Depressing…but very enlightening…

Maybe Tommy Tubberville was on to something on ESPN this morning when he said Oklahoma wins “and it’s not going to be that close”…

Don’t think I could agree more. From portions of this game and others of this season, I have the distinct feeling that I’ve seen this before . . .QB decides pre-snap and that’s that . Seriously, at times, I’m not sure if I’m seeing Colt-Shipley or Simms-Williams.

The one thing, regardless of talent, that Applewhite brought to the table over Simms was the ability to see the entire field and to hit whomever the open man was, thereby forcing the defense to stress the coverage and account for all receivers. Simms, on the other hand, seemed to check on Roy, then check on Roy again.

Let’s hope Colt has this out of his system, or a good D (read: OU) will make him, and us, pay.

I wasn’t able to watch the game this weekend, but that last play really is mind boggling. Send Fozzy on a go route to clear that top defender, send Buckner on a post to take that safety, and then you’re basically left with Kirkendoll WIDE open on the strong side of the field with the safety giving him a 6 to 7 yard cushion.

There is only Good Colt. Look for him Saturday. A whole lot of “tendencies” may evaporate come game time.

looks like a mis-read on Colts part. Pre-snap, he sees the LB on Shipley with safety help over the top and sees Chiles as the only WR with press coverage. Colt reads blitz from the left side of the line so he can either take a quick throw to the left or he can take the riskier throw with more big play potential to his guy whom he thinks has single coverage. However, when Colt looks up he’s got a guy coming straight at him.

If Colt makes the right read 100% of the time (which we shouldn’t expect) he would have seen that Shipley was actually his best option in the seam or with an 8 yard hitch.

However, even if Colt doesn’t make the right read he still is capable of making a play with his feet on something like this. The protection at the line has been tremedous, and he could have scrambled through the gaping holes on the left side of the line to buy more time to hit Shipley dragging across the middle of the field.

We and the coaches know that Colt can make this play, but with a week to go before OU you don’t want your QB getting clobbered. I don’t think this was really an instance of “bad Colt”, merely GD keeping his cards close to his chest and protecting his QB.

Shipley will be double and triple teamed against OU.

If Colt stares down recievers it will be 6 the other way.

If Colt doesnt run and tries to be super pocket pro we wont pick up as many 3rd downs which will be critical

If we cant run for over 100 yards to keep them honest, we will lose, simple.

i appreciate the commentary; the pictures alone are too depressing. i particularly like “stand and watch route.”

Actually, the 3rd and 6 looks like Colt made the right read. Seeing the blitz coming, you have to make a presnap decision. With two safeties playing over top, anything that you can complete to the left side will have to be underneath for a minimal gain.

On the other hand you have man-to-man coverage on the right with Shipley and Chiles, with the corner on Chiles in press coverage. Look that way and if Chiles beats his man at the line and Shipley pulling the other defender away, that’s an easy first down with a good throw. Hit Chiles in stride and you have a first down.

Colt threw 2 picks and wasn’t as sharp. Maybe the CU scheme just gives him trouble…. more of a matchup issue? Maybe in the offseason he just doesn’t watch as much film on them as does with OU?

Anyhow, if it truly is a Colt issue and Colt is the heisman caliber QB we think he is, we’re in for a treat on Saturday. He seems to match up just fine against OU.

If only we could get the receivers all on the same page.

Good post with the snap shots. One thing that I noticed in the game this weekend was that CU had their BIG LB (either #51 or #54 ) matched up with our WR. The LB looked like he weighed at least 250. There is no way he could have kept up with a small speedy receiver like Goodwin.

It has to be Buckner running the wrong route. Kirkendoll is the most precise route runner on the team.

After all the complaining about the O-line that has gone on after the game, it looks like they did a great job on these three plays.

Awesome stuff, the pictures add a lot.

Yet another option was Fozzy, who was covered by a big LB who did not have a chance of staying with Fozzy. Seems like it would have been an easy six.

Texas runs this play quite a bit and is one of GD’s favorite quick game calls. Chris Brown, author of smartfootball.com, explains it much better than I could:

The route concept used is one Texas uses a great great, diagrammed below. To the two-receiver side, Texas runs double-slants. This serves as both a man beater and a nice route against cover two. To the three receiver side they run a variant of the two-man concept, where the outside receiver runs a fade and both inside receivers run out routes. If the flat defender to that side widens with the out run by the middle receiver, the innermost receiver should come open. If he doesn’t, well McCoy has a man in the flat.

Link to play diagram
Link to Brown’s analysis of the Texas Passing Game

It looked like Colorado was in zero coverage (no deep safeties, man to man across the board, and everyone else blitzing), but with a caveat; the two DEs rushed initially then dropped into short zones, presumably trying to rob on a quick throw made because of the blitz . My guess is that Colt read zero coverage pre-snap and immediately looked to the short side because that’s what the concept of the play tells him to do. Why did he immediately look to Chiles instead of Shipley? Maybe he banked on Chiles beating the bump at the line and would thus have a better chance to run after the catch to pick up the first down, as opposed to Shipley whose defender gave him more cushion and may have had a better shot to stop Jordan short of the sticks. That is pure speculation though.

First off, I really appreciate these "Snap Shots" analyses. Always very good stuff.

All due respect, Peter, but in the second set of photos (the 2nd and 7 series) it looks to me like Tanner is primarily at fault for the failure of this play by losing control of his seal on the Buff’s DT.

The play is designed for Colt to follow Hall’s block, while Ulatoski and Tanner keep an outside seal on the right DT and DE (photos 2 and 3). Tanner loses contain on the DT, who casually fills the designed lane (photo 4). By the time the hole between Ulatoski and Tanner fully develops, Colt has already committed to his right and can’t really cut back into the open hole (photo 5). At that point, Pericak, pretty much free to roam the line at will, simply cleans up the mess (photo 6).

While I agree that Colt certainly could have better read the situation as it developed and cut back between Tanner and Ulatoski, it sure looks to me like the Buff’s DT flat out whipped Tanner.

No argument on Colt not bringing his A-game so far this season. This particular play is clearly a case of plenty of blame to go around. In fact, that’s a pretty fair description of the offense’s efforts so far this season.

As for the kind words, they’re well deserved, Peter. Keep writing great stuff and I’ll keep reading (and occasionally opining).

….losing Quan Crosby took a year off of McCoy college career and he’s back to 2007.

Chiles, Kirkendoll, and Buckner together can’t add up to Crosby. They run bad routes, they drop balls, miss blocks and don’t really pick up much yardage after catching the ball.

So McCoy focuses on Shipley because he is the only one producing consistently and we have a one dimensional offense that even CU can stop.

There is two parts of designing an offense, one is tailoring the play to the strengths of your players. I think GD does a good job of this. The other is understanding the weaknesses of the other team and tailoring your game plan to exploit it, and this seems to get neglected.

The example shows this really well. CU was sitting back with six men 5 yards back or deeper. All the route were in front of them making it easy for the secondary to cover. If the defense is going to set up deep and you send 2 receivers deep that will take 3 backs with them and you still have man coverage on one. Plus then you have better numbers for the other 2 receivers and more open field if the catch is made.

But GD settled for running mostly short routes in front of the coverage. This really defeats the idea of using the spread. The word itself says what to do. But GD doesn’t spread the field vertically enough to thin out the defensive secondary. Once that is done then there is more room to use the running backs who get matched up with LB’s instead of cornerbacks who are faster.
If the defense is going to line up 10 yards back for Christ sakes send someone deep, 1 receiver will take 2 men deep out of the play.

I wouldn’t even bother having the receivers block on run plays just send them deep, if the conerbacks and safeties don’t respect that burn them with play action, if the do follow the receivers deep, then the fastest, best open field tacklers are out of the play and you have a chance for your running backs, tight ends and slot receivers to beat linebackers.
Plus if your receivers don’t block to good then send them deep, they should be least able to run fast. Having a defensive back 25 yards down the field is no different than getting a good block on him.
If you run the a spread offense and don’t spread the field there is no advantage. If you send 2 receivers deep and it takes 3 defense backs to cover the deep zones then your playing 8 against 9 with the added advantage of getting rid of the other teams fastest players. With some fast running backs like DJ Monroe or Fozzy Whitaker and your worst blockers taking the defenses fastest, best open field tacklers out of the play, the offense has a big advantage.
But that’s just not GD’s style.