11-20-2011, 12:12 PM
I was in the camp wondering about the 4th quarter play-calling, particularly the last drive. Cal was not just stacking the box against the run, they were stacking between the tackles to stop the power game. They should have been susceptible to anything that got outside, which is why the flares to Hewitt were working, and why the wildcat when Gaffney got outside should have been a big gainer if he didn't slip. Imagine the Ducks against that defensive set -- they would have been scoring at will. A lot of the calls to make someone pay for that strategy are downfield passes, and I understood the reluctance to go there given performance so far, receiver injuries (we're throwing a bomb to Dudchock? Would have been his first catch of the year?), time in the game, etc. But surely we had some other plays in the playbook to spring people outside the tackles?
I have been remarkably confident on 4th and short calls over the season, but had no confidence in the 4th and 2 fourth quarter call because we all expected it would be up the middle and Cal's whole Q4 defense was set up to stuff those. 1 yard okay, but not 2.
Isn't it great that we can quibble about strategy after winning the Big Game and going 10-1? In between bitching about play-calling I pinch myself every now and then.
I have been remarkably confident on 4th and short calls over the season, but had no confidence in the 4th and 2 fourth quarter call because we all expected it would be up the middle and Cal's whole Q4 defense was set up to stuff those. 1 yard okay, but not 2.
Isn't it great that we can quibble about strategy after winning the Big Game and going 10-1? In between bitching about play-calling I pinch myself every now and then.
