ADVERTISEMENT

Why So Many Long Passes Yesterday?

GastonLion

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2002
985
713
1
I thought that Moorhead's offense would include more short, quick passes to receivers in stride to take advantage of their speed and athleticism in the open field. I also expected more than the one shot to Barkley for the first down.
The long passes are reminiscent of last year and do nothing to sustain drives, eat clock and provide tempo to the offense.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PSU65
Kent State loaded the box. The response to that is to throw quick passes to the outside. Kent State's corners started playing tight to take away the quick outs. The response to that is go deep to take advantage of one-on-one coverage. It's distressing that the PSU WRs couldn't get better separation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc-M and PSU65
I thought that Moorhead's offense would include more short, quick passes to receivers in stride to take advantage of their speed and athleticism in the open field. I also expected more that the one shot to Barkley for the first down.
The long passes are reminiscent of last year and do nothing to sustain drives, eat clock and provide tempo to the offense.
I loved it eventually they will connect in some of them!!
 
I thought that Moorhead's offense would include more short, quick passes to receivers in stride to take advantage of their speed and athleticism in the open field. I also expected more that the one shot to Barkley for the first down.
The long passes are reminiscent of last year and do nothing to sustain drives, eat clock and provide tempo to the offense.

I buy into the thinking that we gambled with a more conservative game plan on a weaker opponent, and most of that up tempo offense is coming next week

we gave Pitt ZERO game film to study . . .
 
  • Like
Reactions: biacto
Kent State loaded the box. The response to that is to throw quick passes to the outside. Kent State's corners started playing tight to take away the quick outs. The response to that is go deep to take advantage of one-on-one coverage. It's distressing that the PSU WRs couldn't get better separation.

Our receivers have good straight line speed BUT lack "football quickness". I am surprised we did not see more of Polk, he has that quickness.
 
I thought that Moorhead's offense would include more short, quick passes to receivers in stride to take advantage of their speed and athleticism in the open field. I also expected more than the one shot to Barkley for the first down.
The long passes are reminiscent of last year and do nothing to sustain drives, eat clock and provide tempo to the offense.


Wanted to get the defense to back off the line of scrimmage. We will see the defense sit on the LOS until we can burn some teams deep.
 
Corners pressing, safeties in the box. They were basically challenging us to throw long.
 
From what I saw of Fordham's offense and Moorhead's youtube video explaining his offense, a lot appeared to be missing.
I don't know exactly why. Maybe it's not wanting to show everything. Maybe it's not having everything ready. The lack of passes to backs was an obvious omission, as were shorter, crossing routes.
 
Kent State loaded the box. The response to that is to throw quick passes to the outside. Kent State's corners started playing tight to take away the quick outs. The response to that is go deep to take advantage of one-on-one coverage. It's distressing that the PSU WRs couldn't get better separation.

Agree because Kent State loaded the box we placing at time eleven guys at the line of scrimmage. Disagree with your comment on the separation by our receivers on the deep routes. They had separation a few times, but Trace did not have the arm strength to get the ball out there on the deep stuff. His arm strength will limit this offense on the deep patterns and the long down and outs. If yesterday we played a secondary like you will see in most of the Big Ten he would have had a few picks.
 
Agree because Kent State loaded the box we placing at time eleven guys at the line of scrimmage. Disagree with your comment on the separation by our receivers on the deep routes. They had separation a few times, but Trace did not have the arm strength to get the ball out there on the deep stuff. His arm strength will limit this offense on the deep patterns and the long down and outs. If yesterday we played a secondary like you will see in most of the Big Ten he would have had a few picks.

I think if you watch the replays, it wasn't his arm strength. he wasn't setting his feet before throwing.

same thing on that easy TD throw he plunked a few feet in front of Gesicki

all coachable issues . . .
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT