Watching from sec. 117, what I found most frustrating was that the ND OC clearly made adjustments to the playcalling based on game script and flow, while Musgrave seemingly made very few, if any. Plummer’s inaccuracy in the passing game definitely contributed to some inefficiency, but there also did not appear to be any change in the approach, especially in the 2H.
Musgrave’s limitations as an offensive mind were on full display.
Great write-up. 2 questions and an agreement-observations.
1) Does anyone know what #10 didn't start the second half? He's our most impactful defender amongst the front 7. Is it a rotation issue? ND went 9 plays, 60 yards to score on that possession.
2) Your comment re: TEs was maddening to me during the game and since. #85 is a poor blocker. #4 is ok. I see many plays where the team needs a quality block and in comes #14 (WR) to help. If we need blocking, why didn't #34 get more action? Or a six OL formation?
3) Why did Musgrave call so many traditional drop back plays? Do you believe we don't have roll out plays?
Great analysis and write-up. Given the extreme weakness of the O-line I can't really think of anything to mask this deficiency other than moving to a completely different scheme like (chuckle) the triple option. Other than that, give Plummer a chance by hitting short passes with perhaps a two step drop back. Our screen passes have generally been blown up, though. But if the QB is getting hit before you can say one Mississippi you're probably in big trouble. I also was wondering what the TE's were doing since edge blocking has been poor. If they really are doing nothing we might as well be running an offense with 9 or 10 players.
This was an excellent analysis. I believe the defense did as much as it could, with the exception of the point of attack on 2nd half running plays. I do believe the egregious off-sides call changed the complexion of the game. Cal's drives could have resulted in field goal attempts, and put pressure on Notre Dame to catch up rather than vice-versa. I especially agree that failure to use three-step drops, slants and quick 5 yard passes, and the absence of the tight end, was completely perplexing.
Those TE stats are SO, so disappointing. I wasn't really paying attention to the personnel but had assumed we were using TEs to block (and they were just getting blown up by a good ND defense).
sayeth the raven, dump Musgrave ---- in close games where Cal has a chance to win, they won't as long as Musgrave is the OC. Had Cal scored on the Hail Mary and gone for two, he'd have called a sneak or A gap dive
I'm so glad you've highlighted the mystery of our TE play, since I've been focused on the lack of them getting passes or being effective blockers. If Terry isn't being thrown to, or blocking, then what the hell? I'm increasingly convinced Musgrave is not the signal caller we need. Who doubts that Tedford or Dykes could get double the points out of these same players?
"The rest of this season is going to be defined by how Cal addresses their offensive line problems." I just don't think they will; I have not seen anything in the past three games to indicate they are making improvement or changing plays to compensate for this fundamental problem. And believe me man, I want to see improvement, I really do. I will look at the game again, see what others have seen and described so well on this blog, for myself. But I already know what I saw the first time. One thing about the defense, why not attack the QB with more blitzes throughout the game, especially in the first half when he was vulnerable and nervous? So, Arizona up next, looks like two evenly matched teams. Cal at home. Cal should win, yes? Maybe?
Understandably a lot of comments about play calling on offense.
But I have to say I’m equally baffled by the game Sirmon called. ND’s QB was a basket case early in the game, and we let him off the hook. Should have blitzed and stunted the hell out of him, and stacked the box against the run, until he proved he could burn us downfield, which I don’t think he would have done. Instead we let him get comfortable with short passes, and gave up a ton of 5-10 yard runs.
I think ND has a really good D line (it def looked good at Ohio State), and that really magnified our greatest weakness (our O line). But I don’t think anyone left on our schedule has as formidable a defensive front as ND, so I think there is room for our O line to look better.
ND had a hangover loss v Marshall and let us play closer than they normally would have because of their QB being so green. They will probably eventually have 7-8 wins, and so will we.
Speaking of tight ends, Jermaine Terry had his first catch of the season on a short crosser. He is not even close to the pass catching beast everyone thought he would be. The dude has shown he can put the weight on. Put him on the D line, a position he played to great success in high school. Or even more outside the box, make him a lean and mean O tackle.
The frustrating part in Musgrave's inability to scheme around an obviously deficient OL. 4 wide and empty sets ain’t getting it done.
Watching from sec. 117, what I found most frustrating was that the ND OC clearly made adjustments to the playcalling based on game script and flow, while Musgrave seemingly made very few, if any. Plummer’s inaccuracy in the passing game definitely contributed to some inefficiency, but there also did not appear to be any change in the approach, especially in the 2H.
Musgrave’s limitations as an offensive mind were on full display.
Great write-up. 2 questions and an agreement-observations.
1) Does anyone know what #10 didn't start the second half? He's our most impactful defender amongst the front 7. Is it a rotation issue? ND went 9 plays, 60 yards to score on that possession.
2) Your comment re: TEs was maddening to me during the game and since. #85 is a poor blocker. #4 is ok. I see many plays where the team needs a quality block and in comes #14 (WR) to help. If we need blocking, why didn't #34 get more action? Or a six OL formation?
3) Why did Musgrave call so many traditional drop back plays? Do you believe we don't have roll out plays?
thank you.
Great analysis and write-up. Given the extreme weakness of the O-line I can't really think of anything to mask this deficiency other than moving to a completely different scheme like (chuckle) the triple option. Other than that, give Plummer a chance by hitting short passes with perhaps a two step drop back. Our screen passes have generally been blown up, though. But if the QB is getting hit before you can say one Mississippi you're probably in big trouble. I also was wondering what the TE's were doing since edge blocking has been poor. If they really are doing nothing we might as well be running an offense with 9 or 10 players.
This was an excellent analysis. I believe the defense did as much as it could, with the exception of the point of attack on 2nd half running plays. I do believe the egregious off-sides call changed the complexion of the game. Cal's drives could have resulted in field goal attempts, and put pressure on Notre Dame to catch up rather than vice-versa. I especially agree that failure to use three-step drops, slants and quick 5 yard passes, and the absence of the tight end, was completely perplexing.
Those TE stats are SO, so disappointing. I wasn't really paying attention to the personnel but had assumed we were using TEs to block (and they were just getting blown up by a good ND defense).
sayeth the raven, dump Musgrave ---- in close games where Cal has a chance to win, they won't as long as Musgrave is the OC. Had Cal scored on the Hail Mary and gone for two, he'd have called a sneak or A gap dive
I'm so glad you've highlighted the mystery of our TE play, since I've been focused on the lack of them getting passes or being effective blockers. If Terry isn't being thrown to, or blocking, then what the hell? I'm increasingly convinced Musgrave is not the signal caller we need. Who doubts that Tedford or Dykes could get double the points out of these same players?
"The rest of this season is going to be defined by how Cal addresses their offensive line problems." I just don't think they will; I have not seen anything in the past three games to indicate they are making improvement or changing plays to compensate for this fundamental problem. And believe me man, I want to see improvement, I really do. I will look at the game again, see what others have seen and described so well on this blog, for myself. But I already know what I saw the first time. One thing about the defense, why not attack the QB with more blitzes throughout the game, especially in the first half when he was vulnerable and nervous? So, Arizona up next, looks like two evenly matched teams. Cal at home. Cal should win, yes? Maybe?
Understandably a lot of comments about play calling on offense.
But I have to say I’m equally baffled by the game Sirmon called. ND’s QB was a basket case early in the game, and we let him off the hook. Should have blitzed and stunted the hell out of him, and stacked the box against the run, until he proved he could burn us downfield, which I don’t think he would have done. Instead we let him get comfortable with short passes, and gave up a ton of 5-10 yard runs.
We spent years making fun of a Toyota Tercel offense. Boy, what I would give for a Toyota Tercel offense right now.
I think ND has a really good D line (it def looked good at Ohio State), and that really magnified our greatest weakness (our O line). But I don’t think anyone left on our schedule has as formidable a defensive front as ND, so I think there is room for our O line to look better.
ND had a hangover loss v Marshall and let us play closer than they normally would have because of their QB being so green. They will probably eventually have 7-8 wins, and so will we.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-football/news/notre-dame-TD-phantom-offsides-call-win-over-Cal/jawhtc542r0m2fwnntf29zoj
Speaking of tight ends, Jermaine Terry had his first catch of the season on a short crosser. He is not even close to the pass catching beast everyone thought he would be. The dude has shown he can put the weight on. Put him on the D line, a position he played to great success in high school. Or even more outside the box, make him a lean and mean O tackle.
Thanks, Nick. Great stuff!