Missing the open man that one play isn't the point. The point is that open man is missed over and over and over. TA has shown he isn't able to make reads. He has one guy in his mind that he is throwing to each and every play and that is the only person he looks for. He will force it to him if needed. Hence all the ints.
Watched the film, no questions about it, Langsdorf made the right call...
- Thread starter HuskerBorn
- Start date
A couple questions for the board about making the right call. Why did a guy that is very powerful and has been money for us this season, not get a single carry? Janovich didn't see the ball once. Why is that? With few carries, he has done quite well and gave the defense something to think about. Also, why with Newby running like a high school freshman, did some other guys not get a chance to do something? Ozigbo may have provided a spark. I just don't get the coaching decisions these guys make.
On the play in question, take the 3 points and see what happens. it's then a 5 point game (although we didn't now at the time) but we got the ball back 2 more times after that. The defense had played great after the 2 TD runs. 2 more field goals and we win the game. Hell, Brown make the 40+ yard field goal into the wind by 15 yards. TAKE THE POINTS. I could see going for it if you were on the 45 yard line.
On the play in question, take the 3 points and see what happens. it's then a 5 point game (although we didn't now at the time) but we got the ball back 2 more times after that. The defense had played great after the 2 TD runs. 2 more field goals and we win the game. Hell, Brown make the 40+ yard field goal into the wind by 15 yards. TAKE THE POINTS. I could see going for it if you were on the 45 yard line.
The only way taking the points is not a no-brainer is if you do not have any faith in your defense. That is the only reason I can think of why you would not try and get the game to one score.
If you have a brain fart and decide to go for it, run Cross or Jano. Up until that last drive those two guys made it over 90% of the time on 3rd (or 4th) and three yards or less. Let that sink in. We make it over 90% of the time in those situations by running our big guys...and we pass.
Riley needs to go have lunch with Osborne again. Maybe he will listen next time.
If you have a brain fart and decide to go for it, run Cross or Jano. Up until that last drive those two guys made it over 90% of the time on 3rd (or 4th) and three yards or less. Let that sink in. We make it over 90% of the time in those situations by running our big guys...and we pass.
Riley needs to go have lunch with Osborne again. Maybe he will listen next time.
Your boy is 5-6 at Youngstown State. His team is undisciplined and he was twice in the national media because of his childish behavior. MR might not be the guy, but neither was the last guy. He's gone. We're better off because of it. Get over it.
Absolutely this. It's a timing play. He's got pretty much one count between we he receives the snap before he goes into his throwing motion. The defense is showing the fade is open. (Being "open" doesn't mean there is no coverage, just no help over the top. There is no way to determine if the receiver will have a step in that one count.) If the fade isn't his first progression, then it's pointless, because he doesn't have time for it to be a second progression.
Some of the posters get this idea that Tommy is out there playing backyard football with a three mississippi count before the rushers release. There is no time for looking at each option before committing. He reads his first progression, and if it's there (it was), he throws it. What is going on with second option is irrelevant if the first option is open. If he throws the ball better, it's a great read.
I actually like the play call...if it's on third down and you know you'll go for it on 4th. On fourth, call a play with a run or a short, high percentage pattern as the first two reads.
Terrible play call.
Exactly. The fade route play is obviously a pre-snap read. The idea that he should have looked at a different receiver after taking the snap on this play call is ridiculous. Maybe there is an argument that he should have made a different pre-snap read and not thrown the fade. But once he makes that read he is not going to look at other receivers after the snap. He would clearly be instructed not to do that on that route. It is not like he waits to throw the ball until after the receiver breaks open on that play. I would assume that on that play call checking for single coverage on the fade is the first key and if he gets that he is supposed to throw that route. Maybe Tommy should have taken the game situation into account and changed the read on his own. Certainly he could have executed the pass better. Again - maybe it was even the wrong pre-snap read based on the defensive alignment. But to say he should have looked off the fade after the snap and changed to a different receiver just does not make any sense given the play.
It's not a pre snap decision. It's the deep ball option. It's other option is the underneath man. Haven't you ever heard of running off a defender???
IF he throws to Carter and he rumbles in for a TD you would have said it was a brilliant call. Good call but if he was going to throw the fade it was a bad throw. Should have been a PI flag on top of it. I would ALWAYS look for my TE in that situation with the box stacked like that. The TE is almost ALWAYS open. Stupid QB decision.
If I was trying to get one yard, I would much rather have that receiver run about 8-10 yds and then come back towards me as a second option. TE is the first read, comeback route is second. If my primary receiver is on the opposite side and I need 1 yd., I'm not too concerned about running off that defender.
Nothing can change the fact that it was a stupid play call to begin with. Should have kicked the FG and made it a one possession game.
If the TE was his first read, okay. But it makes no sense that it would be. The fade route is pointless if it's a second read, because by the time you get to it, the WR is already through the back of the endzone. You seem to think that Armstrong, or any college QB, makes a decision on what his progression is suppose to be. The progression is part of the play call. If the fade route is open, the QB throws it. That's the play call. You can't separate the decision to throw the open fade instead of the open TE route from the play call.
I disagree with that. To count on the 8 points, you are counting on converting a two point conversion. So, basically you are kicking a 37 yard fg instead of going for it on 4th and 1/2 on a 30 yard field goal, but then passing on a 19 yard extra point and trying to convert a 4 and 2 on a 12 yard field. I'll take the 4th and 1/2, particularly since converting the two point try just means you are just getting to a 50/50 shot in overtime.
Yes, that is what I am saying. Ferentz has taken a lot of heat for getting too conservative and shutting down the offense for fear of mistakes and turnovers etc. Once a lead is dwindled, the play calling opens up again and Iowa seems to score when they have to. Unfortunately, you can't tell Tommy to quit throwing the ball to the wrong guy.
It was a long shot to even tie the game, let alone win it. As I said, most coaches would think, I have maybe 2 possessions to get 11 points, and 2 possessions weren't even guaranteed. You gotta get points when given the opportunity, otherwise subsequent possessions become almost meaningless.
I wouldn't even have faulted Langsdorf for running the ball on 4th down, but throwing a fade made absolutely no sense IMO.
Iowa is a good team, no doubt. They minimize mistakes, and in the case of our team, allowed Tommy to do what Tommy has done almost the entire year...make poor decisions. That being said, we also wouldn't have won the 5 games we won without him. High risk, high reward player.
Last edited:
The QB has to be smart enough to figure out that there he is going to have one DB trying to cover two receivers based on his pre-snap read of the defense on that side of the ball. As I said, I would ALWAYS look for the TE with that pre-snap defensive set up.
I think it was a bad call for the sole reason that Tommy is our QB. Can't count on him and it cost us. Iowa had the box loaded and it would have been a fight. Sucks all around.
I think 90% of the throws Tommy makes are pre-snap reads as he locks onto his receivers right away, hence the reason he leads the country in throwing to the wrong team.
So based upon your expert knowledge how did you know presnap that the outside backer who was lined up on the outside of our TE wasn't going to go out to the flat and cover him? You know...do what outside linebackers usually do. (If it is man, the safety has Westerkamp, the corner has the outside man, and the OLB has Carter. If it is base zone the OLB has the flat).
P.S. I am not so sure I would call this a stacked box considering it was a 4th and 1.
Last edited:
Now you're talking about Tommy I totally agree. He's going for the walk off home run.
The quarterback making game-changing decisions has been a part of the game for decades. TO's QBs always had the option to audible to a different play depending on defense. TO would send in a call with the running back or receiver, but if the defense lined up in a manner that the play wouldn't work, QB had the responsibility to audible to a different play. Today, defensive schemes are more sophisticated than ever. There is no way that OC can call a play and take all responsibility to make a read away from the QB. Well, you could do it, but over the course of the game you will run the wrong play into the wrong defense as many times as not. Those who say take all decision making away from the QB are naïve. A coach can't take decision-making away from the QB in today's game and be successful.
Unfortunately, we apparently had no one on the team this year with the athleticism necessary to win at this level, so we have TA. Coaches have to call the offense the way it needs to be called and cross your fingers (or hold your nose some might say), and hope against hope, TA does the right thing. It has worked out on occasions, such as the throw against MSU for the win, and other times not. Does anyone really think the throw to Morgan, Jr., into tight coverage when there were options underneath was a great decision or throw? TA saw the one on one match up and threw the ball up for grabs, just like the 4th and 1 play (granted down and distance were different). Morgan made a great adjustment and the defender fell down or that would also have been just another pass thrown up for grabs that didn't work out.
Unless we get a QB in here next year who has D1 athleticism and arm, and the mental makeup to avoid the temptation of the all or nothing plays and the mental discipline to handle making the right decision way more times than not over the course of 70 or 80 plays, it will be more of the same next year - and very little the coaches can do about that - other than development a top 10 defense to cover up or hit the jackpot on an AA type running back emerging. Thus is the legacy of what was left to them by Bo.
Unfortunately, we apparently had no one on the team this year with the athleticism necessary to win at this level, so we have TA. Coaches have to call the offense the way it needs to be called and cross your fingers (or hold your nose some might say), and hope against hope, TA does the right thing. It has worked out on occasions, such as the throw against MSU for the win, and other times not. Does anyone really think the throw to Morgan, Jr., into tight coverage when there were options underneath was a great decision or throw? TA saw the one on one match up and threw the ball up for grabs, just like the 4th and 1 play (granted down and distance were different). Morgan made a great adjustment and the defender fell down or that would also have been just another pass thrown up for grabs that didn't work out.
Unless we get a QB in here next year who has D1 athleticism and arm, and the mental makeup to avoid the temptation of the all or nothing plays and the mental discipline to handle making the right decision way more times than not over the course of 70 or 80 plays, it will be more of the same next year - and very little the coaches can do about that - other than development a top 10 defense to cover up or hit the jackpot on an AA type running back emerging. Thus is the legacy of what was left to them by Bo.
tro80,
1. You are making the assumption that the defense was lined up in such a way that Tommy should have audibled out of it. It wasn't. It was exactly the right defense to run the fade against. If Tommy changed the play, it would not have been an audible way from a bad match-up. It would have been overruling his coach on a decision to call a fade route. The play call wasn't bad from an x's and o's standpoint. It was bad from a game management standpoint. QBs shouldn't overrule their coaches on those types of decisions.
2. Athleticism at QB isn't an issue. Making good decisions is. (Tommy made plenty of horrible decisions during this game; I'm just not putting this 4th and 1 at his feet.) Apparently there is no one on the team that makes better decisions to make them a better option.
1. You are making the assumption that the defense was lined up in such a way that Tommy should have audibled out of it. It wasn't. It was exactly the right defense to run the fade against. If Tommy changed the play, it would not have been an audible way from a bad match-up. It would have been overruling his coach on a decision to call a fade route. The play call wasn't bad from an x's and o's standpoint. It was bad from a game management standpoint. QBs shouldn't overrule their coaches on those types of decisions.
2. Athleticism at QB isn't an issue. Making good decisions is. (Tommy made plenty of horrible decisions during this game; I'm just not putting this 4th and 1 at his feet.) Apparently there is no one on the team that makes better decisions to make them a better option.
I don't think Tommy has the option to audible. Tommy's best pass is the deep ball. Lot's of deep balls get picked. Favre is a great NFL QB but is the all time NFL leader in int's...maybe a gunslinger isn't the best mentor for how to win college football games. That pick 6 changed the entire game. Iowa was lucky to get some of their fumbles back. I don't see them winning a national title.
GBR
GBR
Great...you found a picture that shows an open receiver. You could find that on half of all pass plays. Your quote of this being a brilliant play call only works out because the OLB is blitzing. I will ask once again. On Tommy's pre-snap read what makes you think the OLB, who is lined up on the outside shoulder of Carter, isn't doing his usual responsibility of playing the flat in a zone or taking the TE in man to man coverage? Are you just guessing that he is blitzing? Do you want our quarterbacks making pre-snap reads based upon a guess or based upon what he sees?
Great...you found a picture that shows an open receiver. You could find that on half of all pass plays. Your quote of this being a brilliant play call only works out because the OLB is blitzing. I will ask once again. On Tommy's pre-snap read what makes you think the OLB, who is lined up on the outside shoulder of Carter, isn't doing his usual responsibility of playing the flat in a zone or taking the TE in man to man coverage? Are you just guessing that he is blitzing? Do you want our quarterbacks making pre-snap reads based upon a guess or based upon what he sees?
I find it highly questionable that the be all end all of reads on 4th and one in that situation was the 500 fade route. If it read open preplay, then you have that in your back pocket but the short higher percentage route has to be your first look. There is 0 percent chance that the play was designed pre snap to be a stand and throw a fade route. Maybe on 3rd and a half inch but not on fourth down.
Looking at your presnap picture you have two guys to cover three with safety help, with 8 guys within 5 yards of the ball in an "obvious" run situation. Route tree is designed to be clear outs with Westerkamp and Moore, leaving an outside backer on Cethan( a match up I would take) who is lined up with an inside lean on a typical running down.
Now the picture you discredit shows how the presnap read was completely blown by Armstrong. The fade never should have been thrown, period.
Listen to what you are saying. Carter has the OLB on him on a quick turn to the flat. He will ALWAYS have that on this play unless the qb sees pre-snap the OLB blitzing. What you do not always have is a safety walking into the box on the right side of the field (the pic doesn't show that). That is what Tommy saw. Now, I can agree that we may have been better considering the situation to throw to Carter in the flat even thought the OLB will be covering Carter (based on the pre-snap read). But the idea that Tommy missed a wide open Carter because he blew the pre-snap read is just wrong.
It shows a lack of football IQ by many here.
It shows a lack of football IQ by many here.
Riley will not listen as he is a goofy guy who has shown throughout his career that he is nothing more than an slightly above average coach. Some people want to compare Riley to Bo. Fine if you want to compare a lunatic to a goofball. I think they are both bad coaches. Hell, the Millard North football staff would have won more games this year with the Huskers than what Riley and crew did.
Clearly he must be. You 100% have to have faith in your athletic tight ends ability to get 1/2 yard against an OLD that is leaning to the inside showing blitz. Sure, you can read the safety in the box on the other side as well, but you use that as a safety valve not your primary route. Especially on a fourth down.
Tom's just been on vacation and has a lot of stored up trolling in the tank that he has to spew all over the board.
The only problem I have with the call is that at this point in the season DL should probably just recognize that Tommy is bad and cut his losses. It was a wide open first down, probably lots more, but Tommy can't read a defense and makes bad decisions.
The other thing that makes me chuckle is the continued insistence we run Cross again on fourth down. They just stopped it, so clearly we don't need to try anything else.
I'll agree with you, but one would have to think Danny probably hoped that Armstrong had learned something to see it. It was a good, if not great call, and it was blown between the ears of a junior QB.
you guys are hilarious. Read a defense? Look at the pictures above and tell me pre-snap what Tommy was supposed to read.
I don't see how a timing route is going to be the safety valve. If he waits even a second longer, there simply isn't room for it. Unless you are saying he should only throw it if he sees, prior to the snap, that Carter won't be open.
I also don't see how the play design changes based on whether it's 3rd or 1 or 4th and 1. The play design is the design you run in practice. I don't recall Nebraska taking a time out and Langs coming down with a stick to draw it out in the dirt.
The coaches did say that they were hesitant to run it agin because Iowa was run blitzing off the edge and they didn't want to get hit in the backfield again. So I believe they called the play thinking Iowa was going to bring a man off the edge.
So you're telling me that we called a low percentage fade route in your mind and didn't intend the flat route to be the primary?
If so then I'm on board with all you whack-a-doos that we need to get rid of our coaches right now. That is inexcusable.
With that alignment on the bunch side, there is no reason to think the fade was the best option. It does matter if it's third or fourth, on third you can take the low percentage play and still have another down. On fourth, you don't get another chance.
Re-read the post. I never said TA should have audibled. Quite the opposite. I think it was an appropriate call given our line. We had a guy that would have had the first down and then some. The point is that there is not now and there never has been a way to call a football game without putting a substantial amount of the game on your QB to make the right decisions. Just like the ill-fated third down incompletion from way back when. For all those who piss and moan about the coaches not taking the decision out of TA's hands. At this level, you simply can't coach that way. There are too many possibilities at the start of each play. You have to call a play, and each play must have basic rules and options in case the defense does this or that, and you have to rely on your QB at this level to have the mental fortitude to make a decision understanding such things as time left, score, down and distance. So, you call a play that you think will provide an option that can be successful, and hope that your 3rd year veteran QB will understand down and distance in the moment and won't resort to the all or nothing option on 4th down if it is going to be a 50-50 ball at best.
Again, to be clear, the point is coaches aren't all knowing. They can't anticipate and advise TA of every possible outcome of each play and say now don't do this or don't do that on each play. They instill basic rules and leave it to the players to understand and make good decisions. If they inherited a QB who is not capable of doing that (and thanks to the recruiting results of the last 7 years, they don't have any other QB with enough D1 level skills that could replace him) then they have to do the best they can with what they have. This year, it just wasn't enough. We didn't have a team that could win consistently with a game-manager type QB or overcome TA's inconsistent decisions, because our running game and our D were not good enough. So we have what we have. And if its TA again next year, then it will be more of the same. Perhaps the D will be better and we have a greater chance of winning the games despite TA's decision making. Or, perhaps we find an AA type running back who can save us from ourselves enough to be more successful. There is always hope, and hope is a good thing.
Again, to be clear, the point is coaches aren't all knowing. They can't anticipate and advise TA of every possible outcome of each play and say now don't do this or don't do that on each play. They instill basic rules and leave it to the players to understand and make good decisions. If they inherited a QB who is not capable of doing that (and thanks to the recruiting results of the last 7 years, they don't have any other QB with enough D1 level skills that could replace him) then they have to do the best they can with what they have. This year, it just wasn't enough. We didn't have a team that could win consistently with a game-manager type QB or overcome TA's inconsistent decisions, because our running game and our D were not good enough. So we have what we have. And if its TA again next year, then it will be more of the same. Perhaps the D will be better and we have a greater chance of winning the games despite TA's decision making. Or, perhaps we find an AA type running back who can save us from ourselves enough to be more successful. There is always hope, and hope is a good thing.
Bolded, unfortunately. A QB needs to do two things. TOs QBs were gifted runners who could pass when needed and managed the game in the way TO wanted. I would think Riley's ideal QB would be a gifted passer who could get upfield on a scramble for some yardage and would manage the offense in the way MR wanted. Tommy is a gifted runner who can makes some throws, but cannot consistently manage the offense.
No question. It's sad that we are having to be disappointed with an outstanding play call, that was WIDE open, because our QB can't read a defense and/or makes poor decisions. But that is where we are at right now with Tommy.