re: This being an interception was wildly disappointing

The reason, and part of what I saw on Saturday night, is he was late on the throw. He did a poor job of anticipating receivers being open and throwing quickly when they were open. This pass should have been an easy TD but he waited and then also underthrew it to the inside. I also agree that it does matter because you have to be able to hit receivers when they are that open and that pass would have either created an easy TD or a tackle inside of the 20 for a big play! Hopefully he fixes this issue as the season goes on but I don't know why you can't bring up the fact that he struggled or the offense as a whole struggled Saturday.

quote:

---

I mean, I probably would have said the same thing a couple of weeks ago but at this point he’s completing 44% of his passes >10 yards downfield. That’s #11 of 16 starters on the SEC.

---

We can definitely agree that the pass to Barion Brown against Clemson should have been a touchdown. So that would increase his %, hes also had a few other passes downfield that should have been caught whether by Zavion or Kyle Parker. I am not a big completion % guy because of all the factors. However, I will say this Nuss had his worst game where he missed open receivers in his reads, and open receivers with his throws. Nuss doesn't under throw receivers and drift the ball inside. That is not how he usually misses on deep passes.

In 2/3 games if his completion % on downfield passes is still 44% then we can revisit this but if Parker and Zavion catch their passes and Brown and Nuss connect on the 3 passes between Clemson and La Tech its a completely different story.

quote:

---

I keep seeing this. But nobody gives examples.

---

When Zavion lines up at single receiver side he is running 2 routes. Drag or whip.

When Zavion lines up in the backfield its counter or outside zone.

When the offense lines up in pistol its outside zone.

Would you like me to keep going? Tendencies are a big thing in scouting/self scouting. Thats why good offensive coordinators try to make everything look the same so you can't diagnose the play based on formation, alignment, player rotation, etc. We got into trouble against it to start 2023 and last year in the middle/end of season and now to start the season our tendecies are making it easier on the defense to diagnoes the play. Mainly from player alignment/formation.

Clemson was a great play calling game. But we became predictable late in that game when we tried to go to the well 1 more time with Zavion in the backfield. That rolled over to last week. They are going to have to either sequence some plays off that look without giving Zavion the ball or start to use Zavion in the backfield more with a normal offense so the tendencies are broken.

quote:

---

I’m not a big “secret playbook” guy.

However, it seems clear to me that they’re setting up other plays off of the looks you mentioned. Especially the counters to Thomas on motion into the backfield. Also the quad WR looks.

Some of those tendencies are just way too obvious for me to believe they aren’t setting up some sort of twist. I can totally understand why we wouldn’t want to put our other options from those looks on tape against Louisiana Tech.

I’m sure opposing DC’s will be expecting some sort of trickery on those plays moving forward. So it’ll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

---

I hope you are right but with how bad our tendencies were last year and against Tech I am not confident that we will break tendencies and be unpredictable this year with our offense. But if we want to be in the Playoff we need to be a very unpredictable offense that doesn't give away plays based on formation or tendencies.