After seeing a few teams using a Wildcat formation this weekend I sure wish we'd adopt that for an occasional change up. If not that, we at least need
SOMETHING to mix things up. Bringing in Riley Nelson once in a while could be good. And I'm thinking our scheme is too careful with QB's anyway. I see
so many teams doing great things with a mobile QB Look at the stable of 'em we're going to have next year. Why have those guys watch for years (or
transfer) and only really develop one?
Wildcat Formation
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 MotabRobb |
Wildcat Formation |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 394 (11/02/09 12:07:59) |
|
||
|
jockanddoc |
|||
|
Posts: 389 (11/02/09 15:17:55) |
I can think of a few things:
|
||
|
ezone00 |
|||
|
Posts: 6192 (11/02/09 16:45:09) |
I've never heard anything different than JJ is quicker than BYU's other RB (AKA, Unga, Tonga, and Kariya) which does not in know way shape or form IMO
= burner. He may have a high 4.5 or low 4.6 40 and that does not seem fast. JJ is shifty and pretty quick (very fast to top end speed), but I do not believe
he has that next gear like Luuuke did.
Rex 
|
||
|
Cougar in Big D |
A few thoughts | ||
|
Posts: 1295 (11/02/09 17:23:41) |
I like what you were saying, Kevin, about taking advantage of your size and strength when you have it. I remember watching a BYU game against a much bigger
and stronger Notre Dame team more than 15 years ago. Back then, ND ran the ball about 90% of the time, or so it seemed. The defense had made some stops here
and there, but ND pretty much ran it right down the middle on every play for about 3 or 4 yards. By halftime, ND was winning, but not by that much. I thought
we'd have a decent chance to win the game if we could just put some drives together in the second half. But in the 3rd quarter, something was different.
The runs that were going for 3 or 4 yards in the first half were now going for 6 or 7 yards. Our defense was obviously tired and worn out. In the 4th
quarter, the defense wasn't stopping anything - not the run or the pass. The final score was a blowout.
|
||
|
tthenrie |
|||
|
Posts: 925 (11/03/09 12:24:32) |
I have to agree with you there. In the past we had to have our passing game open the running game, but I think those days are past. With the limited options
we are using on Offense, I agree that we should be using the strength and size of the offensive lines we have been getting the past several years, and the
quality inside rushers like Fui, Harvey, Tonga, and Kariya and start pounding 3 downs with the occasional 1st and 3rd down pass plays to keep defenses honest.
We have actually had pretty good success doing just that the past few games, although the O line splits are still too wide and the plays take a long time to
develop. The real problem I see, though, is that our D isn't stopping even mediocre offenses if there is any speed at all involved. I gotta tell ya, that
4-4 Florida State team just isn't that good. 28 points should have beat them. TCU, on the other hand, is pretty good, although their offense is only
mediocre. I guarantee you Florida does not want to meet them in a bowl.
|
||
|
Cougar in Big D |
Agreed | ||
|
Posts: 1296 (11/03/09 14:09:19) |
"I guarantee you Florida does not want to meet them in a bowl."
I can't agree with you more. TCU's defense is strong enough to shut anyone down, and they're going to be very hard to beat. This is especially true of teams like Florida that don't have much of an offense in the first place. |
||
|
ezone00 |
|||
|
Posts: 6195 (11/03/09 15:51:22) |
I have to disagree, TCU in just crazy good (#1 in the Nation, #3 in scoring D). But their O has been almost as good (#12 in the Nation, #11 in scoring O) this
year and they are so balanced they are very hard to stop;
TCU's O @Virginia- Rushing 203; Passing 177; Total 380, 30 points -vs- giving up 177 yards and 14 points Texas St- Rushing 286; Passing 222; Total 508, 56 points -vs- giving up 249 yards and 21 points @Clemson- Rushing 162; Passing 226; Total 388, 14 points -vs- giving up 309 yards and 10 points SMU- Rushing 229; Passing 189; Total 418, 39 points -vs- giving up 224 yards and 14 points @Air Force- Rushing 195; Passing 198; Total 393, 20 points -vs- giving up 287 yards and 17 points Colorado St- Rushing 275; Passing 224; Total 499, 44 points -vs- giving up 182 yards and 6 points @BYU- Rushing 127; Passing 285; Total 413, 38 points -vs- giving up 298 yards and 7 points UNLV- Rushing 390; Passing 188; Total 578, 41 points -vs- giving up 160 yards and 0 points Average- Rushing 233.4; Passing 213.6; Total 447.0, 35.2 points -vs- giving up 235.8 yards and 11.1 points TCU would rather run it down their opponents throats, but if they have to they can make you pay by going over the top (AKA, Clemson & BYU), because they are going to get their yards... BYU can do this (Utah St and UNLV) and does not quite have as much balance as TCU, but BYU's D is not close to TCU's level. Rex 
|
||
|
Bob Henstra |
|||
|
Posts: 2123 (11/04/09 20:19:02) |
I think we're at about the same level as last year. We end up with the same 10-3 record. Who can we trade for a few good D backs?
|
||
|
MotabRobb |
|||
|
Posts: 398 (11/05/09 12:46:04) |
But the coaches keep saying our D backs are the best we've had in years. That makes me think the real problem is in the LB's this year and I think that
is born out by the fact that the DB's make a greater percentage of the tackles.
|
||
|
tthenrie |
|||
|
Posts: 932 (11/09/09 07:29:14) |
Well, I have to wonder about the D-backs when the best you can do is a 5'6" speed demon.
|
||
