ADVERTISEMENT

Why the love affair with Whop today?

bdhman

Senior
Gold Member
Apr 19, 2002
2,311
2,817
113
Don’t get it. Frye, Marshall and TE’s??

Really don’t understand the O game plan today. D played good enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
How many negative or zero yard gains did we have throwing him the ball?
I don’t know, but 18 catches (Big Ten and IU bowl record), only equated to 81 yards or 4.5 per catch. That will also likely be a record that’s going to stand for a long time for the most catches for the least amount of yards. Tittle never even looked for Hendershot. Had him wide open many times. Speaks to inexperience of tuttle. Couldn’t get through many reads and we likely had to dumb down our play book to accommodate it.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know, but 18 catches (Big Ten and IU bowl record), only equated to 81 yards or 4.5 per catch. That will also likely be a record that’s randy’s a long time for the most catches for the least amount of yards. Tittle never even looked for Hendershot. Had hike wide open many times. Speaks to inexperience of tuttle. Couldn’t get through many reads and we likely had to dumb down our play book to accommodate it.
I totally agree. You can't win doing less with more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
I don’t know, but 18 catches (Big Ten and IU bowl record), only equated to 81 yards or 4.5 per catch. That will also likely be a record that’s going to stand for a long time for the most catches for the least amount of yards. Tittle never even looked for Hendershot. Had him wide open many times. Speaks to inexperience of tuttle. Couldn’t get through many reads and we likely had to dumb down our play book to accommodate it.

The 4.5 yds per reception was a result of the number of dump screens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
The 4.5 yds per reception was a result of the number of dump screens.
I beg to differ. Several times he caught a pass over the middle and retreated for minimal or no gain. And then you had the one where he caught one for another short gain and then ran backwards for a 12 yard or so loss. He was not up to taking a hit. The OC had him running those plays so part of his problem was not all his fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
I don’t know, but 18 catches (Big Ten and IU bowl record), only equated to 81 yards or 4.5 per catch. That will also likely be a record that’s going to stand for a long time for the most catches for the least amount of yards. Tittle never even looked for Hendershot. Had him wide open many times. Speaks to inexperience of tuttle. Couldn’t get through many reads and we likely had to dumb down our play book to accommodate it.
If I had to guess, I'd say the coaching staff figured that OM's DBs were going to focus on keeping Fryfogle in check, leave Marshall to his DB and then take their chances on Whop not hurting them.

If I were a QB, I'd probably neglect Hendershot too . . . he's had too many drops to suit me. He had one target that I can recall yesterday . . . and dropped a well-placed pass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
I beg to differ. Several times he caught a pass over the middle and retreated for minimal or no gain. And then you had the one where he caught one for another short gain and then ran backwards for a 12 yard or so loss. He was not up to taking a hit. The OC had him running those plays so part of his problem was not all his fault.
The play where he lost twelve could have broke for a huge play if he got anything from Tuttle other than just completely getting out of the defender's way like he did. There was nothing ahead of Whop but green grass and IU jerseys on that side of the field. That's a huge gain or maybe even a TD if Tuttle just stays where he is and holds the defender up for even a split second to let Whop turn back upfield. The guy that tackled Whop was the only one left who had a prayer of getting to him on that.

But in general, I won't disagree that Whop giving up yards really hurt us. Especially on the play where he had a first down, gave up two yards, and then we were stuffed on third and short and punted.
 
I beg to differ. Several times he caught a pass over the middle and retreated for minimal or no gain. And then you had the one where he caught one for another short gain and then ran backwards for a 12 yard or so loss. He was not up to taking a hit. The OC had him running those plays so part of his problem was not all his fault.
I think the running backwards is a product of (a) Whop being able to get by that that in practice, and (b) SEC speed on OM's defense. Whop likely doesn't see a defense that can stop him on those plays . . . and thinks he's doing the right thing when he tries them in a game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
Sheridan had an awful day.

Both coordinators were terrible but Womack might have had the worst day of his career.
I’ll agree he did not have a great day. Part of the problem was his players were always waiting to get the D call while Miss was starting to run a play. His D though held M to a TD in each quarter. I know that IF a frog had wings he wouldn’t whomp his butt every time he landed but if the O had run the ball and controlled the game better then the D would not have been out there as much. Yes several of their top WRs were out but their backups were good replacements just like our are. Sheridan by far had the worse day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
The crazy part was that after everyone watching the game figured out that whop was the focus of the offense IU never took the next step in the game plan. That is simply extraordinarily poor coaching.

that was THE worst coached game for IU in the past two years ... the only thing that kept IU in the game was the kids and their heart and talent ... the coaches did nothing to help. Very frustrating to watch.
 
I wouldn't have minded the repeated screens so much if we ever used the obvious setup play to build off of them, but we never did. By the end of the game, Ole Miss's DBs were creeping upfield every time they saw that trips formation to the boundary, and we never took advantage of it.

I don't understand why we never tried to use the fake screen and go off of it, it would have been wide open with how hard we had them biting up just upon seeing us line up in that formation. Yet I don't think we ran the fake screen even one time. We neither were getting production out of the screens themselves, nor capitalizing off the defense's reaction to those screen plays.
 
I beg to differ. Several times he caught a pass over the middle and retreated for minimal or no gain. And then you had the one where he caught one for another short gain and then ran backwards for a 12 yard or so loss. He was not up to taking a hit. The OC had him running those plays so part of his problem was not all his fault.

Whop scrambling has not appeared to be contact avoidance as much as confidence in his ability to making something out of nothing.
 
I wouldn't have minded the repeated screens so much if we ever used the obvious setup play to build off of them, but we never did. By the end of the game, Ole Miss's DBs were creeping upfield every time they saw that trips formation to the boundary, and we never took advantage of it.

I don't understand why we never tried to use the fake screen and go off of it, it would have been wide open with how hard we had them biting up just upon seeing us line up in that formation. Yet I don't think we ran the fake screen even one time. We neither were getting production out of the screens themselves, nor capitalizing off the defense's reaction to those screen plays.

Tuttle, at this point in his development, has the same inability to process check downs as Richard lego did when he graduated. He has time to improve but he has work to do.
 
Whop needs to understand some times, based on down and situation, you take what you can get and not try for the homerun every time.
On film, newcomer transfer WR DJ Mathews has shown a similar propensity to "give" yardage in order to "gain" yardage.
 
The 4.5 yds per reception was a result of the number of dump screens.
True. Also running the wrong direction after the catch may have had something to do with it. It also shows an offensive coordinator who keeps betting it will work for long yardage. Almost like a degenerate gambler who keeps betting and keeps losing. Just dumb.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT