• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Really Tired of Our O

8

80deacon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Messages
2,379
Reaction score
216
It has become very difficult for me to watch our offense. Comparing it to a Clemson team which could have shellaced us drawing plays in the dirt, they ran 3 times the variety of plays compared to us. QB option wide ( 2 TDs and a 1st down), double reverse in the backfield, pitch outs, screens, draws, etc.

I have no problem with the RPO as the staple O, but it is high time for it to have incorporated more variation and nuanced options.
 
Last edited:
I enjoy the offense and don’t think it’s productive to compare it to Clemson at this point.
 
Meh, we love it when we play teams of our caliber. While I'm not happy with kicking FGs down four TDs, and not going for it on 4th and 1 when we need a TD, perspective is key here.
 
80deacon said:
It has become very difficult for me to watch our offense. Comparing it to a Clemson team which could have shellaced us drawing plays in the dirt, they ran 3 times the variety of plays compared to us. QB option wide ( 2 TDs and a 1st down), double reverse in the backfield, pitch outs, screens, draws, etc.

I have no problem with the RPO as the staple O, but it is high time for it to have incorporated more variation and nuanced options.
Click to expand...


Over the last 3-4 years, our offense has put up record numbers of yards per game and scored tons of points. Our offensive scheme is fine. However the play calling within that scheme against Clemson was bad. Yesterday, it was clear that Clawson knew we couldn't compete with Clemson and they just quit- the coaches not the players. The failures to go for it on 4th and short and settling for field goals are disappointing. It's not like the loss would have been much worse. We were never in the game and never made much attempt to be in the game.
 
Easy to argue we were overly conservative at multiple points last night. Also easy to see that one of the times we did go for it on 4th and called a pass play we nearly got our QB murdered. Clemson played a borderline flawless first half against us and benefited from a couple huge no-calls and drops on our side. We needed mistakes on their side and big plays on ours and we got the opposite. A couple risky 4th down plays or heavier reliance on the passing game wasn't changing that outcome. Two years ago Laurence and Etienne were putting 44 on Alabama, so we can probably cut Clawson a little slack for the COVID opener with no fans and a messed up off-season that also saw his best receiver quit late in the process.
 
Given our offensive production the last few years against teams that don't have Clemson's talent level, I think the issue is more talent differential than scheme. We couldn't run the ball but I was very encouraged by how well we moved the ball in the air. We had opportunities to score and just didn't execute. Sam threw some great balls and the dropoff to kern isn't near as big as I thought it may be. We could have easily ended up with 20-24 points which is solid against clemson. Of course they would have left their starters in and kept scoring.

I thought we kept their running game somewhat in check - they're better than us but we made them execute rather than just running 50 yards untouched. The bigger issue to me is how easy they passed the ball. Other teams will be able to replicate that if our coverage isn't tighter.
 
LilburnDeac said:
Over the last 3-4 years, our offense has put up record numbers of yards per game and scored tons of points. Our offensive scheme is fine. However the play calling within that scheme against Clemson was bad. Yesterday, it was clear that Clawson knew we couldn't compete with Clemson and they just quit- the coaches not the players. The failures to go for it on 4th and short and settling for field goals are disappointing. It's not like the loss would have been much worse. We were never in the game and never made much attempt to be in the game.
Click to expand...

This was not a game that Wake was going to win.

Only one starter on offense yesterday was a starter in that spot a year ago. I was pleasantly surprised at the few false start penalties. Congrats to learning via walk throughs.

Clawson wasn't opening up the playbook very far. No sense in letting NCState and others know what is coming in future games.

Clawson may be trying to maximize the possibility of getting six wins, and a bowl win while perhaps looking worse than necessary in some games. It was obvious from Wake's first series on offense that the game was not being called fairly or evenly. When even the blatant, obvious pass interference wasn't called, and it was so obvious that the announcers spoke about it twice and showed it on replay, Wake was done.

ACC wants an undefeated Clemson or Notre Dame in the title game. Wake Forest isn't spoiling that scenario week 1.
 
Deaconblue said:
This was not a game that Wake was going to win.

Only one starter on offense yesterday was a starter in that spot a year ago. I was pleasantly surprised at the few false start penalties. Congrats to learning via walk throughs.

Clawson wasn't opening up the playbook very far. No sense in letting NCState and others know what is coming in future games.

Clawson may be trying to maximize the possibility of getting six wins, and a bowl win while perhaps looking worse than necessary in some games. It was obvious from Wake's first series on offense that the game was not being called fairly or evenly. When even the blatant, obvious pass interference wasn't called, and it was so obvious that the announcers spoke about it twice and showed it on replay, Wake was done.

ACC wants an undefeated Clemson or Notre Dame in the title game. Wake Forest isn't spoiling that scenario week 1.
Click to expand...
I agree with the bolded statement but an evenly called game was not going to change that. While I am enthusiastic with the team and think they can have a good season, they're not close to Clemson's level right now, especially having lost multiple key pieces from the past season. Even if the refs gave WF every borderline call, Clemson would have still likely won by 3+ TDs.
 
Deaconblue said:
This was not a game that Wake was going to win.

Only one starter on offense yesterday was a starter in that spot a year ago. I was pleasantly surprised at the few false start penalties. Congrats to learning via walk throughs.

Clawson wasn't opening up the playbook very far. No sense in letting NCState and others know what is coming in future games.

Clawson may be trying to maximize the possibility of getting six wins, and a bowl win while perhaps looking worse than necessary in some games. It was obvious from Wake's first series on offense that the game was not being called fairly or evenly. When even the blatant, obvious pass interference wasn't called, and it was so obvious that the announcers spoke about it twice and showed it on replay, Wake was done.

ACC wants an undefeated Clemson or Notre Dame in the title game. Wake Forest isn't spoiling that scenario week 1.
Click to expand...


This is all perfectly plausible. Then why bother to watch? I turned it off after the not going for it in 4th down for the second time, that set the loser tone.

Clawsen says we “competed” The only way to actually “compete” is to run the clock down consistently and keep the ball. Go for it in 4th down near midfield, and use onside kicks, anything that is a 30% plus chance of working - do. open up the play book. We did squat. Nothing. No wrinkles zero. Clawsen is a great program builder but clearly lacks imagination.
 
The offense and I think the team will be fine. To me we looked fast as a team. Not a good read judging usagainst Clemson. Not a knock on Wake but we have maybe 2 to 3 guys that would start for that program.
 
diverdeac said:
This is all perfectly plausible. Then why bother to watch? I turned it off after the not going for it in 4th down for the second time, that set the loser tone.

Clawsen says we “competed” The only way to actually “compete” is to run the clock down consistently and keep the ball. Go for it in 4th down near midfield, and use onside kicks, anything that is a 30% plus chance of working - do. open up the play book. We did squat. Nothing. No wrinkles zero. Clawsen is a great program builder but clearly lacks imagination.
Click to expand...

Agree - its year 7. Clemson knows the basic Wake offense backwards and forwards, and Wake showed it yesterday. The lack of adaptation by Clawson/Ruggierro is a little infuriating. There are still major Red zone/inside the 30 issues for this offense. The Delay RPO on 3rd and 12, not going for it on 4th and short in Clemson territory multiple times, punting from the Clemson 40.......that crap is like Grobe/Lobo never left.
 
HCF3 said:
Agree - its year 7. Clemson knows the basic Wake offense backwards and forwards, and Wake showed it yesterday. The lack of adaptation by Clawson/Ruggierro is a little infuriating. There are still major Red zone/inside the 30 issues for this offense. The Delay RPO on 3rd and 12, not going for it on 4th and short in Clemson territory multiple times, punting from the Clemson 40.......that crap is like Grobe/Lobo never left.
Click to expand...

Thank you...as just a point of clarification, I'm not really venting about the microscopics of this game, but just how it's representative of the ongoing frustration with the O. Besides Clemson, it doesn't seem to matter who we play, Tulane or BC, Duke or Utah State, App or Syracuse, we always have nailbiter wins or losses. To me, it comes down to the O being too easy to eventually figure out. It took UNC a half. Teams like BC, Duke, and Syracuse who have seen it for years, end up making games close, that by all other measurements, we should comfortably win, IMHO.
 
I make an O face when we score though!
 
Todd Blackledge was complimentary of the Wake QBs in an interview this morning. His summation - "Wake has a chance to be a good team." Whether that implies we are not there yet, who knows.
 
tagsfan said:
Todd Blackledge was complimentary of the Wake QBs in an interview this morning. His summation - "Wake has a chance to be a good team." Whether that implies we are not there yet, who knows.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think if your QB's are given time to throw, we can be really good on offense. We had guys open consistently against Clemson, Sam and company just didn't have enough opportunities to deliver the ball and we failed to catch some that they did deliver.

Kern really, really impressed me. He came in for one play when Sam got his helmet ripped off and delivered a nice ball on a slant and then when he came in after Sam got his bell rung, he really threw some nice balls. It's limited time I know, but I really like the way he delivered the football. That's a good thing because we know Sam's not going to make it through the season without getting banged up in all likelihood.
 
80deacon said:
It has become very difficult for me to watch our offense. Comparing it to a Clemson team which could have shellaced us drawing plays in the dirt, they ran 3 times the variety of plays compared to us. QB option wide ( 2 TDs and a 1st down), double reverse in the backfield, pitch outs, screens, draws, etc.

I have no problem with the RPO as the staple O, but it is high time for it to have incorporated more variation and nuanced options.
Click to expand...

Agreed the rapid base RPO we run was cool back when every other team wasn't running it. Now it is more of a negative than a positive.

Efficiency wise our offense was below average nationally last year, and it will be even worse this season. And that doesn't even factor in the injury factor nor the fatigue of our own defense.

Slow it down Clawson and maybe add a wrinkle or two. We are way too predictable.
 
BillBrasky said:
Agreed the rapid base RPO we run was cool back when every other team wasn't running it. Now it is more of a negative than a positive.

Efficiency wise our offense was below average nationally last year, and it will be even worse this season. And that doesn't even factor in the injury factor nor the fatigue of our own defense.

Slow it down Clawson and maybe add a wrinkle or two. We are way too predictable.
Click to expand...

I love Clawson, but the fact that Kendal Hinton didn't throw a pass at all last year is almost criminal. People can rag on Grobe, but at least we ran some stuff like that when he was here.
 
I am a huge Clawson fan, but if I had to criticize him in one word it would be "stubborn." He's great in nearly every aspect of leading this program, but adjusting to his personnel and/or the situation presented is his biggest weakness. I'm in total agreement that not allowing Hinton to throw was insane. We didn't even use the threat of his throwing ability. And not going for 4th and 1 a couple times was difficult to watch.

On a positive note, two of our biggest issues last year were kick coverage and short yardage. I loved the Hartman sneak play, and it's great to see kickoffs going out of the endzone.

Play Greene, Roberson, and Morin at the same time, and I won't complain for a while.
 
I think our offensive efficiency is going to be better than projected to start the year. I'm pretty optimistic about how we're going to come together on that side of the ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top