Good, Bad, and Ugly

[PlayerRep]

From my observation, CP is one hell of a football team. They found out early the dive was not the best option because of our D line so they went to the edges and sealed off the DBs and LBs with some of the best blocking I have seen in a long time. We could not contain the edges so the safeties were needed to come up to close it off. On the first wide open TD the DB fell down, on the Sanders TD he could not cover because of the leg cramp, on the FB TD he slipped out of the backfield late while the QB was scrambling for his life to the left. I don't see how any of those could have been stopped. On top of that, on all three plays the QB was being harassed and a split second away from being sacked. I was surprised he even got the ball away. I can not remember a game we have played against a triple option team when we were not burned once or twice on deep balls. It's the nature of the beast. Even with all of that, we were about a foot right of winning.

Sanders got beat because he made a huge mistake, not because he had had a cramp earlier.

And, if it's a pass play, the safeties are not needed to defend the edge. That's the key. The safety has to stay with his man/pass defense until he knows for sure that it's not a pass.

You may want to watch the replay one more time. Sanders had just replaced Strong who was injured the play prior. He was singled on Lewis, nine yards off the receiver, back peddled three or four steps and turned to run with him. He didn't bite on the play fake, he simply didn't have it to run with Lewis. It may be that even healthy, he's still not able to run with Lewis who did the same thing USDSU the week prior. What huge mistake are you referring to?

Nope. Don't agree. You look again. He didn't think the receiver was going long, and let him run past him. That's the mistake.

 

[PhxGriz]

From my observation, CP is one hell of a football team. They found out early the dive was not the best option because of our D line so they went to the edges and sealed off the DBs and LBs with some of the best blocking I have seen in a long time. We could not contain the edges so the safeties were needed to come up to close it off. On the first wide open TD the DB fell down, on the Sanders TD he could not cover because of the leg cramp, on the FB TD he slipped out of the backfield late while the QB was scrambling for his life to the left. I don't see how any of those could have been stopped. On top of that, on all three plays the QB was being harassed and a split second away from being sacked. I was surprised he even got the ball away. I can not remember a game we have played against a triple option team when we were not burned once or twice on deep balls. It's the nature of the beast. Even with all of that, we were about a foot right of winning.

Sanders got beat because he made a huge mistake, not because he had had a cramp earlier.

And, if it's a pass play, the safeties are not needed to defend the edge. That's the key. The safety has to stay with his man/pass defense until he knows for sure that it's not a pass.

No shit sherlock, but that is part of what puts more pressure on the Safeties when reading what Poly does compared to what EWU does. It is not rocket science to figure that out.

Agreed. Way tougher for a safety to play the triple option well than it is to defend a spread offense such as EWU.

How many times has Sanders faced a triple option team as well?

 

[PlayerRep]

Didn't Sanders play against CP once last year, and the talented EWU receivers once last year. Now he has faced CP twice. Will eventually face the EWU receivers again.

 

[PlayerRep]

From my observation, CP is one hell of a football team. They found out early the dive was not the best option because of our D line so they went to the edges and sealed off the DBs and LBs with some of the best blocking I have seen in a long time. We could not contain the edges so the safeties were needed to come up to close it off. On the first wide open TD the DB fell down, on the Sanders TD he could not cover because of the leg cramp, on the FB TD he slipped out of the backfield late while the QB was scrambling for his life to the left. I don't see how any of those could have been stopped. On top of that, on all three plays the QB was being harassed and a split second away from being sacked. I was surprised he even got the ball away. I can not remember a game we have played against a triple option team when we were not burned once or twice on deep balls. It's the nature of the beast. Even with all of that, we were about a foot right of winning.

Sanders got beat because he made a huge mistake, not because he had had a cramp earlier.

And, if it's a pass play, the safeties are not needed to defend the edge. That's the key. The safety has to stay with his man/pass defense until he knows for sure that it's not a pass.

No shit sherlock, but that is part of what puts more pressure on the Safeties when reading what Poly does compared to what EWU does. It is not rocket science to figure that out.

Agreed. Way tougher for a safety to play the triple option well than it is to defend a spread offense such as EWU.

Way tougher for a safety to defend the EWU receiving corp than to defend the CP receiving corp. Discipline. The triple option is very hard to defend, but with discipline triple option passing can be effectively defended.

 

[PlayerRep]

From my observation, CP is one hell of a football team. They found out early the dive was not the best option because of our D line so they went to the edges and sealed off the DBs and LBs with some of the best blocking I have seen in a long time. We could not contain the edges so the safeties were needed to come up to close it off. On the first wide open TD the DB fell down, on the Sanders TD he could not cover because of the leg cramp, on the FB TD he slipped out of the backfield late while the QB was scrambling for his life to the left. I don't see how any of those could have been stopped. On top of that, on all three plays the QB was being harassed and a split second away from being sacked. I was surprised he even got the ball away. I can not remember a game we have played against a triple option team when we were not burned once or twice on deep balls. It's the nature of the beast. Even with all of that, we were about a foot right of winning.

Sanders got beat because he made a huge mistake, not because he had had a cramp earlier.

And, if it's a pass play, the safeties are not needed to defend the edge. That's the key. The safety has to stay with his man/pass defense until he knows for sure that it's not a pass.

No shit sherlock, but that is part of what puts more pressure on the Safeties when reading what Poly does compared to what EWU does. It is not rocket science to figure that out.[/quote

Ok, Hot Shot, so now you are the team trainer and know for a fact that a cramp was not part of the issue and it was just "a huge mistake". And that CP was gaining 5 to 10 yards on every run to the edge with outstanding blocking so there was no need for safety help, even though, none of the passes were "pass plays". They all came off some sort of option run, which was shut off by the D and the QB was improvising.

Sanders did not come up to the defend the run on that play, and he didn't fill on the edge.

 

[PlayerRep]

You keep wanting to have a different discussion than what we were having, and attribute statements to HHH that he didn't say. The topic was pass defense for safeties--CP's triple option offense. There is no way that EWU's passing offense doesn't place more pressure on safeties than CP's passing offense. I have heard the UM defensive coaches talk specifically about the tremendous problems that EWU's passing offense, great receivers including Kupp, and accurate qb's. I have talked to past UM safeties about this very subject.

Actually, yeager is having the exact same discussion I was having. It seems that you made it a different discussion. The point was that EWU puts DIFFERENT pressure on the safeties in the passing game than does Poly. But please, carry on.

Nope, yeager said the triple option puts significant pressure on the safeties, not that it just puts pressure on the safeties in the passing game. And the passing game was the discussion being had, not defending the triple option. In any event, both of you are wrong. EWU in recent years has been a much tougher on the pass defenders than CP's passing offense.

And I agree. Take a minute and think about why the pressure on the safeties is different.

Playing safety against the EWU receivers and passing game puts significant pressure on safeties, and, in my view, it is much easier to defend the triple option passing game (think discipline) than to defend the EWU receivers/passing game. Note that "passing" word. Note that the discussion in the beginning of this thread related to the passing defense. Note that the UM defense gave up 56 yards in 4-13 passing by CP in 2015. Don't think the CP passing game put much pressure on our safeties last year. Seems to me that you are trying to invent something that doesn't exist.

If you want to argue that the CP triple option defense is hard to defend, then I will be happy to agree with you. It's especially hard for teams that don't face triple option/running teams alot.

 

[grizfan406]

Basically, we gifted these guys four touches--two on turnovers, two on blown coverages. That's 28 points to a very good team on their home field in blistering heat--and still we came within a point, and coulda/shoulda won it. Funny thing is, given how well our offense played, I'm almost happier with this game than I was in the N. Iowa victory, where I thought our entire offense stunk, and we won partly on the inept passing of our opponent.

all of this, yes, agreed.

 

[bgbigdog]

From my observation, CP is one hell of a football team. They found out early the dive was not the best option because of our D line so they went to the edges and sealed off the DBs and LBs with some of the best blocking I have seen in a long time. We could not contain the edges so the safeties were needed to come up to close it off. On the first wide open TD the DB fell down, on the Sanders TD he could not cover because of the leg cramp, on the FB TD he slipped out of the backfield late while the QB was scrambling for his life to the left. I don't see how any of those could have been stopped. On top of that, on all three plays the QB was being harassed and a split second away from being sacked. I was surprised he even got the ball away. I can not remember a game we have played against a triple option team when we were not burned once or twice on deep balls. It's the nature of the beast. Even with all of that, we were about a foot right of winning.

Sanders got beat because he made a huge mistake, not because he had had a cramp earlier.

And, if it's a pass play, the safeties are not needed to defend the edge. That's the key. The safety has to stay with his man/pass defense until he knows for sure that it's not a pass.

You may want to watch the replay one more time. Sanders had just replaced Strong who was injured the play prior. He was singled on Lewis, nine yards off the receiver, back peddled three or four steps and turned to run with him. He didn't bite on the play fake, he simply didn't have it to run with Lewis. It may be that even healthy, he's still not able to run with Lewis who did the same thing USDSU the week prior. What huge mistake are you referring to?

Nope. Don't agree. You look again. He didn't think the receiver was going long, and let him run past him. That's the mistake.

Boy, sure put me in my place. Nope. Don't need to look again. Cover zero, no help deep. His only mistake was not tackling Lewis as he ran by him because Yamen knew he couldn't stay with him. Why aren't they playing the cover two shell you normally see? Because they're playing an option team that was gashing them @ will on the edges.

 

[Diesel]

Sixth year senior dropdown from Air Force has first clean pocket, DL passed up multiple times to light him up on option runs after the pitch throughout the game ( Kidder had a couple of hits in the first half that should have done him in, Schye chose to follow ball instead of blowing up QB) Sander's on one leg is twenty yrds down field when ball is thrown. Good pass, great protection, okey route and catch TD and Griz were still in place to win with 4:00 min.

Lyons may have been more fresh when firstdown on 31 Yard line LJM had hot hand, but looked winded in the last three downs. Woulda coulda shoulda. Congradulations to CP for the win.

Strong was out with injury on go ahead TD Sander's had issues in the run game his off coverage would have given him enough room on most plays,got beat. Looking forward to three home games

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Actually, yeager is having the exact same discussion I was having. It seems that you made it a different discussion. The point was that EWU puts DIFFERENT pressure on the safeties in the passing game than does Poly. But please, carry on.

Nope, yeager said the triple option puts significant pressure on the safeties, not that it just puts pressure on the safeties in the passing game. And the passing game was the discussion being had, not defending the triple option. In any event, both of you are wrong. EWU in recent years has been a much tougher on the pass defenders than CP's passing offense.

And I agree. Take a minute and think about why the pressure on the safeties is different.

Playing safety against the EWU receivers and passing game puts significant pressure on safeties, and, in my view, it is much easier to defend the triple option passing game (think discipline) than to defend the EWU receivers/passing game. Note that "passing" word. Note that the discussion in the beginning of this thread related to the passing defense. Note that the UM defense gave up 56 yards in 4-13 passing by CP in 2015. Don't think the CP passing game put much pressure on our safeties last year. Seems to me that you are trying to invent something that doesn't exist.

If you want to argue that the CP triple option defense is hard to defend, then I will be happy to agree with you. It's especially hard for teams that don't face triple option/running teams alot.

Poly passing against FCS teams this season:

9-11, 1 td, 17.9 yds/completion
5-9, 2 tds, 26.0 yds/completion
6-10, 3 tds, 26.2 yds/completion

Seems pretty good for a passing game that is easy to defend. You know why it puts different pressure on the safeties......threat of the run. EWU passing game is based on match-ups, the Poly passing game is based on scheme. This was the point that everyone was trying to make.

 

[Sam A. Blitz]

I would agree that an EWU type offense would put more "pressure" on the safeties. I don't know if it makes the Cal Poly offense any easier to defend for a safety, especially when they only see a trip option once a year. All I know is that the safety play was much better against EWU last year that it was against Cal Poly last year and this year, especially for Sanders. Hopefully we will see a similar effort against EWU this year, because they will need to perform at a high level in order for us to win.

 

[rimrockgriz]

I would agree that an EWU type offense would put more "pressure" on the safeties. I don't know if it makes the Cal Poly offense any easier to defend for a safety, especially when they only see a trip option once a year. All I know is that the safety play was much better against EWU last year that it was against Cal Poly last year and this year, especially for Sanders. Hopefully we will see a similar effort against EWU this year, because they will need to perform at a high level in order for us to win.

If you remember we put incredible pressure on EWU last year. In fact I remember we had a sack fumble for a TD. It had been a long time coming vs the fn Eagles. There's a pile of good football comments here and I'd like to add that defending the triple option from a safety point of view is damn frustrating. Human nature takes over at some point and you cheat up to help with run support. We all know what happens when they catch you Discipline is the right word and it is violated by every safety that faces a strong option squad. I felt the "D" played well enough to win the contest. BG handing the ball over on consecutive series put us 6' under. I.M.O. I watched the Eagles play N.A.U. on Saturday and I'm not excited about defending their passing attack. We'll need a ton of sacks to win... :egriz:

 

[kemajic]

I would agree that an EWU type offense would put more "pressure" on the safeties. I don't know if it makes the Cal Poly offense any easier to defend for a safety, especially when they only see a trip option once a year. All I know is that the safety play was much better against EWU last year that it was against Cal Poly last year and this year, especially for Sanders. Hopefully we will see a similar effort against EWU this year, because they will need to perform at a high level in order for us to win.

If you remember we put incredible pressure on EWU last year. In fact I remember we had a sack fumble for a TD. It had been a long time coming vs the fn Eagles. There's a pile of good football comments here and I'd like to add that defending the triple option from a safety point of view is damn frustrating. Human nature takes over at some point and you cheat up to help with run support. We all know what happens when they catch you Discipline is the right word and it is violated by every safety that faces a strong option squad. I felt the "D" played well enough to win the contest. BG handing the ball over on consecutive series put us 6' under. I.M.O. I watched the Eagles play N.A.U. on Saturday and I'm not excited about defending their passing attack. We'll need a ton of sacks to win... :egriz:

Last year's EWU was an aberration; poor and immobile QB play by their standards. Not the case this year as they are carving people up irrespective of which QB is playing. And their receiver corps is as good as ever. Likely to be another shootout even if we are at the top of our game.

 

[UMGriz75]

You'd think, if Triple Option were that formidable of an offense, we'd be using it, or at least more coaches would be using it.

 

[SoldierGriz]

You'd think, if Triple Option were that formidable of an offense, we'd be using it, or at least more coaches would be using it.

It's formidable because more coaches DO NOT use it...it's now an outlier.

I guarantee every coach in the ACC with Ga Tech on their schedule goes through the same thing. Pain in the ass to prepare for it because it is rare.

 

[PlayerRep]

Poly passing against FCS teams this season:

9-11, 1 td, 17.9 yds/completion
5-9, 2 tds, 26.0 yds/completion
6-10, 3 tds, 26.2 yds/completion

Seems pretty good for a passing game that is easy to defend. You know why it puts different pressure on the safeties......threat of the run. EWU passing game is based on match-ups, the Poly passing game is based on scheme. This was the point that everyone was trying to make.

Those 3 games are SoDakSt, San Diego and Montana. Montana gave up 3 TD's. SDS gave up 1 TD and fewer yards per completion. San Diego is the other team. Even they gave up one fewer TD. Are you saying that UM's defense and secondary are weak or weaker than San Diego's?

Nevada gave up: 5 for 12 for 62 yards, and no TD's. 12.4 per completion.

Note that UM coaches have called our secondary an FBS secondary. I think UM should be compared to Nevada not the Univ of San Deigo.

2015 UM pass defense stats against CP: 4 for 13 for 56 yards, and 1 TD (36 yards). 14 yards per catch.

 

[kemajic]

You'd think, if Triple Option were that formidable of an offense, we'd be using it, or at least more coaches would be using it.

It's formidable because more coaches DO NOT use it...it's now an outlier.

I guarantee every coach in the ACC with Ga Tech on their schedule goes through the same thing. Pain in the ass to prepare for it because it is rare.

Navy

 

[Diesel]

One of the most physical games played on any level. Kidder, Strong, Buss, Sanders were all significantly slowed by injuries going into the fourth quarter. CP QB, FB, and others were also beat up. Schye missed a couple opportunities to destroy QB and chose to follow the pitch that was covered by other defenders, Kidder had incredible game and he did hit Dano hard a couple of times, to his credit he endured the punishment.

Second half adjustments LBs like Buss were wide and penetrated at snap taking away pitch plays even though Buss was noticeably injured or nicked up.

Sanders did not look completely healthy to begin with, he had a bead on Garcia in the first half that he should have knocked out the smaller Garcia on pitch play, Garcia ran him over for a significant gain.

Strong got beat up and handed out some punishment in the process.

Throw the stats away if Griz continue to perform like they did at CP they will be just fine this year. Looking back on the game it truly is a game of inches, coaching on both sides superb, and a lot of tough SOBs played in that game.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Note that UM coaches have called our secondary an FBS secondary. I think UM should be compared to Nevada not the Univ of San Deigo.

Than maybe they should play like it. The results seem to suggest that they are no Nevada.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

You'd think, if Triple Option were that formidable of an offense, we'd be using it, or at least more coaches would be using it.

One of the big advantages of the triple option is that so few use it.