forums

Dawson is fed up with the inside run talk

deezydinh said:
Only pvssies run it to the outside. Real men run into a 8 man box

Also is it me or did mark fletcher cut back in to make contact with a defender instead
Click to expand...
He sure did. Instead of simply walking into the end zone at that. Was running into contact.
Hoyacane1620 said:
He claims that every team in the country runs the same plays. Many things determine where the run ends up. Sometimes the way the defense plays it determines which gap the run goes to ......

He's very testy today. clearly heard the outside noise....

He's on a dissertation about how well Carson managed the game. did many things to alter protections and calls that aren't obvious to the outside eye... He is pretty adamant that Carson did a great job on Saturday...
Click to expand...
He's not wrong though. The variation is how he sets the line. So if we're running outside zone from a bunch formation more often than not lately....... Pretty *** ****** backwards if I say so myself. He has a dominant oline more often than not and his lack of creativity in the run game has essentially turned out offense into a 11 man band of eunuchs... ****** guys fed up huh. Me too. Tired of the **** he's calling lately making our season become a question mark yet again. If heatherman doesn't get creative now this week and play press we might have a long weekend again. I think our physicality will be too much for SMU. But lashlee can make it interesting with how he calls this game. They're gonna try gimmick after gimmick. Press man, cheat a safety into the box and adjust backers splits. Quick routes is what to expect meaning lashlee will try to stretch the field eventually.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Brad_Wellson said:
You didn't explain ****. You flailed trying to save face.

Dawson also explained that any one of his runs also has the option to bounce.

It's a meaningless statement based on what you originally claimed.
Click to expand...
Having an option to bounce? Do you realize how asinine that statement is? A running back, at least an effective one chooses to bounce or not based on gaps and where his oline is. To bounce out of a tight formation simply means he hopes for the best using at best a tight end or a wr as his blockers. To do that is essentially just accounting for a short gain or a loss when our lineman getting downhill is the only thing that accounts for gains in this offense lately. The problem has been when we go inside zone and brockenmyer continues to get blown up or simply the fact defenses know bell can't run block so there's limited options where the play heads.
 
He'd have a point if we didn't just go 10 straight quarters of not being able to run the ball because the defense knows another A gap run is coming.

I get it, Dawson has forgotten more offensive scheme than I've learned. However some things are so painfully obvious that even a JAG like me can see it.
 
SinisterCane said:
Mario Cristobal's coaching record at FIU is 27-47, I believe he had one winning season at eight and five so where are these multiple bowl games coming from?
Click to expand...
FIU went to bowl games in 2010 and 2011, that’s more than one, hence the multiple comment. Considering that FIU has only been to five bowl games in school history, that’s something.
 
JHallCanes said:
I’m happy how the game turned out. Turnovers and big plays are part of the game and you can’t just remove them from the equation when you want to fit a narrative.

But again it was 14-7 with 4 minutes left in the 3rd quarter and Stanford has the ball.

We didn’t come out after halftime like some juggernaut that was just a little sleepy in the first half. We needed basically a pick 6 against Stanford to change the game.

We have a good team…but that’s just not good man.
Click to expand...
Anyone who watched the game knows that was about as ugly as a 42-7 game can get. If some people want to play the result and pretend everything on offense was great, go for it but we needed multiple turnovers and short fields to put away the worst team in our conference.

I guess the good news is, we didn’t take our foot off the pedal in the fourth quarter, so I guess there’s some improvement to be noted.
 
Ryanmilli said:
That last point is being overlooked a bit perhaps. In the first image below, Fletcher looks like he is housing this if he just runs outside or even straight ahead. Instead, he cut inside right back into #32 and tried to run him over. The 4th-and-1 play where Brock got blown up is another play where if he just cuts back against the grain he likely has at least the first down. Contrast that with Lyle's TD run, where he bounced it out to the sideline in a similar situation and scored.

View attachment 341088

View attachment 341089
Click to expand...
THANK YOU!!!

I wanted to throw a brick at my TV (but it's big and I love it so I didn't) when I saw that opening to Fletcher's left. I'm all for running over people, but I will take a TD 100/100 times over running over a defender and getting tackled in the process.
 
DTP said:
Anyone who watched the game knows that was about as ugly as a 42-7 game can get. If some people want to play the result and pretend everything on offense was great, go for it but we needed multiple turnovers and short fields to put away the worst team in our conference.

I guess the good news is, we didn’t take our foot off the pedal in the fourth quarter, so I guess there’s some improvement to be noted.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I’ve watched a lot of teams this year struggle bigtime after they lose. Many good teams actually have just kept losing. I thought it would be a tough challenge had we needed to go to SMU last week. Thought we would need to get our mojo back a little bit. There’s a hangover effect that’s really permeated all of college football.

It played out similar to what I expected and I expected us to finish strong and get some momentum for SMU, but it was just too difficult for most of the game.
 
Bottom line, it pi$$es me off to no end that an OC is sounding as obtuse as he is about the running game. “Live by the sword, die by the sword” is all I’m going to say.
 
Advertisement
DTP said:
Anyone who watched the game knows that was about as ugly as a 42-7 game can get. If some people want to play the result and pretend everything on offense was great, go for it but we needed multiple turnovers and short fields to put away the worst team in our conference.

I guess the good news is, we didn’t take our foot off the pedal in the fourth quarter, so I guess there’s some improvement to be noted.
Click to expand...

This is where I think we get into trouble though and play the result.

Did we not "take our foot off the pedal" (whatever that really means) ?

We scored on a 3 yard drive to make the score 21-7 with about 3 minutes left in the 4th quarter. I think for all intents and purposes, against that team, the game is over, but it's only a 14 point game with a whole quarter to go, so you can't just kneel the ball (refrain from Mario/GT jokes, please).

We force a turnover, and get the ball on the Stanford 45. We proceed to run the ball 4 times, score, and basically end the game. Basically the same thing as against FSU when everyone killed the staff for shutting things down, except against this team, you can get 12 a carry late in a game, against FSU you cannot.

Not saying you said anything wrong, I just think the mob mentality here plays the result far too much. What if Fletcher fumbles? What if we get stuffed on one of those runs and it's 2nd and 12 instead of getting 4 straight first downs? Then Dawson is a clown, Mario is a caveman, we went into a shell, blah blah blah.

For the record, I'd have done the same **** thing Dawson did. 12 yards, run it again. 10 yards, run it again. 16 yards, run it again. 7 yards, touchdown, go home. But this place focuses on the result and not the process. If we get a hold on one of those plays, and the drive stalls, the coaches are braindead ********. But since we scored in 4 plays, we "didn't take our foot off the gas".
 
I think Mario lit him up for not selling the vision he's laid out. It's not uncommon for a leader to want a united front on policy in public, and when Dawson came out and said it was mirabal/mario's run scheme and then "it is what it is" (almost sounded frustrated with it himself) it wasn't a good look for the leadership overall. Behind closed doors you can vent and express frustration, but you better be selling the vision in public.
 
P-Tizzle said:
Except that he didn’t. He won two conference championships at FAU…but they were not in a row. He went 5-7 between a 5-7 season. Also forget going 17-12 in the PAC 10 or 4-4 in the SEC at UT. Kiffin is a good coach but he’s not great. Great coaches win a championship and he hasn’t been close.
Click to expand...
I’d like to add at USC he was under major scholarship reductions, so im sure that short handed him at USC. You’re right they weren’t in a row so I stand corrected on that, but he did win 2 conference championships at FAU. Also, I think it’s tougher to win and acquire talent at Ole Miss than Miami, he was rebuilding Tennessee and left for a better job at USC. You don’t have to be great to be better than Mario.
 
Brad_Wellson said:
You keep having to come up with new excuses because you keep leaving out facts.

USC was also one of the top 3-or-4 programs in America when Lane got that job. He was preseason #1 in 2012 and went 7-6.
Click to expand...
They’re not excuses, they’re facts. USC got hit with major sanctions right after he got hired, with major scholarship reductions, USC should’ve gave him more time.
 
Astcloud11 said:
What have you done for me lately is the biggest thing in sports. Miami is 17-4 in the last 2 years combined, as things stand. 2 of those losses were to teams that won 10+ games. The other 2 were GT(who took UGA to 7OT) and a Louisville team who very well could also finish with 10+ wins this year.
A reminder that Mario is 3-1 vs the SEC while at Miami, and 2-0 vs teams with a common opponent as Lane Kiffin, who is 1-1 (Beat 2023 TAMU by double digits when Lane won by 3...Blew out UF last year while Lane lost).
Click to expand...
With the talent that Mario has acquired while at Miami, he should easily win the ACC with Clemson and FSU being on their ***…easily brother
 
Advertisement
OrangeBowlMagic said:
For the record, I'd have done the same **** thing Dawson did. 12 yards, run it again. 10 yards, run it again. 16 yards, run it again.
Click to expand...

At some point do you account for the fact that center can’t hold up at the point of attack? It looks to me like the interior OL is the weakest part, so doesn’t seem like the smartest decision to run into the A gap.
 
Ryanmilli said:
That last point is being overlooked a bit perhaps. In the first image below, Fletcher looks like he is housing this if he just runs outside or even straight ahead. Instead, he cut inside right back into #32 and tried to run him over. The 4th-and-1 play where Brock got blown up is another play where if he just cuts back against the grain he likely has at least the first down. Contrast that with Lyle's TD run, where he bounced it out to the sideline in a similar situation and scored.

View attachment 341088

View attachment 341089
Click to expand...

I'm just gonna tell you, Fletcher has been doing that his ENTIRE career at Miami. The first time I ever noticed was his freshman year against FSU. This play was just mind boggling to me. The last image is right before Fletcher cuts BACK towards the safety. Emory's finger and arm is up because right at the moment he knows Fletcher is going to the house the run. Except he doesn't. The play starts at 1:06:10. It's even worse live.

I love Fletcher. I do. But he is very, very limited when it comes to anything past 15 yards. I don't understand what he's trying to do.



1761671845861.png




1761671971097.png
 
Astcloud11 said:
Are you forgetting that Lane also coached the Premier program in "the weak Pac-12"?
Lane took over from Pete Caroll and was 28-15 getting fired after 5 games into year 4. Mario took over for Willie Taggart, went 35-12 in his 4 years, and got hired away.
Click to expand...
Lane was also hit with major sanctions and scholarship reductions right after being hired, he could only get 15 scholarship players a year for 3 years in a row, couldn’t accumulate any depth, im sure that makes it a lot more difficult. Had USC given him more time he would’ve won more.
 
Back
Top