Should we fire Satterfield??

I mean ... I know it's 3rd and 19.  But you're definitely going for it on fourth down.  So perhaps the open crosser underneath is a better choice than throwing into double coverage.


 
Mavric said:
Benhart out here blocking absolutely no one.  Again.
Click to expand...


This is a prime look at the cat and mouse game being played with these ILB's peeling off the pressure look.  If they both came, this is actually blocked up and has a decent chance of popping.   As it is 1 drops to the hole position and the other tracks EJ in man and drops him before it has a chance.  If you replace this call offensively with the play DR is sacked, you're fading the edge player stoning EJ from being a perfect call.  

 
Mavric said:
Benhart out here blocking absolutely no one.  Again.
Click to expand...
lol, there was one play where not only did benhart not block someone but then he spun around and actually tackled raiola lol.

mighta missed it if u posted it earlier in the thread but I remember chuckling and rewinding that immediately. I can’t wait until he’s out of the program. His name will forever be tied to the frost era and represent mediocrity of this line 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric said:
I think you could put five kindergartners out there and it would look roughly like whatever our OL was trying to do here.
Click to expand...
It's a screen... Do your best "I'm trying to block you" for 2 counts and then let them go. There's a corner blitz and the LB reads screen, but I have no idea why the left guard thinks he needs to block a blitzing corner he'll never reach instead of the LB like his assignment calls for.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ZRod said:
It's a screen... Do your best "I'm trying to block you" for 2 counts and then let them go. There's a corner blitz and the LB reads screen, but I have no idea why the left guard thinks he needs to block a blitzing corner he'll never reach instead of the LB like his assignment calls for.
Click to expand...
Yeah.  The one thing though is someone should have gotten to the next level and blocked the LB that ended up blowing up the play.

 
Mavric said:
I mean ... I know it's 3rd and 19.  But you're definitely going for it on fourth down.  So perhaps the open crosser underneath is a better choice than throwing into double coverage.
Click to expand...


Free plug for https://black41flashreverse.substack.com/ (I think he's on here somewhere, dunno which of you it is or if that's true), but he's got the the wider angle of this play. It's Dagger to the bottom of the screen, and the dig comes open right after Raiola throws this up to Neyor. On a good throw it would've been a first down, bad throw it's probably still 4th and short.

You could really make an argument where he threw it was the actual worst choice (outside of checking down to the back), it's the only double covered guy. 

 
ZRod said:
It's a screen... Do your best "I'm trying to block you" for 2 counts and then let them go. There's a corner blitz and the LB reads screen, but I have no idea why the left guard thinks he needs to block a blitzing corner he'll never reach instead of the LB like his assignment calls for.
Click to expand...
Seems to me from watching the play, that the Right guard has the backer responsibility as he directly tries to go get to him specifically 

 
Husker in WI said:
I'm curious what people want "being more aggressive" to look like. Looking at the OSU passing game, with the following caveats:

  1. Plenty of pass plays are not easily bucketed into quick/medium/deep, there are routes at each level and I do not know the primary reads
  2. I am a novice and do not have all-22 film, although I think the broadcast view is enough to identify something as a designed quick pass
  3. Related to point #1, maybe a play is called as a shot and Raiola finds an outlet. Maybe a play is called as a quick throw and he chucks it up to a route intended just to clear defenders out. Without asking Satt/Raiola, it's impossible to know for certain what the intent of a certain call was

With those understood, I counted:

6 screens

6 RPOs (2 of them go routes rather than bubble/arrow stuff)

8 quick game throws (Including 1 quick out to get into field goal range at the end of the half, excluding 2 pop passes to Barney which are really a running play IMO)

15 intermediate throws

7 deep throws

It's not this dink and dunk 3 step and throw offense. I'd also argue the RPOs are called runs, and shouldn't factor heavily into peoples perception of how we call the passing game. The YPA looks terrible because a lot of the screens/RPOs are getting blown up for negative yardage, and we aren't connecting on the deep balls nearly enough to pull it up. The lines between quick/intermediate and intermediate/deep are admittedly blurry, but I went with anything that didn't look to be a clear 3 step or catch and throw as at least intermediate. Especially considering OSU's defensive front, this seems like a fairly aggressive spread. I think a lot of people are lumping the RPOs and screens together, but they're not the same.
Click to expand...


First of all, amazing post, +1.

I think your point about how it's hard to judge "aggressiveness" on designed pass plays where you have one receiver at each level (short/intermediate/deep) is actually a really critical point. Great thoughts there.

On that 3rd & 6 pass play we had been looking at, what I'm saying is that maybe calling those on 1st down or 2nd & long instead of the bubble screens or swing passes frequently might be a good answer - mainly just from a standpoint of making the defense defend something that the film says we're not generally going to do as much of on those down & distance scenarios.

I think it's time to take the training wheels all the way off and just see what Raiola can do on those types of plays that are more "spread" in nature.

While I'm not at all in the camp of saying that Satterfield should be fired now or at the end of the season regardless of what happens in the next four games, it's not even debatable IMO that we started dropping off on offense after the Illinois game. Hammering away with our status quo seems like it won't end well in these next four.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top