4th Down Call

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Nov 14, 2010
2,611
1,336
743
#41
For those that are sooo critical of the 4th down call AND execution, you might want to learn a little bit about the call before you automatically assume it was horrible, hysterical, pathetic, or whatever stupid description people use.
The playcall was to lineup and motion just exactly like 2-3 plays run earlier. Each of the previous times, TC ran the ball. But this time the play called for TC to run a naked roll out and throw to Woods coming across the formation. Clearly the coaches were expecting the defense to recognize the formation and play the run. However the problem was 2 things. Woods got held up along the line and wasn’t open. Baylor blitz which didn’t allow time for a second read. Sure, TC should have thrown the ball away, but that mistake only cost us 7 yds - hardly the difference in the game.

All the criticism of the 4th down call is representative of the overall criticism of TC, the offense, MY and even Gundy - criticism made without much if any real understanding of what’s going on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dude

Baylor didn't blitz

We left 2 unblocked players to the side we booted to and that was by design.

The unblocked DEnd was going to meet the mesh point and ran into Woods which means, by design, you chased an unblocked player right into the only option you had on the play.

Then, Stoner went in motion, the outside receiver went deep so there was no other option to throw it to on that side of the field.

That is, unless you wanted to throw it deep to the outside receiver. But... To do that you would have to think that you were going to have enough time despite the fact that you left 2 defenders unblocked.

You said it was just like 2-3 times that we had done before.

We hadn't handed the ball to Stoner all day, but he was the motion guy to draw the defense.

We ran a naked bootleg, under center, with NO tight end in the game.

So, we left 2 unblocked players, but only had one option on the play and we ran a guy right to him with where we set the mesh point.

We out numbered ourselves

There is no way to defend the setup of that play
 
Last edited:

Jostate

CPTNQUIRK called me a greenhorn
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
17,370
13,305
1,743
#42
Dude

Baylor didn't blitz

We left 2 unblocked players to the side we booted to.

Then, Stoner went in motion, the outside receiver went deep so there was no other option to throw it to off of that naked.

We ran a naked bootleg, under center, with NO tight end in the game.

There is no way to defend the setup of that play
Everyone will dog pile Corndog for not throwing it away. Which is fair. But that play was a mess from the snap. It looked like it had 2 possible results, a sack or a desperation chunk it away for a turnover on downs.
 

GumbyFromPokeyLand

Wrangler
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2011
93
18
558
59
Breckenridge, CO
#43
2009? What does that have to do with 2014, TC’s freshman year?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What I am saying is that, while I was there, we had three multi-year starters and we offered them and not Taylor Cornelius. Didn’t think he had enough zip on his passes and struggled with passes outside the hashes and downfield.
Only one of them even played after 2013, TCs senior year in HS. ENMSU didnt even sign a QB in 2014 so I assume they didn’t even try to recruit a QB with 2 upcoming juniors and a sophomore on the roster.

Regardless, just because some small time Div II school didn’t offer him in 2014 doesn’t mean he’s not a good, not great, Div I QB in 2018.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 14, 2010
2,611
1,336
743
#44
Everyone will dog pile Corndog for not throwing it away. Which is fair. But that play was a mess from the snap. It looked like it had 2 possible results, a sack or a desperation chunk it away for a turnover on downs.
Agreed

Cornelius had 2 choices

Throw it away or take a sack

Why in the world would you throw the ball away on 4th down?

Since it was 4th down he did what he was supposed to do. He tried to extend the play to give his team a chance to stay on offense
 

GumbyFromPokeyLand

Wrangler
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2011
93
18
558
59
Breckenridge, CO
#45
For those that are sooo critical of the 4th down call AND execution, you might want to learn a little bit about the call before you automatically assume it was horrible, hysterical, pathetic, or whatever stupid description people use.
The playcall was to lineup and motion just exactly like 2-3 plays run earlier. Each of the previous times, TC ran the ball. But this time the play called for TC to run a naked roll out and throw to Woods coming across the formation. Clearly the coaches were expecting the defense to recognize the formation and play the run. However the problem was 2 things. Woods got held up along the line and wasn’t open. Baylor blitz which didn’t allow time for a second read. Sure, TC should have thrown the ball away, but that mistake only cost us 7 yds - hardly the difference in the game.

All the criticism of the 4th down call is representative of the overall criticism of TC, the offense, MY and even Gundy - criticism made without much if any real understanding of what’s going on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dude

Baylor didn't blitz

We left 2 unblocked players to the side we booted to and that was by design.

The unblocked DEnd was going to meet the mesh point and ran into Woods which means, by design, you chased an unblocked player right into the only option you had on the play.

Then, Stoner went in motion, the outside receiver went deep so there was no other option to throw it to on that side of the field.

That is, unless you wanted to throw it deep to the outside receiver. But... To do that you would have to think that you were going to have enough time despite the fact that you left 2 defenders unblocked.

You said it was just like 2-3 times that we had done before.

We hadn't handed the ball to Stoner all day, but he was the motion guy to draw the defense.

We ran a naked bootleg, under center, with NO tight end in the game.

So, we left 2 unblocked players, but only had one option on the play and we ran a guy right to him with where we set the mesh point.

We out numbered ourselves

There is no way to defend the setup of that play
Where to start?

You are right about the blitz. I was just recounting Yurcich’s explanation of the play without reviewing the video. My bad. However.....,

Baylor rushed with 5, 2 played static just behind the LOS, 4 dropped into coverage.

Stoner went in motion to take the safety away from the play. The WR went deep to take the CB out of the play.

There was only one unblocked player (DE) which is by design on a naked. Thus the name. We expected to influence the DE by having the RT block inside.

TC, not Stoner, had run out of that formation and IR motion 2-3 times earlier in the game.

Johnson lined up wide left. He ran about an 8 yd cross and was the designed 2nd read.

The play was designed to either throw to Woods or Corn to keep, with Johnson as the third option. The DE rushed up the field instead of inside which knocked Woods off, and the safety came up for contain. No room to run, first read not on his route, no time for the second read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,454
6,642
1,743
Landlocked
#46
For those that are sooo critical of the 4th down call AND execution, you might want to learn a little bit about the call before you automatically assume it was horrible, hysterical, pathetic, or whatever stupid description people use.
The playcall was to lineup and motion just exactly like 2-3 plays run earlier. Each of the previous times, TC ran the ball. But this time the play called for TC to run a naked roll out and throw to Woods coming across the formation. Clearly the coaches were expecting the defense to recognize the formation and play the run. However the problem was 2 things. Woods got held up along the line and wasn’t open. Baylor blitz which didn’t allow time for a second read. Sure, TC should have thrown the ball away, but that mistake only cost us 7 yds - hardly the difference in the game.

All the criticism of the 4th down call is representative of the overall criticism of TC, the offense, MY and even Gundy - criticism made without much if any real understanding of what’s going on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you're telling me we showed them one look and did something different? Dude, that's brilliant. Why don't more teams try that kind of thing? Defensive coordinators would be so screwed. I'm sure a D1 DC wouldn't have the first clue how to defend such witchcraft.
 

GumbyFromPokeyLand

Wrangler
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2011
93
18
558
59
Breckenridge, CO
#47
For those that are sooo critical of the 4th down call AND execution, you might want to learn a little bit about the call before you automatically assume it was horrible, hysterical, pathetic, or whatever stupid description people use.
The playcall was to lineup and motion just exactly like 2-3 plays run earlier. Each of the previous times, TC ran the ball. But this time the play called for TC to run a naked roll out and throw to Woods coming across the formation. Clearly the coaches were expecting the defense to recognize the formation and play the run. However the problem was 2 things. Woods got held up along the line and wasn’t open. Baylor blitz which didn’t allow time for a second read. Sure, TC should have thrown the ball away, but that mistake only cost us 7 yds - hardly the difference in the game.

All the criticism of the 4th down call is representative of the overall criticism of TC, the offense, MY and even Gundy - criticism made without much if any real understanding of what’s going on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you're telling me we showed them one look and did something different? Dude, that's brilliant. Why don't more teams try that kind of thing? Defensive coordinators would be so screwed. I'm sure a D1 DC wouldn't have the first clue how to defend such witchcraft.
I know you’re just being sarcastic, but yes, that’s part of every game plan for every team in every game - running different plays out of the same formation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 14, 2010
2,611
1,336
743
#48
Where to start?

You are right about the blitz. I was just recounting Yurcich’s explanation of the play without reviewing the video. My bad. However.....,

Baylor rushed with 5, 2 played static just behind the LOS, 4 dropped into coverage.

Stoner went in motion to take the safety away from the play. The WR went deep to take the CB out of the play.

There was only one unblocked player (DE) which is by design on a naked. Thus the name. We expected to influence the DE by having the RT block inside.

TC, not Stoner, had run out of that formation and IR motion 2-3 times earlier in the game.

Johnson lined up wide left. He ran about an 8 yd cross and was the designed 2nd read.

The play was designed to either throw to Woods or Corn to keep, with Johnson as the third option. The DE rushed up the field instead of inside which knocked Woods off, and the safety came up for contain. No room to run, first read not on his route, no time for the second read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They didn't "drop" into coverage

They were in man coverage

That's why the safety chased Stoner on the motion and that's why the corner away from the boot chased Wallace.

That segways to he next point. It was not the safety that come up for contain. That safety chased Stoner.

It was the lb to that side, who was completely unblocked. He was the 2nd unblocked player to that side that made the play on Cornelius.

Again, we created a mesh point on a bootleg that drew the unblocked DEnd directly into the path of the H back who was the primary and ONLY feasibleTarget on the play.

By leaving the linebacker unblocked, Cornelius was not a feasible option.

Also, by leaving that same linebacker unblocked, to ask Cornelius to stop his roll, throw back across his body late back across the middle to a receiver that was being covered man to man is not even close to a feasible option.

There is no defense for the setup of that play
 

GumbyFromPokeyLand

Wrangler
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2011
93
18
558
59
Breckenridge, CO
#50
Where to start?

You are right about the blitz. I was just recounting Yurcich’s explanation of the play without reviewing the video. My bad. However.....,

Baylor rushed with 5, 2 played static just behind the LOS, 4 dropped into coverage.

Stoner went in motion to take the safety away from the play. The WR went deep to take the CB out of the play.

There was only one unblocked player (DE) which is by design on a naked. Thus the name. We expected to influence the DE by having the RT block inside.

TC, not Stoner, had run out of that formation and IR motion 2-3 times earlier in the game.

Johnson lined up wide left. He ran about an 8 yd cross and was the designed 2nd read.

The play was designed to either throw to Woods or Corn to keep, with Johnson as the third option. The DE rushed up the field instead of inside which knocked Woods off, and the safety came up for contain. No room to run, first read not on his route, no time for the second read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They didn't "drop" into coverage

They were in man coverage

That's why the safety chased Stoner on the motion and that's why the corner away from the boot chased Wallace.

That segways to he next point. It was not the safety that come up for contain. That safety chased Stoner.

It was the lb to that side, who was completely unblocked. He was the 2nd unblocked player to that side that made the play on Cornelius.

Again, we created a mesh point on a bootleg that drew the unblocked DEnd directly into the path of the H back who was the primary and ONLY feasibleTarget on the play.

By leaving the linebacker unblocked, Cornelius was not a feasible option.

Also, by leaving that same linebacker unblocked, to ask Cornelius to stop his roll, throw back across his body late back across the middle to a receiver that was being covered man to man is not even close to a feasible option.

There is no defense for the setup of that play
#21 is a safety that lined up as a LB.

Regardless, the play was called BEFORE Baylor set their defense. Was clearly a situation where you don’t check out of the play that has 3 options. Baylor had a good defense for that call, their DE also made a great play by both rushing up field AND taking out the first option.

I know your entire gig is to second guess. Why not try giving us the play that would work? Not a play against that defense, but a play that would work without the benefit of seeing Baylors personnel or alignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 14, 2010
2,611
1,336
743
#51
#21 is a safety that lined up as a LB.

Regardless, the play was called BEFORE Baylor set their defense. Was clearly a situation where you don’t check out of the play that has 3 options. Baylor had a good defense for that call, their DE also made a great play by both rushing up field AND taking out the first option.

I know your entire gig is to second guess. Why not try giving us the play that would work? Not a play against that defense, but a play that would work without the benefit of seeing Baylors personnel or alignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tiering the play with feasible options to check to

If you're going to run that boot then put a tight end in, release him and that playside lb has to either cover him or he gets wide open.

If he drops into coverage then Cornelius can keep and gets the first down easy.

If he forces on Cornelius then he just dumps it to a wide open Tight End exactly as he did last week against Texas on the touchdown to Woods.

You made the typical sarcastic comment about how, we as fans, can't possibly know what happened etc .. when in reality you were the one who didn't know what happened as I've showed you.

Classic Stuff!
 

GumbyFromPokeyLand

Wrangler
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2011
93
18
558
59
Breckenridge, CO
#52
#21 is a safety that lined up as a LB.

Regardless, the play was called BEFORE Baylor set their defense. Was clearly a situation where you don’t check out of the play that has 3 options. Baylor had a good defense for that call, their DE also made a great play by both rushing up field AND taking out the first option.

I know your entire gig is to second guess. Why not try giving us the play that would work? Not a play against that defense, but a play that would work without the benefit of seeing Baylors personnel or alignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tiering the play with feasible options to check to

If you're going to run that boot then put a tight end in, release him and that playside lb has to either cover him or he gets wide open.

If he drops into coverage then Cornelius can keep and gets the first down easy.

If he forces on Cornelius then he just dumps it to a wide open Tight End exactly as he did last week against Texas on the touchdown to Woods.

You made the typical sarcastic comment about how, we as fans, can't possibly know what happened etc .. when in reality you were the one who didn't know what happened as I've showed you.

Classic Stuff!
And if they are in man across the board and put a safety on the TE, and LB seals the edge, and the DE takes an outside rush? Same result.

I was just recounting the play as described by Yurcich and adding what the video showed. Has nothing to do with what I do or don’t know. I’m not into second guessing. It’s pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 14, 2010
2,611
1,336
743
#53
And if they are in man across the board and put a safety on the TE, and LB seals the edge, and the DE takes an outside rush? Same result.

I was just recounting the play as described by Yurcich and adding what the video showed. Has nothing to do with what I do or don’t know. I’m not into second guessing. It’s pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No

Then you hit the H back who would be uncovered

At that point outside linebacker could either take QB or the H

Whichever one he chooses, QB takes the other

That is
Unless you design the play to have the unblocked DEnd run into him

That's why, like I said, these plays have to be tiered
 

GumbyFromPokeyLand

Wrangler
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2011
93
18
558
59
Breckenridge, CO
#54
And if they are in man across the board and put a safety on the TE, and LB seals the edge, and the DE takes an outside rush? Same result.

I was just recounting the play as described by Yurcich and adding what the video showed. Has nothing to do with what I do or don’t know. I’m not into second guessing. It’s pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No

Then you hit the H back who would be uncovered

At that point outside linebacker could either take QB or the H

That is
Unless you design the play to have the unblocked DEnd run into him

That's why, like I said, these plays have to be tiered
If they are in man across the board, everyone is covered, including the H either by a LB or safety.
There is a defense to defeat any play.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Mfa6677

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Jan 15, 2016
526
545
143
41
Kansas
#55
And if they are in man across the board and put a safety on the TE, and LB seals the edge, and the DE takes an outside rush? Same result.

I was just recounting the play as described by Yurcich and adding what the video showed. Has nothing to do with what I do or don’t know. I’m not into second guessing. It’s pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually you talked shit like usual based only what a coach said. As usual you take everything they say as fact. Herecomesbullet disproved your fans don’t know what’s going on statement and proved you weren’t as knowledgeable on the play as you thought you were so now you backpeddle and say you aren’t in to second guessing Classic stuff Gumby. Like I told you on gopokes. Just fade us in these spots and win money. Rinse repeat.
 

GumbyFromPokeyLand

Wrangler
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2011
93
18
558
59
Breckenridge, CO
#56
And if they are in man across the board and put a safety on the TE, and LB seals the edge, and the DE takes an outside rush? Same result.

I was just recounting the play as described by Yurcich and adding what the video showed. Has nothing to do with what I do or don’t know. I’m not into second guessing. It’s pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually you talked shit like usual based only what a coach said. As usual you take everything they say as fact. Herecomesbullet disproved your fans don’t know what’s going on statement and proved you weren’t as knowledgeable on the play as you thought you were so now you backpeddle and say you aren’t in to second guessing Classic stuff Gumby. Like I told you on gopokes. Just fade us in these spots and win money. Rinse repeat.
Dude, it ain’t me that has all the answers. I leave that for all the know-it-alls. Nobody, repeat nobody that posts here or elsewhere knows near enough about the combination of our playbook, what we practice, the reads and the defenses we face to give a meaningful consistent assessment/critique of the play calls or game plans. From a fans standpoint, it either works or it doesn’t.

Carry on with your “fade”, whatever the hell that means.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Mfa6677

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Jan 15, 2016
526
545
143
41
Kansas
#57
Dude, it ain’t me that has all the answers. I leave that for all the know-it-alls. Nobody, repeat nobody that posts here or elsewhere knows near enough about the combination of our playbook, what we practice, the reads and the defenses we face to give a meaningful consistent assessment/critique of the play calls or game plans. From a fans standpoint, it either works or it doesn’t.

Carry on with your “fade”, whatever the hell that means.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You claim to not have the answers but spend your time on message boards explaining to others why they don’t have the answers by using your thoughts. Hilarious. And you know exactly what my fade means. You talk plenty about gambling and quote those fake odds put out by casinos about what money is bet Which by the way is hysterical. You really think casinos would post that info and it be accurate lol
 
Nov 14, 2010
2,611
1,336
743
#58
If they are in man across the board, everyone is covered, including the H either by a LB or safety.
There is a defense to defeat any play.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It couldn't have been a safety because 1 can safety was chasing Stoner and the other one would have been covering the Tight End.

That leaves the OLB to cover the H, and if he does then there is no one accounting for the quarterback and he runs for the 1st down.

Like I said, go back and watch how we set it up against Texas with a Tight End and you'll see how it works.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,454
6,642
1,743
Landlocked
#59
It couldn't have been a safety because 1 can safety was chasing Stoner and the other one would have been covering the Tight End.

That leaves the OLB to cover the H, and if he does then there is no one accounting for the quarterback and he runs for the 1st down.

Like I said, go back and watch how we set it up against Texas with a Tight End and you'll see how it works.
Gumby obviously forgot that the QB could run and was only considering the pass coverage. Once he realized it, he tried to back out by saying he's not an expert.