Scott Takes the Blame on the 2 Point Play

[Bull94]

50 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

A right handed quarterback rolling to his right at least has the appearance of a pass option to the defense. Running to the left to the short side of the field all but eliminates that perceived option by the defense.

Again  my concerns are what led up to that:

• Down 8, he had 4+ minutes of game clock to be thinking of what play to call, if he didn't already have a short list if plays to go to which most coaches would - poor preparation
• This led to a timeout that completely changed how we would play the final drive on defense; with an extra 40 seconds on the clock, we could have kicked deep and gotten the ball back with 40 seconds with much better field position only needing a field goal to win - poor preparation leading to limited options
• Then there is the play call itself where you run a right handed quarterback to the left into the boundary - poor judgment

there was no pass option so it didn't need to be defended. There were no receivers running routes. plenty of QBs have rolled to the opposite side and completed passes.

again I'm not defending the call just saying that the same play worked earlier in the game.

What you need to understand is that we have a coach in his first year with a 27 year old OC. They are human and will make mistakes. I'm sure they will learn from them.  even experienced older coaches make bad play calls or misuse timeouts.

You have the benefit of hindsight. It's easy to say it was a bad call after it didn't work. I bet nobody(including you) said the same when they ran it earlier for a TD.

[NewEnglandBull]

And here I thought the biggest issue was two fumbles by our QB, once in the red zone and once in the opponents red zone. Interesting....

[BrassBulls12]

Again, if the TE seals the edge instead of getting blown up into the blocking back, its more that likely a successful conversion and this conversation isn't happening. 

[Bull94]

26 minutes ago, BrassBulls12 said:

Again, if the TE seals the edge instead of getting blown up into the blocking back, its more that likely a successful conversion and this conversation isn't happening. 

that's the thing. if it worked nobody would say a thing about it being a bad play call.

[Bull94]

Just now, brybull1970 said:

That's pretty much how all sports works - its an outcome based game. Strategies and decisions usually only get scrutinized when they blow up in your face.

But the problem - in this specific case - it didn't work, and it wasn't going to work because of what has been pointed out previously. And in the bigger picture if a rookie coach can make that king of series of mistakes then future decisions are likely to be scrutinized until he gets up to speed.

But, if there was ever a year to learn and mistakes this is it. 

clearly they thought it would work. it did earlier in the game.

bad calls can have good results just as good play calls can have bad outcomes.

[BrassBulls12]

6 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

it didn't work, and it wasn't going to work because of what has been pointed out previously.

Is there a lot of tape of that TE being a bad blocker? That's the only legitimate argument for that play not working. All the other armchair OC stuff is for the birds. you cant scheme your way out of one on one matches, particularly at the line of scrimmage. I hate to break it to you but if the TE doesn't seal the edge going the other way doesn't work either. That DE didnt give a **** about a pass option. 

Edited October 22, 2020 by BrassBulls12

[BiggTipp]

On 10/19/2020 at 3:47 PM, Friscobull said:

That play doesn’t even work against our crap D.  For you to defend that call is ridiculous, it was bush league and you are the only one claiming he guessed wrong and therefore should be absolved of any fault because it was just as likely the play would have worked than any other one.

 

 

Tell me what play call was made that got the score from 17-14 Temple to 21-17 USF...

[Triple B]

54 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

And here I thought the biggest issue was two fumbles by our QB, once in the red zone and once in the opponents red zone. Interesting....

Not sure why would you think a possible 14 point swing in a 2 point loss would be the biggest issue ...

[BiggTipp]

8 minutes ago, BiggTipp said:

 

 

Tell me what play call was made that got the score from 17-14 Temple to 21-17 USF...

Now having watched the 2 pt try and seeing Temple line up with 9 in the box, it was failed from the beginning. That would have been a perfect time for St. Felix to release his block and sit in the middle of the endzone. I watched the 2pt play at 1/2 speed. Blocking failed. St. Felix only put his hand on someone, neither f the pulling o-lineman ever blocked anybody, and the TE got pushed back into the backfield. BUT watch the DB's for Temple on that play...they were ALL run defense on that play. This may morph into another play where the play flows as usual for the qb sweep but NJ stops and takes a step back to deliver a pass to a potential wide open St. Felix in the endzone.

[BrassBulls12]

11 minutes ago, BiggTipp said:

 

 

Tell me what play call was made that got the score from 17-14 Temple to 21-17 USF...

That would QB buck sweep, into the boundary  I might add. notice the TE 89 sealing the edge allowing the back and QB to get outside.