Our coach is too conservative

[Danny J]

Too conservative? We threw the ball about a thousand times tonight. I realize it's because we could not run the ball, but BB and Enos turned Brandon Allen loose..... I would hardly call that conservative.

I should have made the title "too conservative with the game on the line" but I am over it now. Just frustrating how the game turned out. So much to work on as far as the D goes. I am not sure what the staff is going to do going forward against spread offenses. Our offense is playing out of this world. It would make BP blush.

[Albert Einswine]

Too conservative? We threw the ball about a thousand times tonight. I realize it's because we could not run the ball, but BB and Enos turned Brandon Allen loose..... I would hardly call that conservative.

We were too aggressive until we were too conservative...

[hog.goblin]

We were too aggressive until we were too conservative...

I can get on board with that...

[LZH]

I should have made the title "too conservative with the game on the line" but I am over it now. Just frustrating how the game turned out. So much to work on as far as the D goes. I am not sure what the staff is going to do going forward against spread offenses. Our offense is playing out of this world. It would make BP blush.

I do wish we would have had a chance to see what would have happened had we taken a shot or two at the end zone before we tried that field goal. More than anything else, defensive problems, not being able to run the ball, etc.... That will probably bother me the most tomorrow and all week long.

[Albert Einswine]

I can get on board with that...

If we just block the defenders on the chip shot we probably go up and maybe hold on. With our matador D tonight there are no guarantees.

[Danny J]

I do wish we would have had a chance to see what would have happened had we taken a shot or two at the end zone before we tried that field goal. More than anything else, defensive problems, not being able to run the ball, etc.... That will probably bother me the most tomorrow and all week long.

Those WR screens that Dak was throwing all night will likely give our staff and me nightmares tonight. Looked like 7 on 7 out there.

[PonderinHog]

We were too aggressive until we were too conservative...

Sometimes you just have to WTH and take a chance.

[LZH]

Those WR screens that Dak was throwing all night will likely give our staff and me nightmares tonight. Looked like 7 on 7 out there.

Yeah, our defense looked pretty bad tonight. I don't know if that's because they are that good, or because we just played that poorly.

[1HourToHogville]

Bielema will never get it right irregardless of all our collective advice.  His inability to poll Hogville in real time for game decisions is holding up further success. 

[LZH]

We were too aggressive until we were too conservative...

Yogi Berra could not have said it better. I guess I should rephrase my post to exclude the last few plays of that last drive.

[redeye]

I also thought it was a mistake to settle for the FG, but it wasn't an awful call.  The playcalling wasn't that conservative, either, but there were a couple of game-changing mistakes.  The decision to throw long on 4th and 1 at the end of the 3rd was the worst call of the game and that certainly wasn't conservative.

[PonderinHog]

Yeah, our defense looked pretty bad tonight. I don't know if that's because they are that good, or because we just played that poorly.

The defensive scheme probably best fits our personnel at this stage in their development.  It's painful to watch us get slowly chewed up, but it probably beats getting repeatedly torched for huge gains.  They're a step slow and don't tackle all that well as it is, but I suppose it could be worse if we try to be more aggressive with our pass coverage. Hard to imagine it being much worse, though.

But I ain't mad.

[kodiakisland]

Too conservative? We threw the ball about a thousand times tonight. I realize it's because we could not run the ball, but BB and Enos turned Brandon Allen loose..... I would hardly call that conservative.

Plus going for it all on the 4th down play, plus going for two.  Wait, now is he too conservative or not conservative enough?

Our defense sucked, that was the problem tonight.

[LZH]

The defensive scheme probably best fits our personnel at this stage in their development.  It's painful to watch us get slowly chewed up, but it probably beats getting repeatedly torched for huge gains.  They're a step slow and don't tackle all that well as it is, but I suppose it could be worse if we try to be more aggressive with our pass coverage. Hard to imagine it being much worse, though.

But I ain't mad.

I know we lost some talent to the pros, but we don't seem nearly as aggressive or able to tackle nearly as well as we did at the end of last year..... and I can't understand why. The season is almost over, you would think we would have it together by now.

[iCalledThatHogBrotha!]

Another example: MSU 4th down with 15-20 seconds left in the half. We could have called timeout and forced them to punt, with a chance at blocking it.

Instead we are content to run out the clock, except they are smarter than us and call their own TO with 3 seconds left to get another free shot at scoring. If they make a play there the game turns into a blowout.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I know we lost some talent to the pros, but we don't seem nearly as aggressive or able to tackle nearly as well as we did at the end of last year..... and I can't understand why. The season is almost over, you would think we would have it together by now.

It would be great to be able to be a fly on the wall in practice and meetings for a couple of weeks and we all might have a better perspective of what the real core issues are with the defense. All that is left is for all of us amateurs to speculate and draw our own un-informed conclusions, and we do a very good job of that based on all of the football that we have watched in person or on t.v. that is additionally fueled and influenced by our passion for the Hogs and wanting to see them win.

Is it youth? Inexperience? Talent level? Talent that hasn't developed yet? Confusion with regard to schemes as it applies to varying offensive sets and routes that they haven't practiced? Is it a particular call or scheme that doesn't match up well with the offensive play call? I know that it is more difficult to be an efficient tackler if you are out of position to begin with. I'm not sure what the answer is. I just know that Robb Smith and Bielema are the one's who have to come up with the answer because this defense is leaking like a sieve, even though they played better in the 2nd half than the 1st half last night. It may not seem that way but they did.

[Nuttcracker, Sweet!]

You guys are delusional. You always kick the FG there.

YOU are delusional! Have you not seen our FG attempts this season? Shaky at best. 8-13 with TWO blocked!

AND almost 50 seconds on the clock for MOO U to get into FG range themselves when the defense has stopped them exactly ONE time other than turnovers?

The FG should be the last resort when there is that much time left and a terrible pass defense to try to hold off the opponent.

Tyler Wilson and Tommy Craft kept referring to that being a "game-winning FG" when there were 46 seconds left in the game...

They said "you don't want to put the ball back in Prescott's hands" when even a made FG does exactly that with him only needing only a FG to win for his team and almost 50 seconds!

With the opponent having that much time and a QB with 7 TDS and NO INTS, taking the ball out of BAs hands is playing not to lose! And that gets you a LOSS most of the time!

"What if he throws a pick?" they said. He had none on 43 attempts all night and it is better to lose that way than playing ultra-conservative not to lose and getting a FG blocked!

[LZH]

It would be great to be able to be a fly on the wall in practice and meetings for a couple of weeks and we all might have a better perspective of what the real core issues are with the defense. All that is left is for all of us amateurs to speculate and draw our own un-informed conclusions, and we do a very good job of that based on all of the football that we have watched in person or on t.v. that is additionally fueled and influenced by our passion for the Hogs and wanting to see them win.

Is it youth? Inexperience? Talent level? Talent that hasn't developed yet? Confusion with regard to schemes as it applies to varying offensive sets and routes that they haven't practiced? Is it a particular call or scheme that doesn't match up well with the offensive play call? I know that it is more difficult to be an efficient tackler if you are out of position to begin with. I'm not sure what the answer is. I just know that Robb Smith and Bielema are the one's who have to come up with the answer because this defense is leaking like a sieve, even though they played better in the 2nd half than the 1st half last night. It may not seem that way but they did.

Maybe we just had more talent last year than I thought we did. We don't seem to be breaking down and tackling like we did during the second half of last season.... I'm mostly referring to open field tackling. It could be that we are just playing kids out of necessity instead of giving them another year to develop.

Either way, last night looked pretty bad. I know Prescott is a once in a decade recruit for someone like Mississippi State, but we had no answer for anything they did. Or, maybe we just had a bad night.

Whatever it is, Smith has my attention and my support. Because you don't turn around a defense as crummy as we were a few years ago in just a few months like he did.... Using mostly the same players.

I, like the rest of us, could come up with a million things to complain about. But at least we had a chance to win last night even though we were whipped pretty well the entire football game. I mean without those turnovers, it would not have even been close.

Besides, we still have a chance to win 8 games this year.... Which is about where we all expected to be at the end of the season anyway.

[Hogsolo]

I agree we should have played for the TD, but the decision making shows he had faith in his guys. 

I'm not upset at all by the outcome.  Sucks we can't beat Miss State, but what the hey. 

[Nuttcracker, Sweet!]

The worst part of this decision is even if we get a field goal, MSU only has to get in field goal position.  Pretty easy for them with 46 seconds left against our defense.  If we go for a TD, we potentially get more time off the clock AND force them to get a touchdown.

EXACTLY! Why some people don't get this, I'll never know! Especially with a shaky kicker and terrible pass defense!!!

[hoglady]

I suspect this defense will look light years better against Missouri than they did last night.
Give Dak Prescott credit for being a great QB and the Ms. St Oline credit for holding up last night.
Our D is not good - and against a QB as good as Prescott it can look downright horrible.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

YOU are delusional! Have you not seen our FG attempts this season? Shaky at best. 8-13 with TWO blocked!

AND almost 50 seconds on the clock for MOO U to get into FG range themselves when the defense has stopped them exactly ONE time other than turnovers?

The FG should be the last resort when there is that much time left and a terrible pass defense to try to hold off the opponent.

Tyler Wilson and Tommy Craft kept referring to that being a "game-winning FG" when there were 46 seconds left in the game...

They said "you don't want to put the ball back in Prescott's hands" when even a made FG does exactly that with him only needing only a FG to win for his team and almost 50 seconds!

With the opponent having that much time and a QB with 7 TDS and NO INTS, taking the ball out of BAs hands is playing not to lose! And that gets you a LOSS most of the time!

"What if he throws a pick?" they said. He had none on 43 attempts all night and it is better to lose that way than playing ultra-conservative not to lose and getting a FG blocked!

Facts are your friend. From the range we were kicking last night we have been 5 of 6 for the season (83.3%).

That alone disqualifies your notion that this wasn't the best thing to do at the time.

http://stats.ncaa.org/team/stats/12240?org_id=31&year_stat_category_id=10830

[HAWG MAFIA]

You whiners are effing insane!!!! Coach played it right, move it down the field, get within FG range, run the ball, force opponent to burn time outs, kick the chip shot FG.

You don't go for Tad and give the ball back to Ms State with 45 seconds and 3 timeouts. They had ZERO punts. We never stopped them. They stopped themselves with a tipped pass for the interception. Our defense was like screens on a submarine.

46 didn't block his man,


end of conversation

[Nuttcracker, Sweet!]

Every coach in a America would have done the exact same thing.  It wasn't too conservative, it was the right thing to do.  Try to run the clock out, make them use all of their time outs, kick the easy FG to win.  Just didn't work out.

If we pass there and don't score and make the field goal but give them them ball with plenty of time to score we (including me) would have been screaming about not running the clock out with the biggest OLine in the game.

BB made the right calls, just got the FG blocked.

the only problem with your logic is: when has a FG been easy for us this season?

There have been no "easy FGs" all season and running three straight times up the middle when you have not had a running game all night and taking the ball out of a QB's hands who has over 400 yards and 7 TDS and NO INTS is ultra-conservative and playing not to lose.

If there had been less time left or MOO U had run out of TOs, I could get on board with it, but even if the FG had been good, there were :46 seconds left and the terrible pass defense had stopped them ONE TIME and they could have easily gotten into FG range themselves to beat us...

[cc]

Every coach in the world does the exact same thing in that situation. Making MSU burn their timeouts was the right call. Just needed to execute. The coaches put us in a position for an easy field goal to win and the players did not execute. It sucks but it is what it is.

Exactly

[Albert Einswine]

I would have preferred to keep doing with BA what had been working all night and hopefully score a TD and 2 point conversion.

But I can't rail on the decision that was made, and I think it's stupid to do so.

The decision that was made was completely orthodox and uncontroversial.

The field goal attempt was barely more than a PAT. We don't normally whiff on PAT protections.

[Wildhog]

Facts are your friend. From the range we were kicking last night we have been 5 of 6 for the season (83.3%).

That alone disqualifies your notion that this wasn't the best thing to do at the time.

http://stats.ncaa.org/team/stats/12240?org_id=31&year_stat_category_id=10830

I completely understand the coaches' decision.  I think they could have done a little bit more to try to score on the ground, but I get it.  The last thing you want is to turn that ball over when you can run the clock down to under a minute and kick a 29 yard FG at home.

I also understand Nuttcracker's point about FG execution to a degree.  Statistically, we've been good, but a lot of them haven't exactly been pretty.  I don't think anyone can honestly say they still don't hold their breath every time we kick in a pressure situation.

[LZH]

I would have preferred to keep doing with BA what had been working all night and hopefully score a TD and 2 point conversion.

But I can't rail on the decision that was made, and I think it's stupid to do so.

The decision that was made was completely orthodox and uncontroversial.

The field goal attempt was barely more than a PAT. We don't normally whiff on PAT protections.

I would have liked to have seen us take a shot at the end zone, maybe a back corner route on 3rd down. But other than that, you are correct.... It was basically an extra point.

[Nuttcracker, Sweet!]

Would have preferred to keep the game in BA's hands, but I understand the decision. It's standard doctrine.

I'm not pissed, I'm bitterly disappointed.

This is a reasonable position. I don't agree that standard doctrine applies when you have had as many kicks blocked as we have, though.

Not calling for anyone's firing, I just believe it's playing not to lose when there is that much time on the clock even if most  coaches would have done the same thing.

BB went against standard procedure in the OM game, which admittedly we were lucky to win, so I guess things just evened out.

It seems like when you don't have a complete team and you strongly emphasize one area like winning on the road, you start losing at home more. Happened to MA last season too.

[JoeyCapital]

This is a reasonable position. I don't agree that standard doctrine applies when you have had as many kicks blocked as we have, though.

Don't we only have two blocked kicks now? So, didn't we only have one at the time the call was made?

[Hogsmo Kramer]

If it's 4th down and your only option yes.   When it was 1st and 10 you try to at least throw the ball once.  Especially when your qb has already taken you 80 yards by passing it.

^^^This^^^

We didn't even try to get it in. We were setting up for the FG 100%.

Conservative and scared play calling.

And quite frankly even if we make it there was a decent chance we still lose on a late drive and FG by MS State.

At least try to get a TD there instead of completely taking your foot off the gas and relying on our unbelievably inept FG unit and D to win the game.

[Hawgzinbowlz]

You whiners are effing insane!!!! Coach played it right, move it down the field, get within FG range, run the ball, force opponent to burn time outs, kick the chip shot FG.

You don't go for Tad and give the ball back to Ms State with 45 seconds and 3 timeouts. They had ZERO punts. We never stopped them. They stopped themselves with a tipped pass for the interception. Our defense was like screens on a submarine.

46 didn't block his man,


end of conversation

CBB did not play it right. To take the game out of the hands of BA, who was on fire, and put it on the leg of a kicker who has a history of kicking with a lack of elevation is beyond belief. Bielema did play it right if we had a kicker that was money (like Hocker), and we don't.
BA would have won the game for us, and after his performance in the Ole Miss game it's astounding that we took the plays/the game out of his hands.
FYI MSU kicked two punts (Cornelius was injured on one of them) and if we had scored a TD, at the end, they had less than a minute to score a TD. If we HAD scored a FG they had plenty of time to go down and get within FG range. It would have been much more difficult for them to drive the length of the field for a TD compared to getting within FG range.
We choked when we played not to lose, and CBB was doing his best at double talking when describing his coaching decisions.

You are correct that our D was terrible (more than once they were looking around/not set when MSU snapped the ball)...and CRS will still collect his check.

" GO HOGS "

...And there will be much more conversation...

[hawgtime]

we should've kept pushing and got a TD. If they stopped us, then so be it. Never, NEVER run 3 times up the middle to line up a possible FG.


uuuuurrrrhhhhhgggggggggggggggggggggggggggg!!!! 

Beliema!  (let the OC do it)

[Fort Dweller]

I completely understand the coaches' decision.  I think they could have done a little bit more to try to score on the ground, but I get it.  The last thing you want is to turn that ball over when you can run the clock down to under a minute and kick a 29 yard FG at home.

I also understand Nuttcracker's point about FG execution to a degree.  Statistically, we've been good, but a lot of them haven't exactly been pretty.  I don't think anyone can honestly say they still don't hold their breath every time we kick in a pressure situation.

This is where I was last night.  In all honesty, it's a darned if you do, darned if you don't.

You expect your ST to execute and kick a chip shot for the win.  But, as a hog fan, I expect the football Gods to exact vengeance on us for their miscalculation and giving us a face mask and a 4&25 conversion against OM.

The universe has been balanced again because the hog fans are back to being miserable. 

[Wildhog]

This is where I was last night.  In all honesty, it's a darned if you do, darned if you don't.

You expect your ST to execute and kick a chip shot for the win.  But, as a hog fan, I expect the football Gods to exact vengeance on us for their miscalculation and giving us a face mask and a 4&25 conversion against OM.

The universe has been balanced again because the hog fans are back to being miserable. 

Beat Mizzou.

[Fort Dweller]

Beat Mizzou.

Damn skippy. 

I want a blood bath.

[LZH]

CBB did not play it right. To take the game out of the hands of BA, who was on fire, and put it on the leg of a kicker who has a history of kicking with a lack of elevation is beyond belief.

Everyone knew what we were getting when he was hired, so I don't understand why people are throwing a fit now. You just have to take the bad with the good......nothing new to see here.

[Redhogs]

This is beyond any doubt the dumbest thread in the history of Hogville.

Then don't read it.

[Hog Pharm]

YOU are delusional! Have you not seen our FG attempts this season? Shaky at best. 8-13 with TWO blocked!

AND almost 50 seconds on the clock for MOO U to get into FG range themselves when the defense has stopped them exactly ONE time other than turnovers?

The FG should be the last resort when there is that much time left and a terrible pass defense to try to hold off the opponent.

Tyler Wilson and Tommy Craft kept referring to that being a "game-winning FG" when there were 46 seconds left in the game...

They said "you don't want to put the ball back in Prescott's hands" when even a made FG does exactly that with him only needing only a FG to win for his team and almost 50 seconds!

With the opponent having that much time and a QB with 7 TDS and NO INTS, taking the ball out of BAs hands is playing not to lose! And that gets you a LOSS most of the time!

"What if he throws a pick?" they said. He had none on 43 attempts all night and it is better to lose that way than playing ultra-conservative not to lose and getting a FG blocked!

It's better to lose that way? What does that mean?? A loss is a loss. They would have had the ball with about 35 seconds after the kickoff with zero timeouts. Tackle them in bounds once and you probably win the game. At worst they are attempting a long FG in the cold.

[Hawgzinbowlz]

Everyone knew what we were getting when he was hired, so I don't understand why people are throwing a fit now. You just have to take the bad with the good......nothing new to see here.

Someday you may understand that we want to win. Botched decisions deserve identification and we certainly don't have to enjoy the bad.
Nothing new, and waiting for the next guy.

" GO HOGS "

[Hog Pharm]

CBB did not play it right. To take the game out of the hands of BA, who was on fire, and put it on the leg of a kicker who has a history of kicking with a lack of elevation is beyond belief. Bielema did play it right if we had a kicker that was money (like Hocker), and we don't.
BA would have won the game for us, and after his performance in the Ole Miss game it's astounding that we took the plays/the game out of his hands.
FYI MSU kicked two punts (Cornelius was injured on one of them) and if we had scored a TD, at the end, they had less than a minute to score a TD. If we HAD scored a FG they had plenty of time to go down and get within FG range. It would have been much more difficult for them to drive the length of the field for a TD compared to getting within FG range.
We choked when we played not to lose, and CBB was doing his best at double talking when describing his coaching decisions.

You are correct that our D was terrible (more than once they were looking around/not set when MSU snapped the ball)...and CRS will still collect his check.

" GO HOGS "

...And there will be much more conversation...

Unless we score on the play before we started milking the clock. Which would have given them the ball with over 1:30 and all three timeouts. A lot different than 35 seconds with zero timeouts. Look, I understand your point. At the time I was hoping we would keep throwing it but now I can see it either way.

[Hawgzinbowlz]

Unless we score on the play before we started milking the clock. Which would have given them the ball with over 1:30 and all three timeouts. A lot different than 35 seconds with zero timeouts. Look, I understand your point. At the time I was hoping we would keep throwing it but now I can see it either way.

To take the game away from a red hot BA and put it on a shaky special teams unit doesn't seem high percentage football. A first down (inside the 6) would have set up a true chip shot FG...and bled the clock.

A lot of what ifs...and we missed the "chip shot" FG.

I'll take a coach that keeps his foot on the accelerator, and doesn't play "not to lose".

" GO HOGS "

[Wildhog]

To take the game away from a red hot BA and put it on a shaky special teams unit doesn't seem high percentage football. A first down (inside the 6) would have set up a true chip shot FG...and bled the clock.

A lot of what ifs...and we missed the "chip shot" FG.

I'll take a coach that keeps his foot on the accelerator, and doesn't play "not to lose".

" GO HOGS "

We're all disappointed. 

[Hog Pharm]

To take the game away from a red hot BA and put it on a shaky special teams unit doesn't seem high percentage football. A first down (inside the 6) would have set up a true chip shot FG...and bled the clock.

A lot of what ifs...and we missed the "chip shot" FG.

I'll take a coach that keeps his foot on the accelerator, and doesn't play "not to lose".

" GO HOGS "

I'd say going for two in OT to win is not "playing not to lose." You can disagree with the strategy last night which is a reasonable gripe, but let's not act like CBB consistently plays conservatively.

[Aporkalypse Now]

Yes...except when you have a FG kicker who is shaky and a kicking game that has now had 3 blocks in the last 4 games. Why the hell wouldn't you try to score instead of running 3 straight times? You just went 80 yards in less than 2 minutes without one dropped pass or incompletion. Why not go for the TD and 2 point conversion? Even if he made the FG they get the ball back with 50 seconds. What then? Pray our DB's can stop them? What game were you watching?

Um , for the exact same reason he kept going with BA after he missed 3 wide open receivers for TDs early in the season. He absolutely made the right call in the game, our kicker is just terrible. Sorry, but he is. He's never in his life won a football game with a clutch kick.

Our defense needs a serious talent upgrade.

[Albert Einswine]

Um , for the exact same reason he kept going with BA after he missed 3 wide open receivers for TDs early in the season. He absolutely made the right call in the game, our kicker is just terrible. Sorry, but he is. He's never in his life won a football game with a clutch kick.

Our defense needs a serious talent upgrade.

The kicker wasn't the problem on the play, he didn't miss the kick. For God's sake, the protection whiffed and allowed a defender to come unimpeded in for the block.

[Hawgzinbowlz]

I'd say going for two in OT to win is not "playing not to lose." You can disagree with the strategy last night which is a reasonable gripe, but let's not act like CBB consistently plays conservatively.

You're correct. Going for two was good football. Last nights decision was not. I'm addressing last nights decision.

" GO HOGS "

[Hog Pharm]

You're correct. Going for two was good football. Last nights decision was not. I'm addressing last nights decision.

" GO HOGS "

Ok gotcha. I was just confused because you said you'd rather have a coach who plays not to lose. Criticizing last night's decision is fair.

[LZH]

Someday you may understand that we want to win. Botched decisions deserve identification and we certainly don't have to enjoy the bad.
Nothing new, and waiting for the next guy.

" GO HOGS "

Someday I might understand WHO wants to win? And BTW, I never said we had to enjoy the bad, I said we have to take the bad with the good.....because BB's reputation was already pretty well known before he ever got to Fayetteville, and he certainly didn't worry about what he said or how he acted once he got here.

But it is what it is, and he's our coach. So we deal with it. I don't know what anyone would expect me to say other than that. Is he turning the program around? Maybe so, we look better than we did two years ago.  So it looks like he is. But are we going to have nights like Saturday as long as he's here? Yes, it looks like we will.

What is funny to me is we have all of these past holier-than-thou Bielema supporters throwing a fit because of how we lost the ball game the other night.

[Wildhog]

What is funny to me is we have all of these past holier-than-thou Bielema supporters throwing a fit because of how we lost the ball game the other night.