Washington State vs. Montana State: Game Thoughts
by Brian Floyd on Sep 11, 2010 11:45 PM PDT
Email
PrintWhile it's fresh in my mind, I might as well rehash the game.
- It's common knowledge the opening series for most teams is scripted. Apparently the script called for Jeff Tuel to hit Jared Karstetter on a five-yard out to start the game. That worked out swimmingly. I don't know why Tuel even threw the ball, but there was no way that ball was getting to Karstetter.
- Bend but don't break defense was fun in the first quarter, wasn't it? Montana State drove the field, ended up deep in WSU territory and settled for a field goal each time.
- Second series for WSU. Nice strike to Karstetter for the first down, followed by a screen pass to James Montgomery that would've been for a first down until he fumbled. Two series, two turnovers.
- Reid Forrest uncorked two punts over 50 yards, another over 40 and had one 19 yard punt. Mark it down, this was the only mistake our Heisman contender will make. He also got drilled on a punt and limped off the field in the third quarter. My hopes and dreams almost came crashing down in front of my eyes.
- Against an undersized -- but quick -- defensive line, the Cougar offensive line decided to stick to their normal wide-splits. As a result, MSU was able to make a quick rip-move and cruise past the blockers. The result? Blown up run plays and a quarterback running for his life at times. A simple adjustment -- tightening up the splits -- should've fixed this.
- To go along with the splits, would it kill Tuel to change up the cadence? Maybe make the defense show by going with a hard-count? Instead, MSU had him timed by the middle of the first quarter and exploited it. Players coming on a blitz were able to crash the offensive line at full-speed because the cadence were so predictable. Change it up. It's simple, but it does wonders.
- The MSU cornerbacks were also undersized. With a big, physical wide receiver like Karstetter, it seemed like it would've been easy to abuse them. The corners were matched up in man on the outside frequently, and simply throwing the ball up for the receivers to make a play would've been a sound strategy.
- The WSU goal-line offense needs work, to put it nicely. With a chance to seal the game after Alex Hoffman-Ellis' interception, they couldn't punch it in from the two. Earlier in the game, it took four plays from the three to punch it in, with James Montgomery finally breaking through for the Cougs on fourth down. As the bigger team, it was shocking that they couldn't simply run over MSU.
- The Cougs burned two timeouts on one possession in the second quarter, using them within two plays of each other. After James Montgomery broke a run for a 70 yard gain, WSU had to call a timeout. After a 16 yard Chantz Staden gain, WSU had to call another timeout because of formation issues. This is a serious problem.
- I was incredibly upset with the running backs in the second quarter. Shortly thereafter, James Montgomery broke his long run off and Chantz Staden caught a screen pass, made a nifty move and almost took it the distance. The running game still needs to get going, but seeing a 100 yard rusher again was nice.
I want nothing more than to see Mizell succeed and I hope the taste of action he saw today -- and the success he had in his time on the field -- pushes him to continue working in film and in practice to improve. Seriously, the sky is the limit with him if he puts in the work he needs to.
62 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
We need that chart.
Good process, bad results, etc.
by Kyle Rancourt on Sep 12, 2010 3:17 AM PDT up reply actions
It depends
I think it’s safe to assume you’re disappointed in what you saw yesterday…how would you feel if we didn’t get the W? if we had lost 22-20, do you have the same level of disappointment, are you even more outraged, indifferent? I think for this game a win was an absolute must, a loss would have been a total crusher for the staff, players, fans, so in that sense the result does matter.
For the mentality of the players and fans, yes
But whether we pulled the game out or not doesn’t change the opinion I formed watching the team throughout the game. I’d be more embarrassed had we lost, but I wasn’t exactly sunshine and lollipops after we won.
"I’d be more embarrassed had we lost"
WINNER. The end result impacted largely by a handful of pretty fluky plays does significantly impact my interpretation of what I saw.
Sorry, that should be "does not"
My brain isn’t quite working yet, since I actually saw a Seahawks dominant victory today. I’m all discombobulated.
Ok, help me out here
Didn’t have access to TV or radio during the game, so I watched it on my phone’s (very slow to update clock time) ESPN app… What happened with the possession in the 4th after Mizell’s pick? Looked at first like we were taking knees to kill it, but then it showed a -3 yrd rush for Tuel on 4th down. 3 knees and a botched snap on the FG? With this team three rushes for negative yardage is believable, but that 4th down piece made zero sense…
Rooting for lovable losers since 1984.
Though, I have to proudly say...
At least we’re not the 2008 Huskies!!!
Rooting for lovable losers since 1984.
by seattlecougar on Sep 12, 2010 2:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Wulff seemed to think that kneeling on 4th down would drain the clock
Since that play results on a TO on downs, the clock stops. Wulff did not know this… and that right there is part of why I want him long gone.
My brother gets to be on the field during the games.
He said that Wulff was saying that there was a 15 second mistake on the game clock that would have allowed us to run out the clock by taking a knee. The officials even admitted the mistake but said they couldn’t do anything about it. That said I still would have ran the ball on third down and possibly tried a FG on 4th down.
by Cougars Hunt and Kill on Sep 12, 2010 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Here's what I don't understand
We got the ball with 1:02 on clock, or something close to that. We sat on it, ran the play clock to eight seconds, sat on it again and they called timeout.
So, with a 40 second running play clock that is started immediately after the play (rule change), the timing seemed like it wasn’t off. That’s what doesn’t make sense to me. I don’t know that it was a timing error. Again, I’m not sure.
by Brian Floyd on Sep 12, 2010 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions
If the clock starts winding after the first kneel (first down), and he snaps it with eight seconds on the play clock.
You are looking at around 28 seconds left he takes a knee for 2nd down. They call timeout with 25, we take another knee on 3rd down. They call their last timeout. Now it is fourth down with around 20 seconds left. It sure does not look like a timing error to me, since MSU got the ball back with 16 seconds.
CougCenter Formerly known as Dancing Football
Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 12, 2010 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions
OK, good. I thought I was crazy
Because I saw them take a knee on the first play and it didn’t add up to me.
I believe the rule used to be the playclock wound when the ball was set. Two years ago, it changed and the clock started immediately following the play. It may seem small, but it’s about a 10 second difference.
by Brian Floyd on Sep 12, 2010 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions
The play clock was only 25 when they wound it at the set of the ball.
CougCenter Formerly known as Dancing Football
Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 12, 2010 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions
In that case, it probably still ends up being a negligible difference
Since the clock was wound on the set and it takes a good 10-15 seconds to set the ball. Yes, it was wrong, but the difference was likely so small it didn’t matter.
by Brian Floyd on Sep 12, 2010 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't think it was a timing error
I think it was a coaching staff not knowing the rule change error.
What really bugs me is that after MSU called that first timeout, and now we know that they have one more timeout and we can’t run the clock out, why not try and run the ball on 3rd and 4th down. More time goes off the clock, and concievably we might get the first.
To me, taking a knee and handing it back to them shows no confidence that the running backs/o line/QB can execute simple dive plays without something horrendous happening.
Because you might fumble
Do you really think that couldn’t happen? After everything we’ve seen the last two years?
Thats ridiculous
To think any football coach doesn’t understand the rule for a change of possesion. I was under the impression that ignorance was not allowed on this prestigious site.
There are so many other options other than kneeling on that 4th down.
1. Kick a field goal. Yes you run the risk of a block but a 4 point lead is much better than a 1 point lead.
2. Throw a 3 step drop fade to the corner of the endzone. Its relatively low risk unless one of our linemen fall down. You have a shot to seal the game, and even if it is incomplete, you run of as much or more clock than the kneel, and you don’t lose yardage.
3. Have Tuel chuck it as high and deep as he can out of the back of the endzone. The clock doesn’t stop till the ball hits the ground. It runs off more clock than the kneel, and again, we don’t lose yardage.
4. Run it.
All of these options are better than a kneel. And don’t forget, they snapped the ball with :08 on the play clock on second down, probably thinking that because MSU didn’t use one of their two timeouts right away, that they wouldn’t use them or something. This part of yesterday has me the most frustrated because any 14 year old who is good at NCAA football can utilize better clock management. It is basic, basic football.
by spencer peaty on Sep 12, 2010 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I guess...
4 is the best option.
by well you win some and lose others on Sep 12, 2010 8:45 AM PDT up reply actions
A couple things.
The cougs played awful, and the coaching was awful as well. But, based off of what you said, there is one thing I want to point out:
The two field goals in the first were from turnovers, the other team was easily already in field goal range. Also, from what I heard on the radio after the game was over, was that the cougs should have been able to run out the clock, but a officiating mistake was made and they only had 25 seconds instead of 40 seconds to hike the ball. Why on earth Wulff didn’t decide to run a play on 4th when he knew that he couldn’t run out the clock, is beyond me.
Seriously
Even if the officials mangled the clock, that doesn’t at all excuse the decision to then give them the ball back. Knowing that just makes me even more upset, as I would have slightly tolerated ignorance over outright incompetence.
This may be an unfair bit of guesswork, but if forced to guess- I’d say this was more about Wulff not having the confidence in his team to not turn the ball over.
In the bit Grippi just posted, he basically says that a lot of the bad play was because the team was “too tight” as if that somehow excuses things. Isn’t shaping the team’s attitude prior to the game part of the coach’s job? That just sounds like he didn’t have them ready to play.
twitter.com/b_dids Here, I am batman.
...
As I mentioned above, they should have ran a play on 4th to use up more of the clock (a run play would have been best). Also, the defense needs to be blitzing and putting more pressure on the quarterback. The defensive plays towards the end of the game, started happening because of this pressure. I have lost faith in this coaching staff, and unless they are somehow able to help this team win another game, they probably wont get it back from me. I’ll always be rooting for this team though, hoping for a miracle.
I wrote this in my post above but I'll restate it here
after 1st down the play clock read :08 seconds when they snapped the ball.
by spencer peaty on Sep 12, 2010 7:52 AM PDT up reply actions
And how is that not something that you tell the QB before he starts the series
“The most important thing to do is snap the ball with 1 second left”.
I mean I’m not a football coach, and maybe that’s something you assume has been drilled into the kid so you don’t have to remind him, but really?
Either Tuel’s just making 8th grade level mistakes or he’s not getting coached up. The first calls into question what measures for accountability exist within Wulff’s system, and the second reflects on attention to detail. Either way- those are the sorts of things that should be really important to a program in this state. We can’t change the talent, we can’t magically age players, but we can make sure we know what we’re doing and are as absolutely prepared as possible.
twitter.com/b_dids Here, I am batman.
by Dids on Sep 12, 2010 8:58 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
good point
Ive never seen a football team more inept at starting out a game than the Cougs of the past 3 years. You would think that over his tenure, Wulff might be able to scheme up a few surprises. But like Wulff said in the interview, his teams just don’t make plays to build any momentum.
At this rate, what will happen in our first play against SMU?
1st game- Fumble
2nd game- Interception
3rd game-?
My guess is either a safty or an intergalactic invasion.
by spencer peaty on Sep 12, 2010 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions
The last one would make my "alternate reality" piece pretty boring.
CougCenter Formerly known as Dancing Football
Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 12, 2010 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions
It's not Wulff's job to scheme up a few surprises
It’s his job to find a coordinator who can scheme up a few surprises. I’ll leave it at that.
i still think that a pac-10 team should not have to come up with surprises for a big sky team
by BigWood! on Sep 12, 2010 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
You are correct.
I really just mean that it’s up to the coordinator to come up with a plan to defeat the other team. Neither coordinator comported himself well on that front. And, again, I’ll leave it at that.
Running game
if you remove Montgomery’s 70 yard run, he had 19 other carries for 46 yards, just over 2.4 yards per carry. this is a major problem. I never had any expectations that we would have a power run game like a Wisconsin or Ohio State or something, but this absolutely has to improve.
Brian wrote about the splits being off and I didn’t get to see the game so maybe someone else can give some more insight here, but were we able to blow the Dline off the line at all? Were the play calls bad? were there holes available but the RB’s just ran straight into a linebacker? the lack of a running game against a team that by default is supposed to be smaller is disconcerting.
Based on Brian’s review there seems to be a lot of things that qualify as questionable coaching/in-game adjustment type things, i.e. the line splits, QB cadence, first series scripting. I’m not saying this is all on Wulff, the coordinators and other assistants are on the hook here as well.
Here was my problem with the OLine and running game
We kept running the stretch play against a smaller, faster defense. Their quick, little guys were then able to shoot the gaps in the stretch and drag the back down in the backfield.
This is where the splits come into play. Tighten them up and literally run it down their throat. We weren’t gonna beat them to the edge. Our one long run — the 70 yarder — was on a backside zone play that Montgomery ran to perfection. Other than that, we just weren’t blowing them off the line and weren’t blocking very well. Some of that has to do with technique, some has to do with how WSU and MSU were lined up.
key observation
Brian- this is my main gripe about the schemes for the Cougs. The splits frequently strike me, on both O and D, as disadvantageous. I felt the experienced Mont. St. linemen would give us some trouble- they are a good run defense team the last 3 years- but that our inherent girth would wear them down. We gave them huge gaps and they split them all day. I totally agree that w/ Zach, Guerra and Roxas- the lack of speed/quickness creates a need for tight gaps.
If you can't Go Cougs... don't go.
by hollyweirdcoug on Sep 12, 2010 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions
I obviously completely agree
And, really, it’s such a simple adjustment to make. “Ok, guys, everyone take a step towards the center.” Nothing has to change with the blocking scheme, it just simply means tightening it up a little. Instead, the quicker MSU defensive linemen were able to use their quickness and a rip move to blow by our interior linemen.
so who should be stepping up
and saying something about the splits in this scenario? one of the linemen says something to the OL coach? the OL coach sees it himself and at the next dead ball he tells them to change it? the offensive coordinator? QB, headcoach?? etc etc.
I’d really like to know more about the coach/player interaction during the game and what’s being communicated in real time down there(they should do “Hard Knocks Wazzu”.)
someone in the booth upstairs should be saying something
by BigWood! on Sep 12, 2010 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Yep.
CougCenter Formerly known as Dancing Football
Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 12, 2010 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions
After most Coug sports events
I feel better about it the nest morning. This makes two weeks in a row where that isn’t the case.
Cougar999 version 2.0. Now with a shorter name!
It was good we had a timeout left at the end of the game...
Because lining up the safeties on the goalline was so stupid it could have cost us the game. We were screaming “PUT YOUR FEET ON THE 40” while our safeties were sitting at the five yard line.
Sigh.
Walden utterly flipped his shit in the booth
and was yelling down to th field as if they could hear him.
Totally hilarious. Got so wrapped up in being amused that I forgot about it in terms of a coaching failure.
twitter.com/b_dids Here, I am batman.
LOL @ Walden
Though I thought he was Wulff’s sole supporter in the program. I can’t believe he didn’t make up excuses for Paul as he does on a regular basis.
I watched the replay of the game
and in all fairness to Wulff he was screaming at the secondary to move up on that play and was the one who called the time out. He was flipping out just as much as everyone else was when he saw our DBs lined up way to far back.
by Cougars Hunt and Kill on Sep 12, 2010 7:18 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
So, the quesiton is ...
Where did those guys get it in their heads that that was where they should line up? I’m sure they didn’t imagine it …
Is your opinion of Wulff shifting?
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
I'm going to more or less keep my thoughts to myself until after this weekend
But I was really, REALLY unhappy yesterday.
I noticed a deafening silence
I won’t press, but I noticed reservation in your comments the past two days.
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
I had to go to the bar to watch the game yesterday
And I was gone at the Seahawks today, so don’t read too much into it. But I do need to sort out a number of thoughts before I write anything much of substance this week.
Sometimes players don't
do exactly what they are supposed to! It’s also possible that a different staff member advised the DBs to be that deep. Clearly Wulff did not approve.
by Cougars Hunt and Kill on Sep 12, 2010 9:25 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Lee Corso
“An experienced coach would call this play” Prevent
by newportcoug on Sep 12, 2010 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on CougCenter
Related FanShots on CougCenter
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
