All defenders do that. It is their job. Rutgers defenders do it as well, when the wr slows or stops.
Gavin's throw to the cameraman
- Thread starter MrsScrew
- Start date
Different play, but Extra Point is correct about all defenders do that. It's basic defender play. Different type of play, but Google "defense bait quarterback interception" and you can find lots of examples:
It's a teachable moment. I listened to Gavin's post game interview, and hopefully he learned from it. Sometimes players make the same mistake twice. But third time is a curse, not the charm. Watch the clip at 0.25X speed using the settings in the lower right corner. Watch both defenders. They knew where the ball was going. Wimsatt was locked onto Dremel.
The ball was sailing high too. Hallman made a nice acrobatic catch. He's having a nice year with 4 INTs already.
Here's another angle (watch at 0.25 speed) and a picture:
And this guy does not seem wrong about the throw, I don't necessarily agree with the "QB" statement--it was a bad/inaccurate throw (he's a Rutgers alum):
Also, Jackson was not a good option, as he had two defenders on him. Not sure if there is an angle showing if Washington was open on the other side of the field.
It's easy for us fans to play Sunday/Monday morning QB with the film slowed down and dissecting the play every which way. I often say at the office, it's a good thing our judgment calls, which are never split second, are subject to instant replay.
Would love for @gef21 to add some thoughts.
Last edited:
Paywalled article here:
"Hallman, who was matched up on Jackson, saw his man come off the line and race inside, which alerted him to the fact that Dremel was about to turn outside on an out route for the end zone."
"One week earlier, during Rutgers’ 52-3 victory against Wagner, the Scarlet Knights had run a nearly identical play from the left hash that resulted in Dremel catching a 4-yard touchdown pass on fourth-and-goal late in the first quarter. So Hallman, with that sequence firmly in his mind, yelled to safety Preston Zachman to switch off receivers during the play."
Interesting side story on how Hallman played in WIsconsin's first seven games last year as a freshman, filling in for injured players. In their double OT loss to Michigan State last year, he made a costly PI penalty that led to MSU TD. He has not forgotten that. He found support from senior players on the team a a relationship with former Wisconsin cornerback Scott Starks, who played five seasons with the Jacksonville Jaguars.
theathletic.com
"Hallman, who was matched up on Jackson, saw his man come off the line and race inside, which alerted him to the fact that Dremel was about to turn outside on an out route for the end zone."
"One week earlier, during Rutgers’ 52-3 victory against Wagner, the Scarlet Knights had run a nearly identical play from the left hash that resulted in Dremel catching a 4-yard touchdown pass on fourth-and-goal late in the first quarter. So Hallman, with that sequence firmly in his mind, yelled to safety Preston Zachman to switch off receivers during the play."
Interesting side story on how Hallman played in WIsconsin's first seven games last year as a freshman, filling in for injured players. In their double OT loss to Michigan State last year, he made a costly PI penalty that led to MSU TD. He has not forgotten that. He found support from senior players on the team a a relationship with former Wisconsin cornerback Scott Starks, who played five seasons with the Jacksonville Jaguars.
Wisconsin's 95-yard TD by Ricardo Hallman was 'difference in the ballgame' — and much more
Hallman knows as much as anyone the lows cornerbacks can experience. In Wisconsin's win vs. Rutgers, he showed just how far back he's come.
theathletic.com
yes was a bad throw but the comments are things a few of us have said since day 1. Either Gav isn't getting it or he not as coachable as one would think. At this point, he should know not to lock in on guys and especially so that close to the goal line
Different play, but Extra Point is correct about all defenders do that. It's basic defender play. Different type of play, but Google "defense bait quarterback interception" and you can find lots of examples:
It's a teachable moment. I listened to Gavin's post game interview, and hopefully he learned from it. Sometimes players make the same mistake twice. But third time is a curse, not the charm. Watch the clip at 0.25X speed using the settings in the lower right corner. Watch both defenders. They knew where the ball was going. Wimsatt was locked onto Dremel.
The ball was sailing high too. Hallman made a nice acrobatic catch. He's having a nice year with 4 INTs already.
Here's another angle (watch at 0.25 speed) and a picture:
And this guy does not seem wrong about the throw, I don't necessarily agree with the "QB" statement--it was a bad/inaccurate throw (he's a Rutgers alum):
Also, Jackson was not a good option, as he had two defenders on him. Not sure if there is an angle showing if Washington was open on the other side of the field.
It's easy for us fans to play Sunday/Monday morning QB with the film slowed down and dissecting the play every which way. I often say at the office, it's a good thing our judgment calls, which are never split second, are subject to instant replay.
Would love for @gef21 to add some thoughts.
correct
how anyone could think that statement is directed at wideouts vs the qb is just further evidence of the cult of delusion
I literally said the exact thing to the new guy at the R Fund tailgate on Saturday. Which, by the way, an hour in, Hobbs still hadn't shown up.
The INT wasn't a bad play call, it was awesome defense. So the defenders were running a pattern read zone or a match up zone. Outside defender reads 1-2 and passes off and inside reads 2-1 and passes off. It is a zone that plays like a man so you can be aggressive. It also helps beat rub routes down in the end zone. It was an awesome scheme and awesome execution.
Different play, but Extra Point is correct about all defenders do that. It's basic defender play. Different type of play, but Google "defense bait quarterback interception" and you can find lots of examples:
It's a teachable moment. I listened to Gavin's post game interview, and hopefully he learned from it. Sometimes players make the same mistake twice. But third time is a curse, not the charm. Watch the clip at 0.25X speed using the settings in the lower right corner. Watch both defenders. They knew where the ball was going. Wimsatt was locked onto Dremel.
The ball was sailing high too. Hallman made a nice acrobatic catch. He's having a nice year with 4 INTs already.
Here's another angle (watch at 0.25 speed) and a picture:
And this guy does not seem wrong about the throw, I don't necessarily agree with the "QB" statement--it was a bad/inaccurate throw (he's a Rutgers alum):
Also, Jackson was not a good option, as he had two defenders on him. Not sure if there is an angle showing if Washington was open on the other side of the field.
It's easy for us fans to play Sunday/Monday morning QB with the film slowed down and dissecting the play every which way. I often say at the office, it's a good thing our judgment calls, which are never split second, are subject to instant replay.
Would love for @gef21 to add some thoughts.
The throw should not have been made. And should not have been put where it was. It either has to be place to the sidelines or over to allow the out to turn up.
It's also a pet peeve of mine to see anything going out run flat. It helps defenders pick balls off. I would also like to see a third option to that side with a swing.
I see the concept we tried to run, it wasn't bad, but the defense was better.
Overall in the game we were 2 throws away from winning. This one and the over throw that would have scored.
The baiting you are describing is in a zone D. In man coverage, you can’t bait unless you know you have the recovery speed.
Don’t need to do a ton of film work to see that. Most of us can see that from our seats in the stadium. Everything is pre scripted and very little read. If first option isn’t open it’s throw out of bounds or run.
Why was it not a bad play call? Sure sounds like Wisc was prepared for it. To me, it’s putting your players to be successful. Wisc DC did that and Our OC didn’t.
What’s wrong with that? You rather hold the ball to get sacked or turn it over? It’s not like our OL is great at pass protection. I think that’s the reason why Simon is not playing. He doesn’t have that run option.
Awful call. Once again the play needs to have perfect timing and execution to have a chance of being successful. Everything is sped up inside the 10 yard line. It is the offensive sides (specifically the OC) responsibility to slow things down. No need to make 35 yard throw across the field in that situation. If you want to run similar action make it a sprint out or roll the pocket to put more pressure on the d and force to defend the run as an additional option.
Nothing wrong with that. But it’s not like we force the opposing team to do a ton of film work. Defend the primary target because we don’t come off of it.
If it scores is it a good or bad call? Other teams play too. It was a good call but a bad read with GW.
It is much more complicated at the college level than just that. They sold a man free coverage but ran pattern read. Its a zone with man principles. Awesome system. It allows you to run zone but be massively aggressive like in man. because the route combo gave him no other zone responsibilities.
You nailed it. Sometimes the other team makes the better play. Thanks for the detailed answer. That Rutgers fan who drew the red and green circles on the ball placement does not have any apparent football experience but he nailed it.
We have a saying in our office about costly mistakes -once, we review and learn if it was a procedural problem, which falls on management (coaches), or an employee mistake (player). Twice on the employee is forgiveable, but third time may be the door.
As I said above, and Greg said in his presser, these are split second decisions, which most of us don't see, unless you are in emergency services. Easy for people to judge from their keyboards, but not so easy to execute.
Onward, upward - hopefully.
Last edited:
By the way, that was not a R Fund tailgate. It was the Rutgers Foundation tailgate. May have missed it, but did not see any Rutgers Foundation people there.
Pat may have had other items scheduled close to game time. There were R Fund people there, including the representative in charge of major gifts. Perhaps the R Fund staff and Pat were deployed to maximize coverage of various events.
I really admire the cameraman's commitment to the shot, but next time he should be a little more careful with the equipment on the way to the ground. Just because he didn't protect his equipment is no reason not to protect the camera.
Had to check to see if I was still in the right thread. If Wimsatt was baited into this throw that was really cruel.
Had to check to see if I was still in the right thread. If Wimsatt was baited into this throw that was really cruel.
Perfect strategy when you don’t have to worry about being beat deep. Keep everything in front of you and attack the ball.
I have been a pattern read guy for years. It run well, is very hard to be beat, because it really makes life hard for QBs. It destroys most presnap reads and it takes away most soft windows in zones.
Your second paragraph sums up my issue with this play call. To me it was a procedural problem more so than an employee/player issue. It is the manager/coach/OC responsibility to put their employee/player in the best spot to succeed. The OC made a play call that requires near perfect execution for it to be successful. This spot on the field requires the coach to simplify the play rather than make it difficult. Ask a professional qb what is the most difficult throw and to a man most will say opposite hash out. Than compound that difficulty with calling it in a shortened field where the defender doesn’t have to worry about getting beat deep, with limited pattern options and it is a no win situation. Also add that they ran the same play with the same player personnel in the same spot the week before and you get the result we saw.
you and mel are something else
it was NOT awesome, it was normal defense against a competent team. The throw was bad
I don't have an issue with the play call, the execution is another matter
Yep. I get called a softie sometimes because my first instinct is to look at the procedure and the instructions to the employee before tearing off the employees head (which we never do). As the Bible says, take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye. I'm not religious, but that is a good rule to live by. For fans that do not understand all of the nuances of a play call and execution and only see the pick 6 and losing, emotion comes into play. Rule #2 for management is to never (or minimize) reaction based on emotion.
Gavin has had quite a few successful sideline passes that were very close to the sideline. In the diagram above that I posted by the Twitter guy, if the ball was closer to the sideline, perhaps it would not have been a pick 6 or a pick. I would not call that pick 6 a sideline pass- it appeared to be 3-5 yards in bounds. But I don't know if there is a clear definition of a sideline pass. Maybe it was a muffed sideline pass that was poorly directed?
I think the defensive play call was awesome. Going from man press to pattern read was brilliant. But to each their own.
Consider the person you are responding to is most probably high on many people's ignore lists.
that's a badge of honor given how utterly stupid and ridiculous our fanbase errr uh cult of greg is.
an no one is thinking it was brilliant unless you're mediocre
I mean pattern zone read is not very normal. We see a lot of press man free or press man zero played against us. We rarely see a man principle zone scheme, and done at an elite level.
i agree with you and that’s why, in my opinion, it was a terrible call. Best result on that play was our WR being a tackle dummy for no gain based on their D. That play was never going to score. Yes, they made a great play by jumping it and turn it into a pick 6. If he didn’t jump it, he would have a free shot at a shallow cross WR for no gain. High risk for no reward.
The issue is that GW should not have thrown it, and he did. I think the backside look was a high low corner combo. He should have looked to that side which should have let the low be open based on their scheme. But I can not find the film angle on that side.
Absolutely, but that’s asking a lot from a 19 year kid. Maybe a more seasoned QB can make that read. just Wish they gave him a one option look or run it play. So frustrating.
The issue is that they gave him that and he made the wrong read. If he reads man on an in out slant out combo hes supposed to throw the out. The problem is that he read man free, and it was zone read.
Not busting chops, and just asking, and don't take offense. Did you play football? Or does your F150 Lightning have Madden NFL installed in an update I did not get?
if I can handle an electric grill, I can coach football 😀.
Similar threads
