PonyFans.com

Again-Our Special Teams Unit almost cost us another game. If you did not know that was going to be a fake you should not be coaching D1 football. Why have a Punt return unit even in the game?? The stands were screaming watch the fake! Everyone knew it but the coaching staff.

100% agreed. Still don't understand how they didn't see that coming.

I would contend that even if the coaching staff knew the fake was coming, they weren't looking for that play. Yes somebody probably needed to be anchored on the far side of the field or just play straight up defense on it. There's no guarantee we're going to make the tackle.

However, when you call fake, you're typically thinking of something up the middle. That reverse was beautifully designed. How many of us were expecting that? I know I wasn't.

Put it on McKnight, yes.

However, maybe Marshall was working on that this week. Give them a little credit.

Sure, that was a great fake. But when you are playing to defend against a fake, you have players spread across the field. Had we put up a defense like that, we would have had a better shot of defending against it, since it was a 4th and long situation.

McKnight is fine IMHO.

Just put some safeties and maybe some corners on the return team. Need quickness, not bulk, on the outside of that group.

Mitch McConnell wrote:However, when you call fake, you're typically thinking of something up the middle.

I don't know about this. Our own fake against TCU (and Tulane 2 years ago) involved the punter taking off to the far right and hugging the sideline (Morstead broke it back inside for a huge gain against TU two years ago, whereas Szymanski barely got past the first down line this year).

That being said, the reverse was a more unpredictable element. Disciplined defense still stops that.

CalallenStang wrote:

Mitch McConnell wrote: Disciplined defense still stops that.

All the time? You sure about that?

Even the most disciplined defense in the country -- TCU -- had problems with Zach Line and that trap.

No guarantees about anything.

You can put the kids in position. They gotta make the tackle.

Mitch McConnell wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:

Mitch McConnell wrote: Disciplined defense still stops that.

All the time? You sure about that?

You stay at home, you play your assignments, and the reverse goes nowhere 95% of the time. The entire reason teams call reverses is that they notice the defense is overcommitting to the direction of the play. Think about the amount of yardage a team gives up setting up a reverse (at least 5 yards behind the LOS)...playing disciplined football makes it hard for a reverse to even get back to the LOS, much less past it

Mitch McConnell wrote:I would contend that even if the coaching staff knew the fake was coming, they weren't looking for that play. .....

Exactly. It was well-devised and well-executed. I'd never seen that play.

Mitch McConnell wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:

Mitch McConnell wrote: Disciplined defense still stops that.

All the time? You sure about that?

Even the most disciplined defense in the country -- TCU -- had problems with Zach Line and that trap.

No guarantees about anything.

You can put the kids in position. They gotta make the tackle.

So you are saying there were kids in position who missed the tackle? I did not see anyone over there. I would change your last line to say "Kids can't make the tackle if you do not put them in position"

I think too many times fans will gravitate to the line of thinking of what their team didn't do as opposed to tipping their hat to the other guy.

Wuba -- it was a suggestion off of us lining up in a regular defensive formation. Obviously, we had the punt return team. Obviously, they burned us because of how we were lined up.

Bottom line -- Marshall did a nice job on that play. We just got beat on it. But the defense did its job and kept them out of the end zone.

Calallen -- can you reveal where that 95% percent is coming from? That's a new defensive statistic on me. You might need to check the history of every Division I college football game since the game was invented to verify that. And so 95% percent doesn't represent all the time. Thanks in advance.

The real Problem I have is that it was obvious the fake was coming and SMU looked completely unprepared for it. In a situation like that you should leave your base defense in and you should call a timeout to remind each player to stay at home on their assignment. McKnight will not be gone because he is close with June, and maybe the Special team unit will improve when we have more depth to play on special terams, but IMHO McKnight's units have done a poor enough job this year that he deserves to be fired.

Our 'fake' against TCU was a botched snap that hit of the shoulder pad of one of our protection guy. There was no strategy there, it was run-for-your-life.

Mitch McConnell wrote:Calallen -- can you reveal where that 95% percent is coming from? That's a new defensive statistic on me. You might need to check the history of every Division I college football game since the game was invented to verify that. And so 95% percent doesn't represent all the time. Thanks in advance.

Defense plays assignment football instead of overcommitting, reverse is stopped unless tackles are missed. The end.

Mitch McConnell wrote:I think too many times fans will gravitate to the line of thinking of what their team didn't do as opposed to tipping their hat to the other guy.

Wuba -- it was a suggestion off of us lining up in a regular defensive formation. Obviously, we had the punt return team. Obviously, they burned us because of how we were lined up.

Bottom line -- Marshall did a nice job on that play. We just got beat on it. But the defense did its job and kept them out of the end zone.

Calallen -- can you reveal where that 95% percent is coming from? That's a new defensive statistic on me. You might need to check the history of every Division I college football game since the game was invented to verify that. And so 95% percent doesn't represent all the time. Thanks in advance.

Look, it was a well designed plan. Given.

The point most of us are trying to make is that we look completely unprepared for a fake. That takes absolutely nothing away from Marshall.

Would the play still have worked? Maybe so. But we stood a better chance of defending it had we actually put out a different formation designed to defend against a fake of any kind.