Why get passive?

[smokeyB_blues]

I'd like to get yalls take on a viewpoint of mine. This is something that has bugged me for yrs under Coach B. What I see is that every time we gain a lead and get up by a couple touchdowns we seem to lose aggression and ease up possibly changing the game plan mid game and go from balanced to run heavy and predictable. We saw this against TCU and in the games vs A&M in particular. Am I alone on this?

[Pig in the Pokey]

I'd like to get yalls take on a viewpoint of mine. This is something that has bugged me for yrs under Coach B. What I see is that every time we gain a lead and get up by a couple touchdowns we seem to lose aggression and ease up possibly changing the game plan mid game and go from balanced to run heavy and predictable. We saw this against TCU and in the games vs A&M in particular. Am I alone on this?

THIS week, bro


yeah, it's only you. enjoy the huge win.

[DeltaBoy]

No we adapted to what they were giving us but their D stood tall in the 2nd half till the final 4 minutes.

[hogwild6700]

I believe it's normal for a lot of teams to get up, lose hunger, and start playing "not to lose".

[smokeyB_blues]

No we adapted to what they were giving us but their D stood tall in the 2nd half till the final 4 minutes.

That they did it was just an observation of mine. I am always happy for a win I just hate the fact that more time then not when we get up we get complacent and let the other teams back in it.

[AugustaHog]

What you are seeing in those instances is that teams are becoming more desperate and start chucking away.  Unfortunately for us, that's our biggest defensive weakness.  Especially our LB's trying to cover WRs over the middle.  Offensively, we didn't do anything differently.  We just weren't effective.  I would say that CDE has been a little tighter with Austin's leash early in the first couple games.  You have seen what we are capable of when he has to turn him loose.  Just look at the way we finished the LT and TCU games.  We have the ability to do damage and get the offense pretty close to what we were at the end of last year.  As the line comes together and Austin works through his progressions more, this offense could become filthy.  When you are that balanced, you can do what you want to people.

[AugustaHog]

I'm not saying that as a knock on Enos for reining him in a bit.  He's a young QB and taking care of the ball is paramount.  That TCU game was always going to be knife edge close and one bone-head play (or several, looking at you Trill  ) could cost you the game.

[smokeyB_blues]

What you are seeing in those instances is that teams are becoming more desperate and start chucking away.  Unfortunately for us, that's our biggest defensive weakness.  Especially our LB's trying to cover WRs over the middle.  Offensively, we didn't do anything differently.  We just weren't effective.  I would say that CDE has been a little tighter with Austin's leash early in the first couple games.  You have seen what we are capable of when he has to turn him loose.  Just look at the way we finished the LT and TCU games.  We have the ability to do damage and get the offense pretty close to what we were at the end of last year.  As the line comes together and Austin works through his progressions more, this offense could become filthy.  When you are that balanced, you can do what you want to people.

That is what continues my excitement for this season this one of those if done right this year could be special but our weaknesses need to become our strengths as we get into SEC play. The fact that we have gotten our young guys feet wet so early in the year against good competion is a major plus.

[rljjr]

I think TCU played decent defense to keep us out of the end zone and make us settle for 3's. That kept them in it. Then we missed the FG and they got fired up and jammed it down our throats. It's the same thing we did to LaTech. Big Mo was on their side and they rode it. We took it back and got into OT where we have confidence. Had we converted ONE of the FGs into a TD we would have won going away. We didn't let up in that TCU game.

[31to6]

I'd like to get yalls take on a viewpoint of mine. This is something that has bugged me for yrs under Coach B. What I see is that every time we gain a lead and get up by a couple touchdowns we seem to lose aggression and ease up possibly changing the game plan mid game and go from balanced to run heavy and predictable. We saw this against TCU and in the games vs A&M in particular. Am I alone on this?

Exact same gameplan is how we iced games like LSU and K-State late in the season.

If you have a two-score lead *and* they can't stop you from driving for 8-9 minutes then you are basically giving them 2-3 possessions to both catch up and stop you from scoring at all.

You are also giving your defense a lot of time to rest in the 2nd half, which lets you play best on best in the 4th quarter.

The difference between "overly conservative play-calling" and "crushing them mercilessly" is execution.

[Edit: I will say that I don't think it was just play-calling. I think that TCU made some defensive *and* offensive adjustments at the half, as did we, and it opened a window for them to come back. We probably *did* play a little tight in the 2nd half on offense.]

[Baconomics]

The play calling late in this game did not really reflect a "passive" approach.  Perhaps the players get passive or maybe they're just tired.  But here is how the three series went when we were up by 13 late:

Kody rushes for 4.  Kody rushes for 3.  Austin rushes for 3.  Drew catches for 4.  RW rushes for 7.  Austin throws to Keon, incomplete.  RW rushes for 5.  RW rushes for a bunch down to the 3.  That stupid dive where we don't block the LB loses 3.  RW rushes for 1.  Play action covered like a blanket.  No chance.  FG missed.

RW rushes for a loss of 2.  (TCU had 9 in the box.)  Out route to Reed for 11.  FB leaves his post and Austin gets hit as he throws to a wide-open Morgan, incomplete.  Punt.

Bootleg pass delivered late and nearly picked, incomplete.  RW rushes for 3.  Pass across the middle was incomplete.  (Cornelius thought he was held.)  Punt.

The last two series included 4 passes of 6 plays and yielded nothing.  The missed-FG series was the best of the three and we ran it almost exclusively.  So, the play-calling was not passive, but perhaps we had opportunities for big strikes in the play-calling as TCU was taking more risks.  Hard to tell.

I think you're right in general; I'm just not sure this game was a good example of it.

[31to6]

The play calling late in this game did not really reflect a "passive" approach.  Perhaps the players get passive or maybe they're just tired.  But here is how the three series went when we were up by 13 late:

Kody rushes for 4.  Kody rushes for 3.  Austin rushes for 3.  Drew catches for 4.  RW rushes for 7.  Austin throws to Keon, incomplete.  RW rushes for 5.  RW rushes for a bunch down to the 3.  That stupid dive where we don't block the LB loses 3.  RW rushes for 1.  Play action covered like a blanket.  No chance.  FG missed.

RW rushes for a loss of 2.  (TCU had 9 in the box.)  Out route to Reed for 11.  FB leaves his post and Austin gets hit as he throws to a wide-open Morgan, incomplete.  Punt.

Bootleg pass delivered late and nearly picked, incomplete.  RW rushes for 3.  Pass across the middle was incomplete.  (Cornelius thought he was held.)  Punt.

The last two series included 4 passes of 6 plays and yielded nothing.  The missed-FG series was the best of the three and we ran it almost exclusively.  So, the play-calling was not passive, but perhaps we had opportunities for big strikes in the play-calling as TCU was taking more risks.  Hard to tell.

I think you're right in general; I'm just not sure this game was a good example of it.

Getting 0 points out of the first drive is really what opened the window. We shot ourself in the foot on that drive twice and still had a chance to make it a 3-possession game. Not saying if we make the FG we can just sit back, but 3 scores makes the opposition play even more wide open which makes them more prone to throwing the ball to the wrong team or making another big mistake. Also, being up 3 scores lets you play more aggressively on defense if you think it will seal the game.

[RebelW]

I understand we've blown leads in the past, but our defense looked pretty good against TCU and think we've really made the next step. I think you really have to give credit to Gary Pattersons skill of making 2nd half changes. Look at last years bowl game against Oregon.

[Paul]

i really didn't like the timeout after RWIII ran down to the 2 yd line.  We had all the momentum & should have just lined up & run thru them into the end zone.  That's what TCU did to us after the long completions in the 4th qtr.   Instead we let the TCU D regroup & force the FG.  I think probably BB wanted to go over with Enos what to call cuz he knew if we scored a TD, the game was likely over. 

[razorbacker3]

i really didn't like the timeout after RWIII ran down to the 2 yd line.  We had all the momentum & should have just lined up & run thru them into the end zone.  That's what TCU did to us after the long completions in the 4th qtr.   Instead we let the TCU D regroup & force the FG.  I think probably BB wanted to go over with Enos what to call cuz he knew if we scored a TD, the game was likely over. 

TCU completely sold out for a RW run and dove thru a gap for a loss on the 1st down play. A quick pass would have easily scored then. 20/20 hindsight.

[Biggus Piggus]

I'd like to get yalls take on a viewpoint of mine. This is something that has bugged me for yrs under Coach B. What I see is that every time we gain a lead and get up by a couple touchdowns we seem to lose aggression and ease up possibly changing the game plan mid game and go from balanced to run heavy and predictable. We saw this against TCU and in the games vs A&M in particular. Am I alone on this?

It's not passive at all. It is "we're gonna dominate you."

We're running, you know and we know it. And we're gonna do it anyway.

OOF! UGH! OUCH! *punt*

[Biggus Piggus]

Have to point out, too:

Arkansas's best drive of the night came after TCU scored to make it 13-7. We moved the ball pretty well when it was 20-7. Simply had a bad sequence after first and goal at the 2. Going "passive" or "conservative" or whatever had nothing to do with anything.

The bigger problem was how many possessions Arkansas squandered in the first half, when the D was stout and the O could have blown the game wide open.

[Paul]

TCU completely sold out for a RW run and dove thru a gap for a loss on the 1st down play. A quick pass would have easily scored then. 20/20 hindsight.

a bootleg would've worked well.  I have perfect vision through my retrospectivescope!

[Tejano Jawg]

The bigger problem was how many possessions Arkansas squandered in the first half, when the D was stout and the O could have blown the game wide open.

This is something we gotta fix. While we've proven lately we're pretty good in overtime(s), I think we'd all prefer it not get that far. We let too many teams get back in the game late in regulation...i.e. Auburn last year. TCU this year. We need to go up 3 scores, then see what the other guys have.

Think of A&M 2 years ago...Jon W's run would have set up the final first-half score that would have buried the Ags. But we got the penalty, and never got that back. Tried to hang on for dear life but couldn't.

[hawginbigd1]

I bet if we could chart it in CBBs tenure i bet we have more negative plays than positive plays inside the 5 with the 3 tight formation. I hate the formation down close secondary and LBs have no depth or width to defend

[Rison Razor Hog]

I bet if we could chart it in CBBs tenure i bet we have more negative plays than positive plays inside the 5 with the 3 tight formation. I hate the formation down close secondary and LBs have no depth or width to defend

Well, Coach Hawginbigd1, how many plays are we talking 1, 3, 5, 10 a hundred? You leave the inference that our play calling is weak and it needs your superior insight for a way to correct the problem, so let's have it... We first do need to know exactly what the magnitude of the problem is, and you've conveniently left the data to evaluate it locked up in the spot you pulled it from (not your head, by-the-way). But please, don't let JMSU stop you from a swipe at the coaches.

[razorbackkid]

I bet if we could chart it in CBBs tenure i bet we have more negative plays than positive plays inside the 5 with the 3 tight formation. I hate the formation down close secondary and LBs have no depth or width to defend

There is no "if" we can chart it.  Being on Hogville tells me you have access to google.  Chart it, share it.  Coach B. may read this thread and respond.

Never know.

:razorback:

[wikipedia brown]

We overcame one of the best coaches in cfb at halftime adjustments. How could anyone be bitching still?

[31to6]

Well, Coach Hawginbigd1, how many plays are we talking 1, 3, 5, 10 a hundred? You leave the inference that our play calling is weak and it needs your superior insight for a way to correct the problem, so let's have it... We first do need to know exactly what the magnitude of the problem is, and you've conveniently left the data to evaluate it locked up in the spot you pulled it from (not your head, by-the-way). But please, don't let JMSU stop you from a swipe at the coaches.

The one tendency that I would like to see addressed is more play action on 2nd down and goal from the 5. Right now we tend to run-run-pass and it is too predictable.

If you have 2nd and short the offense has all the initiative and you can force them to defend the entire EZ on a down when you call the shots.

Other than that, I have no problem with tight formations in the red zone. They let you do some really interesting things like spring TE's, QB RPO and other option-type goal-line plays, and so on. Also, the team that can run effectively in the red zone is, over the long haul, going to have the better red zone percentage. When we see CBB doing it, it is not stubborn for stubborn's sake--it is stubborn because he knows that once you have that team that can execute a blocking scheme well enough to shove into the EZ on the ground whenever you want, you become amazingly effective in all short-yardage situations.

[Atlhogfan1]

It isn't losing aggression or being passive.  It is circumstances.  And it happens with most football teams - what the offenses do and what the defenses do- including NFL in the 4th qtr.  I don't believe this needs to be explained in detail.


It wasn't losing aggression vs TCU after the failed red zone trip. 

After TCU made it 20-14:

We went run, pass, pass, punt.

Pass, run, pass, punt.

4 passes and 2 runs

Now it is 28-20 and TCU's defense and our offense change because of the circumstances(time, time outs left, distance to score).


The plays where you could say we lost aggression was 1st and 2nd goal up 20-7.  Still understandable to run at least once there. 

[hawginbigd1]

Well, Coach Hawginbigd1, how many plays are we talking 1, 3, 5, 10 a hundred? You leave the inference that our play calling is weak and it needs your superior insight for a way to correct the problem, so let's have it... We first do need to know exactly what the magnitude of the problem is, and you've conveniently left the data to evaluate it locked up in the spot you pulled it from (not your head, by-the-way). But please, don't let JMSU stop you from a swipe at the coaches.

Ok SA, It is my opinion and I am entitled to it, It just seems more often than not we get stuffed in run plays in a tight formation inside the 5. IMO it is scheme and not talent that causes the issue. I don't mind the play call to run, I just don't like the formation. If you don't believe we have had short yardage issues for the past few years, well you are watching a different game.

[Biggus Piggus]

Ok SA, It is my opinion and I am entitled to it, It just seems more often than not we get stuffed in run plays in a tight formation inside the 5. IMO it is scheme and not talent that causes the issue. I don't mind the play call to run, I just don't like the formation. If you don't believe we have had short yardage issues for the past few years, well you are watching a different game.

The play is designed to work, and we don't execute those plays well. Talent or whatever.

[AugustaHog]

The play is designed to work, and we don't execute those plays well. Talent or whatever.

Yep if we are going to be a smash mouth, hardnosed team, we've gotta finish on the goal line.  Just have to execute.  Smoke and mirrors is only going to last so long.

[Biggus Piggus]

Yep if we are going to be a smash mouth, hardnosed team, we've gotta finish on the goal line.  Just have to execute.  Smoke and mirrors is only going to last so long.

What seems to happen every time --

Opponent gets penetration into the backfield.
Opponent piles so many bodies up there, the only rational thing would be to run around the pile, not into it.

[hogsanity]

I'd like to get yalls take on a viewpoint of mine. This is something that has bugged me for yrs under Coach B. What I see is that every time we gain a lead and get up by a couple touchdowns we seem to lose aggression and ease up possibly changing the game plan mid game and go from balanced to run heavy and predictable. We saw this against TCU and in the games vs A&M in particular. Am I alone on this?

I believe a lot of people just look for things they want to see or for things they can gripe about, but do not really exist.

[AugustaHog]

What seems to happen every time --

Opponent gets penetration into the backfield.
Opponent piles so many bodies up there, the only rational thing would be to run around the pile, not into it.

I think this is one reason the plays we have seen in the redzone like the BA/AA QB keepers, OMG, and the double reverse pass work so well.  It is hard to run it up the gut in the I form against some of these teams with massive heavy packages when they are loading up the box.  I still think we should be better at it with the personnel that we have though.  All these teams are gearing up for that run b/t the tackles and left wondering what happened when AA hits one of our outstanding receivers or shifts the point of attack like the QB run.  Sprinkle is truly the key here because he is a matchup nightmare for anybody on the field and it is super difficult to keep track of him with all that traffic.  Morgan is great at finding holes and sitting in that spot too. 

[AFWarrior83]

CBB doesn't seem to play conservative to protect a lead imo. We're a team that likes to run the ball, so we do that often (as long as we're having success). Fortunately we finally have a balanced offense that can throw it when we need to. I think TCU made adjustments as the game progressed, so we had to counter their counter so to speak. TCU got back in the game because our players stopped executing, not because of the play-calling.

[daprospecta]

THIS week, bro


yeah, it's only you. enjoy the huge win.

No. It's not only him. I called that out in the In-game-thread while we were still leading.  CBB/Enos had a great game plan coming into but went straight vanilla when we were leading.  You will lose games against good-great teams that way especially if they have great coaches.  Great coaches adjust and will start scoring eventually.  I'm enjoying the huge win but I did notice this as well.

[hobhog]

Have to point out, too:

Arkansas's best drive of the night came after TCU scored to make it 13-7. We moved the ball pretty well when it was 20-7. Simply had a bad sequence after first and goal at the 2. Going "passive" or "conservative" or whatever had nothing to do with anything.

The bigger problem was how many possessions Arkansas squandered in the first half, when the D was stout and the O could have blown the game wide open.

I think we saw AA come of age in this game. He was not the same QB at end of game as he was at the beginning of the game. This is a good thing and bodes well for rest of season.

[razorsharptusk]

It did seem like we stalled a bit on offense, but then you have to stop and realize we got to the 2 yard line to pretty much drive the nail in the coffin, couldn't do it running or throwing, and missed the field goal.  If we get the ball to the 2 yard line, or in the red zone, we need to score.  When we missed that field goal, you could feel the momentum change. 

[durock]

I'm new here so forgive my ignorance. Could it be when we are up a few scores they are calling plays to see weakness in the defense that we can exploit later.

[jm]

Allowing the opposition to throw passes to uncovered receivers continues to be our biggest issue. I don't know if it is lack of talent or lack of the ability to game plan, but we either give up easy 5 yard completions or we can't/don't cover the receivers downfield.  When is the last time we actually broke up a pass? I know we had the pick6, but only because the ball was very poorly thrown and behind the receiver by almost 3 yards.
Any coach that trys to run the ball against us is an idiot. They shouldn't even have a running back on the field against us.

[AugustaHog]

This is what the spread creates.  They force bad matchups with slower LBers on speedy WRs.  See Ellis vs. Turpin.  That guys the fastest dude on their team.  Why in the blue hell is our slowest LBer trying to cover him?  Short of an awful throw by Trill or some serious pressure, 99/100 times that kid burns Brooksie.  That's the issue here.  They are trying to force our hand and put us in positions that make us uncomfortable.  This is why you see Bama trimming down some of their LBers.  The game is dictating that speed be a little more of a priority than size.  Our D looked pretty good if you take out those two long gainers.  If we can limit that in the future, we'll be pleased with the results.

[daprospecta]

This is what the spread creates.  They force bad matchups with slower LBers on speedy WRs.  See Ellis vs. Turpin.  That guys the fastest dude on their team.  Why in the blue hell is our slowest LBer trying to cover him?  Short of an awful throw by Trill or some serious pressure, 99/100 times that kid burns Brooksie.  That's the issue here.  They are trying to force our hand and put us in positions that make us uncomfortable.  This is why you see Bama trimming down some of their LBers.  The game is dictating that speed be a little more of a priority than size.  Our D looked pretty good if you take out those two long gainers.  If we can limit that in the future, we'll be pleased with the results.

I always thought the elixir for that problem was to have strong CB/DB's and LB's jamming the receivers at the line . I remember when we used to play Alabama with Childs, Cobi, Wright,Adams, etc, they would  jam them and give enough time for their D-Line to apply pressure.

[12247]

Anyone remotely interested in football, interested enough to have for whatever reason, read a couple or three articles about Arkansas football, not even necessary to have seen Arkansas play the game, would have known the RB would get the ball in that goal line situation.  So they did pile up in the only place they had to concern themselves with and yep, it worked.

But in the end TCU won the open field part of the game and we won the tight field part of the game.  Lucky for us, the overtimes were played on a short field, one where we could get our big bodies near and sometimes in contact with their small fast bodies and shut them down.  We were gassed by the fourth quarter,

As to passive, I believe we do try to control the ball and slow the game down when we are up.  Not sure that is passive by definition but it sure looks passive while in play.  That is just BB ball.  The only problem with that kind of thinking is that you are requiring your team to run over an off balanced amount of defenders because they can sell out to stop what you do every time you are in that position.

Ever think about if TCU had attempted to play our style of game with the players they had or heaven forbid, we were forced to play the spread with our players. 

[JOKERHOG]

This is the same struggles the razorbacks have had since the 1985's.  That is how Ken Hatfield kept losing to Texas. 

[ricepig]

It isn't losing aggression or being passive.  It is circumstances.  And it happens with most football teams - what the offenses do and what the defenses do- including NFL in the 4th qtr.  I don't believe this needs to be explained in detail.


It wasn't losing aggression vs TCU after the failed red zone trip. 

After TCU made it 20-14:

We went run, pass, pass, punt.

Pass, run, pass, punt.

4 passes and 2 runs

Now it is 28-20 and TCU's defense and our offense change because of the circumstances(time, time outs left, distance to score).


The plays where you could say we lost aggression was 1st and 2nd goal up 20-7.  Still understandable to run at least once there. 

Yep, just read the play chart.

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/stats/football/2016/ar091016.htm

[smokeyB_blues]

Definitely very predictable today sure have a great passing game when we use it. Ground and pound is not gonna win every game in the SEC, the time to give Austin Allen the key to the car in redzone was yesterday this isnt pop warner football player we play against was hoping this game wouldnt turn out like this and had faith, but when I can tell what we are fixing to do its really bad