James Morris/Fake Punt
- Thread starter CJSHawk
- Start date
tm3308
Well-Known Member
This. You aren't supposed to cover the option with one man. That's exactly what teams running an option play WANT you to get forced into doing.
Forget the fake punt. The reason James gets criticism is he doesn't make a lot of plays and gets swallowed by blocks consistently. He only had 6 tackles in the game. That total is way to low for a middle linebacker in the Hawkeyes defensive scheme. Both Kirksey and Hitchens had more then double his total in tackles and were all over the field making plays.
hawkfan340
Well-Known Member
Actually they don't care if you take the pitchman or the pitch receiver. They just care that everyone else is blocked and that the optioned defender can't cover both guys.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
hawkfan340
Well-Known Member
The LBs played well with the exception of Hitchens getting burnt on that wheel route (?). The real problem was the secondary and the d-line.
hawkfan340
Well-Known Member
Yep. Misread and thought you said they wanted you to take the pitch receiver. My bad.
Not necessarily...it depends on the way the defense is structured on a given play...not unusual to have an LB, in this case Morris, responsible for the pressure on the initial ball carrier. Sometimes its even the corner or the strong safety.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Lol no worries. I probably could have phrased that more clearly.
SpecialKHawk
Well-Known Member
Ott hit the initial ball carrier forcing a pitch. Morris flowed over but did not make a play and Kirksey could not shed the block as he was farther outside and downfield.
I was also curious why our far side gunner followed the motion man all the way across the field. There were multiple Iowa guys on the opposite side.
I was also concerned after the very first NIU punt about a fake at some point as all of our guys turned there back on the punter and ran down field with the blockers as the punter received the snap....Hello Wisky 2010.
The concern is I expected that we would be much improved with a new special teams coach and to give up a fake punt the first game.....NOT GOOD
I was also curious why our far side gunner followed the motion man all the way across the field. There were multiple Iowa guys on the opposite side.
I was also concerned after the very first NIU punt about a fake at some point as all of our guys turned there back on the punter and ran down field with the blockers as the punter received the snap....Hello Wisky 2010.
The concern is I expected that we would be much improved with a new special teams coach and to give up a fake punt the first game.....NOT GOOD
Ihave never heard criticism directed towards James, I hear that he is an elite player and his dad is the equipment manager-get reminded every week
SpecialKHawk
Well-Known Member
You just add up all of this BS pop Warner mistakes game after game, season after season and folks wonder why we are in so many tight games and lose to inferior programs with half the talent and resources.
That is because we have a head coach who is not accountable and therefore does not demand excellence of others around him and within his program. He plays favorites and does not create real competition. You get on the field over a better player because you work hard and tow the company line even though you do not get it done on Saturdays.
You end up with a program that has not beaten BCS team in a year and has under performed in many seasons.
That is because we have a head coach who is not accountable and therefore does not demand excellence of others around him and within his program. He plays favorites and does not create real competition. You get on the field over a better player because you work hard and tow the company line even though you do not get it done on Saturdays.
You end up with a program that has not beaten BCS team in a year and has under performed in many seasons.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I'd have to see the play again to make sure something about our formation was different. But the outside guys' job, first and foremost, is to block the punt team's gunners. To let that guy go in motion and not follow him would be to leave a man unaccounted for on a punt return, which can pretty easily lead to a returner getting blown up if the punt is a little low (and therefore what a returner would often believe to be a returnable kick).
Maybe our formation was set up in such a way that it wouldn't have been an issue, though. Like I said, I'd have to see it again to make sure.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
How is this part really significant? Our last win against a BCS conference opponent was in mid-October. Yes, that sucks. But it's been almost a year since ANYONE beat a BCS team, unless they beat one this past weekend (which Iowa didn't have an opportunity to do).
SpecialKHawk
Well-Known Member
Ask yourself why they put him in motion? There is a reason.
Keep in mind we were in punt safe and the punt was likely to be a fair catch / inside the 20 type punt given the field position. If you are in punt safe you are not likely setting up a return and your punt returner is well aware of that.
Again, given the situation and parameters and additional players on the other side why would our side gunner follow him. Is this not what NIU wants to run this type of fake?
SpecialKHawk
Well-Known Member
And at the very least as a head coach when you see something odd that you are not expecting and you are in punt safe meaning you are worried about a fake call timeout which you had time outs at that point to discuss.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
So your argument is that the motion made it pretty clear that a fake was in play (even though they did that at least a couple times and only ran a fake once), and therefore we should have left that guy unaccounted for?
It's likely a man-to-man situation because if they DO actually punt, you still need to have every man blocked (I'm guessing that's probably tough to do if you're running a zone.
It was a well-executed fake. This wasn't Wisconsin redux, where we just weren't paying any attention. We were ready for a fake and NIU ran a very well-executed play (not to mention a different kind of fake than I've seen run before).
SpecialKHawk
Well-Known Member
They wanted two things first of which is they wanted check that we were in man and they wanted to pull the outside containment person out of the play eliminating one more possibility for the play to be unsuccessful. We had no one then that could conceivably force the play back in to the flow containment and kiriksey was now to far downfield to react.
I would have had my gunner signal to the to the teammate on the other side and brought himself closer to the line of scrimmage on his side uncovered. I do not care at that point about man coverage on an interior lineman so there should be numbers on our side to cover the motion man. We are also not setting up a return.
Call timeout if there is confusion. Honestly this is indefensible in today's game.
