Steele Jantz
- Thread starter BloodyBuddy
- Start date
You can certainly do that, or even make the LB a second read. Have the TE release to the "shallow seam" where the LB starts the play from. If the LB stays home, the TE blocks him and QB keeps. If the LB comes up to play the run, dump it to the TE at 5-7 yards. The disadvantage of the second read is that it's more mental work for the QB. The obvious advantage is that you can call a single play (zone read double option???) and always make the defense wrong until they change their strategy again. When the defense changes how they play, the straight zone read will probably start working again.
Last edited:
Well, since that "guy" was me, I clearly said that after Iowa made adjustments, and then went on to talk about the 3rd Q opportunities. It was fairly intuitive that we have been talking about the halftime adjustments Iowa made, and our lack of ability to respond offensively.
Here is what you said: "The Offense only put up 9 points, all in the 1st Q. Once Iowa adjusted, we could barely function."
Your intuition is far better than mine evidently. Although, as you pointd out, you were the author so you would know what you meant.....I think.
The problem with this is that the OL is run blocking and if the QB decided to throw the 5 -7 pass downfield to the TE there most likely will be a penalty for illegal man down field (Since the OL would be trying to run block downfield).
I will say I did like the zone-read playaction passes we ran in the first quarter. The problem I saw with the zone-read against Iowa is both RB's kept wanting to bounce the ball outside instead of turning it up and slamming it in the whole. White did this one time resulting in a loss and if he would have went up the middle there was a huge hole and most likely would have scored.
Sorry you are unfamiliar with the concept of halftime adjustments and the context of my comments.
This is why I think we missed Woody more than some posters think. I'm confident that Woody would have hit the hole rather than turned outside and at times blown open the crease for positive yardage.
I'd feel great about his performance if we played 10 more games against teams of Western Ill's calibur. Unless we do poorly against the leathernecks, I don't think anybody's stats will be that telling
Well you basically said all the production occurred in the first quarter.
Aside from that, my point is that we moved the ball really well for long stretches of the game. We were certainly more effective in the first half than the second, but to say we couldn't do anything seems to ignore the fact that we were inside 11 yards three more times after we scored all our points and that one of those was with 3 minutes left in the game.
I understand your meaning. I also understand that football teams make adjustments throughout a game, not just at halftime - well, good teams do anyway. So it wasn't as obvious what you meant to say as you make it out to be.
The point remains that someone responded to what you did say and then took a shot from another poster that he was totally wrong. Based on what you said - whether he understood what you meant - he was right and didn't deserve a shot.
----
This is all really stupid. Taken as a whole game, Jantz wasn't as good as some want to make him out to be and he wasn't as bad as others want to make him out to be. Can't we just agree that their is some reasons for hope at the QB position and some things for him to work on and call it a day?
That's kind of where I'm coming from. I'm not saying SJ is beyond reproach. But we're 2-0. SJ has the confidence of the coaching staff so that's good enough for me. Does he need to improve? Yes. Can he? Absolutely.
I just don't see the need to have a 14 page thread with what I would call hyper-critical analysis. I certainly don't see the need to suggest as some (but not all) have that JB should possibly be inserted.
It has to be a fast enough read that the linemen don't have a chance to get down field. Otherwise that is a concern. But I know it's doable because I've read about teams that do it. Linemen get what, 3 yards before being too far down field right? And on a zone scheme no one usually goes right to a LB, they at least chip on a DL before going to the second level.
And there's no reason for the RB to cut the zone read outside. With the OL zone blocking hard to the play side, often getting a double-team or two in there somewhere, if a hole doesn't open up internally there is usually a backside lane available. But trying to run outside around the end is just running into the LB who are working hard that direction to keep gap control. The RB's should know that.
bhphat - How does the TE know to look for the ball when he is trying to lay the wood to someone? Honest question.
It just seems that this will take him out of the equation blocking on the other 9 out of 10 times that they aren't looking to pass out of the zone read. It's kind of tough to be your best blocking both at the LOS and down at a LB when you are trying to see what your backs are doing.
The play action out of the ZR down field or the little ZR option we saw in the 1st Q seem to be simpler solutions than trying to pull out of the play on a read and expect a blocker to make the same read. I really liked that ZR option. I hope to see that (or a variation with a slot receiver following the QB) now and again to keep D's honest.
It just seems that this will take him out of the equation blocking on the other 9 out of 10 times that they aren't looking to pass out of the zone read. It's kind of tough to be your best blocking both at the LOS and down at a LB when you are trying to see what your backs are doing.
The play action out of the ZR down field or the little ZR option we saw in the 1st Q seem to be simpler solutions than trying to pull out of the play on a read and expect a blocker to make the same read. I really liked that ZR option. I hope to see that (or a variation with a slot receiver following the QB) now and again to keep D's honest.
The TE has to read the LB too - if the LB stays put, TE blocks him. If the LB immediately vacates the area, immediately turn and look for the ball to be in the air. It takes a lot of practice, and obviously everyone needs to make the same reads for it to work. But it's really not much different than when a QB and WR make reads based on the secondary to determine which route they'll run.
A simpler version is the "Stick-Draw" that OSU ran to perfection last year - Wheeden talked about it during Gruden's QB Camp. It's one play that's both a run and a pass. QB/WR make a read based on the defense to determine if it should be a pass, and everyone else plays it like a run up the middle. Only the QB/WR know if it will be a run or pass.
This is a good link that kind of sums everything up. There's lots more info via Google. Combining quick passes, run plays and screens in the same play | Smart Football
I was at the game & don't remember it being that windy... anyone else? Not saying I was completely sober but a little wind only hurts stuff fairly high in the air. (kicks, bombs, birds, planes, superman..you know)
You could easily game plan that, but if an OL is uncovered and the next covered lineman's guy slants away, he's getting to the next level immediately (usually). He'll more-than-chip if a covered lineman behind him tries to cross his face and stay on the block until the backside OL can control the block, then move to the 2nd level, at which point the ball has already been thrown (using your PA example). But again, you can gameplan that so that the guy doesn't immediately release downfield to avoid the penalty.
I don't really remember the path of the running back on the zone read plays, or if they varied it up a little bit, but I know that if you are running inside zone, you are really giving the RB a three way go. He presses the LOS to commit the pursuit (important, as it can force LB's to get caught up "in the wash"), then based on his vision makes one of the three choices: 1) Bounce it outside (best if the PST/E has sealed the corner), 2) Bang it up inside, or 3) Cut it back. If the RB needlessly bounced it when it should have been cutback or run inside, then he must have seen something that wasn't really there (or tried to make a play when there was none to be made).
On more of a stretch read play, where the RB's path is taking him towards the outside leg of the tackle or beyond, that's really just a two way go, as due to the path of the tailback the cutback lane is almost non-existent.
nice to hear rhoads praise the things jantz did well while not downplaying his mistakes too much and prove his trust in him... good for jantz's confidence to not have to feel like he's looking over his shoulder... also good to hear jantz knew the mistakes he made and was eager to find ways to fix them... i expect him to have a HUGE game vs western illinois..
Something that I thought was a great point from Arnaud and Kyle from Miller and Brinson this afternoon. Those long ball passes that Steele threw were actually smart throws. If your guy is deep and has beat his defender, you want to throw it long and give your WR a chance to run under it and make a play. Kyle brought out earlier that Steele threw one short and that was the PI call. Kyle brought out that if you throw that short and make your WR slow down to catch it, you run the risk of a pass breakup or and interception. Kyle and Arnaud both agreed that in those situations you want to air it out so only 2 things can potentially happen. Either your WR catches it or no one catches and you live for another offensive play.
Pretty good insight and both guys said Steele made the right call on those guys but they just didn't hook up on one and Kyle even said weather was certainly a factor in the passing game and that makes timing and accurately throwing the long ball even harder.
Pretty good insight and both guys said Steele made the right call on those guys but they just didn't hook up on one and Kyle even said weather was certainly a factor in the passing game and that makes timing and accurately throwing the long ball even harder.
