ADVERTISEMENT

"Urban Meyer breaks down one of the biggest plays in @RFootball's win at Virginia Tech on the latest 𝘜𝘳𝘣𝘢𝘯 𝘈𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘺𝘴𝘪𝘴"

The DB was a WR for years before moving to defense (he plays for Washington now).
A DB at Michigan knew what to expect from RU because RU was very predictable.
That's not new either - I recall PSU DB coach telling his players they would get 4 INTs and they got 5.

I would still like to know why RU WR on Michigan play had his facemask in his hand as ball is arriving. Michigan players wore yellow gloves so the white glove is WRs. There is another Michigan player behind receiver so maybe his helmet was screwed-up. I've noticed many times that RU players often seem to have ill fitting helmets

qe8NFk7.jpeg
misleading freezeframe. See that leg kicking out? That is a Michigan defender who was draped across him during his route.. pulling his left arm back and swinging on his back before teh ball got there. Screens are not protected from contact for pass interference for some reason. There is also depth perception issues involved. The full field view early in the replay shows you what was going on.

To me.. it shows high suspicion of the tunnel screen being known as soon as the player motion was revealed.. that Dremel moved toward the CB to screen.. then Dremel's cover guy ignored the possibility that Dremel was going out. As soon as he sees Dremel break down to block.. he jumps on that screen pass.

Wimsatt's slow delivery makes this work for that CB. This is why you hear QB coaches talking about short compact throwing motion. Wimsatt's long windups and lanky wingspan provide a huge clue to defenders as to where the ball is going. And when they see film or in game experience with him, or anyone like him, and they don't see him look off receivers or pump fake and go elsewhere.. as soon as he begins his windup.. safeties are headed where he is looking.

Now think of that pl;ay vs Michigan where.. instead of throwing that tunnel screen.. Wimsatt pump fakes and Dremel fake-blocks than goes out.. HUGE gainer for Dremel.. if Wimsatt can lead him accurately.. a big if. We should have seen the D jumping on throws before that point. Every D did last year.
 
The DB was a WR for years before moving to defense (he plays for Washington now).
A DB at Michigan knew what to expect from RU because RU was very predictable.
That's not new either - I recall PSU DB coach telling his players they would get 4 INTs and they got 5.

I would still like to know why RU WR on Michigan play had his facemask in his hand as ball is arriving. Michigan players wore yellow gloves so the white glove is WRs. There is another Michigan player behind receiver so maybe his helmet was screwed-up. I've noticed many times that RU players often seem to have ill fitting helmets

qe8NFk7.jpeg
That was literally the first and only time they ran that screen play last year. So it couldn't have been predictable unless they knew the playcall. Or the UM player just made an elite play.
 
I like the focus on Asamoah's contribution on that play. Too often the O-linemen only get noticed when they get beat by a pass rusher or flagged for a penalty.
Of course, that was also a strong effort by Ian. 😀
Also a lesson to be learned...your eyes never know what they are seeing with OL - someone that hasn't been there- may have thought the OL got juked, not once but twice and that our big guy never go a clean block. Urben broke it down brilliant and simplified it for everyone. Even his "get big" comment and could show the perfect form...Brilliant and loved it
 
Anecdotal at best, but this play was featured on the Netflix sign stealing documentary. One would think that Stallions gave them some good examples of plays he helped blow up.
When the sign stealing scandal broke this play was the first thing I thought of.

But a question: How does sign stealing work? I assume that the D coordinator calls the D plays based on the stolen sign. But Michigan wouldn't be able to communicate to the players the exact play rutgers was running, right?
 
That was literally the first and only time they ran that screen play last year. So it couldn't have been predictable unless they knew the playcall. Or the UM player just made an elite play.

I go by the area.
RU throws to the seams a lot (as do others but with RU its "safety first").
The Dremel play was popular there last Sept until teams scouted the pattern and shut it.
There are weak spots in the middle zone vertically and along flats more horizontally.
Defensive schemes change between LB areas and DB areas.

RU receivers weren't great at contested catches.
RU likes to hit guys near sidelines and in between zones close to LOS.
The solo player on the fly (like Beckham always did) might be easier than a screen there. Obviously it didn't work too well as it was.

As an aside, I like to see long passes because that's when defenses blow coverages between vertical transitions - like a running relay where a runner drops the baton. Pass interference, trips on the turf, botched assignments - happen all the time going deep. Just need tough WR who fights for the ball and wins most times.

I'm tired of endless dinks and dunks
 
When the sign stealing scandal broke this play was the first thing I thought of.

But a question: How does sign stealing work? I assume that the D coordinator calls the D plays based on the stolen sign. But Michigan wouldn't be able to communicate to the players the exact play rutgers was running, right?
On the documentary they showed a few examples of them generally calling out a pass, calling a power run and to what side, etc
 
misleading freezeframe. See that leg kicking out? That is a Michigan defender who was draped across him during his route.. pulling his left arm back and swinging on his back before teh ball got there. Screens are not protected from contact for pass interference for some reason. There is also depth perception issues involved. The full field view early in the replay shows you what was going on.

To me.. it shows high suspicion of the tunnel screen being known as soon as the player motion was revealed.. that Dremel moved toward the CB to screen.. then Dremel's cover guy ignored the possibility that Dremel was going out. As soon as he sees Dremel break down to block.. he jumps on that screen pass.

Wimsatt's slow delivery makes this work for that CB. This is why you hear QB coaches talking about short compact throwing motion. Wimsatt's long windups and lanky wingspan provide a huge clue to defenders as to where the ball is going. And when they see film or in game experience with him, or anyone like him, and they don't see him look off receivers or pump fake and go elsewhere.. as soon as he begins his windup.. safeties are headed where he is looking.

Now think of that pl;ay vs Michigan where.. instead of throwing that tunnel screen.. Wimsatt pump fakes and Dremel fake-blocks than goes out.. HUGE gainer for Dremel.. if Wimsatt can lead him accurately.. a big if. We should have seen the D jumping on throws before that point. Every D did last year.

That play was a mess from the snap and the probably should not have been thrown.
The OL in the screen weren't even in a position to do anything.
Receiver looked like he was going outside and then came back inside.
But OL weren't there yet so it seems an attempt to disguise the screen that backfired.
Seems like a bad place to run a cute screen on 4th and 2.
Michigan hadn't allowed a 4th all year.

You can see all Michigan DBs wearing yellow gloves so the white glove was RU receiver.
Receiver was already covered and I doubt a faster ball would have done anything.
Bullet passes in congested areas can be deflections and INTs.
GW had to back-up 5 yds and taking time
Always easy to blame Wimsatt but I still see a soft receiver with his hand on his facemask.

Go and get the balls.


kmhpJ7N.gif
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT