[81alum]

My plentiful criticisms of playcalling have all been focused in one area:  What does Shaw do to CHANGE the gameplan when the one he had going in DOESN'T WORK???

This game doesn't do anything to address that criticism.  We all know the issues in the games that were lost last year so no need to elaborate.  When it works like it did in the P12 championship, there's nothing to criticize.  They had a gameplan going in worked and that's fantastic.  It's the failure to adjust the gameplan when it isn't working that was the team's downfall last year.

I agree with this, mostly.

What makes the Shaw playcalling debate interesting, however, is that it is his philosophy to NOT adjust playcalling "on the fly."  He is convinced that even if interior runs don't work in the 1st quarter, or the 2nd quarter, or the 3rd quarter--that they are nonetheless doing something productive in wearing down the opposing defense and that they will work in the 4th quarter.  So you could say it is a deliberate part of his strategy to be stubborn.

The question is--how well does this work?  Sometimes it works very well and those 2 yard runs become 7 yard runs.  But against some opponents it never works (Michigan State?)  At what point does a coach realize that the other team will not be worn down and trampled in the 4th quarter?  I think a brilliant coach would know the signs to indicate whether the Woody Hayes strategy was likely to pay off later in the game or that it was not--and if not, a shift to a less predictable and less stubborn strategy would follow.

All that said, having tight ends I think will solve the "stubborn" problem, so I am a lot less worried about a conservative philosophy this year than last.

[81alum]

My plentiful criticisms of playcalling have all been focused in one area:  What does Shaw do to CHANGE the gameplan when the one he had going in DOESN'T WORK???

This game doesn't do anything to address that criticism.  We all know the issues in the games that were lost last year so no need to elaborate.  When it works like it did in the P12 championship, there's nothing to criticize.  They had a gameplan going in worked and that's fantastic.  It's the failure to adjust the gameplan when it isn't working that was the team's downfall last year.

I agree with this, mostly.

What makes the Shaw playcalling debate interesting, however, is that it is his philosophy to NOT adjust playcalling "on the fly."  He is convinced that even if interior runs don't work in the 1st quarter, or the 2nd quarter, or the 3rd quarter--that they are nonetheless doing something productive in wearing down the opposing defense and that they will work in the 4th quarter.  So you could say it is a deliberate part of his strategy to be stubborn.

The question is--how well does this work?  Sometimes it works very well and those 2 yard runs become 7 yard runs.  But against some opponents it never works (Michigan State?)  At what point does a coach realize that the other team will not be worn down and trampled in the 4th quarter?  I think a brilliant coach would know the signs to indicate whether the Woody Hayes strategy was likely to pay off later in the game or that it was not--and if not, a shift to a less predictable and less stubborn strategy would follow.

All that said, having tight ends I think will solve the "stubborn" problem, so I am a lot less worried about a conservative philosophy this year than last.