the Polo Grounds

Back to the forum index

that "wrong route" third interception

by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:17
edited by Jay, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:31

Here's the play cued up:

(if direct link doesn't work, try going to the video at 1:01:45 or so)

You've got TJ and Davaris ending up in the same area, but still, Tommy, you can't throw that ball.


He had a very nice pocket, and if he were a more confident runner that would have been an excellent time to pump fake, tuck, and run. He had a wide open lane.


It was 3rd & 10 and I'm not sure he would have picked up the first, but it would have set up a pretty makeable FG for Brindza. Critical failure in the game not to pick up more points here.




Once, just once...

by Jim (OFD) @, Naptown, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 17:55 @ Jay

I would like to see TR pull it down and try to run for it. I know he won't get there, but it would do wonders for the offense overall, and make opposing defenses at least think (if only for a microsecond) about the threat of a run on a 3rd and short to medium.

You would have to believe if he pulls it, TJ would try to block the safety. At least then Rees has a shot.


you clearly don't remember Stanford 2011

by HumanRobot @, Cybertron, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 18:53 @ Jim (OFD)

[ No text ]


It was like one of those dreams where you run in place...

by MattG, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 22:50 @ HumanRobot

...and the finish line keeps getting farther away. Tommy may actually walk faster than he runs.


"Can't we figure out what we keep doin' wrong...

by scriptcomesfirst @, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 18:10 @ Jim (OFD)

Why drives never last for very long...
What are we doin' wrong?"


So another thing

by Domer99, John Wesley Powell's Expedition Island, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:02 @ Jay
edited by Domer99, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:09

I didn't have a good vantage point in the stadium so I didn't realize how lucky Tommy was on the second down right before the interception. 2nd and 10 and Tommy throws to a double covered DeVaris. Tommy throws to his outside shoulder while DeVaris turns inside prompting Mayock to say something along the lines of "quarterback and receiver on the wrong page again."

But forget them being on the wrong page, as throwing the the outside was probably the "better" area to throw, but Daniels was draped by 2 OU defenders. Very well-covered. Tommy should have felt lucky at that point, and simply said "whooh, that was too close. I can't throw this next one like that."

But again, for as defiant as Kelly has been about defending Tommy, there's just so much miscommunication that it's difficult to believe that Rees isn't at least part of the issue (or moreso than BK is suggesting).



by PBurns ⌂ @, Ah Denver, the Sunshine State. Beautiful, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:01 @ Jay

My guess is it was supposed to be a drive, and Daniels had a dumb moment, trying to get to where Tommy was looking after he was bumped off his route.

Just run 4 verts


Can someone help me understand that package?

by JN @, Seattle, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:43 @ Jay

Why are DD and TJ running that route combo against that coverage on 3rd & 10. It appears that TJ was running a 10-yard crossing route, which means DD was (or should have been) running a drag or slant or something underneath him. With proper spacing, that means DD's route is well short of the sticks and TJ is double covered.

Against that defensive alignment, it sure seems like DD is more likely to be open as he can run behind TJ and get his man picked, but that leaves him 7 yards short of the first and in the middle of the field with a safety back there.

Why isn't one of them running an out and the other running over the middle to make the safety choose? As it is, we've got 2 v. 3 and the safety will end up between both receivers and the first down marker regardless of who Tommy chooses. If TJ runs an out and DD runs a cross or slant, the safety has top pick one (probably DD) and the other has single coverage.

In addition to the pour routes by the WRs, is that just not a well designed play?


WRT the drag route being open

by PBurns ⌂ @, Ah Denver, the Sunshine State. Beautiful, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:02 @ JN

Ostensibly, if he catches the ball, he's got a good shot to get to the sticks. If he doesn't, you're in field goal range, and no real harm done.

Just run 4 verts


But aren't you basically giving up 1/3 of the field?

by JN @, Seattle, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:15 @ PBurns

With a statute at QB, the defense can cover 5 receivers with 6 DBs. The only open throw was the out to Niklas, which is a tough throw for Tommy. But even if DD is open underneath, he has to beat his man and avoid a safety to get the first. With Golson in, I love that play as he can run 10+ yards to the left (or the safety or another defender has to spy him).

Without Golson, I don't see why you'd call that route combination on 3rd and 10. Presumably the first read would be a route that gets you a first down, but what route is that? Niklas? Rees can't make that throw consistently. The guy most likely to be open is DD and he'd be well short of the first.

That's not a play designed to take advantage of the strengths of our QB in that down & distance, imo.


OFD has a breakdown...

by FunkDoctorSpock, Your Nightmares, B* tches, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:00 @ JN

I think Kelly went into pure defensive mode

by Domer99, John Wesley Powell's Expedition Island, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:41 @ Jay

in order to protect Tommy. Yeah, the receivers may have run the wrong route, but you can't give up the ball there. You have to see that safety. We could not afford a turnover at that juncture.

Kelly is managing the Rees crisis fallout, but I'd suspect he'd get on Tommy regardless behind closed doors.

And sometimes I wonder who is at fault with these receivers running a wrong route. There was a big missed third down conversion in the 2nd half when Niklas cut off a route and Tommy threw an outside post. Is this a failure of receiver recognition? Bad communication of Tommy's part? Or Tommy getting baited into a wrong formation?

For Kelly, it seems like he's going to defer and default to protecting Tommy with all the criticism out there.


That play with Niklas

by PBurns ⌂ @, Ah Denver, the Sunshine State. Beautiful, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:04 @ Domer99

was on Rees. There was a safety flying over the top of Niklas from the center of the field. Niklas saw it and sat down, as he should. Tommy didn't see the safety and threw downfield accordingly.

Just run 4 verts


You could actually see him tell Rees that...

by ⌂ @, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:49 @ Domer99

On TV, right after it happened. He didn't go purple, but you could tell what he was coaching at that moment.

Sometimes I rhyme slow sometimes I rhyme quick.


I know this can't all be on the receivers

by Domer99, John Wesley Powell's Expedition Island, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:53 @

Because there's seemingly been an inordinate amount of miscommunication between Rees and the receiving corps.


What a terrible freakin' throw that was.

by KGB, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:38 @ Jay

Frankly, I don't give a flying shit if the receivers were having a thumb war out there. Rees seemingly decided to split the difference on his throw between the two. Do that over the middle of the field against a defense that's even halfway-competent, and if you escape the play without a change in possession, you should probably play the lottery that evening.

Ability aside, I expect a senior QB and a guy with umpteen number of starts under his belt to never ever ever make that goddamned throw.


Can we expect more Hendrix next week?

by MattG, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:14 @ KGB

Listen, I realize that, overall, he's not as good at quarterbacking as Tommy Rees. He's even less accurate, supposedly. Rees has beaten Hendrix out during every single year of their combined careers.

That said, Tommy is just playing some abysmal football. I can't believe that Hendrix could have done worse than what we've seen in the last month or so. And he has one major advantage in that he is Something Different, psychologically (for defenses and for us) and physically.

Across the board, even though Tommy is somewhat-to-way better than Hendrix at most aspects of quarterbacking - accuracy, reads, arm strength and so on -- Tommy is also slightly-to-way-below-average in each category.

Yes, Hendrix appears for all the world to be abysmal at certain aspects of QBing. But he appears to actually be *above* average in terms of "general athleticism", if not "straight line speed".

*It may be the only category of QB-ing that either guy is above-average in.*

I'm reaching the point of the 2013 season that I'd be willing to look for any comparative advantage we can get from any of our quarterbacks, and try to leverage that.

Usually, I'd say that "post-horrifying-loss-to-ASU" would be the breaking point, where I'd start to work in some kind of two-headed QB situation, with a hyper-run-focused Hendrix team as a change of pace.

But if that's even possible, why wait until the season has officially hit the rocks? Let's get crazy with this thing. Have some fun out there "Andryziak/Graham for Rice" or "Jackson for Powlus" style.


Is Eric Chappell busy this weekend?

by KGB, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 13:09 @ MattG

[ No text ]


He better not be, he has my tickets

by MattG, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 13:36 @ KGB

[ No text ]


I think it's a given

by Domer99, John Wesley Powell's Expedition Island, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:21 @ MattG
edited by Domer99, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:24

Until this running game can sort itself out, I think Hendrix will see 5-10 plays a game. EDIT: (I just noticed you said more, I don't know that it'll actually be more but I think he'll play. That's all I was trying to say. Doubt it will be much more, though.) Unfortunately, it's one of those obvious "tells" again, as I think Hendrix only passed one time when he came in. But it opens up opportunities for our other RBs. Defenses can't just sell out on the one RB.

And it's dawning on me why we are using the pistol so much. In theory, the pistol is used to prevent defenses from "picking a side" because the RB is coming from directly behind and doesn't have a predestined hole he is likely to take.

Not running out of the pistol with Rees only exacerbates the handicap we have running the ball. Hendrix' presence keeps defenses a little more honest.


At this point, what is Tommy giving us?

by Jeremy (WeIsND), Offices of Babip Pecota Vorp & Eckstein, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:20 @ MattG

I know Mayock likes to say that he puts us into good plays, but man, that certainly doesn't seem to be true lately. And even if he calls a good play, the execution hasn't been there recently.

Its sad that he's probably clearly still the best option. But I'd be willing to really give Hendrix a shot in a few games this year just to see if its worth trying to convince him to come back for his 5th year next season.


I dunno man

by HullieAndMikes, Joe Turner's bookcase, ALHS, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:19 @ MattG

Hendrix's arm is just like a more powerful version of Tommy's. Do you prefer our interceptions lofted and tipped or fired directly into a linebacker's gut?

I understand the psychology of different, but we tried the Hendrix Experience already.


I say mix it up.

by MattG, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:33 @ HullieAndMikes

Defenses know exactly what we're going to do, because they get into a certain formation and Tommy audibles into exactly what they want him to do.

The results of the Rees experiment are inert and boring. I say we introduce a new, potentially volatile element!

If the experiment fails, that's just the status quo anyway. It's just my gut feeling, but I'd rather go down in a fiery ball of crazy than to stumble through another week of stepping on our cranks on the way to 3-3.

In the meantime, at the absolute minimum, defenses will have to think about twice as much stuff. Tommy pass plays, Tommy run plays, Andrew passes and Andrew runs.

Shoot, change them out mid-drive! Call plays that are contraindicated by the QB on the field!

Better to have failed while daring greatly, than to live another week in the gray twilight of the 2013 Rees Irish, hoping like hell to beat Purdue. PURDUE!


Why don't we just change our audibles?

by Jeff (BGS), A starter home in suburban Tempe, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 16:39 @ MattG
edited by Jeff (BGS), Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 16:42

When Rees sees the defense stacking the box, instead of lobbing a pass 30 yards down the sideline to a receiver in single coverage, why not have that receiver start off on a go route and then run a hitch? Or even just slant behind the LBs?

I know. This is crazy talk.


We should play to our strengths.

by Pete, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:41 @ MattG

Pull the QB altogether and play four running backs at once. Like the Wildcat on steroids. The Rabid Wildcat.


If Stanford can go 9 OL...

by MattG, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:48 @ Pete

Hey. We're never gonna survive unless we get a little crazy.

OR, we could all agree to watch Tommy do his Peyton-audibles for 40 seconds between every single play, followed by him kinda chucking it at a WR who is covered and standing still 20 yards downfield. I mean, that's still an option.



by bpeters07 @, Sack Lake City, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 13:05 @ MattG

[ No text ]


Which starting RB is going to sit?

by Mike (bart), Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:42 @ Pete

[ No text ]


We definitely have a strange RB situation. I guess we should

by GuinnessBob, The Dark Hedges, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 13:10 @ Mike (bart)

anticipate more of it against ASU.

As far as just the RB's went -- we started the game with GA3 a few times. Then ran Amir. Then brought back in GA3. Then saw a little Cam run. Then ran Amir again. And then brought in GA3 again. Then we brought in that young kid, Folston (awesome run btw). And then we also added Hendrix in the mix (who mostly runs).

And that's with over 5 min left in the 1st Quarter!

Is this a good system to run or is this just f'd up? It seems hard to figure out a clear RB (which I believe the coaching staff has said they are looking for) when everyone seems to only get a play or two here and there.

Personally, I'd like to see more of Folston. Like others have posted, he seems to have better vision than the others (in his limited carries). And why not Amir in the slot a few times for quick passes because his speed is better than all the other receivers (I think)?


We're redshirting Bryant for medical reasons.

by Pete, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 13:01 @ Mike (bart)

But I am open to discussions of converting Andrew Hendrix into a fifth running back.


I think they are trying

by HullieAndMikes, Joe Turner's bookcase, ALHS, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 12:39 @ MattG

But Hendrix is the one messing it up.

There's a little Christopher Nolan-Joker starting to come out in these parts. I get it from our fan perspective, but Kelly likes being employed and seems to abhor anarchy.


With Golson on that play

by hobbs, San Diego, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:31 @ Jay
edited by hobbs, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:50

1. He could have run for the 1st down by heading upfield and running (left) toward the ND sideline. Both OU defenders on that side of the field were running inside (right). If a mobile QB took off on that play, and ran toward the sideline, its an easy 1st down.

2. Deep sideline out to Niklas thrown to the 5 yard line. ND and OU both have three guys on that side of the field. The top OU defender has his back to the QB and is tracking the WR. No way he turns around in time to locate the ball and make a play. He's all but run out of the play. #19 is in single coverage on Niklas and has been beaten badly and is under him by about 4 yards. He's toast with a sideline throw to the 5. The only OU defender who could possibly make a play on a out to Niklas is squatting at the 16. Even though he's in zone and looking right at the QB at the time of release Niklas is already 6 yards behind him. A good throw from a QB who has a strong arm simply doesn't give that guy time enough to recover and to make up the 10 yard difference.

Problem is I'm not sure Tommy had the arm to make that throw before the CB comes under the pass. Golson makes that throw easily. TR??

Still TR should have at least tried to work Niklas on that play.

3. Step up and by time.


totally agree on the deep out to Niklas

by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:32 @ hobbs

[ No text ]


think you're missing an 's' at the end of the URL (for time)

by bpeters07 @, Sack Lake City, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:25 @ Jay

[ No text ]


thanks, fixed

by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:31 @ bpeters07

[ No text ]


What was DD's error? Cut the route shallower?

by BillyGoat, At Thanksgiving with Joe Bethersontin, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:20 @ Jay

[ No text ]


Kelly blamed both receivers (edit)

by Jay ⌂, San Diego, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:21 @ BillyGoat
edited by Jay, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:25

I think he said Daniels was too deep and TJ was too shallow. It looked like both were trying to run the same route, although Tommy looked like he was going for TJ. If Daniels had taken his man horizontal instead it probably would not have been tipped. However, it probably still would have been incomplete. TJ had a safety over the top who was ready to make a play on the pass. Poor decision by Rees even if Daniels had cleared out underneath.

This is a perfect example of a play where Golson would have run the ball out of the pocket (if they had covered it like that).


IF they were both wrong...

by ⌂ @, Tuesday, October 01, 2013, 11:37 @ Jay

That's really frustrating.

That means they both missed the read. So... WTF?

Sometimes I rhyme slow sometimes I rhyme quick.

387161 Postings in 33502 Threads, 205 registered users, 42 users online (1 registered, 41 guests)
powered by my little forum