by youngterrier on Sun Nov 05, 2017 11:47 am
Let me be more specific in my criticism of the coaching, because it's specifically on playcalling.
We had a change in offensive philosophy around 2013/2014 (probably as a result of us laying an egg in the second half of 2012 in terms of scoring points). There was a Shanesy article about at the time. More wideouts, more passes, etc.
I don't object to that change in philosophy. At times we execute that philosophy really well. But the thing is, we're still an option team and option teams, more than other teams, are at their most effective when they call plays on a schedule. It's great that we have an intermediate passing game. That could be the difference between us winning and losing in some of these games, having to convert on third and 7 or so. But the problem is, we don't use it effectively. More often we see dumb trick plays (double reverse flea flicker screen) that are just on paper bad ideas (that specific play is going to be limited always) or endzone bombs (admittedly, some of those passes may have been covered short and our QB was throwing it away). Further, if we're committing to go for it on 4th and 6, why pass it on third and six? regardless of the fourth down play call, I like our chances on a shorter attempt.
Option teams are successful because teams know what they are going to do (run the ball) but are unable to stop it. Your average run-of-the-mill offense benefits by not having that sort of certainty behind it. Execution matters in every offense, but arguably it's more important in an option offense because there's less uncertainty about the strategy (they know we're going to run, but whether or not they can stop us is up to us).
What we're seeing on offense this year (and I'd argue, last year) is a failure to execute, but even then I don't think it's necessarily that. We ran the ball great against every team except Chattanooga and the Citadel. Look at the stats and we're above 4ypc in most games. In an option offense, that should be enough to put up points consistently. Turnovers are certainly important, but we've not turned the ball over that much this year. Penalties are important too, but at the same time, we've had lots of three and outs against inferior competition that had nothing to do with penalties (sidenote: at some point, failing to execute falls on the coaches as well, but I digress).
So if option offenses are successful due to staying on schedule and executing well and our execution isn't too bad, logically it has to be due to not staying on schedule which is all playcalling. Our OC doesn't know if he wants to be an option offense or a spread like Western Carolina. We can't be both and if we try to be, we're neither.
The trendline in the last few years has been that our offense fails to score points consistently. Back in 2007-2011 we were a committed option team and could reliably score 30 points in a game. Right now, we're less than committed and we struggle to score 30 in regulation.
I recognize why saying WL should resign if we lost yesterday offends and annoys people (and I'll admit, I'm being hyperbolic because it's so frustrating to watch). As I've pointed out multiple times, the coaches are great at coaching fundamentals and haven't lost anything when it comes to coaching execution. Having said that, the way our offense has worked over the last 4-5 years, it seems the difference between us being good and elite has all to do with the little things like play-calling. And I'm not even one of the people who gets mad when we do a fullback dive for one yard (I joke that I can't wait until the 2nd and 9 play call).
So that's my opinion. I recognize it's unpopular and I don't reasonably expect WL will resign (heck, he's likely Ayer's predecessor and even if I'm annoyed with him 60% of the time he definitely deserves it), but it's going to be hard to convince me that the reason why games are more competitive than they should be isn't because of the way our offense is being managed.
Study hard, Work Hard, Party Hard, Go Terriers!