We needed a spark and ...
- Thread starter 94HawkMA
- Start date
Section136
Well-Known Member
Darn it!!! You should have hollered down at Ferentz on Saturday and told him this. You missed your chance to give him "the push" he said he needed to put in McCall!!! Very discouraging you didnt come through.
HawkeyeMHA
Well-Known Member
very discouraging our fans want our best rb out of the game...
homes
Well-Known Member
When you don't block the guys who are trying to tackle the running back, it doesn't matter who is running the ball. That was the part that was discouraging.
HawkeyeMHA
Well-Known Member
very discouraging when our fans are critical of our rb (instead of our oline) when there is very little running room.
HawkeyeMHA
Well-Known Member
^this. for someone reason coker is the root of all evil and mccall is super back!
Cover3
Well-Known Member
I agree our O-line got worked, but that's all the more reason to put in a shiftier back. I love Coker, but he doesn't stop-and-start well against penetration. The OP just said it wasn't his game, not that he's bad. I agree.
It would have been tough sledding for the other guys, but if they can make a quicker cut, they might have been able to crack a long run or two.
HawkeyeMHA
Well-Known Member
yeah, i can live with that line of thought....
94HawkMA
Well-Known Member
You said it better than I did. That was my point. Yeah, Hawkeye, I wanted our best RB out of the game.
SWIowaHawkeye
Active Member
It was interesting that many of the tackles for little or no gain in the first half especially were coming from the back side linemen coming from behind the zone blocking. Coker was just not getting to the hole before the backside penetration got around the zone, and he was getting hit before he got to or cleared the hole.
We needed to either figure out a way to get Coker to the hole quicker, have another back in that can hit the hole quicker, or figure out some way to counter the back side pressure (hard to do in our zone scheme). I love Coker and the way he runs, but I was very curious to see if McCall or Canzeri could get to the hole quickly enough to avoid some of the problems we were getting from the backside.
It is just one more way that something we do becomes so predictable that a team can design a scheme for it and we just keep doing it when it is not working.
We needed to either figure out a way to get Coker to the hole quicker, have another back in that can hit the hole quicker, or figure out some way to counter the back side pressure (hard to do in our zone scheme). I love Coker and the way he runs, but I was very curious to see if McCall or Canzeri could get to the hole quickly enough to avoid some of the problems we were getting from the backside.
It is just one more way that something we do becomes so predictable that a team can design a scheme for it and we just keep doing it when it is not working.
Well if the backside pursuit was catching up with coker in the first half then the coaches needed to run straight ahead plays and change the blocking. And this is the perfect time to run a counter play with rogers running and a guard pulling to the backside to kick out the backside pursuit. But what do we do, we give our fullback his first carry of the season from the hawks 3 yard line on 2nd and 9, 97 yards away from the goalline.
Sparky
Well-Known Member
hawkfan1319
Well-Known Member
It's more of just the lack of not using a two running back system at all this year. Most teams will put in whoever will help win the game and yes Coker is our best running back . Sometimes you have to try other players and see if they can have a hot streak when all the other players are playing flat.
HawkeyeMHA
Well-Known Member
no reply needed
Sparky
Well-Known Member
About time you shut your mouth. You make yourself look like an idiot 90% of the time.
busabus114
Well-Known Member
Man we have some dumb fans. If you watched the game you would quickly realize that we were out manned up front and in all phases. A different running back was not going to change anything
gohawks71
Well-Known Member
I dont understand... the whole point was to try and get discussion around why Ferentz didnt use someone else for a change of pace which is worth a try especially when we are down by that much as well as when we need someone that can go the distance because coker doesnt have the top end speed to do it but some people look at that and think you are saying coker is a bad back??? That is probably the same thought process Ferentz has and we see the results of that type of thinking... MSU owned our running game! I suppose there is probably no need to reply to this either so lets close this post down then.
Sparky
Well-Known Member
Coker is a good back but has problems when the hole isn't right in front of him. Would it have been so terrible of they would have put McCall in for a few plays to see if he could do something? That's the problem with this coaching staff, they will continue to do the same thing over and over until it works, often times it doesn't work and it's too late to make a change.
The voice of reason.....thank god
gohawks71
Well-Known Member
I totally agree with you !!! I would go as far to say Coker is a great back as a North/South runnner even ... he has continued to work hard and get better even when he was hurting he still handed out punishment to the defense. This isnt a bust on him and no one is calling out players... The fact of the matter is and you pointed it out perfectly that Ferentz is stubborn to the point his phylosophy is a detriment to the team at times. I just wish he was a little more open minded to try and give these young guys a chance more often. The young guys cant play openly with recklace abandon because they make one mistake and Ferentz grounds them to the bench like little children. Ferentz, loosen up and let them correct the mistakes on the field because that trust will be given back to you ten fold coach!
