Main VandyMania.com Page

POLITICAL, RACIAL AND RELIGIOUS DISCUSSIONS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

Going to take me a while to get over this

For discussion regarding the Vanderbilt Commodores' football program.

Moderators: Vandyman74, roanoke, VandyWhit, kerrigjl, BrentVU, jfgogold, NateSY, KarenYates

historybill
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 9:55 am
Contact:

Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby historybill » Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:47 am

Down by 5, with 2:04 to go, we had first and ten at the Notre Dame 37, in a game where our passing game was dynamite and our running game wasn't doing very much.

On first down, we ran the ball up the middle and got 2 yards. The clock ran.

On second down, we ran the ball again, gaining 3 yards. The clock continued to run, and by now there is 1:25 to go and the clock is still running.

Now in a terrible hurry, we threw an incomplete pass, setting up the 4th down play on which Lipscomb nearly made a great catch. He missed the catch, and we then pretty much RAN OUT OF TIME.

Why, why were we running the ball up the middle in a 2-minute offense? Why?



Matheta
Posts: 6787
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 10:46 am
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby Matheta » Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:08 am

historybill wrote:Down by 5, with 2:04 to go, we had first and ten at the Notre Dame 37, in a game where our passing game was dynamite and our running game wasn't doing very much.

On first down, we ran the ball up the middle and got 2 yards. The clock ran.

On second down, we ran the ball again, gaining 3 yards. The clock continued to run, and by now there is 1:25 to go and the clock is still running.

Now in a terrible hurry, we threw an incomplete pass, setting up the 4th down play on which Lipscomb nearly made a great catch. He missed the catch, and we then pretty much RAN OUT OF TIME.

Why, why were we running the ball up the middle in a 2-minute offense? Why?


I believe it's called playing to win. The idea is to score and leave the other team as little time as possible. The two runs used time, the third down was when ND rushed like eight. To quote Denny Green, "you play to win the game!"

alathIN
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 11:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby alathIN » Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:09 am

I don't disagree with running one of those.
Sometimes there's more time than it seems, and a run can catch the defense unsuspecting.
But I don't see doing it twice, and I don't see being so casual about getting back to the line of scrimmage after the run.

dore74
Posts: 2262
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby dore74 » Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:38 am

the run calls made sense to me too. The D looked set for passing and we had been able to get good pushes of he line as he game wore on. too many miscues early were what did us in. thought the guys really showed what they can do. lets beat USC (east) and build on this

roanoke
Posts: 5671
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 8:52 am
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby roanoke » Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:52 am

I basically agree with you. The passing game was working - I do not disagree with a sneaky run as a surprise. I did not think those runs were particularly sneaky. A few times we had spread formations where we had great numbers to run wide.

Those runs just hit the pile. And did eat up a fair amount of time. I agree you do not want to leave ND with much time. But we ended up both panicking ourselves and losing a very important time out in the process. Perhaps the intended surprise was that we ran at all - ND was set up for the pass. If so, I wish we had run wide side and sent our receivers deep.

On the whole, I thought we entered the game running fairly conservatively (almost every first down) and got in a hole. Which is our tendency. After we assumed the deficit, I thought our play calling was pretty good - what i do not understand is why we refuse to use the hurry up more. We used it once, carved them up and put them in a panic - and them stuffed it back into the bag of tricks. Shurmur is great at the hurry up. One might argue we did not need it in the second half and I might agree. I would argue - as iffy as we have been in the red zone - we should consider using it in the red zone. It seems to work with this group.





User avatar
shelbz75
Posts: 1933
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby shelbz75 » Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:01 am

I don’t disagree with Ludwig here, they where trying to score and leave the least amount of time possible for ND The couple times they ran the ball they had a very favorable run box as well. I’ve been a critic in the past but that actually made some sense.

User avatar
AuricGoldfinger
Posts: 11999
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:29 pm
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby AuricGoldfinger » Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:03 am

One other thing I found interesting...Blasingame got three more carries than Vaughn for the game. I feel like Vaughn at this point is the best back of the RB committee and is more versatile. But Blasingame got all the carries in that last drive.
Vanderbilt, here's your blueprint for success in today's fan marketplace: https://www.anchorofgold.com/2018/2/12/ ... y-s-sports

roanoke
Posts: 5671
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 8:52 am
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby roanoke » Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:09 am

Blasingame is a great pass blocker. I think having him in there was perhaps part of that effect?

Vaughn dances a lot. I like him - but I wish Blasingame got more red zone carries. He is a strong kid. I agree Vaughn is the most dangerous option generally. Wakefield is not bad either and Crawford can catch the ball - we have a lot of talent this year. I might add - Bolar and Johnson are playing their way toward more receiving opportunities.

It is easy for me to second guess the run calls when things don't work out. We were right there and Lipscomb actually caught that ball until a 200 pound guy landed on his arm - the ground did not cause the fumble. It's tough because he was down before that kid hit him - but the ND defender made a nice play and it was knocked out. If that play turns out differently - we likely score. Ludwig is calling good games - we got over 400 yards yesterday. Shurmur will get a lot more notice after that one.

User avatar
4timenatlchamps
Posts: 9127
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 4:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby 4timenatlchamps » Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:20 am

I don’t necessarily have an issue with the play calling to be honest. I am with you that these losses never get easier, as proud of the team as I am.

User avatar
Matt2309
Posts: 2573
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2016 9:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby Matt2309 » Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:22 am

roanoke wrote:Blasingame is a great pass blocker. I think having him in there was perhaps part of that effect?

Vaughn dances a lot. I like him - but I wish Blasingame got more red zone carries. He is a strong kid. I agree Vaughn is the most dangerous option generally. Wakefield is not bad either and Crawford can catch the ball - we have a lot of talent this year. I might add - Bolar and Johnson are playing their way toward more receiving opportunities.

It is easy for me to second guess the run calls when things don't work out. We were right there and Lipscomb actually caught that ball until a 200 pound guy landed on his arm - the ground did not cause the fumble. It's tough because he was down before that kid hit him - but the ND defender made a nice play and it was knocked out. If that play turns out differently - we likely score. Ludwig is calling good games - we got over 400 yards yesterday. Shurmur will get a lot more notice after that one.

Vaughn will have that occasional -4 yard run, but Vaughn needs at least 5 more carries than Blasingame

historybill
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 9:55 am
Contact:

Re: Going to take me a while to get over this

Postby historybill » Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:12 am

Matheta wrote:
historybill wrote:Down by 5, with 2:04 to go, we had first and ten at the Notre Dame 37, in a game where our passing game was dynamite and our running game wasn't doing very much.

On first down, we ran the ball up the middle and got 2 yards. The clock ran.

On second down, we ran the ball again, gaining 3 yards. The clock continued to run, and by now there is 1:25 to go and the clock is still running.

Now in a terrible hurry, we threw an incomplete pass, setting up the 4th down play on which Lipscomb nearly made a great catch. He missed the catch, and we then pretty much RAN OUT OF TIME.

Why, why were we running the ball up the middle in a 2-minute offense? Why?


I believe it's called playing to win. The idea is to score and leave the other team as little time as possible. The two runs used time, the third down was when ND rushed like eight. To quote Denny Green, "you play to win the game!"


Dennis Green didn't say that. Herman Edwards did.

Dennis Green punched the microphone and yelled "They are who we thought they were! And we let 'em off the hook!"

To be honest, that's what I felt like saying after we had Notre Dame's rather mediocre pass defense off the hook yesterday.






Return to “Vanderbilt Football”