ADVERTISEMENT

3 requests for the new OC

bdhman

Senior
Gold Member
Apr 19, 2002
2,321
2,849
113
3 requests for the new OC:

1) Assuming RL is still the QB, please do not run the read draw unless RL has the ability to actually read the play and run the ball if that's the right play. I am assuming it was a mix of not wanting RL to get hurt and him not being a good runner that resulted in 99% of the time a read draw was called RL handed off the ball.

2) Either teach the boys to run a screen pass (or bubble screen)correctly or don't run screen passes. I'm guessing 80% of all screen pass plays resulted in an incompletion or less than 3 yards (many times a net loss).

3) Please...do not run the same running play every game to start the game and start the second half. Please!

Go Hoosiers!
 
3 requests for the new OC:

1) Assuming RL is still the QB, please do not run the read draw unless RL has the ability to actually read the play and run the ball if that's the right play. I am assuming it was a mix of not wanting RL to get hurt and him not being a good runner that resulted in 99% of the time a read draw was called RL handed off the ball.

2) Either teach the boys to run a screen pass (or bubble screen)correctly or don't run screen passes. I'm guessing 80% of all screen pass plays resulted in an incompletion or less than 3 yards (many times a net loss).

3) Please...do not run the same running play every game to start the game and start the second half. Please!

Go Hoosiers!
Add to that the 3rd and 3 yards to go completions where Paige would run a crossing pattern and come back to the line of scrimmage to get open.
 
The tunnel screen can go. I hate that play. I'd like to see less floods and a lot more deep crossings and stuff like that. I think he likes the stretch play a lot too. I'd like to see some toss sweep stuff. Get the ball outside to keep the LBs spread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82hoosier
3 requests for the new OC:

2) Either teach the boys to run a screen pass (or bubble screen)correctly or don't run screen passes. I'm guessing 80% of all screen pass plays resulted in an incompletion or less than 3 yards (many times a net loss).
From what I've heard, Grant Heard's receivers block or sit.
 
3 requests for the new OC:

1) Assuming RL is still the QB, please do not run the read draw unless RL has the ability to actually read the play and run the ball if that's the right play. I am assuming it was a mix of not wanting RL to get hurt and him not being a good runner that resulted in 99% of the time a read draw was called RL handed off the ball.

2) Either teach the boys to run a screen pass (or bubble screen)correctly or don't run screen passes. I'm guessing 80% of all screen pass plays resulted in an incompletion or less than 3 yards (many times a net loss).

3) Please...do not run the same running play every game to start the game and start the second half. Please!

Go Hoosiers!
1. Not going to happen. Frey coaches zone blocking schemes well, so zone options reads are going to stay. The issue is, that RL isn't much of a runner, so most defenses stay home and overload and key on the backs. Zone options reads in a spread can still work with a non-running threat QB, but the deception has to be better executed and you have to have strong blocking in the middle of the OL. That was a big issue last season with Rogers. He just wasn't that good at run blocking and when Feeney wasn't there or was moved to RT, his weaknesses really showed up more, especially against better competition. This certainly would work better if we had a true running QB threat.

2. I love screen passes, but you have OL sell the play better. With Lagow throwing more like a 6' QB than a 6'6" guy (his arm angle drops really low), the screen wasn't very effective because he threw it right into the charging DL. Screen passes are some of the hardest passes to throw because you have to throw it with finesse. You could easily tell that Lagow was never taught how to throw them that way. But you still have to run them to keep a defense honest. Even if plays don't work, you still have to do them. That's what a lot of people don't understand. Not every play is going to work, but you can set up a D anyway.

3. Most teams start a game with a run up the middle. It sets a real tone for everyone. It gives the OL the chance to establish the line of scrimmage by smashing into those D linemen letting them know they intend to pound them all game long. It's also an easy play and lets everyone kind of get their blood going a little bit, gain a few yards and be ready to go. Sure, it's predicable, but the chances of you hitting a long pass down the field on the first play are very slim, so most coaches start out easy and simple to get everyone into a flow. They expect it to be 2nd a 8 or 7 on the next play and have usually already scripted the next play as well in their minds. I know Wilson did this a lot. He knew that first run up the middle was just an ice breaker, so they talked in the lockerroom what play 2 would be as well.

Those that bash play calling usually don't have any concept as to why coaches call games the way they do. They see Redding run for 2 yards and automatically think it was a horrible play call, or they see an incomplete pass on a screen and think the same thing. The issue is, you aren't privileged to the game plan so you have no idea what they are trying to do to set the D up. And when your OL is hurt, especially your best OL guy, your best WR is out, most of your back up RBs are down, and your QB is green and raw and still swimming mentally, there's not a whole lot you can run or you will be confused and lost and broken.

Sure it's a great thing the D was where it was last year. But I thought the offensive staff did a pretty fair job to get 6 wins despite what they had to work with. It will be interesting to see what DeBord and Watson can do with Lagow and what we can do running the ball with our scatbacks more. Redding was solid workhorse back, but he wasn't going to fit into the new system where speed and elusive outrank power and drive. Still think we will go as far as our QB, whomever it is, takes us.
 
You make some great points in your post, but I disagree with the portion I've quoted above. The offense didn't get to six wins. The defense did. This would have been a 4-8 season at best if Allen hadn't previously been hired as DC.

Of course the defense was critical to the overall success and we would not have won 6 without it, but I think his point was that the offense could have been much worse considering all the injuries and youth, in which case we would not have won 6 either.
 
You make some great points in your post, but I disagree with the portion I've quoted above. The offense didn't get to six wins. The defense did. This would have been a 4-8 season at best if Allen hadn't previously been hired as DC.
Well you certainly aren't wrong in stating that the D carried us. However, to win games you still have to score some points, and that was more or less what I was saying. The D held though and like you stated, if it had been Knorr's defenses out there, we would have only won maybe 4 games. But the offense scored just enough for us to win those 6 games despite all the issues, on and off the field, that hampered it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10yrProject
Well you certainly aren't wrong in stating that the D carried us. However, to win games you still have to score some points, and that was more or less what I was saying. The D held though and like you stated, if it had been Knorr's defenses out there, we would have only won maybe 4 games. But the offense scored just enough for us to win those 6 games despite all the issues, on and off the field, that hampered it.

Not true, Bama would have won 6 games even if the offense never scored a single point. ;)
 
You make some great points in your post, but I disagree with the portion I've quoted above. The offense didn't get to six wins. The defense did. This would have been a 4-8 season at best if Allen hadn't previously been hired as DC.
That doesn't change the fact that the offensive staff did great work last year and contributed greatly to the six wins and overall competitiveness. Graduations, defections and injuries at all positions were extensive, and the coaches deserve significant credit for their work in molding and developing what was a pretty good unit. Surprised more people dont see that.
 
That doesn't change the fact that the offensive staff did great work last year and contributed greatly to the six wins and overall competitiveness. Graduations, defections and injuries at all positions were extensive, and the coaches deserve significant credit for their work in molding and developing what was a pretty good unit. Surprised more people dont see that.
We were next to last nationally in red zone offense this past season. It's actually quite amazing that we won six games.

Hopefully we'll see significant offensive improvement in 2017 under Coach DeBord.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Siskiyou55 and DANC
We were next to last nationally in red zone offense this past season. It's actually quite amazing that we won six games.

Hopefully we'll see significant offensive improvement in 2017 under Coach DeBord.
Red zone efficiency has never been a particular strength of Wilson's IU offenses, and it obviously wasn't this past year due to all of the factors I previously cited. Given all of those issues, the coaches really did a fantastic job.
 
Red zone efficiency has never been a particular strength of Wilson's IU offenses, and it obviously wasn't this past year due to all of the factors I previously cited. Given all of those issues, the coaches really did a fantastic job.
The play calling in the red zone could have been better, too, though I'm not sure it was all that different from what Wilson did in the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
The play calling in the red zone could have been better, too, though I'm not sure it was all that different from what Wilson did in the past.
It's never been a strength because of the way IU has chosen to run the ball in the Wilson era. What works between the 20's in his offense hasn't worked as well in the red zone where the field is compressed and wider splits create gaps for the D line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RBB89
It's never been a strength because of the way IU has chosen to run the ball in the Wilson era. What works between the 20's in his offense hasn't worked as well in the red zone where the field is compressed and wider splits create gaps for the D line.
Not to mention the personnel he used didn't always make sense. Like the game at OSU where we were inside the 10 and he decided to use Majette instead of a stouter RB. I don't have anything against Majette, but he's not likely to power his way forward for a couple yards when you need it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Red zone efficiency has never been a particular strength of Wilson's IU offenses, and it obviously wasn't this past year due to all of the factors I previously cited. Given all of those issues, the coaches really did a fantastic job.
Right. It obviously wasn't this year (thanks for underscoring my point) and I've developed a bald spot from all the head-scratching I did over many of the red zone plays that were called.

Keep clinging to your myth, though, that we witnessed offensive coaching genius in 2016.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Right. It obviously wasn't this year (thanks for underscoring my point) and I've developed a bald spot from all the head-scratching I did over many of the red zone plays that were called.

Keep clinging to your myth, though, that we witnessed offensive coaching genius in 2016.
Take a look at the two deeps from 2015 and compare them with the two deeps from 2016. Graduation, defections and injuries left IU with a much different team this past season. The results changed not because of play calls but overwhelmingly because of who was running the plays, and it applied to every position group on the offense. It's not hard to understand, and there was nothing mythical about it. It's actually really simple if you know what to look for.
 
Last edited:
Right. It obviously wasn't this year (thanks for underscoring my point) and I've developed a bald spot from all the head-scratching I did over many of the red zone plays that were called.

Keep clinging to your myth, though, that we witnessed offensive coaching genius in 2016.

I don't think anyone was saying that it was offensive genius, but a just very respectable effort given the losses to graduation/NFL and injuries.

And yes Red Zone offense has always been "bad" under Wilson. Last year, IU ranked 24th mostly because Howard was a machine, but that's the only year we ranked in the top 60 in red zone efficiency.

I think something we saw with Wilson is that he never coached down to the talent on the team. That certainly could result in sloppy play when the talent wasn't in place, but because he ever only coached one way, it raised expectations, and when talent was there, the players were already comfortable with the system and things fired on all cylinders (2013/2015)
 
  • Like
Reactions: IUPaterade724
Regardless of what the offensive strategy was the plays were predictable. I wish we had seen more motion, more jet sweeps, more misdirection. Even the interceptions seemed to be predictable (deep throws into double coverage).

I still am scratching my head about Redding going pro. I thought IU called runs as if they had an NFL runner that would break tackles like the prior year. But instead they gave the ball to someone who went down a lot on first contact.
 
Last edited:
3 requests for the new OC:

1) Assuming RL is still the QB, please do not run the read draw unless RL has the ability to actually read the play and run the ball if that's the right play. I am assuming it was a mix of not wanting RL to get hurt and him not being a good runner that resulted in 99% of the time a read draw was called RL handed off the ball.

2) Either teach the boys to run a screen pass (or bubble screen)correctly or don't run screen passes. I'm guessing 80% of all screen pass plays resulted in an incompletion or less than 3 yards (many times a net loss).

3) Please...do not run the same running play every game to start the game and start the second half. Please!

Go Hoosiers!
Here is what is really sad about this post: Had the Internet existed at the time, 82Hoosier could have posted points two and three back then.

Some things just never change, I guess.
 
We were next to last nationally in red zone offense this past season. It's actually quite amazing that we won six games.

Hopefully we'll see significant offensive improvement in 2017 under Coach DeBord.

The actual numbers on redzone efficiency during CKW tenure:

College FB Team Red Zone Scoring Rankings by year
2016-2017 123 out of 128
2015-2016 54 out of 128
2014-2015 34 out of 128
2013-2014 66 out of 125
2012-2013 31 out of 124
2011-2012 95 out of 120
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82hoosier
The actual numbers on redzone efficiency during CKW tenure:

College FB Team Red Zone Scoring Rankings by year
2016-2017 123 out of 128
2015-2016 54 out of 128
2014-2015 34 out of 128
2013-2014 66 out of 125
2012-2013 31 out of 124
2011-2012 95 out of 120
Not exactly a positive trend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bowlmania
The actual numbers on redzone efficiency during CKW tenure:

College FB Team Red Zone Scoring Rankings by year
2016-2017 123 out of 128
2015-2016 54 out of 128
2014-2015 34 out of 128
2013-2014 66 out of 125
2012-2013 31 out of 124
2011-2012 95 out of 120
Not sure where you got your numbers, and you've referenced "efficiency," but I stand by my previous post (we were ranked second from last nationally in red zone offense).
http://stats.ncaa.org/rankings?sport_code=MFB&division=11
Kind of splitting hairs, though (123rd versus 126th).
In 2015, we were 24th, not 54th.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT