2ND Half Play Calling In Black & White

[Uno Boss]

The "blame the play calling" deal after every single loss is getting really tired. Let's face it, the players just didn't get it done yesterday. Drops, fumbles, missed assignments, etc., are not the fault of the coaches.

but even after all of that....

the players rallied and got us in position to tie....and thats when the Chaos really began...

who do you blame then?...

[PiLfan]

I know but it appears that he's better out of the shotgun, especially with a depleted OL, it gives him a little longer to look down the field and make his reads.

This coaching staff doesn't believe in...or is scared to death of...the shotgun. For whatever the reason, I don't know.

We must be the only team in the league to not use it (or if we do, it's like once or twice a game max).

The OL is patchwork at this point...missing two key OL starters will do that to you every time. Shotgun gives the qb some extra time to survey the field...scramble around if necessary. At the very least, they could call a roll out play. Hell, i saw Eli scramble on a couple of scripted roll outs that bought him time away from the pressure and allowed him to complete some key throws. JC can move better than Eli, but I don't recall seeing any designed rollouts for him....It was always either a straight back drop and throw, or (when they wanted to get "imaginative"), they used playaction.

And speaking of which, who else was getting sick of all the playaction late in the game?....Note to al saunders: When you're down by 7, the clock is running out and you're averaging about 3 yards a carry, play action is probably NOT going to work...all it does is turn the qb around and he loses a few key seconds in being able to survey the field. :doh:

[ExoDus84]

I'm embarassed. A hall of fame coach and offensive mastermind, and an OC that run a #1 offense in kansas city for a few years, and this is the best they can do? Thats what happens when you have conflicting ego's.

[Jimbo]

The problem I had with the playcalling, besides the obvious ones from the one yard line, was we didnt try to put the nail in the coffin in the 3rd quarter. The only pass we ran on first down, until we were behind, was a screen to Portis that lost 4 yards. THAT is a play you run on 2nd or 3rd down, not on first down.

I was just sure we'd come out on first down with some play-action on one or more of those 3-and-outs in the second half but we never did. Another near-miss deep to a wide open Moss was the only play call I really liked.

I suppose the drop by Portis on 3rd down might have gotten us a first down to where things could have been changed up but I would have preferred that play on a first down instead of a 3rd down.

Some of it you can blame on the execution but some was just lousy playcalling. The Skins, once again, seemed to coach no to lose instead of coaching to win.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

6 plays in the 3rd quarter people. 6 plays.

[DjTj]

3rd quarter: we ran 6 offensive plays. 2 were running plays, 4 were passes. of the 4 passes, campbell scrambled on one of them, threw to portis for a loss of a 4 on a botched screen pass, threw deep to moss once, and threw short to moss once. does that look like the playcalling by an offensive coordinator whos goal is to "attack"? doesnt look like it to me.

I don't think Al Saunders called the play as a scramble, and there was a deep option on the short pass to Moss. We aren't going to throw it deep on every single play, and we're not going to go no-huddle passing on every down when we're up by a touchdown in the third quarter. Having 4 out of the 6 plays as passing plays is a pretty good balance that doesn't seem too conservative to me.

4th quarter tied up: now the game is tied 17 a piece, and heres what we run

reverse to moss for 2 yards

handoff left to portis for 3 yards

dropped swing pass to portis

punt

again, does that look like an attacking offense to you? looks like mark brunell style

offense, all short, nothing stretch.

I would never call an end-around a conservative call ... if anything, I think Saunders was getting a little too fancy there because we just needed a bread-and-butter plays to get us a first down. The third down play was not a swing pass; Campbell looked deep but checked down to Portis when nobody was open.

I don't see how you can blame Saunders for being too conservative there. Campbell was making the decisions, and it was Campbell that looked like Brunell out there.

we get the ball back again, and what do we do now?

2 handoffs to portis, one for 1 yard, and one fumble on the handoff where the giants get the ball. again, does that look like an attacking offense?

Prior to this drive, Portis had been given the ball three times and gained 3 yards, 8 yards, then 3 yards again. He was the only thing working for the offense, and I thought it was a good call to hand it off to Portis. We needed to slow the game down and keep our defense off the field. Unfortunately, we turned the ball over, but again, that's on the players rather than the coaches.

so while with the lead and tied, here is the offensive playcalling so far:

11 plays, 0 3rd down conversions, 6 running plays, 5 passing plays (one was a scramble but was still attempted pass play). wow. and one pass was deep, all the rest were short out of the backfield garbage.

The stats are almost exactly the same as the first half, which was 17 passing plays and 15 running plays with only two deep passes.

The offense in the second half was exactly like the offense in the first half. What changed was the Giant defense, which started blitzing a lot more on the right side. The problem isn't that we got conservative - we played exactly the same in the second half as the first half; the problem is that we didn't change our scheme after the Giants made halftime adjustments.

so now were losing after giving up 21 straight, and of course we start heaving the ball all over the place. and after some sort of miracle campbell gets us to the 1 yard line, and for 3 plays we do a swing pass to sellers, and two sweeps with our slow backup running, while clinton portis watches from the bench. wow again.

I'm not going to try to defend the play-calling and execution on the last drive. We should have managed the clock better. Portis should have been in there. But whatever we did, it certainly wasn't a lack of an "attack" mentality. We don't need to change our philosophy; we just need to stop screwing up.

[RSimports]

I agree we played like **** yesterday. But why not try using our 280 lb Full back more then once or twice a game? Sure they may be exspecting it from the one yard line but they still need to stop him

[SkinsWizCubsDukes]

huh? We didn't run enough, period. Clinton Portis had 3 carries in the 2nd half, unless I'm reading your stat sheet wrong, TK. 3 carries to our premier offensive player. 3 carries, 14 yards. To be honest, my only gripe with the play calling was why he didn't get the last two carries, which probably would have made us all forget the nightmare we just experienced.

Only gripe with the defense was the 3 3rd down conversions on that opening drive in the second half.

I agree totally with you. I also would add that the spike with almost an entire minute left in the game on 1rst and goal from the 1 yard line? I don't like that call at all, if you didn't want to waste time, throw a quick pass play and at most waste 20 seconds.

The Coaches and players were in panic mode.

Also if CP was in, whether or not he scored, no one would be like oh we should have had Betts in. CP would have been able to enter after the spike (and timeout)

I would like to add that the spike, then led to a timeout. Somehow, we had Betts in and then we threw incomplete...so there was plenty of chances to get CP in the game.

One more thing, the timeout...to me, gave us the upperhand on offense, and then we just blew it. 3 plays to get in the end zone.

Just face it guys, the decision making in the second half was terrible. And some of the play calls were terrible.

I like the fight in the team at the end but I feel like the coaches took this game away from the players.

[mcarey032]

You can say poor play calling along with poor execution. Dropped balls and a fumble don't help either.

[Isifhan]

Throwing deep is one thing. Throwing deep by putting us in a position to be successful is another. On those deep throws the playcall was with JC taking a 5-7 step drop from under center. We KNEW Giants were blitzing, yet we still called those plays from under center. Put him in shotgun and let him see the field. Throwing short on 3rd & 7 from under center is not putting us into positions to execute effectively.

[Warpath11]

6 plays in the 3rd quarter people. 6 plays.

This is all that needs to be said. A sucessful Al Saunders offense has ~70+ plays/game. When you have that many offensive snaps your playmakers are bound to make plays because they will have more opportunities with the ball in their hands. To get 70 offensive snaps a game you need execution particularly of first down so that your 3rd down and distance is always managable.

[Henry]

Playcalling wasn't the problem for the most part.

The problem, for the most part, is the team played like crap.

[BKSkinsFan]

Our 2 minute offense is an obvious weakness. We've shown to be very unprepared and indecisive during this time of the game.

When we are in a hurry, we look like a poorly coached team, plain and simple. I'm not saying that it actually the case, I'm just stating my opinion based on seeing how they perform. In a hurry they are out of sync, and look unaware of what needs to be done and the best way to go about it.

There was plenty of time to attempt a pass with the current package they had in, but decided to instead take 3 shots with their Jumbo package. The pass to Sellers on 2nd down could have gone it had it been an accurate throw. The 2 run plays, both the same play call, was frustrating to watch.

After hearing Coach Gibbs talk about learning from his mistakes when talking about kicking the FG on 1st down against Miami, did he not learn anything from the goal line stand against Dallas last year? That was the game where on 7 straight plays, 1 of them a pass, we could not punch it in the endzone from the 4 yard line.

When talking about being predictable, everyone in that stadium knew what we were doing. The Giants knew where the play was going, and our line was just unable to dominate the line under those circumstances. If we roll Jason out or maybe have Cooley go out for a pass instead of blocking a probowl defensive end the entire half, the Giants may have had to play that goal line more honest. Hell, keep the current package out their and make them cover our WRs only to run Sellers who could carry an entire d-line on his back for 1 yard.

We can say "oh our guys just didn't execute" all we want, but when everyone watching the game knows exactly where you are going, without videotaping you making the calls on the sideline, you've cheated yourself out of a possible win.

[Jimbo]

Throwing deep is one thing. Throwing deep by putting us in a position to be successful is another. On those deep throws the playcall was with JC taking a 5-7 step drop from under center. We KNEW Giants were blitzing, yet we still called those plays from under center. Put him in shotgun and let him see the field. Throwing short on 3rd & 7 from under center is not putting us into positions to execute effectively.

I agree we should have used the shotgun, especially since the right side of the line was struggling in the second half. Not only are these guys new to the line and new to each other but they have yet to play a full game. You could tell they were pretty well worn down at the end of the game.

[Henry]

We can say "oh our guys just didn't execute" all we want, but when everyone watching the game knows exactly where you are going, without videotaping you making the calls on the sideline, you've cheated yourself out of a possible win.

Vince Lombardi would probably disagree with you.

There is a line of thinking followed by some extremely successful coaches that you should be able to execute certain plays so well that it doesn't matter if the other team knows it's coming. That thinking has actually won us a Superbowl or two, if memory serves.

If our team executes as it's capable of executing we should be able to get a yard against the hapless Giants no matter what they do. Otherwise, maybe we aren't actually the amazing team everyone thought we were two days ago.

[Burgold]

It's like I was thinking. It was more of the Brunell problem than a running problem. Too many short, overly conservative passes. Combine that with poor execution and you got problems right hear in River City. Problems that starts with P and that rhymes with D... Hey, where did our D go!

[Neophyte]

Vince Lombardi would probably disagree with you.

There is a line of thinking followed by some extremely successful coaches that you should be able to execute certain plays so well that it doesn't matter if the other team knows it's coming. That thinking has actually won us a Superbowl or two, if memory serves.

If our team executes as it's capable of executing we should be able to get a yard against the hapless Giants no matter what they do. Otherwise, maybe we aren't actually the amazing team everyone thought we were two days ago.

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner folks.

[Smoot Point Really]

If you are ever going to blame play calling, you have to blame play calling in this situation. We were out coached in the 2nd half... We didn't adjust to what the opponents were doing. We didn't commit to using Chris Cooley against a Giant team that was really weak against the TE in previous weeks. We weren't playing to win... We were playing to "not lose"...

[Smoot Point Really]

Vince Lombardi would probably disagree with you.

There is a line of thinking followed by some extremely successful coaches that you should be able to execute certain plays so well that it doesn't matter if the other team knows it's coming. That thinking has actually won us a Superbowl or two, if memory serves.

If our team executes as it's capable of executing we should be able to get a yard against the hapless Giants no matter what they do. Otherwise, maybe we aren't actually the amazing team everyone thought we were two days ago.

Those three Super Bowls were won based on great coaching... We got out-coached in the 2nd half, and that hardly ever happened to a Gibbs I team. In fact, Gibbs I era was noted for the teams ability to make excellent halftime adjustments. We came out flat. It's not time to write off this team or the coaching staff, but we can't overlook the horrible play calling, substitutions and other coaching errors that cost us the game.

BTW, if we could see more HB Blades in future games, that would be great.

[ThomasRoane]

The "blame the play calling" deal after every single loss is getting really tired. Let's face it, the players just didn't get it done yesterday. Drops, fumbles, missed assignments, etc., are not the fault of the coaches.

EXACTLY!!!

As a coach at several age levels I can tell you that any play can work as drawn up on white boards or paper. But only if your O can move the other team's X. We didn't block well, throw well, catch well or run well. So you can't put that all on the coaches. Coaches put players in positions to be successful. It's on the players to make it work.

[budski]

Forget the playcalling it was the goofy uniforms that ruined it for us, not to mention the scoreboard.

[BKSkinsFan]

Vince Lombardi would probably disagree with you.

There is a line of thinking followed by some extremely successful coaches that you should be able to execute certain plays so well that it doesn't matter if the other team knows it's coming. That thinking has actually won us a Superbowl or two, if memory serves.

If our team executes as it's capable of executing we should be able to get a yard against the hapless Giants no matter what they do. Otherwise, maybe we aren't actually the amazing team everyone thought we were two days ago.

I'd normally agree with that, however when we only run for 17 yards in a half, and the only reason you are in a position to tie the game is due to the passing game, it may be wise to continue attacking a defense with the only thing you are having any kind of success with.

Of course I'm playing Monday morning coordinator here, I'm frustrated that my team can't go out and exploit a team's apparent weakness just like last year not being able to run on the Colts. The Giants have shown they can't cover a TE, however we keep our playmaker in blocking Strahan one on one.

I also take into consideration that our D did not get any stops in the 2nd half, which made it more difficult to get into any rhythm watching the Giants offense take 5 & 6 minutes off the clock. Our offense and defense hurt each other with their inabilities to make plays in the 2nd half. However with a smart call on the 1, we go into OT, and that just did not happen.

[meek]

You can't just look at the play calls in black and white. There was a real life game being played by men with egos and emotion. On two of the three sides of the ball yesterday (Danny Smith continued to prove that he's the most valuable coach on the team), we looked more and more uncomfortable as the 2nd half progressed. Whether it was a run or a pass, a cover 2 shell or a blitz, it was done scared both from a playcalling perspective as well as in terms of execution.

I made this post in another thread, but I think its appropriate here as well so I hope that you'll indulge the double post:

Lack of comfort is what breeds conservatism. We saw it in the final stretch of '05 when we won a playoff game with the most anemic offense to ever win a playoff game in NFL history and then went to Seattle and continued to show signs of discomfort. We were "out of our comfort zone" to put it bluntly. The most encouraging sign of the entire Gibs II era was last Monday night when we threw the bomb to Moss that would've sealed the game late in the 4th. Sure it didn't work, but more often than not it will and we'll need it to work to be successful on a long-term basis in big games. It was a call that took guts, but was without a doubt the right call to make.

Unfortunately, by all indications yesterday the coaching staff grew more and more uncomfortable as the 2nd half progressed culminating in the botched goal-to-go playcalling. By all accounts, Campbell was composed but was being hurried and rushed to the line by a frantic sideline that seemed inept at handling the situation.

We have a more talented and deeper roster than we've had in years and I fully expect us to make it into the playoffs. What scares me, though, is how our coaching staff is going to react when our backs are up against the wall the next time we're in a pressure packed situation such as the playoffs. Are we going to have what it takes to call for the bomb to Moss to put the game away, or is our lack of comfort going to push in in the more conservative direction. After watching yesterday, all the positive signs from last Monday seem to have have been lost and this team's true umcomfortable colors seem to shine brighter than ever.

[Henry]

I also take into consideration that our D did not get any stops in the 2nd half, which made it more difficult to get into any rhythm watching the Giants offense take 5 & 6 minutes off the clock. Our offense and defense hurt each other with their inabilities to make plays in the 2nd half. However with a smart call on the 1, we go into OT, and that just did not happen.

Now this I totally agree with. The whole team just played flat-out bad. There was more going on there than bad play-calling.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

I don't understand; we either "take the handcuffs off" of Campbell and let him play or we run a MORE Conservative offense to limit his number of pass attempts. really it's only one way or the other as far as I can tell.

Seems to me this would solve things