• 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!

Louisville Game Review / Clemson Game Week Thread

D

Deac94

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
3,365
Reaction score
459
LOUISVILLE GAME SUMMARY

The first and second half were completely different games.

In the first half, Wake won the turnover margin 3-1, the defense held Louisville to only two explosive plays, and the offense kept Louisville on the sideline with drives of 8,9,12 and 10 plays.

In the second half, Louisville won the turnover margin 1-0, generated five explosive plays on offense, and Wake’s offense couldn’t muster a drive longer than 6 plays (in fact, 7 of 9 possessions were 3 plays or less).

Wake’s total offense was 177 yards in the first half and just 37 yards in the second half.

It’s worth noting that 10 of 14 ACC teams average more than 400 yards of offense per game, however Wake has yet to break the 400-yard mark in a single game this season. Wake has been held under 350 yards of offense for five consecutive games.

Wake generated just one explosive play in the Louisville game (Wolford’s 25 yard run) and are averaging just 2.6 explosive plays per game over their last five games. The season-high remains 6 (Duke game).

RUNNING GAME

The running game is on fumes. Similar to the Virginia game, it started out well enough. 8 of the first 14 RB carries went for 3 yards or more (a success rate of 57%) and featured runs from Carney of 9 and 10 yards and runs from Colburn of 6 and 14 yards. However, only 6 of the last 20 carries gained 3 yards or more (a success rate of 30%) and only one run was longer than 4 yards (a 5 yarder by Carney).

PASSING GAME

Wake didn’t complete a pass longer than 18 yards. They spread the ball around for 9 passes longer than 10 yards (Two apiece for Lewis and Bachman, one each by Colburn, Serigne, Wade, Hines, and Carney). Bachman and Lewis were each targeted 6 times and Hines was targeted 3 times.

In the second half, the passing game gave up almost as many sacks (5) as they had completed passes (7).

DEFENSE

Brad Watson and Jessie Bates both forced critical turnovers, but it was the play of the defensive line that really stood out to me. What a great game from that group. Duke Ejiofor was simply outstanding (again), but was the only DE standout. Remember when we were worried about our DT situation? That seems like a long time ago now. Chris Stewart was excellent, and Josh Banks and Willie Yarbary also disrupted the Louisville offense.

In addition to forcing the first fumble, Brad Watson also had two very nice pass breakups.

Brandon Radcliffe’s 55-yard TD in 3Q appeared to result from Jessie Bates overplaying what he thought was going to be a Lamar Jackson run.

INJURIES

Wow. I don’t remember a time in the Clawson era where the situation was this bad. Josh Harris, Ty Hayworth, Jaboree Williams, Cameron Glenn and Ryan Janvion all missed the game (not to mention Kendall Hinton). Amari Henderson left the game in 4Q and didn’t appear to return. John Wolford suffered an ankle injury but returned. Justin Herron left the game and returned but seemed to be limited by a leg injury. Cam Serigne is likely still slowed by his hamstring injury. By the end of the game, Cortez Lewis also appeared to be struggling physically.

Nathan Gilliam played the entire game at LG. Patrick Osterhage played the entire game (mostly OC although he shifted to RG briefly when Phil Haynes left the game).

TUESDAY PRESS CONFERENCE NOTES

Janvion will miss the Clemson game. Glenn is questionable again this week. Jaboree is very likely to return for Clemson. Wolford didn’t practice on Tuesday. Clawson was hopeful that he would be able to practice on Wednesday.
 
Nice work as always, 94. I saw the BGSU game on ESPMU last night. They were using the 2 point stance, catch and shove technique that we use. The difference being that they had three 5th year seniors and two 4th year juniors. They also had really wide splits. We can't put 5 OLs on an island and play catch and shove in the ACC. This is the crux of our offensive problem and has been for three years.
 
Last edited:
DEACS76 said:
Nice work as always, 94. I saw the BGSU game on ESPMU last night. They were using the 2 point stance, catch and shove technique that we use. The difference being that they had three 5th year seniors and two 4th year juniors. They also had really wide splits. We can't put 5 OLs on an island and play catch and shove in the ACC. This is the crux of our offensive problem and has been for three years.
Click to expand...

When we dominated the line of scrimmage in some games earlier in the season - Duke, for example - it was using this same 2-point stance. Also, the TV broadcast had a brief but interesting discussion of how our offensive line play is based on moving the linemen around the line of scrimmage to create holes. I can't remember what term they used. I've certainly noticed that many of our best running plays have come when guards or tackles have pulled. I would imagine that can be done more effectively out of a 2-point stance.

Honest question here, are there a lot of college football teams still using the three-point stance for the majority of their snaps?
 
Deac94 said:
When we dominated the line of scrimmage in some games earlier in the season - Duke, for example - it was using this same 2-point stance. Also, the TV broadcast had a brief but interesting discussion of how our offensive line play is based on moving the linemen around the line of scrimmage to create holes. I can't remember what term they used. I've certainly noticed that many of our best running plays have come when guards or tackles have pulled. I would imagine that can be done more effectively out of a 2-point stance.

Honest question here, are there a lot of college football teams still using the three-point stance for the majority of their snaps?
Click to expand...

This is completely anecdotal based on watching a game or two here and there, but it seems that a lot of teams have their guards in 3 point stances and tackles and TEs in 2 point stances.
 
I'd be curious to see our first vs. second half splits with the run game. Seems like the predictability of the attack results in less success in later parts of the game.
 
DEACS76 said:
Nice work as always, 94. I saw the BGSU game on ESPMU last night. They were using the 2 point stance, catch and shove technique that we use. The difference being that they had three 5th year seniors and two 4th year juniors. They also had really wide splits. We can't put 5 OLs on an island and play catch and shove in the ACC. This is the crux of our offensive problem and has been for three years.
Click to expand...

The biggest problem is that in the second half we were fielding all freshmen and sophomores on the offensive line against one of the nations best defensive fronts.

That being said, there's really no excuse for our poor offensive results throughout the course of the year. Personnel is still a big issue, and development will help with that, but the conservative play-calling isn't helping either. I refuse to believe that we are so under talented on the offensive side of the ball that we can't generate over 400 yards against at least SOMEBODY throughout the course of the season.
 
Last edited:
Deac94 said:
When we dominated the line of scrimmage in some games earlier in the season - Duke, for example - it was using this same 2-point stance. Also, the TV broadcast had a brief but interesting discussion of how our offensive line play is based on moving the linemen around the line of scrimmage to create holes. I can't remember what term they used. I've certainly noticed that many of our best running plays have come when guards or tackles have pulled. I would imagine that can be done more effectively out of a 2-point stance.

Honest question here, are there a lot of college football teams still using the three-point stance for the majority of their snaps?
Click to expand...

Our biggest runs vs Duke were on trap plays. I remember Hayworth flattening a LB on Cade's 55 yd TD run. Al Groh, of all people, pointed out in the 'Cuse game that the DL was putting their shoulders into the chest of our OLs. Our guys had no leverage and couldn't stop the pass rush. Army did the same. L'ville did it in the second half. The DL has his legs under him, the OL can only use his arms to push back.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I'd be curious to see our first vs. second half splits with the run game. Seems like the predictability of the attack results in less success in later parts of the game.
Click to expand...

This info from the OP comes close to what you are looking for. Instead of using the half as the split, I chose a point in mid-2nd quarter:

"8 of the first 14 RB carries went for 3 yards or more (a success rate of 57%) and featured runs from Carney of 9 and 10 yards and runs from Colburn of 6 and 14 yards. However, only 6 of the last 20 carries gained 3 yards or more (a success rate of 30%) and only one run was longer than 4 yards (a 5 yarder by Carney)."

As Deacsfan27 points out, some of this may have been attributable to the depleted offensive line. My impression is that Harris and Hayworth are Wake's best run blockers.
 
I meant for the whole season. Seems like all season our first half has out-produced our second half, other than maybe the Duke game.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I meant for the whole season. Seems like all season our first half has out-produced our second half, other than maybe the Duke game.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...what was different about the Duke game?
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I meant for the whole season. Seems like all season our first half has out-produced our second half, other than maybe the Duke game.
Click to expand...

Agree. This happened under Grobe too. The staff develops a gameplan which works for a half, and after the defense adjusts, WF doesn't have an answer. Credit for coming up with the initial wrinkle, but WF doesn't seem able to make in-game adjustments.
 
If anyone has 1 extra ticket to the game, preferably west side, please PM me.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 
Deac94 said:
When we dominated the line of scrimmage in some games earlier in the season - Duke, for example - it was using this same 2-point stance. Also, the TV broadcast had a brief but interesting discussion of how our offensive line play is based on moving the linemen around the line of scrimmage to create holes. I can't remember what term they used. I've certainly noticed that many of our best running plays have come when guards or tackles have pulled. I would imagine that can be done more effectively out of a 2-point stance.

Honest question here, are there a lot of college football teams still using the three-point stance for the majority of their snaps?
Click to expand...

This is true to an extent. The problem comes when the d-line just bull rushes the OL in a 2 pt stance. This causes them to drop some and cuts off the angle of the pulling lineman which can really blow up a play because it causes the hole to open more slowly (or not at all) and allows the backside pursuit to reach the back.
 
A few notes from the Coach’s Show:

Clawson is optimistic that Josh Harris and Ty Hayworth will be back on Saturday.

Clawson’s (brief) comments on two of the backup QBs:
Kyle Kearns has an extremely strong arm and throws the ball with a lot of velocity.
Jamie Newman has really stepped up. Big, physical and athletic.

Traveon Redd also missed the Louisville game with an injury, so Wake was actually short 3 safeties.

No mention of #WakeyLeaks
 
Deac94 said:
A few notes from the Coach’s Show:

Clawson is optimistic that Josh Harris and Ty Hayworth will be back on Saturday.

Clawson’s (brief) comments on two of the backup QBs:
Kyle Kearns has an extremely strong arm and throws the ball with a lot of velocity.
Jamie Newman has really stepped up. Big, physical and athletic.

Traveon Redd also missed the Louisville game with an injury, so Wake was actually short 3 safeties.

No mention of #WakeyLeaks
Click to expand...

Janvion is still out for this week's clem's son game but hopefully back for the BC finale.
 
So, Louisville gets creamed last night and loses any chance of a playoff birth. A Clemson loss to us would take them out of the playoff picture and out of the ACC title game. So, on scale of 1 to 10, how hard would we get screwed by the refs tomorrow night if come the 4th quarter we're leading Clemson?
 
http://www.journalnow.com/sports/co...cle_67017e42-e280-5877-b4de-3ce4144c3b0e.html

Link probably fails but W-SJ reports Friday on Dabo Swinney responding to Coach Clawson's comments that Tigers have added motivation coming off a loss. Paraphrasing, Dabo Swinney says that such talk is "sexy" and the real pressure is on the team that knows it is not very good but really needs a a win to be relevant.

Surely Ruggerio knows how to cut and pin to a bulletin board in his own house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top