EWU Offense

[ilovethecats]

This is a totally weird misinterpretation.

For the entire season, the Cats offensive game plan has been 100% happy to go 3 and out or 6 and out and punt for field position. Especially with quality opponents like UW, WSU, and even PSU. Its a very old school football philosophy that works in certain circumstances.

You can't play for field position with EWU. You have to convert points on drives. Full stops. A punt is 100% as bad of a failure as a fumble or INT.

At the end of the game, it doesn't matter if the Cats score on explosive 70 yard runs from Mellot, a 3 play drive with 2 jump balls to McCutcheon, or 98 yards of Ifanse running between the tackles. The ONLY thing that matters is scoring. On every possible drive. "Control" is a stupid euphanism that entirely misses the point of what EWU is trying to do.

"Limiting possessions" is an equally stupid euphemism for "we just need to keep the clock running".

All those euphemisms are from coaching staffs that don't understand what football actually is in 2020 (Jamie Marshall would fit right in). Its fascinating how you dialed in on the turnover margin-which is only relevant because EWU's D strategy is focused on forcing turnovers instead of forcing punts-and ignored the 4th down conversion rate.

MSU is going to need to go for it at least 4 times on 4th down and convert 3 in order to win.

Nothing whatsoever to do with "ball control" or "limiting possessions" or whatever other hackneyed 50 year old cliche from the 70s you want to throw out. Those things completely and utterly miss the point of what you need to do to beat EWU.

You and I are essentially saying the same thing-- they need to sustain scoring drives. I still think it's weird to say it's been their gameplan to punt, but regardless, we agree that if they keep giving the ball back to the Eagles constantly, it's going to be extremely difficult to win.

The only difference is that you think it's stupid, cliche, hackneyed, revealing that I don't understand football, etc. if I suggest that, as part of sustaining scoring drives, they limit the number of opportunities EW has to score.

You don’t have to be a football genius to understand what lord is saying. Eastern won’t score on every single drive with our defense. Eating some clock and scoring helps limit some opportunities. I don’t understand the Petty arguing this week

Same.

Honestly when I posted my original opinion that I think the Cats would benefit from keeping the EW offense off the field, I figured I’d get push back for stating the obvious…

This has to be the most absurd thread I’ve seen in awhile. If you truly believe we should walk in there and have short drives and that a punt that puts them inside their 20 is the same as a turn over you’re a load of bologna. We probably won’t score every drive. But I don’t believe that’s a fail. We can play field position (if we have to) because if they have to drive 80 yards on us vs 30 cuz we went for it for no good reason, that’s 80 yards worth of TA, DH, and TO, CB mauling your players. I’m not a betting man but I’ll bet on this team any week. EB Has ZERO yards for ZERO touchdowns when he doesn’t have the ball. Win the turn over battle and run the ball. It got us to the semis last year.

If it ain’t broke…

Have you watched EWU this year? Field position is 100% irrelevant. Yes, a punt that puts EWU inside their own 20 is EXACTLY the same as a turnover.

I think the issue I have with Vigo is the notion that the key is "sustained" drives...by which I understand to mean a gameplan like in Ogden where we keep the clock running as long as possible in the name of keeping EB off the field.

My issue is that it doesn't matter if the Cats score explosively in <2 minute drives or 10 minute slugfests. What matters is getting a TD on a high percentage of possessions. Eating clock without scoring is 100% pointless. And bottling up big play potential in order to keep the clock running is counterproductive...if the game plan is to eat clock, that means that the Eagles D can load up the box and we keep running at 2 yards per carry and eventually punt. (See the Weber or Wyoming games for what this strategy looks like in practice).

At any rate, that's exactly what EWU wants. They want MSU to play ball control & they will count on eventually forcing a punt, getting a takeaway, or forcing a field goal (sort of the old TG defensive gameplan).

Both teams get exactly the same number of possessions. So if we limit EWUs chances on the offense, we equally limit our own chances to score. Which might work if we are up by 2 TDS, but its going to cause problems if we are playing from behind.

And if our O is truly better than EWUs D, which many posters here think is true (I'm inclined to agree) then we want as many possessions as possible.

I understand what you’re saying. And it makes sense. There’s always more than one way to win a football game.

I started this thread talking about how impressive EWU’s offense is. And it is very impressive. And I have seen them play. More importantly I have seen them play against good defenses, Weber and UM. And I happen to believe our unit is the best they’ll see. Field position, even against this offense, is still very important. I don’t think a punt is the same as a turnover. It sure wasn’t when they played Weber.

Here’s what their offense did against Weber:
TD
Fumble
Fumble
TD
Punt
TD
Punt
Punt
Punt
Punt
Interception
TD
TD

If they were an absolutely unstoppable offense and it was a given they were scoring a TD no matter what, no matter where they started with the ball, I’d agree with you. But as explosive as they are, when facing a great defense they are human so to speak. So like every other team we face, field position and taking care of the ball are still huge factors.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting we’re just content running up the middle 3 times and punting like we did against Weber. But EWU’s defense is no where near as good as Weber’s. There’s no reason whatsoever that our offense shouldn’t be able to move the ball. But there is also no reason that we need to take unnecessary risks or go for it on 4th down every time instead of punting the ball.

Our defense against their explosive offense is what is going to be talked about. But I think the game will be won based on what our offense is able to do to their defense.

On a side note, after watching their game against Weber, I think turnovers will be a huge factor. EB is incredible. Kind of reminds me of a Kyler Murray. He takes chances and makes very tough throws even when he has guys draped all over him. Some end up being incredible gains. But I thought he got away with quite a few balls that should have never been thrown. I think we need to make him pay for these decisions and give our offense more opportunities.

[onceacat]

This is a totally weird misinterpretation.

For the entire season, the Cats offensive game plan has been 100% happy to go 3 and out or 6 and out and punt for field position. Especially with quality opponents like UW, WSU, and even PSU. Its a very old school football philosophy that works in certain circumstances.

You can't play for field position with EWU. You have to convert points on drives. Full stops. A punt is 100% as bad of a failure as a fumble or INT.

At the end of the game, it doesn't matter if the Cats score on explosive 70 yard runs from Mellot, a 3 play drive with 2 jump balls to McCutcheon, or 98 yards of Ifanse running between the tackles. The ONLY thing that matters is scoring. On every possible drive. "Control" is a stupid euphanism that entirely misses the point of what EWU is trying to do.

"Limiting possessions" is an equally stupid euphemism for "we just need to keep the clock running".

All those euphemisms are from coaching staffs that don't understand what football actually is in 2020 (Jamie Marshall would fit right in). Its fascinating how you dialed in on the turnover margin-which is only relevant because EWU's D strategy is focused on forcing turnovers instead of forcing punts-and ignored the 4th down conversion rate.

MSU is going to need to go for it at least 4 times on 4th down and convert 3 in order to win.

Nothing whatsoever to do with "ball control" or "limiting possessions" or whatever other hackneyed 50 year old cliche from the 70s you want to throw out. Those things completely and utterly miss the point of what you need to do to beat EWU.

You and I are essentially saying the same thing-- they need to sustain scoring drives. I still think it's weird to say it's been their gameplan to punt, but regardless, we agree that if they keep giving the ball back to the Eagles constantly, it's going to be extremely difficult to win.

The only difference is that you think it's stupid, cliche, hackneyed, revealing that I don't understand football, etc. if I suggest that, as part of sustaining scoring drives, they limit the number of opportunities EW has to score.

You don’t have to be a football genius to understand what lord is saying. Eastern won’t score on every single drive with our defense. Eating some clock and scoring helps limit some opportunities. I don’t understand the Petty arguing this week

Same.

Honestly when I posted my original opinion that I think the Cats would benefit from keeping the EW offense off the field, I figured I’d get push back for stating the obvious…

This has to be the most absurd thread I’ve seen in awhile. If you truly believe we should walk in there and have short drives and that a punt that puts them inside their 20 is the same as a turn over you’re a load of bologna. We probably won’t score every drive. But I don’t believe that’s a fail. We can play field position (if we have to) because if they have to drive 80 yards on us vs 30 cuz we went for it for no good reason, that’s 80 yards worth of TA, DH, and TO, CB mauling your players. I’m not a betting man but I’ll bet on this team any week. EB Has ZERO yards for ZERO touchdowns when he doesn’t have the ball. Win the turn over battle and run the ball. It got us to the semis last year.

If it ain’t broke…

Have you watched EWU this year? Field position is 100% irrelevant. Yes, a punt that puts EWU inside their own 20 is EXACTLY the same as a turnover.

I think the issue I have with Vigo is the notion that the key is "sustained" drives...by which I understand to mean a gameplan like in Ogden where we keep the clock running as long as possible in the name of keeping EB off the field.

My issue is that it doesn't matter if the Cats score explosively in <2 minute drives or 10 minute slugfests. What matters is getting a TD on a high percentage of possessions. Eating clock without scoring is 100% pointless. And bottling up big play potential in order to keep the clock running is counterproductive...if the game plan is to eat clock, that means that the Eagles D can load up the box and we keep running at 2 yards per carry and eventually punt. (See the Weber or Wyoming games for what this strategy looks like in practice).

At any rate, that's exactly what EWU wants. They want MSU to play ball control & they will count on eventually forcing a punt, getting a takeaway, or forcing a field goal (sort of the old TG defensive gameplan).

Both teams get exactly the same number of possessions. So if we limit EWUs chances on the offense, we equally limit our own chances to score. Which might work if we are up by 2 TDS, but its going to cause problems if we are playing from behind.

And if our O is truly better than EWUs D, which many posters here think is true (I'm inclined to agree) then we want as many possessions as possible.

I understand what you’re saying. And it makes sense. There’s always more than one way to win a football game.

I started this thread talking about how impressive EWU’s offense is. And it is very impressive. And I have seen them play. More importantly I have seen them play against good defenses, Weber and UM. And I happen to believe our unit is the best they’ll see. Field position, even against this offense, is still very important. I don’t think a punt is the same as a turnover. It sure wasn’t when they played Weber.

Here’s what their offense did against Weber:
TD
Fumble
Fumble
TD
Punt
TD
Punt
Punt
Punt
Punt
Interception
TD
TD

If they were an absolutely unstoppable offense and it was a given they were scoring a TD no matter what, no matter where they started with the ball, I’d agree with you. But as explosive as they are, when facing a great defense they are human so to speak. So like every other team we face, field position and taking care of the ball are still huge factors.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting we’re just content running up the middle 3 times and punting like we did against Weber. But EWU’s defense is no where near as good as Weber’s. There’s no reason whatsoever that our offense shouldn’t be able to move the ball. But there is also no reason that we need to take unnecessary risks or go for it on 4th down every time instead of punting the ball.

Our defense against their explosive offense is what is going to be talked about. But I think the game will be won based on what our offense is able to do to their defense.

On a side note, after watching their game against Weber, I think turnovers will be a huge factor. EB is incredible. Kind of reminds me of a Kyler Murray. He takes chances and makes very tough throws even when he has guys draped all over him. Some end up being incredible gains. But I thought he got away with quite a few balls that should have never been thrown. I think we need to make him pay for these decisions and give our offense more opportunities.

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

[Lord Vigo]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

[PapaG]

I don’t understand what the complaints are in this thread. Wouldn’t it make sense to try and establish a running game against a suspect EWU defense? Weber put up 35 on them struggled to even move the ball against the Bobcats. EWU has the sizzle; let’s see how they handle the best defense they will see all season.

[ilovethecats]

I don’t understand what the complaints are in this thread. Wouldn’t it make sense to try and establish a running game against a suspect EWU defense? Weber put up 35 on them struggled to even move the ball against the Bobcats. EWU has the sizzle; let’s see how they handle the best defense they will see all season.

Especially considering they aren’t good at stopping the run and we’re good at running.

[PapaG]

I don’t understand what the complaints are in this thread. Wouldn’t it make sense to try and establish a running game against a suspect EWU defense? Weber put up 35 on them struggled to even move the ball against the Bobcats. EWU has the sizzle; let’s see how they handle the best defense they will see all season.

Especially considering they aren’t good at stopping the run and we’re good at running.

Yeah, but come out passing to surprise them and if that doesn’t work, ‘Cats are possibly down early. Don’t get that though. This team is built through the running game and defense and suddenly that’s not enough to some people here.

[Cledus]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

You had no problem making up things I didn’t say, but it’s bothersome if someone does it to you?

[Lord Vigo]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

You had no problem making up things I didn’t say, but it’s bothersome if someone does it to you?

Feel free to point out whatever that was.

[onceacat]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

Yes, you explicitly said that what the Cats did in Ogden isn't "ball control" "establishing the run" and "chewing clock". Its just that I'm not exactly sure what those things mean if it isn't a steady dose of running power between the tackles with a little mix of safe short passing game to keep things from being too monotonous.

Maybe if you explained how ball control, eating clock, etc is a totally different game plan, I'd be able to process better.

[Cledus]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

You had no problem making up things I didn’t say, but it’s bothersome if someone does it to you?

Feel free to point out whatever that was.

All of your strawman arguments right here in this thread. Since you don’t even recognize what a strawman is, pointing them out is pointless. You’re not the intellectual heavyweight you think you are.

[Lord Vigo]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

Yes, you explicitly said that what the Cats did in Ogden isn't "ball control" "establishing the run" and "chewing clock". Its just that I'm not exactly sure what those things mean if it isn't a steady dose of running power between the tackles with a little mix of safe short passing game to keep things from being too monotonous.

Maybe if you explained how ball control, eating clock, etc is a totally different game plan, I'd be able to process better.

As I’ve now repeated several times, I’m simply saying that the Cats sustaining long offensive drives that keep EW off the field and limit their possessions would be ideal. I am not prescribing how they need to do it. The run game will likely be a big part of it because that’s who the Cats are. But that’s incidental. Like I said— we have basically been saying the same thing.

EDIT— just to be clear, I am not calling for anything like the offensive gameplay against Weber.

For one, the Eagles defense is way too dangerous to punt away too that often. And secondly, their defense is far less dangerous than Weber’s. The Cats will be able to open things up a lot more easily, and they’ll need to.

[bobcatfan123]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

You had no problem making up things I didn’t say, but it’s bothersome if someone does it to you?

Feel free to point out whatever that was.

All of your strawman arguments right here in this thread. Since you don’t even recognize what a strawman is, pointing them out is pointless. You’re not the intellectual heavyweight you think you are.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around your”art of war” argument. We’re going to need to plan a Bobcat nation meet and greet so you can explain this to me after I’ve had whatever your having.

[Lord Vigo]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

You had no problem making up things I didn’t say, but it’s bothersome if someone does it to you?

Feel free to point out whatever that was.

All of your strawman arguments right here in this thread. Since you don’t even recognize what a strawman is, pointing them out is pointless. You’re not the intellectual heavyweight you think you are.

You’re welcome to tell me how I’ve misrepresented your posts. You’ve yet to do that.

But I will say it’s a little ironic that you’re accusing me of being intellectually conceited when this all started because you responded to me with a lengthy post all about how wrong I am and claimed that ancient Chinese military texts backed you up so it was pointless to reply.

In my opinion, you picked an argument and you’re a little upset that you got the worse end of it.

[Cledus]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

You had no problem making up things I didn’t say, but it’s bothersome if someone does it to you?

Feel free to point out whatever that was.

All of your strawman arguments right here in this thread. Since you don’t even recognize what a strawman is, pointing them out is pointless. You’re not the intellectual heavyweight you think you are.

You’re welcome to tell me how I’ve misrepresented your posts. You’ve yet to do that.

But I will say it’s a little ironic that you’re accusing me of being intellectually conceited when this all started because you responded to me with a lengthy post all about how wrong I am and claimed that ancient Chinese military texts backed you up so it was pointless to reply.

In my opinion, you picked an argument and you’re a little upset that you got the worse end of it.

You said I wanted to XY bomb all game. I didn’t. I was trying to say get the ball to our playmakers. Maybe I didn’t make that clear, you could have asked me to clarify. I was at work and some of these threads move quickly so I don’t have all the time in the world to proof for readability and to make sure my words match up with the thoughts I was trying to convey.

The Art of War is a treatise on strategy, not slugging out on the battlefield. There are several concepts in the text that have a cumulative effect. I pointed out just one. I even clarified the exact reference I was making: set a trap the enemy cannot resist. Your response was so dumb the only thing you could do was to mock, which is fine by me.

Long, slow drives are exactly what EWU wants because they can score from anywhere on the field very quickly. Eating clock against EWU is suicide. Remember just one week ago how ISU was running the ball and eating clock when they were down by three scores in the fourth quarter? And how everyone was wondering what the hell they were doing but also thanking them at the same time for helping us win? That was a preview of what will happen if will happen if we worry more about ball control rather than getting the ball to our playmakers.

I don’t care if you don’t believe me. I used to believe in these dumb canards, too, until I looked up the data. Going back to 2008, we’re 2-9 against them and every in those losses our average TOP is more than 33:00. I always go back to 2013 because that gone game illustrates how dumb ball control is more than anything. I don’t care if you don’t believe me, the boxscore is out in the open for everyone to see. In our two wins, the TOP is much lower. I forget the exact number, but something between 30:00 and 31:00.

I actually posted several years of data here some years back dispelling all the popular ideas people hold on to, and it was largely ignored.

You’re too entrenched in your own beliefs to change your mind no matter how much evidence, or irrefutable proof is shown. Again, that’s fine with me. Most people are, so you’re not alone. The difference between you and most other people is you’re here to argue and beat your chest. Normal people roll their eyes and just walk away because it’s not worth the effort to continue. You interpret their silence as admitting defeat and sit there and beat your chest. I know all of this because I have a brother whose personality is identical to yours and I’ve had a front row seat to this show for decades.

[Lord Vigo]

Holy crap.

TL/DR

[GavinDonos]

None of this will matter once the meteor of death hits Earth. I’m sticking to that final assessment.

But I tend to agree that the fewer minutes / plays that EWU can rack up, the better it is for the ‘Cats. I also don’t advocate an offensive strategy of punting by design… not sure who would ever suggest such a ridiculous thing, but apparently someone did earlier in this whacky thread. I tried to read the whole chain but after a couple of pages it felt like I was coming down with carbon monoxide poisoning… so I’m just hoping for a good effort from our defense next Saturday.

[onceacat]

None of this will matter once the meteor of death hits Earth. I’m sticking to that final assessment.

But I tend to agree that the fewer minutes / plays that EWU can rack up, the better it is for the ‘Cats. I also don’t advocate an offensive strategy of punting by design… not sure who would ever suggest such a ridiculous thing, but apparently someone did earlier in this whacky thread. I tried to read the whole chain but after a couple of pages it felt like I was coming down with carbon monoxide poisoning… so I’m just hoping for a good effort from our defense next Saturday.

Literally no one suggested punting by design. I suggested a philosophy by which the staff recognize punting for what it is: a turnover.

A turnover gives EWU the chance to score. Ergo, avoid turnovers EXCEPT the turnovers that occur because you scored a TD.

Our coaching staff has been remarkably chill with the concept of rushing Ifanse between the tackles on 3rd & medium, and trusting the punt coverage & D to eventually flip the field position. As Cledus points out, that's a trap that EWU is setting for us.

Both teams get the same number of possessions. So limiting EWUs possessions ALSO means we limit our own possessions. Since the Delta between our D and EWUs O is really small, and the delta between our O and EWUs D is larger, it makes strategic sense to INCREASE possessions. Because we should score ore points per possession than EWU.

The math on that is really easy. But its not conventional wisdom.

[onceacat]

100% this. The delta between our "good" offense and their "pretty good" defense is bigger than the delta between our elite D and their elite O.

Which means that a high possession game favors our offense.

I wasn't suggesting that the Cats go for it on 4th & 20 on their own 15. But with 3rd & 8 at the 50, it should be 4 down territory.

When people talk "ball control" and "chewing the clock" generally they mean the sort of offensive game the Cats played in Ogden. Maybe its supposed to mean something else on this thread. I think that the EWU D is primed for that sort of game plan...its really easy to defend & a limited number of drives plays into EWUs hands-because as you point out, they have a tendency to go cold for long stretches, even against defenses less quality that ours (see the WIU game for example) and because EB takes a lot of high risk, high reward sort of shots.

So if the Cats can put the Eagles back on their heels (and I'm agnostic about if the offensive plan should be 3 yards and a cloud of dust, or a hurry up power run game, or mixing up a steady dose of Ifanse with some big shots down the field) by getting a 2 score lead, then holding out until the Eagles O goes cold, its all good.

But, back to the original point, a high possession game should lend itself to the Cats favor because 1) the delta between our O and their D and 2) their tendency to go cold/take big risks.

I explicitly told you that that's not at all what was being suggested pages ago.

Did you miss it, or is it easier to just put words in other people's mouth?

I think the underlying issue is that usually ball control offenses are willing to punt the ball & play field position. If you are playing ball control & trying to limit EWUs possessions, you have to complete drives. EWU goes 3 & out A LOT. They just do it fast. And as far as EWU is concerned, a punt is exactly the same as a field goal, because they score on long drives as fast and as easily as short drives. So playing the field position game is pointless.

And their D generates a lot of turnovers.

Weber won that game because 1) they went 4-0 on 4th down and 2) Flipped EWUs normal turnover margin.

I 100% guarantee that if the Cats go 4-0 on 4th down conversions, they come out of Cheney with a win. It doesn't really matter what kind of offense a team runs, they just need to convert 4th downs instead of giving up turnovers (aka punts).

The “ball control” approach that everyone in here is advocating for is using the run game to sustain long, clock-eating scoring drives and thus limit the number of times EW gets the ball.

I’m sure we’d all agree that if the Cats punt all day, they’re going to lose.

Yes, you explicitly said that what the Cats did in Ogden isn't "ball control" "establishing the run" and "chewing clock". Its just that I'm not exactly sure what those things mean if it isn't a steady dose of running power between the tackles with a little mix of safe short passing game to keep things from being too monotonous.

Maybe if you explained how ball control, eating clock, etc is a totally different game plan, I'd be able to process better.

As I’ve now repeated several times, I’m simply saying that the Cats sustaining long offensive drives that keep EW off the field and limit their possessions would be ideal. I am not prescribing how they need to do it. The run game will likely be a big part of it because that’s who the Cats are. But that’s incidental. Like I said— we have basically been saying the same thing.

EDIT— just to be clear, I am not calling for anything like the offensive gameplay against Weber.

For one, the Eagles defense is way too dangerous to punt away too that often. And secondly, their defense is far less dangerous than Weber’s. The Cats will be able to open things up a lot more easily, and they’ll need to.

If I understand you correctly: We need to score more points than them. And the gameplan should be to do so.

Yes, I guess we agree.

[ilovethecats]

Bye weeks make people cranky.

But I like what I’m hearing. If we score every time we have the ball, and never turn it over, (punts are turnovers) we could win!

More teams should do this.

[BelligerentBobcat]

Bye weeks make people cranky.

But I like what I’m hearing. If we score every time we have the ball, and never turn it over, (punts are turnovers) we could win!

More teams should do this.

If only the coaches listened to us.