Playing To Win The Game: How Conservative Gameplans Hurt The Cougs
by Brian Floyd on Sep 15, 2010 5:39 PM PDT
Email
PrintA wise man -- OK, maybe not so wise, but a man nonetheless -- once said "You play to win the game." It doesn't matter what the result ends up being, play to win the game.
After the Montana State game, Chris Ball's comments made it clear the Cougars were not playing to win the game; they were playing not to lose.
"We got some blitzes in the game plan and looking back on it we should have come after him more in the first half," Co-defensive Coordinator Chris Ball said. "We got to half time and we said we got it in the game plan so let's use them. The kids executed great, got hands on the ball, and caught them."
Just before the game, Vince Grippi noted the team had been "tight" all week and that if a few breaks went the Bobcats way, things could spiral downward in a hurry. A first play interception and fumble in the second series proved that, as usual, Grippi was correct.
Being tight leading up to the game is no excuse for calling a conservative game off the bat. What's the best way to shake the nerves right away? Sitting back and playing not to make mistakes isn't it.
Needless to say, I completely disagree with the philosophy behind the way the WSU offense and defense were ran on Saturday. How much would it hurt to let the Cougs fly around and make plays on defense? Would opening up the playbook on offense -- even after a first-play interception on a basic pass play -- hurt WSU? The answer to both should be no and playing with the opposite mindset proved to be far more dangerous.
If this team isn't allowed to play aggressively, it has no chance of winning a game as the underdog. The players are going to make mistakes whether the gameplan is conservative or aggressive, so why not open it up and let them make mistakes at full speed?
I can't say it much better than Sean at WSU Football Blog, so I'm going to steal a quote from what he wrote and encourage everyone to read the rest of his piece.
Most of all, LET THEM FAIL. It's the only way they will improve, as they learn to pick themselves back up and get better after making the mistakes that come with youth and inexperience. LET THEM FAIL, and in the end they will become better players. And LET THEM FAIL on the side of aggressiveness, not by sitting back and letting things happen.
We've played two games and erred on the side of caution in each. Enough of it. These kids are young and excited to be out on the field. They're energetic and have more speed and talent than any of the other teams in Wulff's tenure. Use that energy in a positive manner and let them fly around, not sit in basic zone coverage meant to minimize mistakes.
The staff can no longer treat the team with kid gloves. Going forward, WSU will be the underdog in every game they play -- likely facing teams favored by multiple touchdowns. What does the staff have to lose playing an aggressive style? If the team wins, they pulled off an upset that excites the fanbase. If they lose, at least they went down swinging.
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Open up the playbook!
Wide receiver passes, wildcat formation with Williams, etc.
We need to be creative. We have the talent, now we just need to have the courage to use it!
Zero Confidence
I totally agree with the approach but this entire program has zero confidence as well. The last 2 weeks they have come out and looked lifeless for the most part. I would like to see them attack as well and see where that leaves "us".
I guess it's my deal
saying us when it is the team I am talking about. That’s just me though. I’m strange.
Couldn't have said it any better
Sick and tired of knowing what this team will before they do…..the coaches have become so conservative its not allowing these kids to grow as players and making this team almost as boring to watch as the Seattle Mariners.
At some point the players are going to lose faith in the coaches.
Who wants to play for a coach that is afraid to lose and doesn’t put the players in position to make plays?
4th Quarter
If the coaches needed any proof of the benefit of letting the players loose, its last week’s 4th quarter. Granted I only had a radio broadcast, but it sounded, and I’m sure it looked like, a different team.
SMU is definitely a team where we can’t sit back and let the game come to us. Their offense will chew us up. If the players are allowed to play loose and free and are allowed to go make plays, we could be very competitive.
I agree
If we didn’t turn the defense loose against MSU, we would have lost that game. Only when we came after the freshman QB and put some pressure on him did all of those good things in the 4th quarter happen. I’m not saying to be reckless, but there are 65 reasons from week 1 (admittedly, not all of those points were allowed by the defense, but hopefully my point is clear) as to why the “sit back and let a competent offense pick you apart and overpower you” strategy doesn’t work for the 2010 Cougs.
I know it's not as easy as saying "be more aggressive" and "play to win"
Sometimes, overaggression can lead to demoralizing big plays. So I understand there is a balance there somewhere.
To me, this is actually more about mindset than anything else. It was clear the mindset heading into Saturday was to sit back and wait for Montana State to make mistakes. Seemed like that was the case against OSU, too. My guess it’s because they’re afraid to “break” these kids with another bad performance. Only, it ends up leading to bad performances.
There needs to be an aggressive mindset instilled in the players, that, like you said, they’re going to go down swinging. Part of me wonders if it’s too late for that. That’s not something you turn on overnight.
I think we all desire the 01-03 defense...
…I mean they were the definition of aggressive defense, but their level of blitzing was not necessarily the reason for success. It was the belief in the system, the quality of the coaching, and most importantly the talent level. The upper-classmen talent level. I think any defensive system would have worked with those players.
It does seem that this group responds better to aggressive defensive plays, but the defense last week was also against a qb in his second start. What’s going to happen against Stanford, Cal, UW, etc. Teams with experience in the passing game may cause an otherwise competitive game into a blowout. But it’s also clear, for whatever reason, when they’re not blitzing, they seem to go in a shell and just let the other team pick them apart.
by dertingfactor on Sep 15, 2010 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions
at the very least, the kids need to show that they can execute...
…An “aggressive” set of plays in practice. If they can’t (discipline is critical in going aggressive), then why would the staff put the kids in a position where they are almost guaranteed to fail. Winning football at WSU is going to be about bending not breaking D, keeping the game close, and having a chance to win in 4th.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Sep 15, 2010 10:39 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
So, whose fault is it if they can't execute it in practice?
The coaches or the players? Never mind, don’t answer that. Don’t want to go there again …
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 15, 2010 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions
How can you gauge anything from a WSU practice?
I mean it’s one of the worst offenses in college football lining up against one of the worst defenses in college football. Winning in practice is like the equivalent of winning a gold medal in the special olympics.
by DoubledownA on Sep 15, 2010 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I get the gist of your comment
Just be careful about insensitive remarks. The Special Olympics are pretty freaking awesome, as are those kids/adults.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 15, 2010 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions
sorry about the comment
I just watched “WAITING”
by DoubledownA on Sep 15, 2010 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions
You think.....
uuuuhhhh never mind.
by well you win some and lose others on Sep 16, 2010 8:09 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah
Only Obama gets to make jokes like that and get away with it. The proletariat has no such luxury.
If the President frequented CougCenter and said the same thing
He’d get admonished, too.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 16, 2010 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Demoralizing Big Plays?
Need to crawl before you walk my friend. Lets just focus on making some plays before inserting any adjectives.
by DoubledownA on Sep 15, 2010 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions
you're not trying unless you run engage eight once or twice
by newportcoug on Sep 15, 2010 9:57 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Someone on Wulff's staff taking accountability?
Well that’s a start…though I have to admit, after the constant blame to Doba, Youth, Injuries and most recently Bloggers and Message Boarders, Ball’s comments are rather refreshing.
Bill Moos could save the athletic department a ton of money...
All he needs to do is hire Brian Floyd to be the football head coach, defensive coordinator, offensive coordinator, defensive and offensive line coach, line backers coach, quarterback coach, running back coach, defensive backs coach, and special teams coach. Hopefully he can coach both mens and womens basketball teams, along with taking over for Marbut when the baseball team loses to gonzaga because they were too tight and didn’t execute the sac bunts that should be the easiest thing in baseball to do.
I love the Cougs! I love being a Coug! I understand the desire for everyone to want to compete and be a respected program in the PAC10. But reading all of the analysis on here this week has been exhausting. I would consider myself a veteran coach. I have been doing this coaching thing for 14 years. I have been in programs with young inexperienced players with talent, and I have been in veteran talented programs, along with just about every other combination of experience and talent. With this being stated, I could coach for another 50 years and still wouldn’t have the right answer to many obstacles that come up during the season. To me, the Cougs are playing football exactly like a young talented team usually plays. Tight and lacking confidence, being out of postion, not making plays that they should. All of these are the ingredients to having a young and inexperienced program. If you’re not willing to be patient and welcome failure for learning purposes….then you will never rebuild a program succussfully that will stand the test of time. I’m sure the coaches have made mistakes, and I’m sure that they are addressing those mistakes. Usually when you have a young program the coaches will have to learn right along with the players. This season has hardly started and more blow out losses I’m sure are on the way, but I for one will be happy to see small amounts of improvement from the beginning of this season to the end.
This program went nearly 100 years with only 2 bowl game appearances. I’m sure this slump won’t last anywhere close to that.
Your perspective is valuable
But snarky swipes at the author are not. Knock it off.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 15, 2010 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions
In the words of Doc Holliday
what an ugly thing to say
Your comment hardly addresses any point Brian made in his post.
Playing aggressive is not about being impatient. He simply says that the coaching staff should open up the playbook a little bit, instead of dumbing it down for fear of mistakes.
And Brian already stated what he was looking for in this season before it started and it is pretty similar to your own expectations.
CougCenter Formerly known as Dancing Football
Twitter!
by Craig Powers on Sep 16, 2010 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions
You are correct.
That was a very unfair attack on my part. My apologies to Brian and anyone else that I upset. I didn’t address the issue that is really bugging myself and the handful of Cougar Alum that I discuss football with. My opinion is simply this, 1) It doesn’t matter what schemes, splits, offensive play calls, defensive blitz packages, and/or cadence changes that are being used, because this team has very inexperienced players playing pivitol positions. Would a few adjustments here and there make the games minor blow outs compared to major blow outs?….maybe. But maybe the coaches are looking down the road a couple years and understand that they need the kids to learn how to do things a certain way now, so they will be able to make those adjustments later. Those inexperienced players will continue to make many mistakes before they learn through experience how to eliminate those faults. They will learn it though, they are talented and athletic kids that will grow into very solid PAC10 athletes. 2) The mentality of athletes and coaches has changed a lot in the past 10 years. Athletes these days need confidence and positive reinforcement more than ever. When I look at Paul Wulff and his coaching staff I see a coaching staff that is doing their best to encourage and instill confidence into their athletes. 10 years ago at coaching clinics all over the country the lectures were about tactical strategy and game planning. Over the past few years I’ve noticed that now half of the lectures are about “how to motivate today’s athlete”, “How to gain the mental edge”, and “How to develop a PMA”. I’m not saying that there’s anything wrong with paying more attention to the emotional and mental side of athletes than what has been in the past, it’s just different, and that’s the approach I see the Cougar coaching staff taking with this youthful and athletically gifted team.
For the past two seasons the line that I’ve heard from the majority of people is that “It’s hard to make chicken salad out of chicken poop” (keep in mind that i live in an agricultural community, so this line gets delivered as much as the mail). This year however, it feels as though we have an egg sitting in an incubator and hopefully by this time next year we’ll have the right ingredients for the salad.
Again I apologize to Mr. Floyd. He’s calling it as he sees it…..just like the rest of us. GO COUGS!
You are not all wrong
but you are also not all right. I agree that there is still a a very significant talent deficit in several key areas, namely in our linebackers and offensive lines. These are obviously crucial positions to offensive and defensive success, and I do not think that a lot of wins would have been had by any coach the last two years, namely because of those issues.
However, I think, and I believe this is how Brian feels (correct me if I am wrong Brian), that those deficiencies are things that can now be schemed around. We can protect our shoddy O Line by moving Tuel out of the pocket more. We can protect our linbackers, who struggle shedding/blowing up blockers, by making sure that we have four down lineman damn near every snap, so that only one O Lineman can get to the second level. It is as simple as playing to your relative strengths and protecting your relative weaknesses, and frankly that is something that I have never seen from Wulff and Co.
by Fightfightfight on Sep 16, 2010 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it will all click eventually this season.
If Tuel rolls out or if Paul Wulff hires a therapist. Somethings got to give.
Wulff is not only destroying a football program
He’s breaking up what seemed to be the most perfect marriage, COUGAR NATION. It’s so sad to watch.
If you knew what you were talking about
you would have been saying that when Bill Doba was coaching. I was saying it in his first 10 win season when we should have won more games and people thought I was crazy…Wulff is trying to rebuild, it was already destroyed.
Sounds good to me.
I completely agree that playing to strengths will help. I just have a hard time believing that our coaching staff isn’t seeing the same things. Coach Wulff competed with Oregon St. when he was at Eastern and I believe he beat Colorado while at Eastern. With FCS talent and size he was able to compete at a high level, I just don’t see how he and his coaching staff could forget how to do that. So in my opinion there has to be more than what meets the eye when it comes to the schemes and adjustments that have been or have not been made. Anywho, it really is an endless discussion when it comes to rebuilding programs. GO COUGS!
The problem with that
is that way of thinking is just an appeal to authority. The fact is they HAVE identified the strengths, that is how we know what our strengths are. All through the offseason we heard about how improved our D Line and secondary are, but we do not schematically capitalize on those strengths. We schematically weaken our defensive line when we only put 3 hands in the dirt, which we do quite a bit. We do not have the bulk on our line to have someone roving around without having our linebackers smothered in offensive lineman in the running game.
Offensively, we know Tuel can move, that he has play makers at wide receiver, and that our O Line and running backs are comparatively weaker than the rest of the offense. The reason we question the scheme is that we consistently try and run up the gut and throw from the pocket. This is not working, hasn’t worked since Wulff has been here and I have serious doubts that it will work for the next couple of years.
by Fightfightfight on Sep 17, 2010 11:19 AM 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.
