Typically try to get this out a little earlier in the week (and usually can't help but rewatch on Sunday or Monday at the latest), but didn't get a chance to rewatch the Nevada game until today due to some family travel over the long weekend.
In any event, in no particular order are my thoughts/observations after rewatching the Nevada game on DVR:
1) Hankwitz was pretty clearly anticipating more of a spread "air raid" attack than we got. I didn't realize until my rewatch that we started the game essentially in a 4-2-5 with McGee and Igwebuike at safety with Queiro playing the SAM and ran that personnel combination throughout the game. The entire scheme was to push a passing attack into the flats, leaving six and sometimes only five men in the box to face a Nevada offense that had more run than anticipated. Most of Nevada's longer runs came against a five-man box, which is always going to be tough on a defense. Once Hank had some time to digest what Nevada was doing, essentially shutting down Nevada in the second half.
2) I absolutely HATED McCall going into a one-back pro set in both "coming out" situations and in the red zone. We clearly weren't running inside very much with Nevada dedicating seven or eight men to the box, but at least we could find the edge a bit out of our normal spread. The Nevada defense got to compress even further against the single-back set, which further cut down on the lanes Jackson is so good at finding. We tried to run the pro-set stuff last year early and had to abandon it after it proved wholly ineffective. Just run your normal spread stuff, McCall.
3) That said, I think McCall called a pretty good game. While there were clearly more points on the board in the second half, the ball was moving pretty well in the first half as well (albeit with more "empty drives" with the missed chip shot and Skowronek fumble). There were more than a few timely calls (i.e. Jackson flare on third down, well-timed screens against blitzes, Skowronek's fake bubble wheel route, etc.). The same people bitching about predictable play calling would likely be complaining just the same if Jackson didn't get his touches.
4) The number of errors out of a veteran defensive back group is disappointing, especially in the first half. Missed assignments, bad eyes, peeking in the backfield, flat feet... there's really no excuse, especially given how much passing Hank clearly anticipated/prepared to face. McShepard gave up the big plays, but Hartage could have given up a handful if the ball were thrown a little better. Injuries and depth issues aside, there is PLENTY to clean up in the back half if we are going to beat the better teams on our schedule.
5) It's said a lot around here, but Jackson is good. Really good. That might have been the quietest 100-yard game I've seen in a while. Larkin showed some juice as well, flashing very good balance and vision. While I don't know anyone could "replace" Jackson, per se, Larkin was very intriguing in limited run. McGowan also had a little burst on his bubble screen.
6) Slater and Thomas did pretty well for themselves in their first starts at OT. Blocking calls should get easier against more traditional 4-3 or 3-4 teams, which could/should help the entire offensive line but especially the young guys. Still a ways to go, but was pleasantly surprised with our OL after they settled down a bit.
7) Lancaster played very well, showing good leverage for a big guy with good hands. He's going to make money playing this game. Expected a little more out of Thompson, who didn't really do much. The defensive game plan was pretty vanilla, but didn't see much out of the DEs either. Hank might have to reach into his bag of tricks sooner than he would like to generate a pass rush against better offensive lines. Interestingly Warren Long was lined up at DE in some passing situations; not sure if that was game planned against the anticipated "air raid" or a sign of more to come.
8) Absolutely loved Thorson taking over in the fourth quarter ("winning time"), standing in and delivering strikes. Showed a lot of ability and a lot of guts.
While the score was certainly closer than we would have liked, I didn't see anything against Nevada to change my thoughts on this team. Injuries at corner are worrisome, but I still think this is a very capable football team with stars at key positions. If the OL continues to gel and we get a little more out of our DL, we can play with anyone on our schedule.
In any event, in no particular order are my thoughts/observations after rewatching the Nevada game on DVR:
1) Hankwitz was pretty clearly anticipating more of a spread "air raid" attack than we got. I didn't realize until my rewatch that we started the game essentially in a 4-2-5 with McGee and Igwebuike at safety with Queiro playing the SAM and ran that personnel combination throughout the game. The entire scheme was to push a passing attack into the flats, leaving six and sometimes only five men in the box to face a Nevada offense that had more run than anticipated. Most of Nevada's longer runs came against a five-man box, which is always going to be tough on a defense. Once Hank had some time to digest what Nevada was doing, essentially shutting down Nevada in the second half.
2) I absolutely HATED McCall going into a one-back pro set in both "coming out" situations and in the red zone. We clearly weren't running inside very much with Nevada dedicating seven or eight men to the box, but at least we could find the edge a bit out of our normal spread. The Nevada defense got to compress even further against the single-back set, which further cut down on the lanes Jackson is so good at finding. We tried to run the pro-set stuff last year early and had to abandon it after it proved wholly ineffective. Just run your normal spread stuff, McCall.
3) That said, I think McCall called a pretty good game. While there were clearly more points on the board in the second half, the ball was moving pretty well in the first half as well (albeit with more "empty drives" with the missed chip shot and Skowronek fumble). There were more than a few timely calls (i.e. Jackson flare on third down, well-timed screens against blitzes, Skowronek's fake bubble wheel route, etc.). The same people bitching about predictable play calling would likely be complaining just the same if Jackson didn't get his touches.
4) The number of errors out of a veteran defensive back group is disappointing, especially in the first half. Missed assignments, bad eyes, peeking in the backfield, flat feet... there's really no excuse, especially given how much passing Hank clearly anticipated/prepared to face. McShepard gave up the big plays, but Hartage could have given up a handful if the ball were thrown a little better. Injuries and depth issues aside, there is PLENTY to clean up in the back half if we are going to beat the better teams on our schedule.
5) It's said a lot around here, but Jackson is good. Really good. That might have been the quietest 100-yard game I've seen in a while. Larkin showed some juice as well, flashing very good balance and vision. While I don't know anyone could "replace" Jackson, per se, Larkin was very intriguing in limited run. McGowan also had a little burst on his bubble screen.
6) Slater and Thomas did pretty well for themselves in their first starts at OT. Blocking calls should get easier against more traditional 4-3 or 3-4 teams, which could/should help the entire offensive line but especially the young guys. Still a ways to go, but was pleasantly surprised with our OL after they settled down a bit.
7) Lancaster played very well, showing good leverage for a big guy with good hands. He's going to make money playing this game. Expected a little more out of Thompson, who didn't really do much. The defensive game plan was pretty vanilla, but didn't see much out of the DEs either. Hank might have to reach into his bag of tricks sooner than he would like to generate a pass rush against better offensive lines. Interestingly Warren Long was lined up at DE in some passing situations; not sure if that was game planned against the anticipated "air raid" or a sign of more to come.
8) Absolutely loved Thorson taking over in the fourth quarter ("winning time"), standing in and delivering strikes. Showed a lot of ability and a lot of guts.
While the score was certainly closer than we would have liked, I didn't see anything against Nevada to change my thoughts on this team. Injuries at corner are worrisome, but I still think this is a very capable football team with stars at key positions. If the OL continues to gel and we get a little more out of our DL, we can play with anyone on our schedule.
Last edited:
