FWST: TCU’s Cumbie explains why he went with wildcat offense on pivotal series

[TopFrog]

TCU’s Cumbie explains why he went with wildcat offense on pivotal series

By Drew Davison

It’s a play call Sonny Cumbie would like to have back.

TCU had pulled to within 31-24 midway through the third quarter, and had momentum. The defense had just forced SMU to a three-and-out, and the offense was driving in the red zone.

Facing a third-and-4 from the SMU 13, TCU opted to go into its “WildFrog” formation. Fifth-year senior Alex Delton made his first appearance in the game and rushed for 3 yards.

On fourth-and-1 from the SMU 10, the Frogs opted to go for it instead of settling for a field goal. They stayed in the “WildFrog” formation, but had senior running back Sewo Olonilua taking the direct snap.

Read more here: https://www.star-telegram.com/sport...niversity/article235274467.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Limey Frog]

I suppose this is as good a place as any to put this, because i don't want to start a new thread:

https://gofrogs.com/documents/2019/9/21//SMU_41_TCU_38.pdf

I looked at the box score this morning to see whether (as was my suspicion) that first-down situations in which we passed had mostly led to failure while first-down situations in which we ran had mostly led to success. In fact we failed/succeeded to gain fresh downs at about the same rate regardless of what we did first, but when drives stalled (which was often: 9 of 15) it was always because of incomplete passes or sacks taken on QB rushes forced by lack of options in an attempted pass play.

Here's the stat of the night: TCU averaged 5.6 a carry on the ground, but passed 36 times with only 16 incompletions. Yes, at some point the passing game has to carry its load and (as I wrote in a thread last week) you'd hope that SMU might be the time to make that progress. But (as another poster pointed out--"tune up time is over") SMU came to play; given their history of starting fast against us, we should have expected that (I didn't; I was wrong). Seven minutes into the game it was clear that we were in a battle. Why not just switch to last week's second-half game plan at that point?

The stats confirm what seemed true on first look: Sonny is more committed to establishing the passing game than to winning football games. Yes, you've got to get your young QB and shaky receivers into rhythm at some point, but at what cost did we try to do that yesterday? Surely establishing a punishing ground game ought to open that up eventually? We didn't have any drives where we just ran, ran, ran, ran. It was almost always one rush, one incompletion (in either order), third-and-long situation, drive fails.

 

[netty2424]

I suppose this is as good a place as any to put this, because i don't want to start a new thread:

https://gofrogs.com/documents/2019/9/21//SMU_41_TCU_38.pdf

I looked at the box score this morning to see whether (as was my suspicion) that first-down situations in which we passed had mostly led to failure while first-down situations in which we ran had mostly led to success. In fact we failed/succeeded to gain fresh downs at about the same rate regardless of what we did first, but when drives stalled (which was often: 9 of 15) it was always because of incomplete passes or sacks taken on QB rushes forced by lack of options in an attempted pass play.

Here's the stat of the night: TCU averaged 5.6 a carry on the ground, but passed 36 times with only 16 incompletions. Yes, at some point the passing game has to carry its load and (as I wrote in a thread last week) you'd hope that SMU might be the time to make that progress. But (as another poster pointed out--"tune up time is over") SMU came to play; given their history of starting fast against us, we should have expected that (I didn't; I was wrong). Seven minutes into the game it was clear that we were in a battle. Why not just switch to last week's second-half game plan at that point?

The stats confirm what seemed true on first look: Sonny is more committed to establishing the passing game than to winning football games. Yes, you've got to get your young QB and shaky receivers into rhythm at some point, but at what cost did we try to do that yesterday? Surely establishing a punishing ground game ought to open that up eventually? We didn't have any drives where we just ran, ran, ran, ran. It was almost always one rush, one incompletion (in either order), third-and-long situation, drive fails.

Because Cumbie is an air raid coach from the core.

As much as he’s balanced out the run pass ratio at times, it’s against his DNA.

 

[TopFrog]

Cumbie said what I saw in the first half. His play-calling was poor, especially with a freshman QB making his first start. What he had Duggan able to do in the fourth quarter with receivers in space to catch and run was what he should have done in the first half too.

Turnovers cost us. First half play-calling too. Defense didn't look ready to play early. SMU is good and wanted it more. They kicked our arses.

 

[Eight]

Because Cumbie is an air raid coach from the core.

As much as he’s balanced out the run pass ratio at times, it’s against his DNA.

this is what so many don't seem to grasp.

sonny has only worked in air raid systems and gotten very little exposure to any other offensive schemes.

a natural response for people in times of stress is to return to what is most comfortable to them.

not only did tcu go away from the first down run, but go back in the first half and see how many passes were directed to receivers inside the hash marks. looked like they broke out the iowa state game plan from 2017 which makes me wonder if it was suggested to sonny to avoid higher risk throws with a freshman quarterback starting.

 

[Wexahu]

this is what so many don't seem to grasp.

sonny has only worked in air raid systems and gotten very little exposure to any other offensive schemes.

a natural response for people in times of stress is to return to what is most comfortable to them.

not only did tcu go away from the first down run, but go back in the first half and see how many passes were directed to receivers inside the hash marks. looked like they broke out the iowa state game plan from 2017 which makes me wonder if it was suggested to sonny to avoid higher risk throws with a freshman quarterback starting.

I think there is very much a directive of “do what you want, just don’t turn it over”.

 

[frogs9497]

All we needed was one yard. One scheissing yard. Let Sewo play quarterback on just about any other down.

 

[Eight]

All we needed was one yard. One scheissing yard. Let Sewo play quarterback on just about any other down.

wex made a very good point on how people react when a call like this works and it is still a bad call.

how many people in pittsburgh think the call that resulted in the tying score for pitt was a bad call yet the guy throwing the pass damn near one hopped it?

 

[Surfrog]

That's a [ deposit from a bull that looks like Art Briles ] answer.

Defenses are taught rules to follow for responsibilities. Do your job means everyone is covered, no matter what route combination happens. We did not listen to our rules on the flea-flicker reverse, they followed their rules on the sewo pass. If you don't have the confidence in your offense to get 1 friggen yard, somethings messed up.

 

[ThisIsOurTime]

The stats confirm what seemed true on first look: Sonny is more committed to establishing the passing game than to winning football games. Yes, you've got to get your young QB and shaky receivers into rhythm at some point, but at what cost did we try to do that yesterday? Surely establishing a punishing ground game ought to open that up eventually? We didn't have any drives where we just ran, ran, ran, ran. It was almost always one rush, one incompletion (in either order), third-and-long situation, drive fails.

This is too heavy handed. Cumbie isn't thinking about just this one game but games later on in the season and future seasons where we will need to have an established passing game. If we can't throw the ball, they will simply fill the box with extra defenders and it will diminish our ability to run effectively. Your argument is akin to eating the seed corn. With a true freshman QB, we just happen to have greater growing pains in the passing game than usual. If our running game was so dominant, we wouldn't have needed to go for it on 4th down twice.
Also, the TCU offense is a balanced attack offense. That isn't going to change with our coaches unless the coaches are changed. They may tweak the percentages a little more towards the run or pass but it is at most going to be a 60/40 or 40/60 split between run and pass. We do not run a run dominant offense nor have we recruited for that kind of offense. If we implement your idea, we could be jumping around from system to system each year and lose continuity in the process. Instead, they are trying to grow up the offense to where it can reap more benefits in the future. And we will need a passing game if we are to win the Big12 or play for more. We used to have a run dominant offense and there was good reason for why we switched to these more balanced attacked.

 

[Punter1]

wex made a very good point on how people react when a call like this works and it is still a bad call.

how many people in pittsburgh think the call that resulted in the tying score for pitt was a bad call yet the guy throwing the pass damn near one hopped it?

I've seen that play work at least 10 times...Arky did it to us in 2016 to tie the game late. Eagles ran it to Foles in the super bowl...

I would have loved that play call...it even has an option for a run if the QB is covered...which he almost never is.

That play should be in every teams playbook...I was actually thinking as we lined up that we would see that exact play with Reag throwing it to Sewo...

 

[frogs9497]

wex made a very good point on how people react when a call like this works and it is still a bad call.

how many people in pittsburgh think the call that resulted in the tying score for pitt was a bad call yet the guy throwing the pass damn near one hopped it?

had the Sewo pass worked, I'd tell you we got a first down in spite of our play calling. Risk/reward not in our favor.

We just couldn't afford not to get the first in those circumstances. Too much at stake at that point in the game. I'll take my chances on a Sewo or Darius run up the middle every time.

 

[Wexahu]

This is too heavy handed. Cumbie isn't thinking about just this one game but games later on in the season and future seasons where we will need to have an established passing game. If we can't throw the ball, they will simply fill the box with extra defenders and it will diminish our ability to run effectively. Your argument is akin to eating the seed corn. With a true freshman QB, we just happen to have greater growing pains in the passing game than usual. If our running game was so dominant, we wouldn't have needed to go for it on 4th down twice.
Also, the TCU offense is a balanced attack offense. That isn't going to change with our coaches unless the coaches are changed. They may tweak the percentages a little more towards the run or pass but it is at most going to be a 60/40 or 40/60 split between run and pass. We do not run a run dominant offense nor have we recruited for that kind of offense. If we implement your idea, we could be jumping around from system to system each year and lose continuity in the process. Instead, they are trying to grow up the offense to where it can reap more benefits in the future. And we will need a passing game if we are to win the Big12 or play for more. We used to have a run dominant offense and there was good reason for why we switched to these more balanced attacked.

Cumbie hadn’t been involved with anything resembling a balanced attack before he was hired here. If you hire him, leave him alone and let him run his offense. If you don’t want him to do that because you want a different kind of offense, go get someone else. It’s as simple as that. If I’m a head coach and I don’t like 4-3, zone cover 2 defenses I’m not going to hire a Lovie Smith guy and make him run a 4-2-5 man defense.

 

[Wexahu]

had the Sewo pass worked, I'd tell you we got a first down in spite of our play calling. Risk/reward not in our favor.

We just couldn't afford not to get the first in those circumstances. Too much at stake at that point in the game. I'll take my chances on a Sewo or Darius run up the middle every time.

Ok, but in my message board experience with regards to trick plays, ones that don’t work are bad calls and ones that do are good ones. That’s virtually 100% of the time. Next trick play we run that works I’m gonna see how many people here are bitching about what a terrible call it was.

If our safety would’ve laid out Buechele just before he released it on that flea flicker (which he almost did) and caused a fumble or INT, that wouldn’t been considered a bonehead cutesy call. As it turned out, Dykes knows our tendencies and it was a great call.

 

[frogs9497]

Ok, but in my message board experience with regards to trick plays, ones that don’t work are bad calls and ones that do are good ones. That’s virtually 100% of the time. Next trick play we run that works I’m gonna see how many people here are bitching about what a terrible call it was.

True, most won't be critical of a trick play that worked. I probably wouldn't have come on here and complained about it.

 

[Wexahu]

True, most won't be critical of a trick play that worked. I probably wouldn't have come on here and complained about it.

Not trying to be a prick, but I don’t anybody would have. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t a bad call in that situation but very few people if any would’ve recognized or acknowledged that if it had worked.

 

[mc1502]

But it didn't work. I'll take a good football coach who believes in his players over a riverboat gambler any day.

 

[Limey Frog]

This is too heavy handed. Cumbie isn't thinking about just this one game but games later on in the season and future seasons where we will need to have an established passing game. If we can't throw the ball, they will simply fill the box with extra defenders and it will diminish our ability to run effectively. Your argument is akin to eating the seed corn. With a true freshman QB, we just happen to have greater growing pains in the passing game than usual. If our running game was so dominant, we wouldn't have needed to go for it on 4th down twice.

I get that, and I agree up to a point. But when the passing game is as bad as we are now (why, btw? So far, they look suspiciously like QB/receiving units that have done all of the wrong things in the off-season--who's fault would that be?), surely the best way to get your young QB into the game is to establish the run, then go with simpler play-action passes once they start to load the box. We must have some plays of that type in the playbook, surely?

 

[PurpleBlood87]

If you put your backup quarterback in the game and he's in the shotgun formation is that considered the Wildfrog formation?

 

[PurpleBlood87]

Great idea to use a formation that has TWO plays against a team that is coached by a former offensive coach for your team.

I'll wager Sonny had his defensive coaches well versed on those TWO plays just on case.