Flutie or Smith?

[EagleDave]

Thamel is already implying Smith will start next week but it sounds like that is purely based off the depth chart. I anticipate them to start Smith and dumb down the playbook for the next few weeks until he can learn more of the plays. There is still a very long season ahead of us and plenty of opportunity to get to a bowl game.

These next three weeks are key. Anything less than 2-1 (really 3-0) and we could be in trouble. The defense can win these games, we just need the offense to be good enough.

They won't need to utilize all the mis-direction and motion to move the ball against an NIU team that is not as good as previous years (nearly lost to an AWFUL UNLV squad), especially on defense. Give Smith and Willis/Hilliman a basic read-option scheme to run and they'll be fine. Develop the playbook over the next few weeks.

[eagle9903]

When it comes to playcalling, I don't think anyone here is saying that that is why we lost.

What people are upset with, is that the play calling was rarely innovative. When you are seriously outmatched, you can't just stick with the halfback dives and play action passes on third down.You need to get creative. We didn't even attempt to until the drive that resulted in the Hilliman fumble (which was the most vanilla 2nd and 12 play call ever).

The play calling isn't why we didn't score, but it sure is frustrating to watch us try the same run-run-pass-punt shit when it's obviously not working.

At what point should they change the game plan that was a large part of the reason FSU hadn't scored?

[BCMurt09]

We kept it at 7-0 for most of the game and the staff was waiting of the big run to come. It never did, but you could see the FSU defense tiring as the game went on. The runs in the third and fourth, when the holes were there, got longer and longer, but they just never broke one.

I would rather them just say "we're going to stick with what we do best" than say "we have a few new wrinkles." Maybe it is gamesmanship on Daz's part, i don't know.

[rktbrkr]

Wade broken ankle

http://www.si.com/college-football/2015 ... oken-ankle

[footer20]

When it comes to playcalling, I don't think anyone here is saying that that is why we lost.

What people are upset with, is that the play calling was rarely innovative. When you are seriously outmatched, you can't just stick with the halfback dives and play action passes on third down.You need to get creative. We didn't even attempt to until the drive that resulted in the Hilliman fumble (which was the most vanilla 2nd and 12 play call ever).

The play calling isn't why we didn't score, but it sure is frustrating to watch us try the same run-run-pass-punt shit when it's obviously not working.

At what point should they change the game plan that was a large part of the reason FSU hadn't scored?

Now. WE SCORED ZERO POINTS. You cannot win with 0 points.

Are you trying to say that the offensive play-calling played a part in why FSU only scored 7 points on offense? Because it absolutely did not. The defense stood on it's head and the offense never rewarded them. Winning the field position is hardly relevant if you can't turn a short field into points.

I'm not saying air it out. Again, we don't have the personell to do that, but running out of the I formation on first and second down isn't going to work with our offensive line. We need to be creative and get the ball into space for Sherm, Smith, Willis, and Hilliman.

[eagle9903]

When it comes to playcalling, I don't think anyone here is saying that that is why we lost.

What people are upset with, is that the play calling was rarely innovative. When you are seriously outmatched, you can't just stick with the halfback dives and play action passes on third down.You need to get creative. We didn't even attempt to until the drive that resulted in the Hilliman fumble (which was the most vanilla 2nd and 12 play call ever).

The play calling isn't why we didn't score, but it sure is frustrating to watch us try the same run-run-pass-punt shit when it's obviously not working.

At what point should they change the game plan that was a large part of the reason FSU hadn't scored?

Now. WE SCORED ZERO POINTS. You cannot win with 0 points.

Are you trying to say that the offensive play-calling played a part in why FSU only scored 7 points on offense? Because it absolutely did not. The defense stood on it's head and the offense never rewarded them. Winning the field position is hardly relevant if you can't turn a short field into points.

I'm not saying air it out. Again, we don't have the personell to do that, but running out of the I formation on first and second down isn't going to work with our offensive line. We need to be creative and get the ball into space for Sherm, Smith, Willis, and Hilliman.

Ha, of course the offensive game plan played a part in FSU scoring seven. If you don't understand that there is too much ground to make up to explain. That doesn't take away from the defense's effort, it just means they didn't put the defense in a bad spot with turnovers (until the 4th), they regularly turned the field and they chewed clock and the defense got to sit occasionally.

Also, "now" is not an option. During the game at what point during the game do you give up on the game plan and put it in wades hands? Which would be necessary by any playcalling adjustment I can think of.

We know how the game turned out, but it is hardly a stretch to think a more aggressive offensive game plan could have resulted in a much larger FSU lead early and no possibility for the upset in the fourth quarter.

Personally I'll take a Logan over a Daz 10 times of 10, but it doesn't mean this was a bad plan even though it didn't work.

[footer20]

When it comes to playcalling, I don't think anyone here is saying that that is why we lost.

What people are upset with, is that the play calling was rarely innovative. When you are seriously outmatched, you can't just stick with the halfback dives and play action passes on third down.You need to get creative. We didn't even attempt to until the drive that resulted in the Hilliman fumble (which was the most vanilla 2nd and 12 play call ever).

The play calling isn't why we didn't score, but it sure is frustrating to watch us try the same run-run-pass-punt shit when it's obviously not working.

At what point should they change the game plan that was a large part of the reason FSU hadn't scored?

Now. WE SCORED ZERO POINTS. You cannot win with 0 points.

Are you trying to say that the offensive play-calling played a part in why FSU only scored 7 points on offense? Because it absolutely did not. The defense stood on it's head and the offense never rewarded them. Winning the field position is hardly relevant if you can't turn a short field into points.

I'm not saying air it out. Again, we don't have the personell to do that, but running out of the I formation on first and second down isn't going to work with our offensive line. We need to be creative and get the ball into space for Sherm, Smith, Willis, and Hilliman.

Ha, of course the offensive game plan played a part in FSU scoring seven. If you don't understand that there is too much ground to make up to explain. That doesn't take away from the defense's effort, it just means they didn't put the defense in a bad spot with turnovers (until the 4th), they regularly turned the field and they chewed clock and the defense got to sit occasionally.

Also, "now" is not an option. During the game at what point during the game do you give up on the game plan and put it in wades hands? Which would be necessary by any playcalling adjustment I can think of.

We know how the game turned out, but it is hardly a stretch to think a more aggressive offensive game plan could have resulted in a much larger FSU lead early and no possibility for the upset in the fourth quarter.

Personally I'll take a Logan over a Daz 10 times of 10, but it doesn't mean this was a bad plan even though it didn't work.

So you're okay with a gameplan that just makes sure we lose by less?

I understand that keeping the defense off the field is to their advantage but at the end of the day, you need points. And to counter your argument, you can absolutely keep it on the ground and keep the chains moving and keep the clock ticking and still be creative. We were pretty creative last year. We had at least two running options on almost every play and the threat of the read option even allowed to Bordner to get open on some of those play-action passes. The play-calling in last year's USC game was great. Creativity does not mean trick plays and passes only. It means expanding the dimensions of your team so that you are less predictable. Last night, we didn't have a chance of scoring without thinking outside of the box.

[eepstein0]

When it comes to playcalling, I don't think anyone here is saying that that is why we lost.

What people are upset with, is that the play calling was rarely innovative. When you are seriously outmatched, you can't just stick with the halfback dives and play action passes on third down.You need to get creative. We didn't even attempt to until the drive that resulted in the Hilliman fumble (which was the most vanilla 2nd and 12 play call ever).

The play calling isn't why we didn't score, but it sure is frustrating to watch us try the same run-run-pass-punt shit when it's obviously not working.

At what point should they change the game plan that was a large part of the reason FSU hadn't scored?

Now. WE SCORED ZERO POINTS. You cannot win with 0 points.

Are you trying to say that the offensive play-calling played a part in why FSU only scored 7 points on offense? Because it absolutely did not. The defense stood on it's head and the offense never rewarded them. Winning the field position is hardly relevant if you can't turn a short field into points.

I'm not saying air it out. Again, we don't have the personell to do that, but running out of the I formation on first and second down isn't going to work with our offensive line. We need to be creative and get the ball into space for Sherm, Smith, Willis, and Hilliman.

Ha, of course the offensive game plan played a part in FSU scoring seven. If you don't understand that there is too much ground to make up to explain. That doesn't take away from the defense's effort, it just means they didn't put the defense in a bad spot with turnovers (until the 4th), they regularly turned the field and they chewed clock and the defense got to sit occasionally.

Also, "now" is not an option. During the game at what point during the game do you give up on the game plan and put it in wades hands? Which would be necessary by any playcalling adjustment I can think of.

We know how the game turned out, but it is hardly a stretch to think a more aggressive offensive game plan could have resulted in a much larger FSU lead early and no possibility for the upset in the fourth quarter.

Personally I'll take a Logan over a Daz 10 times of 10, but it doesn't mean this was a bad plan even though it didn't work.

So you're okay with a gameplan that just makes sure we lose by less?

I understand that keeping the defense off the field is to their advantage but at the end of the day, you need points. And to counter your argument, you can absolutely keep it on the ground and keep the chains moving and keep the clock ticking and still be creative. We were pretty creative last year. We had at least two running options on almost every play and the threat of the read option even allowed to Bordner to get open on some of those play-action passes. The play-calling in last year's USC game was great. Creativity does not mean trick plays and passes only. It means expanding the dimensions of your team so that you are less predictable. Last night, we didn't have a chance of scoring without thinking outside of the box.

We ran the same damn plays last night that we did against USC. 9903 is 100% right here depressingly.

[eepstein0]

I agree with the general consensus that Smith has the higher ceiling. But he' sheen on campus for only a few months. How well does he know the playbook? That's not a knock on him, most kids are still figuring out the Newton shuttle at this point. It's easy to see his speed and say "just run the Murphy offense", but this kid has to run the team. I think that the kid has great speed and want to believe that he'll add some life to a listless offense. But with our OL, I'm not sure he'll last the full season.

This. When Smith came in last night he didn't know the play book. Smith had a 3rd and 2 on his first drive last night and BC had to take a time out with 8 minutes left to avoid a delay of game. What you might not have seen on TV, but everyone in the stadium witnessed was Smith literally shrugging his shoulders as the play was called in from the side line. He had no idea what play the coaches wanted to run. By the time he got it, or they switched to something he did know, it was too late.

My guess, that was probably a big part of why he was pulled and Flutie finished the game.

Daz is always talking about the QB needing to first and foremost, "manage the game." I expect Flutie to start next week.

In defense of Smith, the idiots calling in the plays weren't doing it correctly all night. I wouldn't extrapolate one play and say Smith doesn't know the playbook, unless you have some source around the time telling you differently.

Smith ran plenty of different plays in the Howard game just fine.

[hansen]

A lot of people going full retard in this thread.

Simple facts are these:

1. OL can't pass block
2. WRs aren't talented enough to quickly create separation given fact 1
3. Given 1 and 2, not even Matt Ryan could effectively pass with this team
4. Our defense is really good (held the #9 team to 7 points).

I'm on board resorting to last year's playbook with preferably Smith. If Daz can fix one, then possibly other options open up. Bottom line we need to win games and we should maximize our strengths (running the ball and playing tough D). People might not like it but it is what is.

[DuxEagle26]

When it comes to playcalling, I don't think anyone here is saying that that is why we lost.

What people are upset with, is that the play calling was rarely innovative. When you are seriously outmatched, you can't just stick with the halfback dives and play action passes on third down.You need to get creative. We didn't even attempt to until the drive that resulted in the Hilliman fumble (which was the most vanilla 2nd and 12 play call ever).

The play calling isn't why we didn't score, but it sure is frustrating to watch us try the same run-run-pass-punt shit when it's obviously not working.

At what point should they change the game plan that was a large part of the reason FSU hadn't scored?

Now. WE SCORED ZERO POINTS. You cannot win with 0 points.

Are you trying to say that the offensive play-calling played a part in why FSU only scored 7 points on offense? Because it absolutely did not. The defense stood on it's head and the offense never rewarded them. Winning the field position is hardly relevant if you can't turn a short field into points.

I'm not saying air it out. Again, we don't have the personell to do that, but running out of the I formation on first and second down isn't going to work with our offensive line. We need to be creative and get the ball into space for Sherm, Smith, Willis, and Hilliman.

Ha, of course the offensive game plan played a part in FSU scoring seven. If you don't understand that there is too much ground to make up to explain. That doesn't take away from the defense's effort, it just means they didn't put the defense in a bad spot with turnovers (until the 4th), they regularly turned the field and they chewed clock and the defense got to sit occasionally.

Also, "now" is not an option. During the game at what point during the game do you give up on the game plan and put it in wades hands? Which would be necessary by any playcalling adjustment I can think of.

We know how the game turned out, but it is hardly a stretch to think a more aggressive offensive game plan could have resulted in a much larger FSU lead early and no possibility for the upset in the fourth quarter.

Personally I'll take a Logan over a Daz 10 times of 10, but it doesn't mean this was a bad plan even though it didn't work.

So you're okay with a gameplan that just makes sure we lose by less?

I understand that keeping the defense off the field is to their advantage but at the end of the day, you need points. And to counter your argument, you can absolutely keep it on the ground and keep the chains moving and keep the clock ticking and still be creative. We were pretty creative last year. We had at least two running options on almost every play and the threat of the read option even allowed to Bordner to get open on some of those play-action passes. The play-calling in last year's USC game was great. Creativity does not mean trick plays and passes only. It means expanding the dimensions of your team so that you are less predictable. Last night, we didn't have a chance of scoring without thinking outside of the box.

We ran the same damn plays last night that we did against USC. 9903 is 100% right here depressingly.

The first three quarters showed no effort to do anything creative, then when the 4th started daz got his head out of his ass and thought "oh shit, maybe I should call some interesting plays now." At that point, the plays that would have been unexpected early in the game became expected. Daz had absolutely no sense of aggression, urgency, or strategy at all last night. TEXTBOOK example of playing not to lose

[footer20]

When it comes to playcalling, I don't think anyone here is saying that that is why we lost.

What people are upset with, is that the play calling was rarely innovative. When you are seriously outmatched, you can't just stick with the halfback dives and play action passes on third down.You need to get creative. We didn't even attempt to until the drive that resulted in the Hilliman fumble (which was the most vanilla 2nd and 12 play call ever).

The play calling isn't why we didn't score, but it sure is frustrating to watch us try the same run-run-pass-punt shit when it's obviously not working.

At what point should they change the game plan that was a large part of the reason FSU hadn't scored?

Now. WE SCORED ZERO POINTS. You cannot win with 0 points.

Are you trying to say that the offensive play-calling played a part in why FSU only scored 7 points on offense? Because it absolutely did not. The defense stood on it's head and the offense never rewarded them. Winning the field position is hardly relevant if you can't turn a short field into points.

I'm not saying air it out. Again, we don't have the personell to do that, but running out of the I formation on first and second down isn't going to work with our offensive line. We need to be creative and get the ball into space for Sherm, Smith, Willis, and Hilliman.

Ha, of course the offensive game plan played a part in FSU scoring seven. If you don't understand that there is too much ground to make up to explain. That doesn't take away from the defense's effort, it just means they didn't put the defense in a bad spot with turnovers (until the 4th), they regularly turned the field and they chewed clock and the defense got to sit occasionally.

Also, "now" is not an option. During the game at what point during the game do you give up on the game plan and put it in wades hands? Which would be necessary by any playcalling adjustment I can think of.

We know how the game turned out, but it is hardly a stretch to think a more aggressive offensive game plan could have resulted in a much larger FSU lead early and no possibility for the upset in the fourth quarter.

Personally I'll take a Logan over a Daz 10 times of 10, but it doesn't mean this was a bad plan even though it didn't work.

So you're okay with a gameplan that just makes sure we lose by less?

I understand that keeping the defense off the field is to their advantage but at the end of the day, you need points. And to counter your argument, you can absolutely keep it on the ground and keep the chains moving and keep the clock ticking and still be creative. We were pretty creative last year. We had at least two running options on almost every play and the threat of the read option even allowed to Bordner to get open on some of those play-action passes. The play-calling in last year's USC game was great. Creativity does not mean trick plays and passes only. It means expanding the dimensions of your team so that you are less predictable. Last night, we didn't have a chance of scoring without thinking outside of the box.

We ran the same damn plays last night that we did against USC. 9903 is 100% right here depressingly.

We ran like 15/20 direct handoffs to backs and only 5 actual read options. That is not the same as last year. Yes, we tried the reverse option once each game to different results but to say we were as creative yesterday as USC last year is simply nonsense. There was barely an attempt to even deceive the defense. I guess that's more because Wade can't run the read like Tyler but regardless, there wasn't a creative playcall in the first 45 minutes.

To get back to my older point, THIS ISN'T WHY WE LOST. I just don't see how you all find this type of conservative bullshit at home against a top 10 team perfectly acceptable. Is it because of the personnel? Is it because it was a moral victory? Because that game was winnable if we made a couple of plays, and we weren't going to make those plays running out of the I on 2nd and 9.

[StratEagle]

We are stuck with the deep sea offense for the long haul.

[DuxEagle26]

I just don't see how you all find this type of conservative bullshit at home against a top 10 team perfectly acceptable.

THIS THIS THIS, can't understand how people on here can accept the fact that our coach won't even attempt to move the ball 40 yards into field goal range with 2 minutes left in the half, won't pass on a first down, and won't show any sign that he actually wants to WIN...rather than the old "eh lets just make sure we don't lose by too much" mentality.

[gallopingghost]

I just don't see how you all find this type of conservative bullshit at home against a top 10 team perfectly acceptable.

THIS THIS THIS, can't understand how people on here can accept the fact that our coach won't even attempt to move the ball 40 yards into field goal range with 2 minutes left in the half, won't pass on a first down, and won't show any sign that he actually wants to WIN...rather than the old "eh lets just make sure we don't lose by too much" mentality.

This and some more this. I blame Ryan Day. I f we could just get rid of him, the offense would be way more dynamic....oh wait.

[QuailMan]

No. I'm describing the game that actually happened last night.

And we didn't score and lost

[RegalBCeagle]

I just don't see how you all find this type of conservative bullshit at home against a top 10 team perfectly acceptable.

THIS THIS THIS, can't understand how people on here can accept the fact that our coach won't even attempt to move the ball 40 yards into field goal range with 2 minutes left in the half, won't pass on a first down, and won't show any sign that he actually wants to WIN...rather than the old "eh lets just make sure we don't lose by too much" mentality.

This was the Howard effect. When you score at will running vanilla (against a quality team like Howard), it has to work vs FSU, right?

[janebc]

With our failure to move the ball, combined with the reappearance of on the field, I think I experienced a PTSD-related flashback last night.

[MaxxPower325]

Can someone explain why Flutie didn't pitch the ball?

While I agree that he definitely should have pitched it, the better question might be, why was Hilliman out there instead of Willis or Outlow? Hilliman wasn't getting that 1st down either.

I have a problem with the personnel choices, especially at RB, quite a bit. Dudeck too: he was never getting open in that game. Better off sending Yiadom out there to sprint down the field 30 times: at least someone would have to cover him!

[eagle9903]

I just don't see how you all find this type of conservative bullshit at home against a top 10 team perfectly acceptable.

THIS THIS THIS, can't understand how people on here can accept the fact that our coach won't even attempt to move the ball 40 yards into field goal range with 2 minutes left in the half, won't pass on a first down, and won't show any sign that he actually wants to WIN...rather than the old "eh lets just make sure we don't lose by too much" mentality.

Putting a td + home dog which has some key talent deficiencies in a position to win late does not equal making "sure we don't lose by too much"

I was not happy with the final series of the first half, but the Taylor injury makes it less offensive.

[eagle9903]

Can someone explain why Flutie didn't pitch the ball?

While I agree that he definitely should have pitched it, the better question might be, why was Hilliman out there instead of Willis or Outlow? Hilliman wasn't getting that 1st down either.

I have a problem with the personnel choices, especially at RB, quite a bit. Dudeck too: he was never getting open in that game. Better off sending Yiadom out there to sprint down the field 30 times: at least someone would have to cover him!

I very much agree on the personnel choices

[twballgame9]

When it comes to playcalling, I don't think anyone here is saying that that is why we lost.

What people are upset with, is that the play calling was rarely innovative. When you are seriously outmatched, you can't just stick with the halfback dives and play action passes on third down.You need to get creative. We didn't even attempt to until the drive that resulted in the Hilliman fumble (which was the most vanilla 2nd and 12 play call ever).

The play calling isn't why we didn't score, but it sure is frustrating to watch us try the same run-run-pass-punt shit when it's obviously not working.

At what point should they change the game plan that was a large part of the reason FSU hadn't scored?

Now. WE SCORED ZERO POINTS. You cannot win with 0 points.

Are you trying to say that the offensive play-calling played a part in why FSU only scored 7 points on offense? Because it absolutely did not. The defense stood on it's head and the offense never rewarded them. Winning the field position is hardly relevant if you can't turn a short field into points.

I'm not saying air it out. Again, we don't have the personell to do that, but running out of the I formation on first and second down isn't going to work with our offensive line. We need to be creative and get the ball into space for Sherm, Smith, Willis, and Hilliman.

Ha, of course the offensive game plan played a part in FSU scoring seven. If you don't understand that there is too much ground to make up to explain. That doesn't take away from the defense's effort, it just means they didn't put the defense in a bad spot with turnovers (until the 4th), they regularly turned the field and they chewed clock and the defense got to sit occasionally.

Also, "now" is not an option. During the game at what point during the game do you give up on the game plan and put it in wades hands? Which would be necessary by any playcalling adjustment I can think of.

We know how the game turned out, but it is hardly a stretch to think a more aggressive offensive game plan could have resulted in a much larger FSU lead early and no possibility for the upset in the fourth quarter.

Personally I'll take a Logan over a Daz 10 times of 10, but it doesn't mean this was a bad plan even though it didn't work.

So you're okay with a gameplan that just makes sure we lose by less?

I understand that keeping the defense off the field is to their advantage but at the end of the day, you need points. And to counter your argument, you can absolutely keep it on the ground and keep the chains moving and keep the clock ticking and still be creative. We were pretty creative last year. We had at least two running options on almost every play and the threat of the read option even allowed to Bordner to get open on some of those play-action passes. The play-calling in last year's USC game was great. Creativity does not mean trick plays and passes only. It means expanding the dimensions of your team so that you are less predictable. Last night, we didn't have a chance of scoring without thinking outside of the box.

We ran the same damn plays last night that we did against USC. 9903 is 100% right here depressingly.

The first three quarters showed no effort to do anything creative, then when the 4th started daz got his head out of his ass and thought "oh shit, maybe I should call some interesting plays now." At that point, the plays that would have been unexpected early in the game became expected. Daz had absolutely no sense of aggression, urgency, or strategy at all last night. TEXTBOOK example of playing not to lose

That's also right about the time he got his QB broken

[twballgame9]

The Island of Misfit ATL fans think Flutie needs to start because we need the better thrower in there, as the running QB got hurt and the other running QB will get hurt. No joke, they think Flutie is a passing QB and that Wade got hurt because of the running offense.

[mod6A]

The Island of Misfit ATL fans think Flutie needs to start because we need the better thrower in there, as the running QB got hurt and the other running QB will get hurt. No joke, they think Flutie is a passing QB and that Wade got hurt because of the running offense.

"Flutie Now. Flutie Forever!" ???

[ILikeBC]

I maintain that Flutie should start for now because he actually knows the playbook. Jeff Smith may very well be a half decent passer, but if he doesn't know anything other than a read option package we will get destroy.

Flutie can essentially run the entire offense except the read option. Smith is the exact opposite. Even though Smith is 100x faster and has a brighter future, I want him to spend a few weeks getting acclimated in practice before he starts.

[claver2010]

where did this smith and the playbook story come from?

[IgnacioA26er]

I maintain that Flutie should start for now because he actually knows the playbook. Jeff Smith may very well be a half decent passer, but if he doesn't know anything other than a read option package we will get destroy.

Flutie can essentially run the entire offense except the read option. Smith is the exact opposite. Even though Smith is 100x faster and has a brighter future, I want him to spend a few weeks getting acclimated in practice before he starts.

As much as it pains me because I really want to see Smith play, this is the right course of action. You could tell Smith looked lost out there. Granted we aren't playing FSU every game, but NIU looked pretty good yesterday and I just don't think Smith is ready for real game action yet. Give him a few more weeks of practice and get him up to speed before throwing him to the hounds. But damn is he fast...

[StratEagle]

He should pick up the playbook pretty quick since the only plays in it are dive left and dive right

[eagle9903]

where did this smith and the playbook story come from?

Mack brown

[twballgame9]

Flutie may know the playbook but so does Todd Fitch. And you wouldn't want Fitch playing QB.

Well I would prefer him to Flutie.