the Polo Grounds

Back to the forum index

full Pitt game on youtube

by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 17:05

I'd love to go over some plays if anybody's interested, like HR did last week. Filed under "recaps", here:

Some Pitt plays to review off the top of my head:

* the failed drive from 1st & goal at the 2
* the big Graham runs & TD
* the Holtz pass
* the EG scramble/pass to Daniels

If you want to review a play, you can link to the exact spot in the replay (use the "copy video URL at current time" feature on youtube). Post a new thread or a reply, link it up, and folks can chime in.

recaps, cut-ups


stuffed at the goal line

by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Friday, November 09, 2012, 07:53 @ Jay
edited by Jay, Friday, November 09, 2012, 07:58

These three plays were interesting to dissect.

Setup: Eifert's just been interfered with on a corner pass, so it's 1st & goal ND at the 2.



Eifert motions into the formation. This is just regular zone blocking, and Riddick picks the hole to the right. He just barely misses getting the ball over the goal line before his knee hits.



Our bread and butter power play. We motion Eifert inside again to set him up as a FB. Golic pulls left into the hole.



#25 Hendricks comes off the edge from the backside and gets a piece of Riddick from behind. If that hadn't happened I think Riddick may have squeaked in.

Here's the overhead view.



We run power again, with Eifert motioning in and Golic pulling.



This time #44 LB Gordon was on a called run blitz. You see him jump to the line presnap, and shoot the gap that Eifert vacates. I remember blaming Golic for not pulling fast enough on this one, but in retrospect I think it was a poor recognition by Eifert (or another lineman, or Golson) that Gordon was blitzing. Golic really never had a shot at him. They should have picked it up presnap.





by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Friday, November 09, 2012, 08:11 @ Jay

The first play got us down to the one-foot line, and nearly got us into the end zone.

The second play, power -- don't mind running this in g2g situations. We've scored plenty on this play before and it seemed like we had a decent push.

The third play -- going to back to power. Maybe outsmarted ourselves on this one. We've done a variety of different things on 3rd & (short) goal to go this season, including passing to Eifert for a touchdown, sneaking it for touchdowns, Golson looking to pass then scrambling in for a TD, running Atkinson on an end around, etc. What we hadn't done is run a power play, let alone two in a row down there. We were probably thinking we'd catch them offguard. If we had picked up the blitz, who knows.


the only issue I have with power

by HumanRobot @, Cybertron, Friday, November 09, 2012, 08:39 @ Jay

Is I feel like it's really, really telegraphed by now. It's to the point where even my mom knows exactly where the ball is going. I don't think we've run any type of "constraint play" on that look all season.


Personally, I like the power.

by ⌂ @, Friday, November 09, 2012, 08:35 @ Jay

It puts 2 key blockers in what is normally their best position: Eiffert in Golic. They're usually very comfortable seeking out their man on those plays.

I'm most disappointed with the lack of recognition of the blitz. Rees woulda had ND out of that 2nd power and throwing a fade (gulp) after snapping the ball with 1 second left.

I do think it was good coaching by Pitt though. I think the LB was told to go automatic on the blitz on the 2nd power try if they saw Eiffert motion. When was the last time we had him motion and then run play-action with him running to the flat?

Sometimes I rhyme slow sometimes I rhyme quick.


Totally agree

by Spesh ⌂ @, Los Angeles, Friday, November 09, 2012, 08:43 @

I think this is why Kelly cited film study as the major reason for red zone struggles against Pitt.


I'll take a Prime rib eye, dry aged.

by Joe (LBbeachrat) @, Los Angeles, CA, Friday, November 09, 2012, 08:31 @ Jay

Nice analysis, Jay.


Why didn't they run at least one QB sneak?

by Jim (fisherj08) @, A Samoan kid's laptop, Friday, November 09, 2012, 08:21 @ Jay

The offensive line has proven in the past that they have the ability to give Golson one yard.


Yup. Really thought we'd sneak on 2nd down

by JN @, Seattle, Friday, November 09, 2012, 09:14 @ Jim (fisherj08)

[ No text ]


My feeling as well

by Jeff (BGS), A starter home in suburban Tempe, Friday, November 09, 2012, 09:04 @ Jim (fisherj08)

When that close to the goal line, I always cringe when the QB steps 2-3 yards further away for a handoff. You don't have to run it every time, but it should at least be an option.

Does anyone know if Golson has the option to audible to/from a QB sneak based on a certain read?

At night, the ice weasels come.


Here's the Daniels Pass.

by Pat (Moco), Slave Den, Brian Cook's Basement, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 21:36 @ Jay

Video of the Play (embedding did not work)::



--Based on what the lineup is, it looks like there are twins right up top (Daniels is at the very top of the screen) and twins left, with Eifert on the left side of the line.



--This is very rudimentary but it looks like Daniels was the primary target on the crossing route, with the rest of the receivers running sideline routes, most likely to save time if necessary.
--Eifert, on the left side, stays in to block.
--Daniels's initial route was a deep in, and he made it all the way to the opposite hash before breaking up field. It was excellent recognition on his part because he recognized that the safety jumped the outside deep route on his side. The Youtube replay shows Daniels's route exactly after the play.

The Snap:


--Receivers run their routes and Golson gets excellent protection. It looks as though he only scrambles around to make time for the receivers to get open. Pitt rushed only 4 and dropped 7.

The Throw:


--Golson underthrew this ball. If you can see, and Golson probably saw the same, Daniels had his guy beat because the safety vacated the area.

The Catch:


--Daniels's man fell but hung onto him when he realized he was going to make the catch. It likely saved a TD (along with Golson's underthrow). The trailing guy is the safety who hauled ass backwards once he realized Daniels went deep.



Nice breakdown

by Mike (bart), Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 22:14 @ Pat (Moco)

The underthrow is probably close to an ideal outcome in that situation. If Golson were to have led Daniels he a) risked running out of real estate and b) would have given the Pitt defender an angle to make a play


It was a good result, but I don't think an intended one

by Greg, sittin on the dock of the bay, Friday, November 09, 2012, 09:09 @ Mike (bart)

Golson was underthrowing (slightly, not awfully) fades too. It seemed that he wanted to make sure (was told to make sure?) that the balls were catchable. I'm thinking specifically of one of our late drives going to the tunnel end where he threw a few fades to the right (band) corner. I kept thinking that if he had put the ball out in front of the receiver to run under, the receiver would have had a better chance at it. But the balls continued to be a bit short and to require the receivers to go up for them -- and Pitt defended them well.

Again, it may have been intentional. But it did seem that Golson was a bit short on downfield throws all through the fourth quarter and OT.


If it happened to us, we'd be swearing "lucky Nardballs"

by Savage, Around Ye Olde Colonial College, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 07:02 @ Mike (bart)

But of course, when our QB does it, it's brilliant strategy to intentionally underthrow and let the receiver who was previously decently-covered come back and make a catch against a DB who would obviously fall down.


It depends...

by BillyGoat, At Thanksgiving with Joe Bethersontin, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 08:00 @ Savage

I think that one in particular was accidentally underthrown.

But in 2005 and 2006, I really believe that Quinn was very conscious about never, ever, ever, overthrowing his gigantic WRs on a deep ball.

There are times that it's a product of good coaching and awareness.


"lucky nardballs" is when it happens 4 or 5 times a game

by Pat, Right behind you, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 07:11 @ Savage

And I'm not so sure that Golson intentionally underthrew it. He might have just chucked it up a bit short as he was running around. Obviously an underthrown ball favors the WR as they usually have the better chance to turn for the ball (or get an interference call) but I assume Golson was just heaving the ball down field and Daniels had to slow up to catch it.


You could probably say one quarter

by Domer99, John Wesley Powell's Expedition Island, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 09:29 @ Pat

Denard had 4 passes that covered 157 yards in the 4th quarter. Of his 338 yards, 202 came in that 4th quarter.

I know Savage is trying to be snarky, and maybe he has a point. But, if anything, I'd say that Robinson's performance this year (his senior season) only serves to validate that the guy isn't a very good passer (and was pretty reliant on throwing up prayers).

Maybe Everett will turn out similarly, but the guy does demonstrate some competency throwing the football.


I agree. My post was tongue-in-cheek.

by Savage, Around Ye Olde Colonial College, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 07:29 @ Pat

(And I just wanted to say "lucky Nardballs" because it sounds vaguely dirty?)


unfortunately for Golson...

by HumanRobot @, Cybertron, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 07:31 @ Savage

"Everett veretted all over the field" just doesn't have the same ring as "Denard narded all over us"


If the pass was completed for a touchdown,

by Jim (fisherj08) @, A Samoan kid's laptop, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 07:55 @ HumanRobot

we could've yelled "GOAL, SON!"



here's the Holtz play

by HumanRobot @, Cybertron, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 19:03 @ Jay

Very, very close... Holtz might be at the 49 and not the 48 but it's close. He might be ON the LOS but I don't think he's behind it.


It looks fine to me.

by ndroman21, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 14:55 @ HumanRobot

I haven't looked up the rule, but I assume it is the same as a QB throwing a forward pass, which is that any part of his body can be on the LOS and still be legal.

It looks to me like he is straddling the LOS when he catches the pass.


another poor effort by Farley on this one

by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 08:56 @ HumanRobot

He was just really tentative most of the game.


Looking at the LBs

by bpeters07 @, Sack Lake City, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 08:26 @ HumanRobot

In chat, I'd suggested that Manti seemed off his game (perhaps another flu victim?), especially since Pitt seemed to be having success with the screen game (and sniffing out screens tends to be one of Manti's specialties).

IIRC, it was Jay who countered that Pitt seemed to actually be taking advantage of Manti's screen-sniffing tendency by luring him away from the play to chase the RB and then running a middle screen to the TE instead.

It looks like this play did indeed manage to lure Manti out toward the running back, and by the time he realized what was happening and turned back, he was sealed off. But what I find interesting is that both Manti and Carlo flow to the running back, leaving the middle of the field wide open. Just based on their location on the field, it would make sense for Manti to have taken the RB while Carlo stays put in the middle (in which case this play would have been Carlo's blunder), but if you watch their reactions, it's Te'o who bails on chasing the RB and makes a last ditch effort to penetrate the screen; Carlo just keeps on pursuing the RB.





Who among the LBs screwed up here?


my guess

by Spesh ⌂ @, Los Angeles, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 08:44 @ bpeters07

is that we're in man coverage...Calabrese has the RB, and Te'o the TE.

Nice play design by Pitt.

Sometimes the bad guys win, and this play seems like one of those situations.


He is just beyond

by PMan, The Banks of the Spokane River, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 08:03 @ HumanRobot

and they missed it.


The right guard was obscuring the view of the line judge

by Jeff (BGS), A starter home in suburban Tempe, Thursday, November 08, 2012, 08:10 @ PMan

But the only reason it looks close is that the camera is so far away. He was clearly past the 48. I didn't see where the ball was spotted before the snap, but on the prior play it was spotted inside the 48.

At night, the ice weasels come.


Agreed, very close.

by Joe (LBbeachrat) @, Los Angeles, CA, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 19:15 @ HumanRobot

His body is clearly past the LOS, but his hands where he catches the ball are just about, but looks slightly past the LOS. Hard to fault the refs for not calling that, though.


here's Graham's 55-yard run on their first drive

by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 17:26 @ Jay

* ND in a four man front.

* Looks like a standard zone left running play.

* They attacked Kona's gap

* They sealed Manti completely

* Farley missed his tackle.

* Thank God for Motta and Russell.


Is it safe to say

by Jeremy (WeIsND), Offices of Babip Pecota Vorp & Eckstein, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 18:26 @ Jay

That things would have been much different had Nix been in the game? If so, he probably forces the guard to at least pay some attention to him, therefore not allowing him to the next level to deal with Manti.

Also - Farley has done a great job this year keeping solid running gains from exploding into huge chunk plays. He's made that tackle quite a few times this year, but seemed a bit out of position, and unable to wrap up due to the cast.

Lessons - 1) Kona not quite ready for primetime (or at least not quite able to demand constant doubles), and 2) Farley probably makes that play without the broken bones in the hand.


Schwenke had a rough time of it.

by San Pedro, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 18:36 @ Jeremy (WeIsND)

You can't let yourself get turned inside by the center. This game was a good illustration of the gap between Kona and Nix.


they ran it to the weakside of their offense

by Spesh ⌂ @, Los Angeles, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 18:14 @ Jay

They have two tight ends right, but they ran it left.


And, er...

by Greg, sittin on the dock of the bay, Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 17:30 @ Jay

...Danny didn't quite get there in time, did he? Not that it's all or even primarily his fault. But he certainly had a shot at Graham and didn't quite get there. But yeah, the seal on Kona and Manti was pretty good on that play.

EDIT: On further review, maybe Danny even drove him inside rather than letting him bounce it outside. So maybe my comment is totally misplaced and shows my utter lack of understanding of what goes on out there. I'd be willing to accept that.

387056 Postings in 33495 Threads, 205 registered users, 62 users online (2 registered, 60 guests)
powered by my little forum