-The offense looked bad, but all hope is not lost
So as it was pointed out ad nauseum Saturday night, Arizona had basically switched defenses mid-stream during the week heading into our game. They essentially switched from a 4-2-5 (a defense that we have been known to shred in the past under Kliff, Neal, and Mike) to essentially a 3-3-5 (a defense that we have struggled with, most recently against UTEP, most notably against ISU, and as early as the Leach years against Rocky Long's UNM squads).
Now, does that mean that Arizona all of a sudden has a great defense? Not necessarily. But in our case, we did not have film of UA using that defense. Yost had said going into week one that he had 40+ plays scripted to start the game. That is definitely on the high side of the number of scripted plays I've heard of, though I'm sure a lot of those are scrapped at some point. But the case remains that our early offense was likely scripted against the 4-2-5 look that Hawaii and NAU had seen in prior weeks.
-But there are some offensive concerns
The prior facts being said, it has now been exposed to other teams that we have not improved against a 3-3-5 look. Guess what base defense Alex Grinch has brought to OU... Yeah. It is a bit concerning that as we got away from a period where scripting might have been used, not many positive adjustments were made. I am by no means knowledgeable on football Xs and Os, especially on the defensive side, but it seems to me that plying that type of defense requires you to stay committed to running the ball (especially between the tackles). It is deceiving to say that it's 5 OL vs 3 DL when running against this type of front, as there are always 2 other positions crashing in to take away the run, and it never comes from the same spot. But success is going to come between the tackles, and you have to keep going there even when it seems you're not having success.
Also, and I mentioned this in another thread, I absolutely hate Yost's use of the unbalanced formation. The way it's implemented with the personnel he uses, of the 5 eligible targets, one is a tackle and the other is a TE who to this point has been more of a safety valve than a threat. Plus you're taking one of your more dynamic playmakers at H, either Rigdon or Mannix (technically they would be the Y and the TE would be the H based on their positions relative to the line of scrimmage) and making him a blocker who is ineligible to catch a pass. I understand that he's trying to create leverage in the running game, but he is sacrificing key positions, in my opinion. If we are going to go unbalanced, I'd rather see the TE flexed out, but have him be the ineligible man, leaving options with the H.
Kliff was a master at using an unbalanced line, especially when Mahomes was here, as he'd be able to get Pat isolated off a read with a lead blocker pulling out in front of him. And even as recently as last year he ran effective counters out of that formation, and at times would even hide someone like Cam Batson as the "eligible tackle" on the backside of the formation. He even made interesting use of an unbalanced line by flexing out an ineligible tackle and creating a diversion from an eligible player attached to 4 other linemen. And not even mentioned yet is the jet motion that can be utilized out of these formations. Leach uses some of these techniques as well.
I know we are still relatively early in the development of Yost's offense here, so it will be interesting to see if any wrinkles are introduced at a later time.
-Defense will keep us in games
The bright side of things is that our defense is good enough to keep us in games. Arizona was averaging 51.5 points through its first two games, and we held them to 28, even though we lost the time of possession battle. That's 54.4% of their normal output. That is a good sign. If we are able to do the same to Oklahoma (admittedly a tall task), they will score 30 on us in Norman. If we can do that, then I don't think it's too early to call our defense a tremendous success.
-Don't lose hope
Texas Tech 27 - @FBS G5 opponent 14
Texas Tech 24 - @FBS G5 opponent 27
Texas Tech 0 - Then G5 opponent 21 (in the 2nd quarter)
Seeing the numbers above seems like a nightmare from a bygone football era. Imagine the meltdown from this board if we were currently in this situation and the heads that would be called for.
This team would go on to score 56 unanswered points in the remaining 2.5 quarters of that game three on the way to 70. This same team snatched victory from the jaws of defeat at Kansas the next weekend, but handed Nebraska it's worst loss and eventually dismantled Aaron Rodgers and #4 Cal in the Holiday Bowl.
These first games listed, of course, were at SMU, a team that finished the season 3-8, at New Mexico, a team that finished the season 7-5, and TCU, which finished the season 5-6.
Now, we will be running a back up quarterback in some form or fashion for the next few weeks. But I believe it is too early to call the season a complete loss. These players will become more comfortable within the program as it takes more live snaps. Who's to say that we won't find something that works for us and sparks us to a nice respectable season, much the way we did in 2004.
I'll keep watching just in case.
So as it was pointed out ad nauseum Saturday night, Arizona had basically switched defenses mid-stream during the week heading into our game. They essentially switched from a 4-2-5 (a defense that we have been known to shred in the past under Kliff, Neal, and Mike) to essentially a 3-3-5 (a defense that we have struggled with, most recently against UTEP, most notably against ISU, and as early as the Leach years against Rocky Long's UNM squads).
Now, does that mean that Arizona all of a sudden has a great defense? Not necessarily. But in our case, we did not have film of UA using that defense. Yost had said going into week one that he had 40+ plays scripted to start the game. That is definitely on the high side of the number of scripted plays I've heard of, though I'm sure a lot of those are scrapped at some point. But the case remains that our early offense was likely scripted against the 4-2-5 look that Hawaii and NAU had seen in prior weeks.
-But there are some offensive concerns
The prior facts being said, it has now been exposed to other teams that we have not improved against a 3-3-5 look. Guess what base defense Alex Grinch has brought to OU... Yeah. It is a bit concerning that as we got away from a period where scripting might have been used, not many positive adjustments were made. I am by no means knowledgeable on football Xs and Os, especially on the defensive side, but it seems to me that plying that type of defense requires you to stay committed to running the ball (especially between the tackles). It is deceiving to say that it's 5 OL vs 3 DL when running against this type of front, as there are always 2 other positions crashing in to take away the run, and it never comes from the same spot. But success is going to come between the tackles, and you have to keep going there even when it seems you're not having success.
Also, and I mentioned this in another thread, I absolutely hate Yost's use of the unbalanced formation. The way it's implemented with the personnel he uses, of the 5 eligible targets, one is a tackle and the other is a TE who to this point has been more of a safety valve than a threat. Plus you're taking one of your more dynamic playmakers at H, either Rigdon or Mannix (technically they would be the Y and the TE would be the H based on their positions relative to the line of scrimmage) and making him a blocker who is ineligible to catch a pass. I understand that he's trying to create leverage in the running game, but he is sacrificing key positions, in my opinion. If we are going to go unbalanced, I'd rather see the TE flexed out, but have him be the ineligible man, leaving options with the H.
Kliff was a master at using an unbalanced line, especially when Mahomes was here, as he'd be able to get Pat isolated off a read with a lead blocker pulling out in front of him. And even as recently as last year he ran effective counters out of that formation, and at times would even hide someone like Cam Batson as the "eligible tackle" on the backside of the formation. He even made interesting use of an unbalanced line by flexing out an ineligible tackle and creating a diversion from an eligible player attached to 4 other linemen. And not even mentioned yet is the jet motion that can be utilized out of these formations. Leach uses some of these techniques as well.
I know we are still relatively early in the development of Yost's offense here, so it will be interesting to see if any wrinkles are introduced at a later time.
-Defense will keep us in games
The bright side of things is that our defense is good enough to keep us in games. Arizona was averaging 51.5 points through its first two games, and we held them to 28, even though we lost the time of possession battle. That's 54.4% of their normal output. That is a good sign. If we are able to do the same to Oklahoma (admittedly a tall task), they will score 30 on us in Norman. If we can do that, then I don't think it's too early to call our defense a tremendous success.
-Don't lose hope
Texas Tech 27 - @FBS G5 opponent 14
Texas Tech 24 - @FBS G5 opponent 27
Texas Tech 0 - Then G5 opponent 21 (in the 2nd quarter)
Seeing the numbers above seems like a nightmare from a bygone football era. Imagine the meltdown from this board if we were currently in this situation and the heads that would be called for.
This team would go on to score 56 unanswered points in the remaining 2.5 quarters of that game three on the way to 70. This same team snatched victory from the jaws of defeat at Kansas the next weekend, but handed Nebraska it's worst loss and eventually dismantled Aaron Rodgers and #4 Cal in the Holiday Bowl.
These first games listed, of course, were at SMU, a team that finished the season 3-8, at New Mexico, a team that finished the season 7-5, and TCU, which finished the season 5-6.
Now, we will be running a back up quarterback in some form or fashion for the next few weeks. But I believe it is too early to call the season a complete loss. These players will become more comfortable within the program as it takes more live snaps. Who's to say that we won't find something that works for us and sparks us to a nice respectable season, much the way we did in 2004.
I'll keep watching just in case.
