• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Play calling

Grizdominate

Well-known member
My take on the play calling is that the offense is very limited right now. They have made the playbook small for Hartman and Samson. They really do not want to have to put either of them into a position to have to win or lose the game. And apparently Ochs is still a few weeks from being completely healed and his playbook is small also. As Ochs get healthier, the playbook will become larger.
 
Yeah, but a playbook being small has nothing to do with runs up the gut over and over again. No playbook, no matter how small, has so few pass plays. The playbook size really doesn't matter, because the playcalling is terrible. I think the Griz have a better arsenal of trick plays than they ever have had before, but the rest of the offensive attack is just not well coached from the OC position. That is in my opinion. In another post, someone mentioned that BH seamed a little miffed with the playcalling too, but I didn't hear tha interview. It will be interesting to see what he has to say. But this isn't like Glenn,s first year when there was someone else on staff to take over the play calling duties. Atleast that I am aware of. Who knows, and a win is a win. And I think that Ochs will make the playcalling look better just because he can audible out of it and work with his experience.
 
Nothing personal, but you two are full of doody.

Our runs today gained 168 yards and our passing 185 yards. And this with 2 freshmen QB's in for 65% of the game.

I hate to tell you this but those numbers are close to what Miami averages a game. Now if it had been 280 yards passing and 72 yards rushing you'd be singing the praises of the OC.

Miami averaged 381 yards per game in 2002. 211 passing, 170 rushing. A balanced attack can garner a 12-1 record and a NC appearance.

Hey 352 yards is 352 yards! Did you happen to notice Ochs passed the ball 22 times in a quarter and a half. They are running the ball with Hartman and Sampson because we would have had 4 interceptions today if we didn't.



Piss and moan, piss and moan.
 
I think we're playing it close to the vest. Don't want to expose anyone to injury and just burn the clock. Plus until Ochs played today, we didn't have a QB that had much success going vertical.

I think you'll start to see more of the vertical game next week when conference play begins. I hope we can still run for 100 + yards, but Ochs should start pushing the passing yardage up a bit! (Quite a bit!!!!)
 
I agree with Ronbo. We did what we had to do to beat a very good team. Ochs was not ready to play and had to play longer than the coaches wanted him to. The gameplan was sound. We wore them down with good offensive line play and our array of runningbacks got the yards to get the time-of-possession back in line. Good win, GRIZ! Cal Poly is much better than some people seem to think.
 
I think you missed our point? Were you at the game? Because if you were, or if you watched, there is no way you can't agree with what we are trying to say here. OUr offense is incredibly predictable. People sit in the stands and call the plays before we run them. First down - run, second down-run, third and long-pass. That is usualy how it goes. Someone mentioned on this board that even Hauck was a little questionab;e on the play caling. We are not whining, we are just saying thatwe think at some point this play calling could cost us. And if we had passed for 280 yards and only ran for 70 some yards, we might not be having this conversation because that is what Hauck said this team was going to be, a passing team. I think a win is a win, but I am concerned, as I think almost everyone is, with our offense. I think Ochs will handle it better than anyone has thus far.
 
I feel the coaches have done an overal very good job. We were not ready for a shootout, but we are getting closer, especially with Ochs healthy. Hauck has played it conservative and not allowed us to give the game away. And we have had very few injuries. I do believe by the time we play Sac State, we had better be ready to open it up. I am with 62Griz on this one.
 
Ronbo, you made my point for me

They are running the ball with Hartman and Sampson because we would have had 4 interceptions today if we didn't.

The playbook is small for Hartman and Sampson, very little in the way of pass plays. The playbook is small for Ochs because he lacks mobility due to injury, hence most every play out of the shotgun. This was all I was getting at, I not once complained about the playcalling, I just realize why plays are being called the way they are. Not asking too much from the freshman, and the same for Ochs.
 
Actually, i find good points on both side of this subject.

First off, going three and out as many times as we did is not acceptable. I know Hammerschmidt and Hauck agree with that...and good DC, HC and decent OC would agree.

Also, if they're going to play hartman it would be wise to pass on first down once in a while. Perhaps use simple plays, with short routes for the primary wrs that might lend to easy completions.

On the other hand, maybe the OC thought that Cal was going to give up yards to the run eventually. And we did gain good yards overall on the ground.

I'm curious though. How many of those rushing yards were on the 2 or 3 big runs we had. and what were we normally getting?

I'm also wondering, how many times the OC thinks having a rb only in the backfield is going to fool anyone. I loved it the first time, tolerated it the second...the third, i knew the OC was off his rocker.

I'm also curious with what qb we had the best success running the ball?

And was Ochs hurting? Is that why they didn't use him more? It can't be because he was leading scoring drives?

Overall, i'm happy with the win. But just by watching the drives with Ochs in i'm convinced we should have beaten Calpoly worse...and
am I the only one that thinks we saw WAAAYYY too much of Tyson Johnson?
 
My Bad, sorry. My reply was directed at those that think that this is the way the coaches will call the games all year.

I agree, right now we need to be more conservative, not throw the game away with picks that would happen for sure with the "Diaper Dandies". Have you seen their passes, dying ducks way off target. Interceptions just waiting to happen. They will get better with experience.
 
Hauck himself said in the postgame interview that they did not start Ochs in the third quarter because they were trying not to use him. He said his mobility is still not great and it limited the plays they could run with him.
 
Even with the limited playbook they could use with Ochs did you notice the team outscored Poly 17-0 when he was in there?

1st quarter and a half while Hartman and Samson played 7-0 Poly.

Last half of the 2nd quarter when Ochs was in 10-0 Griz.

3rd quarter with Hartman and Sampson 7-0 Poly

4th Quarter with Ochs 7-0 Griz.

Ochs 17 Poly 0 today! :D
 
I agree with you ronbo in one area for sure...the OC was trying to "protect" Hartman, and did everything he could to keep the weight off his shoulders. At least i think that was his intent. I can live with that part of it. My opinion is that he's trying to hard to protect the young qbs. hartman isn't that bad. in fact he's good. he's certainly capable of completeting short patterns. and 3rd and long only puts on more pressure.
for now i'm willing to chaulk that up to lack of coaching experience...however he was an OC before, whereas Hauck has never been a HC...perhaps Hauck want the plays called they way they are. Again, i state, it think its a little too much.

In the area of actual play calling i don't mind the running per say. If it were me though i'd vary the run play calls a little more. I think they know more, but perhaps the coaches don't feel they can teach more different plays.

I'm still happy with the win. And this game was a good game for us fans. It was sort of a reality check for us fans, and a good gut check for the players...this game reinforces in their minds/hearts that they can win a close game.

Its one game. Weber will be a pivital point in the season.
We've seen improvement 2 weeks in a row. vs idaho we found a running game. this week we found that we can pass the ball even if its only when Ochs is in the game.(though i still think they could pass decently with Hartman)
 
Is there a reason that we don't run a little play-action-pass (PAP)? One of the few times that it was called, it went for 40 yards to WW.
 
Thats a great point, and exactly what i was thinking during the game. especially in 1st and goal situations.

Many teams that run a lot could stand to use it WAY more.

But it works best if the team has a qb that can "sell" the handoff nicely...ie Craig Ochs. :)
 
I agree with much of what has been said here--but lets not lose sight of the fact that we played and beat a very good team. In previous games our domination in special teams has been a huge advantage--Cal Poly has been the first team to arguably best us in that category. Their punter had us pinned back inside the ten all afternoon, and their returns, especially kickoffs, were for good gains. Their flex defense kept us guessing all afternoon. Few penalties, one turnover all afternoon--- all signs of a well-coached team. Based on what I saw, Cal Poly is a heck of a lot better team than Idaho.
 
I think GrizMania said how many times having only a rb in the backfield is going to fool teams? Remember the big picture. We're not in conference yet. That play is going to come in handy down the road in a tie game in the fourth quarter when nothing else is working and we need a touchdown. There is a number of trick plays that can be ran out of that formation. So I think run it a couple of times a game and let other teams scout it and then use it in a crucial situation.

I was only able to listen to this game so maybe I'm wrong, if the coaches are worried about Hartman's throwing ability, why not run more WR screens? It doesn't seem like a lot have been thrown this year? They are nice short tosses that let our speedy WR's do what they can. They have done well in the past.
 
ronbo said:
Nothing personal, but you two are full of doody.

Our runs today gained 168 yards and our passing 185 yards. And this with 2 freshmen QB's in for 65% of the game.

.

Majority of the yards you put here was with Ochs in the game, and there was a passing threat. By protecting the freshman QB's so much, they have pretty much made it difficult for the offense to operate at all.

Hartman is as capable of completing short passes for a high percentage at this time but the coaches refuse to take the risk of letting him pass the ball. The coaches maybe trying to reduce the pressure on the young freshman QB's, but the predictible offense when Hartman is in leaves the Griz in many 3rd and long situations that tend to increase the pressure on the QB. They need to let Hartman pass the ball. And not just 3rd down because that is a down that carries a lot of pressure, and that, as mentioned is something you want to try to reduce. Need to mix it up.

But, I agree, need to keep the plays simplified for them. But doesn't mean they need to eliminate one facet of the game (passing) to keep it simple for them.
 
CaliGriz said:
I think GrizMania said how many times having only a rb in the backfield is going to fool teams? Remember the big picture. We're not in conference yet. That play is going to come in handy down the road in a tie game in the fourth quarter when nothing else is working and we need a touchdown. There is a number of trick plays that can be ran out of that formation. So I think run it a couple of times a game and let other teams scout it and then use it in a crucial situation.

Good point, and i can live with that i suppose...if that what the OC was thinking, but even though this is non-con game we need to win it and do everything we can. Having Hilliard in there as the qb with nobody else in the backfield won't fool anyone more than once a game, and the more we run it the more teams down the road will expect it, and the more they expect it the less effective it will be. That's why its wise to only run trick plays like this once.
On the other hand, it might be trickier to line up a qb back there in shotgun and do a direct snap to hilliard. by doing this you leave the defense guessing, and still allows the qb to audible out of the play if it looks like it wont work...and also in shotgun the opposing team will suspect pass more than run, where as when only the rb is in the backfield with no qb the other team knows 100% that he's gonna run.
 
"Having Hilliard in there as the qb with nobody else in the backfield won't fool anyone more than once a game, and the more we run it the more teams down the road will expect it."

That's the whole point (I hope :wink: ). Hopefully it isn't meant to fool anybody right now. Its's a set up for later on in the season. It's obvious he is going to run right now. Use it down the road when other teams expect run.

where as when only the rb is in the backfield with no qb the other team knows 100% that he's gonna run.

That wouldn't be much of a trick play then. Who says Hilliard can't throw to Ochs who can then throw it down field to Talmage on a fade down the other side of the field? I would bet he has the arm for it. Why else would Ochs be lining up at WR? (Maybe they didn't do that this week, I had to listen to the game so I couldn't see if Ochs was in for this play, last week they spread Hartman out at WR).Wouldn't that be great to pull on the Bobcats in a third and long right before half time to take the wind out of their sails? They think they have it scouted assuming it's a 100% run and Hilliard throws it to Ochs at WR and he guns it down field?
 
Back
Top