I finally figured out Beck!

I use to think Tim was just stubborn and wanted to win his way. Refused to listen to our opinions about using the I formation, give the ball to Ameer more, use TE's. When he would use them. They seemed to work well but would go away from them back to what he likes.

After the game Saturday I was listening to 93.7 the ticket. A caller stated he use to think Tim was stubborn as well. But is starting to think Tim is coaching to win. But is calling plays to show his offense works more so as a interview for head coaching jobs. If that is what Tim is doing then great. I support it, not that I think he needs to go. But I support anyone working hard to advance their career. But it shouldn't come at the expense of our players. Which seems to be what is happening on the field.

I agree Purdue is becoming a better team. Which is great for the Big 10. But didn't need a complex scheme to beat them. Hopefully Tim learned that on Saturday and wont make the mistake again against Wisconsin.

 
Blackshirts007 said:
The gameplan against purdue should have been to run.
Click to expand...
Eight of our first 10 plays were running plays (our first TD was one of the two that weren't). Overall, we ran the ball about 71% of the time. All this despite averaging 3.5 yards per rush and 5.6 yards per pass.

How much more running did we need to do for the game plan to fit your criteria?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric said:
Eight of our first 10 plays were running plays (our first TD was one of the two that weren't). Overall, we ran the ball about 71% of the time. All this despite averaging 3.5 yards per rush and 5.6 yards per pass.

How much more running did we need to do for the game plan to fit your criteria?
Click to expand...
Until it stops working...

It's not necessarily the amount of running plays, but giving them the proper resources to succeed...

I don't understand why they keep running plays out of the pistol, with three wide-outs, only one tight end (when there's even one on the line) and no FB?? This f'ing boggles my mind. If you're going to run the ball, the opposing team knows you're going to run the ball, how about trying to give it the best chance to succeed, instead of the sh#t we've seen for the past couple years...

A screen pass to a RB once in a while, the play action to a TE, or heaven forbid something from the Diamond.

We've had some really good RB's that haven't been given the best chance to thrive. Imagine what Rex, or AA would have done in a TO offense??

 
Last edited by a moderator:
walksalone said:
Mavric said:
Eight of our first 10 plays were running plays (our first TD was one of the two that weren't). Overall, we ran the ball about 71% of the time. All this despite averaging 3.5 yards per rush and 5.6 yards per pass.

How much more running did we need to do for the game plan to fit your criteria?
Click to expand...
Until it stops working...
Click to expand...
Nice dodge of an answer.

During the first quarter, we had 12 rushing attempts for 27 yards. Barely two yards per carry. When do you say it isn't working (considering we still ran it 39 more times)?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric said:
walksalone said:
Mavric said:
Eight of our first 10 plays were running plays (our first TD was one of the two that weren't). Overall, we ran the ball about 71% of the time. All this despite averaging 3.5 yards per rush and 5.6 yards per pass.

How much more running did we need to do for the game plan to fit your criteria?
Click to expand...
Until it stops working...
Click to expand...
Nice dodge of an answer.

During the first quarter, we had 12 rushing attempts for 27 yards. Barely two yards per carry. When do you say it isn't working (considering we still ran it 39 more times)?
Click to expand...
-1 for you...

how about acknowledging the rest of my post, instead of acting like Fox news and just picking and choosing what you want to decipher...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
walksalone said:
Mavric said:
walksalone said:
Mavric said:
Eight of our first 10 plays were running plays (our first TD was one of the two that weren't). Overall, we ran the ball about 71% of the time. All this despite averaging 3.5 yards per rush and 5.6 yards per pass.

How much more running did we need to do for the game plan to fit your criteria?
Click to expand...
Until it stops working...
Click to expand...
Nice dodge of an answer.

During the first quarter, we had 12 rushing attempts for 27 yards. Barely two yards per carry. When do you say it isn't working (considering we still ran it 39 more times)?
Click to expand...
-1 for you...

how about acknowledging the rest of my post, instead of acting like Fox news and just picking and choosing what you want to decipher...
Click to expand...
+1

 
How about answering my question with a real answer before accusing me of not answering yours?

Your post is just a rambling list of everything we *could* do differently. Pretty easy to cherry pick a few specific things we could have done and assume they would have worked.

One reason to run the ball from a spread formation is it also spreads the defense out. For every offensive player you bring into the box, you bring at least one defender in and let the safeties get closer as well. At best, that's a zero sum game. We don't use a true FB much but use an HB quite a bit which is very similar. If our best player is best at making people miss in space, why in the world would we want to bring more defenders in closer and have to block more guys out of the way to get him a lane?

I assume by "the sh#t we've seen for the past couple years" you're talking about the current #8 rushing offense we have along with the #19, #8, #15 and #9 rushing offenses we've had the last few years. Could be better but let's be realistic here.

How many screen passes to AA have we tried this year and how many have we completed?

Not taking anything away from Rex or AA but I'm pretty sure a lot of RBs would have looked really good on a team that had vastly superior talent compared to 80% of the teams they faced.

 
Mavric said:
How about answering my question with a real answer before accusing me of not answering yours?

Your post is just a rambling list of everything we *could* do differently. Pretty easy to cherry pick a few specific things we could have done and assume they would have worked.

One reason to run the ball from a spread formation is it also spreads the defense out. For every offensive player you bring into the box, you bring at least one defender in and let the safeties get closer as well. At best, that's a zero sum game. We don't use a true FB much but use an HB quite a bit which is very similar. If our best player is best at making people miss in space, why in the world would we want to bring more defenders in closer and have to block more guys out of the way to get him a lane?

I assume by "the sh#t we've seen for the past couple years" you're talking about the current #8 rushing offense we have along with the #19, #8, #15 and #9 rushing offenses we've had the last few years. Could be better but let's be realistic here.

How many screen passes to AA have we tried this year and how many have we completed?

Not taking anything away from Rex or AA but I'm pretty sure a lot of RBs would have looked really good on a team that had vastly superior talent compared to 80% of the teams they faced.
Click to expand...
It's a rambling list?? Those are things that haven't been utilized correctly during Beck's tenure. At least I'm trying to present some sort of solution, instead of trying to covering up for an egotistical getting busy-bag OC...

So if we have three wideouts and a run play is called? Whats to stop them from putting 7 guys in the box, and blowing up the run play? If they're going to load up the box, thats where the extra TE's and FB comes in, ya know...

Not very many screens to AA, if any at all...

But those offenses utilized TE's and FB's, instead of trying to be "the smartest guy in the room", which is Beck...

If Beck actually stopped and used his brain, he might be a good OC. Instead though, we get unpredictability which has cost us wins during his time as OC...

 
walksalone said:
Mavric said:
How about answering my question with a real answer before accusing me of not answering yours?

Your post is just a rambling list of everything we *could* do differently. Pretty easy to cherry pick a few specific things we could have done and assume they would have worked.

One reason to run the ball from a spread formation is it also spreads the defense out. For every offensive player you bring into the box, you bring at least one defender in and let the safeties get closer as well. At best, that's a zero sum game. We don't use a true FB much but use an HB quite a bit which is very similar. If our best player is best at making people miss in space, why in the world would we want to bring more defenders in closer and have to block more guys out of the way to get him a lane?

I assume by "the sh#t we've seen for the past couple years" you're talking about the current #8 rushing offense we have along with the #19, #8, #15 and #9 rushing offenses we've had the last few years. Could be better but let's be realistic here.

How many screen passes to AA have we tried this year and how many have we completed?

Not taking anything away from Rex or AA but I'm pretty sure a lot of RBs would have looked really good on a team that had vastly superior talent compared to 80% of the teams they faced.
Click to expand...
It's a rambling list?? Those are things that haven't been utilized correctly during Beck's tenure. At least I'm trying to present some sort of solution, instead of trying to covering up for an egotistical getting busy-bag OC...

So if we have three wideouts and a run play is called? Whats to stop them from putting 7 guys in the box, and blowing up the run play? If they're going to load up the box, thats where the extra TE's and FB comes in, ya know...

Not very many screens to AA, if any at all...

But those offenses utilized TE's and FB's, instead of trying to be "the smartest guy in the room", which is Beck...

If Beck actually stopped and used his brain, he might be a good OC. Instead though, we get unpredictability which has cost us wins during his time as OC...
Click to expand...
I'm not covering for anything. I'm asking questions that you still haven't answered despite jumping all over me for the same.

What's stopping them from putting seven in the box? A competent passing game for starters. When our QB can't consistently execute the simplest of passes, it does make this tougher. I didn't figure you for a "we need to react to what the defense is doing" kind of guy. I had you pegged for more of a "we need to dictate to the defense" style. Perhaps I was wrong.

We've run several screens to AA but I'm not sure we've completed more than one. We've also run quite a few WR screens but our completion percentage is pretty poor on those as well. It's not a pass that TA is very good at throwing.

 
What question haven't I answered?

A competent passing game? The one where after we've had two successful drives, Beck decides to call three straight pass plays, go three and out, for example?

Then if our QB can't execute the simplest of passing plays, doesn't that make the run game that much more important? I'm not a react to what the defense is doing type of guy. You pound the rock, make the defense try and stop you.

 
I think Beck calls an ample amount of run plays. To me it's not really the quantity that's the problem. It's the quality. We have a base set of run plays that have worked well for us, and Beck has shown he's willing to lean on them, which is great! However, it seems we don't have a lot to compliment those runs. Instead of running 4 stretch plays, run 3 stretch plays and 1 counter off of it (just one example).

The other thing is he doesn't always show that he understands we can control a game with the run, if we are having success with our base stuff. Instead it seems like he just wants to run as many plays in as many formations as possible. 'cause it's what the cool kids are doing. Note: the cool kids aren't the ones winning national titles.

The heck of it is, he does understand we can control a game with our running game. He showed it vs. Miami. I suppose it's on Bo as much as it's on Beck. I just hope they come up with a solid gameplan against Wisconsin.

 
The Dude said:
I think Beck calls an ample amount of run plays. To me it's not really the quantity that's the problem. It's the quality. We have a base set of run plays that have worked well for us, and Beck has shown he's willing to lean on them, which is great! However, it seems we don't have a lot to compliment those runs. Instead of running 4 stretch plays, run 3 stretch plays and 1 counter off of it (just one example).

The other thing is he doesn't always show that he understands we can control a game with the run, if we are having success with our base stuff. Instead it seems like he just wants to run as many plays in as many formations as possible. 'cause it's what the cool kids are doing. Note: the cool kids aren't the ones winning national titles.

The heck of it is, he does understand we can control a game with our running game. He showed it vs. Miami. I suppose it's on Bo as much as it's on Beck. I just hope they come up with a solid gameplan against Wisconsin.
Click to expand...
I cannot +1 that enough...

Thats one of the things that kills me. He showed exactly what this offense could be, against Miami...

 
walksalone said:
What question haven't I answered?

A competent passing game? The one where after we've had two successful drives, Beck decides to call three straight pass plays, go three and out, for example?

Then if our QB can't execute the simplest of passing plays, doesn't that make the run game that much more important? I'm not a react to what the defense is doing type of guy. You pound the rock, make the defense try and stop you.
Click to expand...
You can't harp on Beck for calling "three straight pass plays, go three and out" and ignore just as many instances of us running the football for 3 straight plays and going three and out. Your hatred of Beck clouds your mind. We can't just run the ball straight at a defense that stacks the box and expect it to work (see McNeese St and Michigan State). We have to pass the ball to keep them honest, and in games that TA has been able to complete passes it works (see the Northwestern game). It's when he can't that we start to have some issues (McNeese St and Michigan State).

 
MO Husker said:
You can't harp on Beck for calling "three straight pass plays, go three and out" and ignore just as many instances of us running the football for 3 straight plays and going three and out. Your hatred of Beck clouds your mind. We can't just run the ball straight at a defense that stacks the box and expect it to work (see McNeese St and Michigan State). We have to pass the ball to keep them honest, and in games that TA has been able to complete passes it works (see the Northwestern game). It's when he can't that we start to have some issues (McNeese St and Michigan State).
Click to expand...
You can if the 3 pass plays he's discussing follow two long runs from Ameer in consecutive series where the rushing game was just demolishing the opponent.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top