The shuffle pass at the end….

OptionJacket said:
Our coaches completely blew the end of the first half and end of the game play calling. Absolutely horrible. Those were two TD’s for most teams. Clemson played like garbage and still won. I’m glad our players played hard but our coaches let them down. Gibbs was not a happy camper this game especially the last series. As someone else mentioned, year 3 and no jumbo package. We just line up in shotgun and throw passes out of the end zone.
Click to expand...
You are so right, Gibbs was not happy having to be pulled off the field and getting into the face of one coach. He wanted to make the next play!
 
I don't like running up the middle on 4th down against a top 5 defense. You have to get one of your runners in a one on one situation or throw it. I didn't like the call but will give points for creative.
 
79tech said:
I don't like running up the middle on 4th down against a top 5 defense. You have to get one of your runners in a one on one situation or throw it. I didn't like the call but will give points for creative.
Click to expand...

Trickery is the only option when you lack 1) the speed to get to the edge and 2) the power to get a big push.
 
Got to go to the game, was in the lower corner in the end zone where Tech was driving in the 4th. Clemson's best asset is their defensive front, I don't think there was any play call where we beat them straight up in the trenches. Their secondary is the vulnerable part, so the corner passes, screens, even the option attempt (which I did not like that particular call, but understand what we were trying to do), was to get around or over Clemson's strongest part of their team.
 
I'd really like to be able to understand the effort difference last night. The defense was incredibly improved. The offense fought valiantly. This team believed in themselves and wanted to compete.
 
my probelm is the coach should know the strengths and weaknesses of his players. That TE goes down too easily. The defense made the play, but perhaps there was a better player choice for the shuffle pass.
 
Why not line up Mason at TE on the shuttle pass play? If he catches that pass he would have pushed the LB into the end zone. Also we need to et Biggers on the field for these goal line plays.
 
The Champ said:
Lol at you morons who think we should have lined up from the 3 yard line and tried to blow the best DL in football off the ball. Did you even watch the game? We were not going to move those hogs back.

the shovel works if we get the block. And it was actually a play we set up earlier in the game when we ran option left.

if Yates is the guy moving forward, i do wonder if we should consider a few goal line sets for Sims. He would be an added physical threat on short yardage
Click to expand...

I’m not sure I watched the same game. The play that got us 1st and goal from the 3 yard line was Gibbs up the middle for 4 yards from the Clemson 7 yard line if I remember correctly. Then the only play in the next 4 plays that got any positive yards was Mason up the middle for nearly 2 yards. We gashed them up the middle for much of the 4th qtr. I have no doubt we could have scored if we didn’t try and get fancy with a roll out, end around, or shovel pass. I have little doubt that Gibbs/Mason/Smith score if they get the ball 4 times if needed. They are the best players on the team with the ball in their hands, give it to them.
 
TechAKnee said:
I’m not sure I watched the same game. The play that got us 1st and goal from the 3 yard line was Gibbs up the middle for 4 yards from the Clemson 7 yard line if I remember correctly. Then the only play in the next 4 plays that got any positive yards was Mason up the middle for nearly 2 yards. We gashed them up the middle for much of the 4th qtr. I have no doubt we could have scored if we didn’t try and get fancy with a roll out, end around, or shovel pass. I have little doubt that Gibbs/Mason/Smith score if they get the ball 4 times if needed. They are the best players on the team with the ball in their hands, give it to them.
Click to expand...

That's your prerogative, but I disagree. Same thing with bringing in a DT to try and push the ball in. Everyone already knows the RBs are the best players with the ball in their hands. It's so obvious to run 4 times up the middle that even dumbasses like us think so. So you think Clemson is not going to see that coming? I'm not saying it's impossible to of scored, but it would mean us man on man beating their defense which seems unlikely at this point.

And if we did just feed it to a RB 4 times and it ends up getting stuffed, no points, do you think you would come away thinking "well, that was the best we could of done, the calls were perfect"? Or would you of joined the probably large number of people who would instead be calling us stupid for trying the same thing over and over that failed?
 
TechAKnee said:
I’m not sure I watched the same game. The play that got us 1st and goal from the 3 yard line was Gibbs up the middle for 4 yards from the Clemson 7 yard line if I remember correctly. Then the only play in the next 4 plays that got any positive yards was Mason up the middle for nearly 2 yards. We gashed them up the middle for much of the 4th qtr. I have no doubt we could have scored if we didn’t try and get fancy with a roll out, end around, or shovel pass. I have little doubt that Gibbs/Mason/Smith score if they get the ball 4 times if needed. They are the best players on the team with the ball in their hands, give it to them.
Click to expand...
We ran on them in the fourth quarter because they softened their defense to not give up a big play. Our offensive coaches were reading their defense and checking to a run at the LOS.

Getting four yards from the 8 and punching it in from the 3 are two different things as well. Clemson was primarily defending the goal line, they were not concerned with us going from the 8 to the 4.
 
GTLiebs said:
That's your prerogative, but I disagree. Same thing with bringing in a DT to try and push the ball in. Everyone already knows the RBs are the best players with the ball in their hands. It's so obvious to run 4 times up the middle that even dumbasses like us think so. So you think Clemson is not going to see that coming? I'm not saying it's impossible to of scored, but it would mean us man on man beating their defense which seems unlikely at this point.

And if we did just feed it to a RB 4 times and it ends up getting stuffed, no points, do you think you would come away thinking "well, that was the best we could of done, the calls were perfect"? Or would you of joined the probably large number of people who would instead be calling us stupid for trying the same thing over and over that failed?
Click to expand...

If we lose putting the ball in the hands of our best players I can live with that. The fact is of the final 5 plays the only 2 that gained yards were Mason and Gibbs who just happed to run up the middle. I kind of feel like Coach P gets a little Mike Bobo inside the red zone and feels the need to surprise the D as opposed to simply executing what’s been working. 1st and goal from the 3, there is no reason we should be rolling out.
 
TechAKnee said:
If we lose putting the ball in the hands of our best players I can live with that. The fact is of the final 5 plays the only 2 that gained yards were Mason and Gibbs who just happed to run up the middle. I kind of feel like Coach P gets a little Mike Bobo inside the red zone and feels the need to surprise the D as opposed to simply executing what’s been working. 1st and goal from the 3, there is no reason we should be rolling out.
Click to expand...

I guess thinking about it, I wouldn't say the concept you're talking about is completely wrong, but I have a lot of doubts on it and so mainly I can see why the coaches would go a different route and don't entirely blame them for that.

In the idea of running "whats been working" and the yards they did get leading up to there, what if the other plays we ran helped keep the defense honest and opened that running room in those plays? It's purely a hypothetical that can't be proven right or wrong, but it is possible.
 
The Champ said:
We ran on them in the fourth quarter because they softened their defense to not give up a big play. Our offensive coaches were reading their defense and checking to a run at the LOS.

Getting four yards from the 8 and punching it in from the 3 are two different things as well. Clemson was primarily defending the goal line, they were not concerned with us going from the 8 to the 4.
Click to expand...

l don’t believe that to be the case. We ran on them because we attacked the blitz and ran right at them north/south.

2nd and 2 from the 8 they blitz and Gibbs picks up nearly 5.
4600A636-826D-4D63-894E-DB55F1F5847A.jpeg



1st and goal from the 3 and we roll out. I’m giving the ball to Gibbs. I don’t see some goal line stance from the Clemson D.

2FEFB15A-2A21-486C-A328-235BA178B7BB.jpeg
 
79tech said:
I don't like running up the middle on 4th down against a top 5 defense. You have to get one of your runners in a one on one situation or throw it. I didn't like the call but will give points for creative.
Click to expand...
It should never have come to 4th down. That’s the issue. Gibbs picks up 4 yards from the 7 to 3. 1st and goal. Pound up the middle and we score. Instead we waste 1st and 2nd down. Mason picks up 2 on 3rd up the middle. Never should have gone to 4th down. Ridiculous play calling. Just like before halftime.
 
GT65_UGA89 said:
I had no problem with the 4th n goal play call. As has been alluded to, if 70 just gets in front of the LB it’s a TD.
The play call I didn’t like was on 2nd down - the pitch/pass to McGowan. Then is when Mason or Gibbs should have gotten the ball.
Click to expand...
100% agreed!!!!
 
Liberty said:
I’m kinda partial to the 2016 mutt game where we charged back to win 28-27 on Searcy’s leap into the endzone With 30 secs left.
Click to expand...
Yes. But that didn’t grab any national attention..just local bonerism for a bit.

F UGA. We are making gains against those bastards.
 
As for the original proposition ...
It was an odd and quite bad call. I joked about two possessions earlier, "we're going to run shuttle pass."
I didn't figure we'd try it with a tight end. At the 2. Right into the strength of Clemson's defense.
But was it as bad (for Clemson, not for us) as Clemson going pistol from its own 1 when they all had to do was run QB sneak with their 6-5, 240 pound QB?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top