WildHorn Part 2: Snap Shots Versus UTEP
After an impressive debut against Texas Tech, the Longhorns only used the WildHorn in the red zone and ran two plays: the counter read that accounted for 39 yards against Tech and what might be a power play pulling the playside guard into the hole. Concern about being able to run the ball in the red zone was the most likely reason for the coaching staff to only use the formation inside the 10 yardline, but the results were not particularly encouraging in that respect.
Play 1: Power Read
The Context
Early in the second quarter, leading 23-7, the Longhorns were already well on their way to blowing UTEP out and had sustained one long drive. However, Texas did fail to score a touchdown after getting possession inside the 10 yardline after the botched punt attempt by the Miners. On another sustained drive, the Longhorns found themselves inside the 10 yardline once again with a first down to start the second quarter.
The Play
In the now-familiar WildHorn formation, the Longhorns set up for a new play, though it looks like a counter read before the snap -- it has the same alignment. The first thing to notice is that since the Miners play in a 3-3-5 defense, the read man is now a linebacker on the strong side of the field. The second thing to notice is that instead of pulling the backside guard and tackle, only the playside guard pulls, this time into the hole between the backside guard and tackle -- the reason for calling it a power play, though the Longhorns might call it something else. The playside tackle stays to double team the strongside defensive end along with the center, Chris Hall. Notice also how close the safety is to the line of scrimmage because Texas is inside the 10 yardline.

The strongside linebacker heads upfield to take away Monroe, so Chiles makes the read of keeping the ball. Notice that Charlie Tanner has two options as he pulls through the hole -- the safety, highlighted, or the linebacker. I have the linebacker marked as Chris Hall's man, but it could be Ulatoski's responsibility. Either way, one of the players should get off the double-team block to take the linebacker -- that's one possibility. It's also possible that Tanner is supposed to block the closest player to the line of scrimmage when he pulls through the hole.

Tanner is locked in on the safety, while the linebacker steps up to meet Chiles in the hole.
Tanner throws a great block against the safety, eventually driving him into the end zone. The problem is that the player he decided not to block, the linebacker, is about ready to tackle Chiles. Notice also that Kyle Hix struggled to hold his block long enough to allow Chiles to make any type of move to avoid the tackler in the hole.

Despite the poor choice by Tanner, Chiles might have been able to make it to the end zone or close to it had Hix held his block longer, as the WildHorn triggerman mostly runs through the arm tackle by the linebacker but gets stood up by the end.
The Verdict
The adjustment in the blocking scheme is a good one because it doesn't try to pull a player to block someone already optioned off and gives the Longhorns a much better chance of breaking off a successful play by pulling the guard into the hole instead of to the outside, but the combination of the poor decision by Tanner, the inability to get off the double-team block and get to the second level by the playside combination, and the inability of Hix to hold his block resulted in a short gain for Chiles. It's all about execution, people.
Play 2: Counter Read
The Context
The drive featuring the first play out of the WildHorn formation stalled and ended in a field goal. The following possession for UTEP, the Miners actually managed to pick up a rare first down on a Donald Buckram run, but the Texas defense stiffened and forced a punt. Marching down the field, the Longhorns once again moved inside the UTEP 10 yardline.
The Play

Since Monroe is on the right of Chiles -- the weakside of the field, this play will be the counter read again. The major difference, however, is that Monroe is now lined up slightly in front of Chiles and maybe two steps to his right, a slight adjustment from all the previous iterations of the play. Returning to the version of the counter-read play shown against Tech, the backside guard and tackle will both pull. Instead of double teaming either the nose guard or the strongside defensive end, the left guard, Tray Allen, heads to the second level to block the linebacker.
For the second time in six WildHorn plays, Chris Hall makes another poor snap, hiking it above the head of Chiles and throwing off the timing of the play.
The read linebacker on the play breaks down at the line of scrimmage, giving Chiles the head of handoff. Of course, he can't make the handoff because he's attempting to secure the football. If the snap is good and Kirkendoll and Shipley make their blocks, Monroe has an easy trip into the end zone unless the safety in the middle of the field can make the play.
So, of course, the poor snap has disastrous results for this play, as the backside linebacker, unblocked in the scheme because he's on the backside of the play, is now in the backfield, as well as the defensive end good ol' EBS was supposed to block but had to chop because he had so far to go to block him.
Things are breaking down quite chaotically, as Chris Hall loses his block and Kyle Hix whiffs on a linebacker heading to the party. About the only two things that are going well for the Longhorns right now are the fact that Chiles has mostly avoided the oncoming linebacker who was supposed to be on the backside of this play to minimize the loss by at least a little bit and David Snow's nice block in the back of the supposedly optioned linebacker on the other side. I give Sam Acho more style points for his leg whip sack though.
Just for fun, here's if-then statement for most football plays -- if snap = FAIL, then play = FAIL. Chris Hall has a reasonably complex job as the center, but the issue here is that he's having trouble in the WildHorn with the simplest part of it.
Play 3: Counter Read
The Context
Up 47-7 coming out of halftime, Texas received the ball to start the second half. Eddie Jones and Marquise Goodwin had some communication problems on the short kick, leaving the Longhorns with the ball at the inside their own 10 yardline. Texas had to convert two third downs before Vondrell McGee broke off the big play of the drive -- his 51-yard run. On the play directly following, Greg Davis calls for the WildHorn for the final time on the day with the Longhorns at the UTEP 9 yardline.
The Play

For the first time, UTEP shifts their defensive front prior to the snap. Instead of leaving the weakside defensive end on the left shoulder of the Texas left tackle, he shifts inside a gap. Perhaps UTEP figured out that every time DJ Monroe is lined up on the weakside of the field with his "counter read" positioning several steps away and one step ahead of Chiles, that the Longhorns will run the counter read. That means that EBS must block that weakside end as the guard and tackle pull. As we will see later, that presents a problem.

It is indeed the good ol' counter read play, as Chiles will key on the strongside linebacker and Ulatoski and Tanner will pull. Besides the shift of the defensive line, it's pretty much the same defense UTEP used for the two previous WildHorn plays.
The weakside defensive end comes off the ball upfield with little resistance as EBS tries to block him without success. Meanwhile, Chiles reads the strongside backer crashing on Monroe -- it's a keeper. Hix and Huey both get good initial movement on their opponents.
Just as Chiles decides to keep the ball, he's faced with the defensive end almost right in his face. Ulatoski, the pulling tackle, picks up the block on the charging end, while Tanner throws himself in the general direction of the strongside backer, the player supposedly optioned off on this play.
Ulatoski gets a nice block, but the end disrupts the running lane for Chiles, who now has the avoid the backside baker pursuing the play.
Chiles uses his speed to beat the weakside defender to the hole, leaving two defenders for Chiles to make miss to pick up some yardage, one of whom, on the right, took several bad steps following Monroe.
The defender, probably accounted for in the blocking scheme by Ulatoski, who had to block the defensive end slicing into the backfield, makes contact with Chiles about two yards downfield. Chiles picks up another after contact, making this play by far the most successful WildHorn play against UTEP. Three whole yards. Yippee!
The Verdict
In the sunshine pumping world, the play a huge success, as Chiles picked up one-third of the yards possible on the play. It was also three times more successful than the second-best WildHorn play of the day.
In the real world, UTEP made a defensive adjustment to disrupt the play by virtually guaranteeing that they could get a guy almost unblocked into the backfield. There should be a line call by the center before the play to adjust the blocking, most likely by only pulling the guard and leaving the tackle to block.
The other aspect of this is that it seems like a waste of resources to have Tanner attempt to block the player supposedly optioned off on the play -- that's the point of option football, to option at least one defender off so you don't have to block him.
Stay Tuned
Part 3 will feature final thoughts on both games and some plays the Longhorns should have installed during the bye week.
0 recs |
24 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
These are great. Might I recommend adding some link to keep these altogether?
by UT_BKC on Oct 7, 2009 12:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The third post tomorrow will have links for the other two.
by GhostofBigRoy on Oct 7, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another request. Can you make the words white? The black didn’t show up well. It took me three pictures to realize there was writing as well as arrows.
But again, these are the best.
by UT_BKC on Oct 7, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That wasn’t very clear. I could see the arrows. It was the writing I couldn’t see.
by UT_BKC on Oct 7, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice Pictures.. Thank you
This post makes it easier to understand football
by Crimson Fog on Oct 7, 2009 12:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Nice work
Good point about that it could have been Tanner picking the wrong guy or perhaps Hall should have left his man. In analyzing other zone running plays, Huey usually would have left his man to block the linebacker, but that’s when they pull both Tanner and Ulatoski. If they only pull Tanner, then perhaps Huey has to stay home on the defensive tackle.
The real problem I see is that the formation is not a good one on the goal line, when the safety is so close to the line that it’s easy to get 9 in the box. Other wild-whatever formations have an H-back or flex TE and a TE on the strong side, which creates an unbalanced line and enough power to make the sweep a real threat and opens up a cutback lane behind the left guard. Tim Tebow’s made a living on that play.
by burnt in ny on Oct 7, 2009 12:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m a little confused about the terminology ‘strong side.’ I’ve always head and used this term to refer to the side with the TE. It seems you use it in the opposite manner.
by UT_BKC on Oct 7, 2009 12:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The strong side of an off-balanced offensive formation is where there is an extra lineman (TE), you are correct.
He does say strong side of the field, which I would interpret as the wide side of the field, meaning the side where there is more grass (they are on the right hash, so there is more field to the left). Unless it was an honest mistake/typo.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 7, 2009 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks BiC
The formations are actually balanced because there are an equal number of players on each side of the center — normally, in 11 personnel, Davis likes to use the tight end on the side of the field with the two receivers, making it the strong side.
BiC is right though, I should have just called it the wide side of the field since the WildHorn formations are balanced.
by GhostofBigRoy on Oct 7, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad you asked that
I was wondering the same thing.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 7, 2009 2:18 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Chris Hall
Part of my complaint about using this set in general is the rapport between Hall and Chiles, and the lack of reps they might get in practice, out of necessity.
Maybe it is all Hall’s faults on the bad snaps, though one of them (maybe this one? Cant remember, might have been against Tech) it looked like the ball, while high, came before Chiles expected it. Whose fault that is Im not sure.
Anyway the point is, the number of bad snaps with Chiles behind center already appears to be at a far higher percentage than when McCoy is behind center, even though that center isnt changing. So maybe it is Hall’s fault, maybe its Chiles’ fault, I dont know. What I do know, is that it shows that wherever the problem lies, there needs to be more reps applied to fix it. Though with limited practice time, the more reps the Wild Horn gets, the less our main offense gets, which is not something that I like.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 7, 2009 1:31 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The ball going over Chile’s head or at his feet has nothing to do with Chiles or his rapport with Hall. That would be a factor in snaps under the center, but not here. Or if McCoy was 5 feet taller, then Hall would be snapping to a different spot to get in the general area of the chest. But he’s not, so he shouldn’t have trouble hitting Chiles in the chest.
Hall just needs to do a better job.
by UT_BKC on Oct 7, 2009 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Chiles took the majority of snaps from Hall in practice, do you think there would be more or less botched snaps between them come gametime?
If its purely Hall’s fault, why doesn’t he do the same thing to Colt regularly?
Has Colt just been lucky? I suppose that’s possible. The reality remains that somewhere north of 20% of the Hall to Chiles connections havent hit, and Id be willing to bet its something less than 3% of the Hall to McCoy connections havent.
Then again maybe its just a small sample size, bad snaps will happen. But by God if I see another botched snap between those two… well… I guess Ill just complain some more about the Wild Horn.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 7, 2009 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nailed it
why doesn’t he do the same thing to Colt regularly?
Exactly the question, or rather, since Hall’s snaps to Colt are almost always right on target, why doesn’t he do the same thing to John regularly? My best guess is it is just nerves, with Hall understanding that since this is a foreign package, the lack of familiarity requires more focus on execution, and the snap gets over-thought.
If you're so sure of what it ain't, how about telling us what it am!
by circa1015 on Oct 7, 2009 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Snow's Block in the back
Is not illegal:
Offensive players who are on the line of scrimmage at the snap
within the blocking zone (Rule 2-3-6) may legally block in the back
in the blocking zone,
by littlebighorn on Oct 8, 2009 9:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of rules
I was reading through the roughing the punter rules after the utep game to see if there was a reason that Malcolm Williams didn’t get flagged for it since he never touched the ball and just creamed the punter. I never was able to find a rule as to why that wasn’t roughing the punter but I did come across a rule that says that if the punter gets outside the tackle box then there is no roughing the punter infraction. So every time Justin Tucker does the rugby style punt he could be lit up by a defender after he kicks it and there would be no roughing the punter.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 8, 2009 12:31 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
I thought it was becuase the ball hit the ground
Once the ball hits the ground I though it was fair game.
by Wells on Oct 8, 2009 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
true..
…but what he said it’s apparently also true. Right now during the Mizzou-Neb. game, the Mizzou player lit up the other punter b/c of the situation aaronlybrand described.
by vy til i die on Oct 8, 2009 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Possibility
I thought that might be a reason but I couldn’t find a rule that stated that for a fact.
by aaronlybrand on Oct 9, 2009 12:12 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Great job!
What a great post!
I wonder why Chiles does not lineup under center instead of the shotgun. He could either give it to the to the TB running into the line or bootleg it himself.
The zone read is so friggin slow developing that the D is in position before Chiles has even had a chance to make his read. All the ZR does is let the D that it is a run so the LB feels free to come up to the LOS and the safety comes up toward the LOS.
It would be much better to have big WRs playing when the horns are in the red zone (i.e. no Kirk). It would be nice to see Chiles run the option with the inside WR sealing the run side LB. Chiles would then have to be tackled by a DB (rather than an LB) and would still have the option of pitching it to DJ.
You could have Cody at TB. He could either lead Chiles as a blocker when Chiles is running wide or Chiles could option to Cody so that Cody is isolated on a DB.
The horns are probably better off with 4 WRs than 3 WRs and a TE.
by Kafka on Oct 8, 2009 2:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
How is Chiles going to make his read
when he is turned around getting read for the hand off?
by Wells on Oct 8, 2009 6:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 








































