech Grad just a lifelong fan but someone tell me, the low QB ratings could be improved if we threw more that 13 times right ?
 

danny daniel

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,494
I assume this was an FCS officiating crew. Lost credibility with me with the illegal substitution call against Citadel that was overturned. So I don't doubt that an official told Collins something wrong and he went with it. And if over the stadium it was announced play starts on the snap, (I was there but do not recall) I will give Collins a break on this one.

The fault lies more with the fact that we were in a first down situation with the clock running and needing to simply line up quick and spike the ball. Instead we committed a silly infraction to let the other team chose to run time off the clock. Since we did not stop the clock with a spike (rather a penalty) then the clock by rule would run when ready to play and we lost a LOT of time because we failed to spike. Poor player execution followed by coach confusion? We could have pulled this game out in the last minute but we should have been better prepared and played better in the other 59 minutes.
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
I assume this was an FCS officiating crew. Lost credibility with me with the illegal substitution call against Citadel that was overturned. So I don't doubt that an official told Collins something wrong and he went with it. And if over the stadium it was announced play starts on the snap, (I was there but do not recall) I will give Collins a break on this one.
IIRC, home team supplies the refs.....been like that for several years. CFC gets no breaks for not being aware and not knowing the rules. It was not announced the clock would start on the snap, the proof has been posted previously.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
A couple things I had been thinking about with regards to people complaining about our defensive performance. While I do think the way we attacked the 30 was incorrect, I do think there was a bit more to it.

By now, most of us should be pretty aware of the pros/cons of the offense Citadel was running. These are just my thoughts about why the 30 was almost a perfect offense to counter us.

Secondary: Our strength. It's what we are going to lean on in defense. The 30 pretty much neutralizes this advantage. Our core strength on defense gets taken away just due to the other team's scheme.

Lineman: Unless you have NFL caliber d lineman, the weight/size advantage in the trenches doesn't really matter. There have been so many cases where our line would push around bigger guys in the past, that I am not surprised with the result.

Linebacker: This isn't our team's strength, and it's sadly one of the position groups we really needed to play at a high level. Just having one super athletic linebacker might have been enough to turn the tides, but I didn't see anyone step up.

All that being said, I am not concerned with the defense. I think we could have done things better schematically, but this is just one opponent. When we get back to more standard NCAA offenses, I think we are going to begin looking much better. I'd wager a lot that no other team will hold the ball for over 42 minutes against us.

Duke gave us fits utilizing a very good safety to slow us down. VT at times also. It’s about utilizing talent to the max and we seemed to do it to the minimum at several positions Saturday.
 

gtg391z

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
459
Which changes nothing about what happened here. We could not field a consistent defense for 10 years. I don't care if Army's defense is the second coming of the steel curtain. We couldn't do that here for whatever reason you want to give it.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Which changes nothing about what happened here. We could not field a consistent defense for 10 years. I don't care if Army's defense is the second coming of the steel curtain. We couldn't do that here for whatever reason you want to give it.

True. But it does indicate it might not be the direct result of the O scheme.
 

Technut1990

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
960
They couldn’t even stop our jump balls. We stopped it ourselves by not going to Camp and Carter more.

We should and could have tormented their secondary. This is why I was saying in several other post, that we are running to much. Even then we are running off tackle rather than straight up field. We should be 3-1 going into NC possibly 4-1 afterward but I’m afraid our “rebuilding” mentality will insist that we run off tackle with no lead blocker and ignore all of our 6’2” 230 lb. WRs
 

BleedGoldNWhite21

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,298
They couldn’t even stop our jump balls. We stopped it ourselves by not going to Camp and Carter more.

Awful awful coaching. Oliver had 90+ yards on 11 carries. Mason had 60+ yards on 11 carries, yet we never consistently found ways to get them involved. We were 2 of 3 on deep balls, with the one incompletion being a drop, yet we only tried it 3 times. Our offensive coaches just appear to be absolutely dreadful.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
14,436
Location
Atlanta
Awful awful coaching. Oliver had 90+ yards on 11 carries. Mason had 60+ yards on 11 carries, yet we never consistently found ways to get them involved. We were 2 of 3 on deep balls, with the one incompletion being a drop, yet we only tried it 3 times. Our offensive coaches just appear to be absolutely dreadful.

That's the thing I hate about coaches sometimes. It's like they feel like they have to do something different to justify their existence.

Or they over-coach trying to anticipate or adjust-to-the-adjustment. Well, what if there's no adjustment? Then you've basically out-coached yourself to the benefit or your opponent. That's what I think is happening.

True offensive geniuses can do this. A guy like Friedgen could do that. He didn't coach in a box. He created the box.

These run o' the mill coordinators nowadays lack the imagination to do what our guy needs to be doing, which is use the mismatched personnel to the best of their abilities. I see that's what he's trying to do, I just don't know if he has it in him to succeed.

Anyways, what's done is done. Alls I know is somebody's fanbase is gonna utter these words at some point this season, "Aw man, how'd we lose to Georgia Tech? They lost to the Citadel!?"
 

jandrews

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
275
Awful awful coaching. Oliver had 90+ yards on 11 carries. Mason had 60+ yards on 11 carries, yet we never consistently found ways to get them involved. We were 2 of 3 on deep balls, with the one incompletion being a drop, yet we only tried it 3 times. Our offensive coaches just appear to be absolutely dreadful.

Not sure we should just keep throwing it deep just because they couldn’t stop it. What I never understood is that it’s a cat and mouse game. Force them to stop what you are succeeding at first before throwing everything at them. How many times did our defense get bubbled screened on the same drive against miami. We couldn’t stop them and they kept on doing it. From what I have seen so far TO is a gamer. His only game they let him pass in was against Clemson and they called ok plays but it’s Clemson. The amount of option we ran in the second half as well as called handoffs I fully expect that to be the path forward. I’m not saying we will be unstoppable on defense but with our punting and just playing field position we may be more competitive by just running it at the other team.
 

charles

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
168
Not sure we should just keep throwing it deep just because they couldn’t stop it. What I never understood is that it’s a cat and mouse game. Force them to stop what you are succeeding at first before throwing everything at them. How many times did our defense get bubbled screened on the same drive against miami. We couldn’t stop them and they kept on doing it. From what I have seen so far TO is a gamer. His only game they let him pass in was against Clemson and they called ok plays but it’s Clemson. The amount of option we ran in the second half as well as called handoffs I fully expect that to be the path forward. I’m not saying we will be unstoppable on defense but with our punting and just playing field position we may be more competitive by just running it at the other team.
Yea The painful part of it is that The Citadel won with their 2nd team QB playing the 4th quarter
 
Top