Clarification: The pick 6 against KSU (Not on Heupel)

[thecrimsoncrusader]

There are so many other factors, it's hard to say for sure. LJ also lost the services of Murray and I think Hanna going from '10 to '11, and it's hard to discount that. Hanna may not have been all world for us, but he was the last TE to have a big role in our offense (and he was good enough to make the NFL). I don't need to say how important DM was.

But he also didn't really improve in his final year either (2012).

[BoulderSooner79]

But he also didn't really improve in his final year either (2012).

I'm not disagreeing, just saying there are lots of factors. The entire '12 team was not as good as the '10 or (pre-injury fest) '11 teams.

[PalmBeachSooner]

I will counter with knowing his level of experience at this point it's a play with more risk than reward and shouldn't have been called. Yes, Trevor made the wrong read, and the KSU player made a great play on it. That's what Snyder teams do: they force you into mistakes and then capitalize on them.

I agree. I don't think you need to put TK in that situation. He isn't going to keep it, and we are ignoring what KSU's front seven was showing.

I certainly believe Neal didn't help is QB. He made no effort whatsoever on that play. He has a responsibility to read the defense just as much as TK does on that play. He pretty much stood there and watched.

I think Neal is the poster-child for this team when it comes to effort and execution. With a few exceptions they are inconsistent when it comes to effort and execution.

[BermudaSooner]

Now we know how the Corn fans felt when we picked their pocket for 6 deep in their own end in Norman and we went on to a record 1st quarter.

There's no justifying an offensive staff that calls that play deep in our own territory w/o coaching-up the QB to not throw it if the defender is right there.
If our QB threw it anyway after being coached-up to not do it under those conditions, then he should've been on the pine a minimum of 1 series to think about it before we put him back in. I don't give a damn if the QB is AA and the BU is a pimple faced frosh and it forces us to run 3 up the middle for no gain, that is just not acceptable.
Reeks of sub-par coaching and/or lack of discipline, imo.
Also, I could see it and excuse it if it was some type of great play by the defender, but defensive back just looked up and it was an easy gift 6.
The TCU pick 6 was different, in that it was a very very good stretch and catch play by their defender.


I guess on the bright side, it was a perfect strike, not high and not a gopher killer.

If you sit TK, then we probably don't have the drive all the way down the field for a TD that happened right after that play.

[BoulderSooner79]

If you sit TK, then we probably don't have the drive all the way down the field for a TD that happened right after that play.

This exactly! It was no fluke we went down the field and scored on 3 plays following the pick 6. Josh opened the playbook in order to both respond with points, and to re-inflate TK's confidence. You can claim we might have had that drive w/o the pick 6, but that's unknowable -- I'll just claim with certainty that the pick 6 changed our plan for the next possession and it worked out for us. And TK was sharp the rest of the game.

That's why the 1st and goal at the 4 series irked me the most. You can recover from things that happen early in the game. But in that last series, we knew it could well be our last possession and it turned out that way. We had to get points and even though we had to keep the FG available (sigh), a TD was far preferable given the time remaining. Running into a goal line defense 3 times to prove our diks were bigger smacked of low IQ football.

[BoulderSooner79]

I agree. I don't think you need to put TK in that situation. He isn't going to keep it, and we are ignoring what KSU's front seven was showing.

I certainly believe Neal didn't help is QB. He made no effort whatsoever on that play. He has a responsibility to read the defense just as much as TK does on that play. He pretty much stood there and watched.

I think Neal is the poster-child for this team when it comes to effort and execution. With a few exceptions they are inconsistent when it comes to effort and execution.

I can't comment on Neal's effort in general as I haven't watched him closely. But it was certainly poor execution on that play. He made no attempt to create separation on that route. No juke inside and especially, no drive downfield to try to get the corner to turn his hips or at least force him to stop looking at TK. It was just a lazy, rounded off out pattern that allowed the DB to cover him and watch TK at the same time. Hope that's not the way it was drawn up.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Not sure how anyone would assume that if TK did pump fake that Neal would break off his route up field anyway.

[BoulderSooner79]

Not sure how anyone would assume that if TK did pump fake that Neal would break off his route up field anyway.

I don't either. And I'm not assuming that if my posts implied as much. I would have liked to see a crisper out route on that play and maybe the DB has to start back pedaling. The option I would have expected from TK would be to see the DB has inside position and just air mail the ball high and out of bounds and hope the next play works better.

[TheUnnamedSooner]

Not sure how anyone would assume that if TK did pump fake that Neal would break off his route up field anyway.

You're right. Neal probably would have been faked out as well.

[8timechamps]

8x, you are a loyal fan and you give all of us great insight and info on this board. I just feel like there are 10 other plays that wouldn't have resulted in a pick. With the cb pressing doesn't the play seem even more I'll-advised? I mean , a 30 yard pass across the field with a cb salivating at the prospect of jumping the route? You know way more than me so if I'm off base, fill me in.

I'm sure there are plays that would have had a better outcome, but when you start talking about that, you're entering the "It's a great call if it works, it's a terrible call if it doesn't" area.

The corner is lined up in soft coverage, he doesn't jump the route until after the snap, and it's a aggressive/risky play because he was "all in". If TK reads his press, then Neal takes the out and up for a TD. It was just a mistake. Like I said above, even the most veteran players make mistakes, and that was TK's for the day.

Any pass in that area can be risky, which is why Heupel called the option. Ultimately, there's no magic play call there, but I think the call was fine. It just wasn't executed.

I don't give Heupel a pass when he makes bad calls (or has a bad game), but this wasn't one of those situations. The Neal interception and series of plays at the goal line (at the end of the game) were questionable (at best), but overall I thought this was one of Heupel's best games.

[8timechamps]

Here is why the play-call was bad:

On the play before, as per usual, the play was late in terms of getting called in and as per usual, the coaching staff had to call a time-out. As the whistle blew, Knight received the snap and immediately turned toward the receiver he was going to throw to including being in the throwing motion before hanging into the ball since the whistle blew.

After the time-out, OU is in the exact same formation with the same snap count. So soon as the ball was snapped, once again, Knight turned his head towards Neal this time and the corner jumped the route, which resulted in a pick six.

What OU should have done is the same thing they did two previous times successfully this season when very deep in their own territory (i.e. near the goal line) and go deep. KSU's defense was playing in tight expecting either a short pass or a run play, which is typical in the scenario, so a big play down field was there to be made.

Knight needed to be smarter there, but given the scenario that happened prior to this play, the end result was definitely on Josh Heupel.

I don't understand how people can continue to put the blame on Heupel for that play.

TK has the option to hand off the football (or keep it himself). Hell, he didn't even progress through his reads, he was going to Neal before the ball was snapped. How is that on Heupel?

I know there are plenty of folks unsatisfied with JH, and there's plenty of evidence to back up that criticism, but pointing at this play as being a bad play call seems off base to me. If the play works, nobody gives it a second thought. Nobody.

[8timechamps]

Not sure how anyone would assume that if TK did pump fake that Neal would break off his route up field anyway.

I'm assuming Neal knows how to play the position (granted, that could be a bad assumption). We coach it in high school, so I'm assuming it's coached at OU, but when the safety on your side commits to the middle of the field (or the run), and the corner presses down, it's an automatic 'go' if the initial route isn't there. At that point, you're in one-on-one coverage, with the CB a step behind. It may not always lead to a TD, but it should always be in the WR's mind.

[8timechamps]

Which is why I wonder if TK is even being given the option of going through multiple reads/options or if JH is simply telling him where to go with it prior to the play.

The only time he doesn't have the option available is when the call is a give to the RB. Since we run from the pistol the majority of time, it looks just like a zone read, but there's never an option for TK to keep the ball. On the run/pass option, TK always has the option to hand off or pass. In fact, we've run that same play in every game this year, and quite a few times against KSU.

Even Cody Thomas ran the play (it resulted in a pass to Shepard). It's not a difficult play, and it's certainly not too complex for Knight. For whatever reason, he didn't see the CB sitting on the route and threw the ball. Just a mistake. Nothing more, nothing less.

[BoulderSooner79]

I'm sure there are plays that would have had a better outcome, but when you start talking about that, you're entering the "It's a great call if it works, it's a terrible call if it doesn't" area.

Yep. Every single play presents risk the other team will score whether your team is on offense, defense or ST. This play is being picked on because of the outcome. I'm sure there are many other plays we ran with higher than average turnover risk, but it didn't happen so it's not questioned. There are definitely plays that I question such as coaches opting to go for 2 too early in the game. But execute it well and convert the 2 points is the best way to cover up a questionable decision.

[8timechamps]

Yep. Every single play presents risk the other team will score whether your team is on offense, defense or ST. This play is being picked on because of the outcome. I'm sure there are many other plays we ran with higher than average turnover risk, but it didn't happen so it's not questioned. There are definitely plays that I question such as coaches opting to go for 2 too early in the game. But execute it well and convert the 2 points is the best way to cover up a questionable decision.

That's why the OC position at OU is almost a 'no-win' position. It's probably that way at every program.

When we used Neal to throw the TD against TCU (or WVU, can't remember), I thought "what a great call!". When we used him last week, I thought "what a terrible call!". The truth is, all calls that result in gains are "good", and the ones that don't work are "bad". That's just how we, as fans, view these things. 20/20 hindsight is great that way.

[cvsooner]

That's why the OC position at OU is almost a 'no-win' position. It's probably that way at every program.

When we used Neal to throw the TD against TCU (or WVU, can't remember), I thought "what a great call!". When we used him last week, I thought "what a terrible call!". The truth is, all calls that result in gains are "good", and the ones that don't work are "bad". That's just how we, as fans, view these things. 20/20 hindsight is great that way.

West Virginia.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I griped about it against WV also.. I don't like putting the ball in someone else's hands in the RZ..Middle of the field? sure..

The only reason the WV made more sense is that the QB play wasn't as good as it was Saturday.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Where I differ after talking with some former players is putting the blame on JH when 4 people are involved in the play call process..Too many IMO.

[BoulderSooner79]

I griped about it against WV also.. I don't like putting the ball in someone else's hands in the RZ..Middle of the field? sure..

The only reason the WV made more sense is that the QB play wasn't as good as it was Saturday.

Funny, that's exactly how I felt about that play against WVU. Meh, but okay it worked. I was less critical against KSU because it was farther out, but not far enough - agree, it should be near the middle of the field where it's clear they were fooled or not.

But don't get me wrong, I do like gadget plays and think they serve a good purpose outside pure entertainment. They must be used sparingly and in the right situation, not just because it was practiced that week.

[BoulderSooner79]

Where I differ after talking with some former players is putting the blame on JH when 4 people are involved in the play call process..Too many IMO.

4 people !? During the actual game? That's crazy.