forums

An evidence-based review of our L vs TAMU (via images)

LuCane said:
Perhaps subjective, but I think both of those are plain drops. They're on the RB and WR. I'm more concerned with TVD's timing and anticipation on other plays and maybe it's not fair, but part of it is he's held to a higher standard than WRs we know have issues. But, that part is opinion.

I'm on the hunt to find all of the WR/TE drops.

If anyone has another link to the full game, I'm in. I've jumped around so far, and certain I've missed some, as @cway313 pointed out.
Click to expand...
Espn app has the full game.

PFF usually has the drop stuff, but I let my subscription expire.
 
Advertisement
LuCane said:
Perhaps subjective, but I think both of those are plain drops. They're on the RB and WR. I'm more concerned with TVD's timing and anticipation on other plays and maybe it's not fair, but part of it is he's held to a higher standard than WRs we know have issues. But, that part is opinion.

I'm on the hunt to find all of the WR/TE drops.

If anyone has another link to the full game, I'm in. I've jumped around so far, and certain I've missed some, as @cway313 pointed out.
Click to expand...
The throw to Parrish had the velocity it needed. Any slower and the LB would have caught up.
 
AUcane said:
Redding did not have all those drops. People are giving him a hard time for 2 throws that were virtually impossible throws to
Catch.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Dude almost gets his head taken off and somehow that’s a drop. Get outtta here.
 
LuCane said:
I would say the biggest issue with the WRs is that they're not fast enough (as a group) to run some of the plays we're asking. And, the combination of not getting separation and not having a clear contested catch player... is a clear limiting factor of any offense.

I didn't address it in the OP, but I thought Knighton played a solid game. Saw some posters debating that, so figured I'd give my two cents.
Click to expand...
I got a seat saved for you, had ALOT of applications last night but been driving this bus for AWHILE now.. Was told before I make to big a deal about it but WE NEED SPEEEEEED BAD. We scare no one. Clemson will do same and not be afraid of our wr and DARE us to beat them overtop.
 
scrantoncane said:
Espn app has the full game.

PFF usually has the drop stuff, but I let my subscription expire.
Click to expand...
My only issue with that is apparently drops are subjective. I've listened to peers tell me the Redding clear-out incompletion should be a drop (as noted in OP) and others tell me Key Smith vertical route should be a drop (he "touched" it). I don't know what the criteria is for a drop vs a poor throw, but I disagreed with them on those two plays.
 
Here’s my thoughts.

If you ask TVD to read one side of the field or just decide between 2 options he can be really good.

When you ask him to see the entire field he’s struggles.

There were one on one opportunities last night where he could have attempted jump balls and back shoulder throws.

(I’ve always felt his accuracy on deep shots is not great and he often doesn’t put the ball in the spot where a WR can make a play.)

I think everyone was expecting him to get better and play like a top pick.

With what we’ve seen on film he’s really not ready for the NFL today.

But credit to TAMU they found one thing that made TVD very uncomfortable and over the course of the game he started to panic.

And it was dropping 8 into coverage the more they did it, the more he started bailing, not trusting his protection and even had a scramble on a 3rd and 24 literally about two seconds into the play.

They took away his first read and he never really figured it out.

Now on to coach Gattis

I actually like how he called the game. I liked how mitigated their pass rush even though the pace was slow.

But yes he can help TVD out with more “easy” reads mixed in.

—-

The Wr

More separation would be nice. But I wouldn’t mind just seeing more accurate balls place in an area that gives them a chance to make a play before I just write them off.
 
LuCane said:
Just finished a play by play game review. Not sure I'm interested in debating some of the narratives out there right now. Have seen a ton of confirmation bias as reactions and I'm trying my best to avoid the same. I *am* interested in trying to keep things to facts. Going to do my best to avoid leaps of logic and keep this to plain observations. Open to your help, too. Will focus mostly on the offense.

We gained 392 yards.
We ran 77 plays.
We averaged 5.1 yards/play. (that's around 80th in the NCAA, which lines up with about the rest of our year so far)
We were 5/14 on 3rd down conversions (that's about 36%, which is in the 70s).
We were 0/1 on 4th down conversions.

Here's what I found (click the thumbnails for larger view):

View attachment 208699

- Had to add this to a mostly "offensive" review of the game. Ivey takes a lot of heat when he's lackadaisical or his instincts fail him. He personally got us off the field twice last night. On two big 3rd downs, he played an in-breaking WR aggressively, used his long arm, and made plays. Let's keep the same energy on good and bad. He deserves credit for perhaps his best game as a Cane.

View attachment 208700

- Not necessarily "offense," but this PR made the list. Stevenson made an awful play here. It happens. I'm not sure why it was such a surprise. Despite his age and leadership, he made some risky punt return decisions (didn't he jump to catch one?) last week.

View attachment 208701

- I contemplated making "DROPS" a thread of its own. Here's one of the two clearest and most impactful of the game. Parrish made a mistake. It happens, too. Unfortunately, this one cost us a bunch as you can see by how the field was setup. For all the gripes about Gattis' RZ playcalling and overall approach, this was one of his very slick calls.

On the DROPS TOPIC, there was another obvious one: BSmith's to end the game. Other than that, I counted Key Smith on a crossing route where TVD had two LBs blitzing and threw the ball slightly high, though it's unclear on re-watch if the pass was broken up by the DB or just bounced off Key's hands. Parrish also had a possible "drop" on the last series on an angle route, though again it may be argued as a PBU by a defender. Even if we count those, that's 4. Are people counting the 16 yard completion as a drop because Key Smith might have let it slip on that under throw? It was counted as a reception.

**Plainly, I could not collect matching data to the "6-8" drops most people are claiming on the board. If you can help me identify them, maybe we can increase substantive, fact-based discussions.**

View attachment 208704

- Again, not "offense," but points-related. This blocked FG hurt.

View attachment 208705

- Without a headset or being inside the film room, difficult to fully say what the heck happened on this play. George comes across the formation on a crosser that he turns upfield (doesn't appear by design, but who knows). TVD locks in and gives the Safety ample time to get all the way across and disrupt the play. Did George get lost with the ball in the air? Should TVD have thrown George open toward the sideline? I read people called George lazy or soft on this play, and maybe that's true, but it looked like a sloppy mess if you watch the entire play closely.

View attachment 208706

- Don't know who you "blame" on this, necessarily. Saw another poster mention this is on Key Smith for being "soft." Thought that was a weird accusation, as this play ended up as an incompletion Key Smith essentially never touched. TVD threw the ball before the break and the timing was just completely off. This is more about expecting TVD and Key Smith to have this rapport to throw a precise, timing-based route.

View attachment 208707

- This play design was intended for a big vertical play. Key Smith feigns the run action/block and then takes off. TVD rolls right and just misses. Yes, Key Smith "touched" the ball. Not sure if people are counting this is as drop. He literally is horizontal while diving and nips it with one hand. The ball, as the announcers noted, was not given a lot of air/touch. Whose "fault?"

For the record, let me be clear that I don't think our WRs are "good." Clearly, they're not good enough to do what we need. I just like to keep things to facts and evidence. Where they struggle MORE seems to be in creating separation or scaring defenders to provide cushion. To me, that's an unreasonable ask of a bunch of WRs of whom have maybe 1-2 speed guys. More realistically, we have to scheme them open and, if they THEN drop the ball (like the last play), they deserve the "wrath."

View attachment 208708

- A play that's been highly debated already. Some say this "designed" TVD run was a mess of a call. I saw a couple people get on other posters claiming it was an RPO and therefore a bad decision. Let's be absolutely clear, if this was an RPO, there was no pass option TVD looked at...ever. No one on the boundary side, where TVD's eyes flow to, went out for a pass. If this was an option, it was a zone read and TVD kept it.

View attachment 208709

- Here's clearer proof of the above note. On the field side (to the right), we have two receivers. TVD ends up keeping this and running to his left.

View attachment 208710

- Another highly "debated" play. Some say this was a "drop" by Redding. The announcers laid the blame on the OL. Both of those perspectives, live and on re-watch, seem like reaches. This was a beautifully designed clear-out play to get Redding running free. The OL held their own for a nice few ticks here. I consider this incompletion a big miss by TVD - who could have put a tiny bit more air or just thrown a more accurate pass. This was likely a game changing play.

View attachment 208712

- If people want to gripe about a significant limitation of our offense beyond not having enough speed at WR, I think 1b is that our WRs often are "body catchers." While this play above may not be the perfect example because there is a closing defender (which often makes WRs shield and collect the ball with their bodies), I'm using it as an example of how little I see our WRs extend their arms and snatch the ball with their hands. I guess George does it sometimes, from what I've seen. We need more of it.

View attachment 208713

- Because I'm explicitly trying to keep this factual, everyone should give Gattis credit here for the play design. Beautiful clear out to isolate Mallory on a crossing route.

View attachment 208714

- My issue with the result is the same I said in this thread: https://www.canesinsight.com/threads/elijah-arroyo-vs-tamu.179806/. And, in other places. I think these plays are better suited for Arroyo. Once Mallory out ran the out-leveraged defender (by design), he had a one on one. He couldn't win it, unfortunately, and the play's chunk got limited. Kudos to Mallory for coming back in after getting banged up. I still think this is a play we should try with the player who can more likely win an athletic matchup downfield.

View attachment 208715

- Our offense will continue to be widely debated. Including in this thread, I imagine. I'm asking for more of this for TVD. This was a quick out to George, who had been given significant cushion by an inside defender. TVD apparently needs quicker throws. Talked about that after last week's game re: RPOs. This was a nice throw and gain.

View attachment 208716

- This is obviously NOT an image of the drop to seal the game. Instead, this is a dink on a key 3rd down. What I didn't understand is why many posters saw this as a limitation of our WR? The ball was thrown directly into a zone defender. There wasn't anywhere to go. We had some really good man coverages busters during the game, but missed a few chances to bust zone coverages. TAMU was happy to sit there a few times and let us limit ourselves.

Ok, on to the discussion and I can give my own conclusions later.
Click to expand...
Excellent and fair post!

I agree fully on the giving TVD way more RPO and easy reads, instead of trying to force him to be something that he isn’t. Great coaches scheme to their player’s strengths. We have been saying this same thing for the past 17 years or so.

Gattis called some good plays, and the receivers and Parrish definitely had some costly drops, but his slow developing WR routes and lack of attacking inside the red zone is perplexing. We have a 6’4” WR on the bench collecting dust that could have been used on a fade route/jump ball in the end zone on various occasions, yet not once was he used. As a matter of fact, we never tried to pass the ball to the end zone.

In the 4th quarter, we had the one drive where we ran with Parrish for 3 yards, a TVD keeper (one of the plays you highlighted) for 2 yards, and another run for 1 yard. Just awful play calling. Way too vanilla and uncreative. We have a QB on the bench that is a super talented, fast and physical runner in Jacurri Brown. If we wanted to run the QB in that situation, why not have him in the game to run zone read inside the 10 if we weren’t planning on ever throwing the ball? Frustrating to say the least.

TVD is overthinking on many of his throws, and the WR’s are doing the same on their routes. This is a timing based passing game, with lots of terminology and way more plays and route options than what Lashlee ran. Complexity can often be a detractor, specially when you have player’s that are not experienced in this kind of system, or whose strengths are better suited for a different scheme.

I’ve said in many threads since last night. Either Mario adapts and evolves, or history will surely not be kind to him.
 
skyman said:
I got a seat saved for you, had ALOT of applications last night but been driving this bus for AWHILE now.. Was told before I make to big a deal about it but WE NEED SPEEEEEED BAD. We scare no one. Clemson will do same and not be afraid of our wr and DARE us to beat them overtop.
Click to expand...
I think it can be multiple issues. They are what they are, but our results are worse than what the WR limitations should net. Man, we're seemingly out of sync in the intermediate and deep passing games. One of the biggest conclusions I think can be drawn from looking at the specific plays was that, even when Gattis called a beauty, either TVD couldn't connect or the player (Mallory, as one example) couldn't make a 1 on 1 play. So, we're back to needing too many variables to fall in place to be successful.
 
Advertisement
Agreed on all this, I think a good bit of this was on TVD, which I hate because he could be a dude. That route by George turning up the field should have been thrown to the boundary, he also had a few throws in zone that he threw his wr into trouble like you pointed out. I’ve said it in another thread but the guy can’t fall apart just because his roommate gets hurt, he’s had a whole off-season to build relationships with other wrs and it just doesn’t look like it’s happened.
 
LuCane said:
I think it can be multiple issues. They are what they are, but our results are worse than what the WR limitations should net. Man, we're seemingly out of sync in the intermediate and deep passing games. One of the biggest conclusions I think can be drawn from looking at the specific plays was that, even when Gattis called a beauty, either TVD couldn't connect or the player (Mallory, as one example), couldn't make a 1 on 1 play. So, we're back to needing too many variables to fall in place to be successful.
Click to expand...

Yep, this system is a low margin for error offense. That may work with an Uber talented team but not for our team and especially not for 10+ play drives.
 
Our fanbase lives in extremes like most other fan bases. It’s easy to blame the person you already wanted to blame anyway. What I saw last night was a combo of:

TVDs inaccuracy and locking in on WR
A lack of play making ability from WRs
A few drops
Some poor red zone play design
Lack of zone beating routes concepts

I think what everyone is actually mad about is our new offensive philosophy of ball control, high efficiency and complimentary to the defense. The new philosophy is Mario’s, but I think our fans aren’t going to throw Mario under the bus game 3 and know it’s here forever. In essence, they would have rather lost last night 38-7 as long as we went fast and had more chunk plays that ended up stalling out.

Just my $.02. There is not single factor analysis. It’s all kind of a mess right now
 
LuCane said:
I would say the biggest issue with the WRs is that they're not fast enough (as a group) to run some of the plays we're asking. And, the combination of not getting separation and not having a clear contested catch player... is a clear limiting factor of any offense.

I didn't address it in the OP, but I thought Knighton played a solid game. Saw some posters debating that, so figured I'd give my two cents.
Click to expand...
Speed is definitely an issue. Not saying route’s aren’t but if you do not have speed then how can you judge the routes fairly? In recruiting, Mario is prioritizing speed in our WR’s for a reason.
 
LuCane said:
I think it can be multiple issues. They are what they are, but our results are worse than what the WR limitations should net. Man, we're seemingly out of sync in the intermediate and deep passing games. One of the biggest conclusions I think can be drawn from looking at the specific plays was that, even when Gattis called a beauty, either TVD couldn't connect or the player (Mallory, as one example), couldn't make a 1 on 1 play. So, we're back to needing too many variables to fall in place to be successful.
Click to expand...
On drive one I was content with just running every play because we had movement and cant threaten outside. It was one of reason I said saving the playbook strategy makes no sense. Let TVD and WR "get Fat" on bethune and USM because stats dont really matter in big games, just find way to get W. ATM was out multiple DBs and they still looked wayyyy more athletic than us.

Also on that play where George runs across and turns up field, we do that ALOT. Gattis loves to run that type of route, tighten wr split, opposite wr or te clears out and you kinda wheel route behind it. Restrepo caught one on sideline like that last week against USM to jump start a drive
 
Advertisement
AUcane said:
Yep, this system is a low margin for error offense. That may work with an Uber talented team but not for our team and especially not for 10+ play drives.
Click to expand...
Hence, why Lashlee’s system is more affective in certain ways because it’s less complex and you’re at full speed. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a long term solution. Elite programs eat that **** up. I think we will see an substantial improvement once we bring in better horses.
 
jmccomber5 said:
Lack of zone beating routes concepts
Click to expand...
I haven't read much of the board today so not sure how much this is being talked about, but I thought this was an issue.

Anything Gattis has that beats a zone takes so **** long to develop. You really can't do that against a team like aTm.

I don't recall anyone settling down in the zone and getting their chest turned back towards the qb all night long.
 
Need to get Arroyo involved in the passing game. Also can the receivers/Mallory hold a block out on the edge? We want easier passes for TVD but the screens can’t be used cause the receivers won’t block for them. You saw some of things that makes Gattis a good play caller but the red zone play calling was head scratching.
 
Hurracanes said:
Hence, why Lashlee’s system is more affective in certain ways because it’s less complex and you’re at full speed. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a long term solution. Elite programs eat that **** up. I think we will see an substantial improvement once we bring in better horses.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don’t need to go full speed lashlee 80 plays per game style but some elements of that would be good in this offense to complement gattis’s system.
 
Back
Top