»
Topic: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier
Replies: 37   Last Post: Dec 5, 2013 1:12 PM by: TigerRockAlways
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 37  

Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier

[6]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:22 PM
 

I re-watched the game and noticed something. Spurrier will go to the same play over and over till you stop it at which point he throws deep. The Chad on the other hand stops running the successful plays for done unknown reason. Hot Rod gashed them all night yet had only 14 carries. Why? In fact the only people to run the ball were Tajh and Hot Rod. By contrast, Sukolina had 6 different people run the ball. Which goes to my second point- creativity. We have none. Nada. Zip. The Clemson offense this was very predictable.

Just goes to show how bad the ACC is. We don't beat teams on scheme or toughness, just talent.


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:25 PM
 

I like running plays till you stop them. now not necessarily consectuively though I've seen it done with some successs. but if it worked use it later

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Morris has been calling plays for a long time...


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:28 PM
 

unfortunately for us most of his playcalling years were against highschool coaches. I can't tell if he's getting better or not. I know one thing, SOS isn't likely to dumb down his play calling.

I suspect Dabo had a long term plan when he hired Morris. I know it takes two or three years to develop a lineman perhaps it takes longer to train a coordinator.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Don't know why everyone is nitpicking everything we did

[5]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:32 PM
 

If you just read this board, you'd never know that we outgained South Carolina despite running 20 less plays than they did. You'd also never know that our offense moved the ball easily and never really had much trouble, and that our defense shut down just about everything South Carolina did except a few third down runs by their QB.

The fact is that turnovers, and specifically two muffed punts, killed Clemson, not "schemes or toughness." Clemson's "schemes" worked great, and Clemson looked like the tougher team all night. However, absolutely awful execution by our punt- returner couldn't be overcome, and led to Clemson running very few plays while our defense had to stay on the field all night.

I'm not sure if some of you people are just venting and don't really believe the stuff you're saying, but it ought to be clear that offense and defense weren't really the problem.

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Needs Tweaking ----


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:40 PM
 

Cut the cute tricky stuff. Should save that stuff for
when we are well ahead and when we really need it.
Get tougher in the trenches. The scheme on the O-line
needs tweaking to get the O-line tougher and open
bigger and better run lanes. Plus better pass
protection will need to be created. For instance,
Cole Stoudt's arm may be accurate enough not to run
him so much like Morris did Boyd.


people are only complaining about "the cute stuff"...


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:44 PM
 

because Sammy airmailed the pass to Humphries. If he throws it with anything behind it, or if he throws it a little deeper, it's a TD and we're loving the play. Humphries was wide open when the ball was thrown.

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

By the same token, most people don't realize SC ran a very


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 2:25 PM
 

similar play later in the game. There was a backwards pass to Ellington, who looked to throw, and saw his read wasn't there , then ran for an 8 yard gain rather than throw it up or take a loss. Granted Sammy's guy was pretty much wide open, he let the ball sail on him badly and gave Williams time to get there. The receiver also had a responsibility to find the ball and come back to it instead of continuing the route.

military_donation.jpg

Re: Don't know why everyone is nitpicking everything we did

[1]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 1:12 PM
 

sorry but no we had 3 punts with 1 of those where we were running out the clock. Clemson had 4 punts and 3 of your series were 3 and out and the 4th being a 4 play drive. You did not move the ball at will on us. We could easily say we started with a short field and that is why we did not have more yardage.


Re: Don't know why everyone is nitpicking everything we did


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 5:05 PM
 

So in 2008, the Tigers didn't really win, ##### lost because Smelley threw 4 picks? And... "our defense shut down just about everything SC did except a few third down runs by their QB." Really? He torched our secondary anytime he needed to! Tiger schemes were not that great, and no, Clemson did not look like the tougher team to me. Why do we only fail to secure the ball against good teams? That is coaching!


I think you find most top 10 teams at the top of the talent

[1]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:37 PM
 

pool.

Physical Toughness had nothing to do with 6 turnovers.


Message was edited by: AThomas®


2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

people are just dumping on everything at this point...


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:42 PM
 

... whether or not it has anything to do with the actual games we've played. I don't know how anybody could've watched the game last Satuday and decided we lost because of bad schemes or a lack of toughness.

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: people are just dumping on everything at this point...


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 5:05 PM
 

Well, there is something to be said for mental toughness and bouncing back after making mistakes.

It seems like when we make mistakes, they just keep rolling. There have been a few exceptions - mostly when we're playing teams full of 2* and 3* star recruits.


We obviously didn't always take what we were given while


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:42 PM
 

Spurrier does a good job with that.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg


Clemson averaged like 7 yards per play


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:45 PM
 

The problem wasn't "not taking what we were given." The problem was giving away the ball and not having the opportunity to score.

2020 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

We Have Enough Firepower ----


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:51 PM
 

The offense has the ability to run up and down the
field. Why do anything cutesy when you don't need to.
The element of surprise,...I get that, but it was
not needed. Its like you got a high-powered cannon
and you are deciding to do trick shots with it, when
it already decimates and causes enough destruction.


I disagree with the toughness part. That's more


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 1:20 PM
 

SEC garbage that's been fed to the masses.


Spurrier's playcalling had minimal impact on the game and

[2]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 1:40 PM
 

there was nothing wrong with Morris' playcalling.

Turning the ball over 6 times, especially losing 2 possessions via punt turnovers (with who knows how many plays lost) deep in our end of the field, they are the primary reasons we lost. Obviously.


Re: Spurrier's playcalling had minimal impact on the game and


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 1:42 PM
 

excuse me--did you not see SHAW run around our hapless defense time and time and time again! you missed a decent game by us and poor coaching cost us the game1


This is just ignorance


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 4:57 PM
 

Spurrier took Beasley out of the game in the second half by letting him run up field and then running Shaw on the Q.B. draw underneath him. Spurrier also set up the back breaking TD to Cooper all game long, and used it at just the right moment.

Those 2 adjustments alone won USC the game.

2020 student level member

Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 1:41 PM
 

Boy, you got that correct!!Morris is a very weak OC because he lets HIS ideas dictate what [plays to call RATHER than the game situation. It was disgraceful to lose to the coots when a high school jv coach could see that in the second have we were going thru them literally and only needed to continue the run.
If anybody thinks we go to the top under the current Morris offensive coaching style, please read up on football strategies. The guy is all about his theories not what necessarily works!


Coaching was THE difference in the game.


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 1:48 PM
 

SOS made the adjustments at halftime and Morris didn't.


Re: Coaching was THE difference in the game.


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 1:54 PM
 

I totally agree but most on this site simply can't seem to understand and keep talking about TO's. Sure they hurt, but in the end it was our failure to close the deal and SHAW did! In coaching, top rate coaches look at a game and see who, if anybody can basically beat them. They then devise the D to be sure that player does not beat them. Someone else may but not that player. Our DC fails to understand that simple but proven approach! by themselves


Re: Coaching was THE difference in the game.

[1]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 2:10 PM
 

Spurrier is a line read coach. He looks at the defense on every play and schemes around it, when they zing he zangs. He game plans differently every based on the team he’s going up against. One week he might just settle to pound it with his RB, next week he will take shot down field, the next he’ll utilize his TE and RB in a short dink and dong game.

IMO that is why they look so unorganized at time, they are always calling the plays at the line trying to take the best opportunity at what the D gives them. I think this hurts them to some lends itself to the mystery as to why they will look like world beaters on week and then turn around a struggle against a team they shouldn’t. Mostly because their players will not be as crisp with the play because they do not run them as often. Spurrier has stated in plenty of interviews that he saw something the D was doing in a game so he started drawing up new plays on the sideline.
He’s been doing it a long time and he’s one of the best in the business at

Morris on the other hand runs a system. He is going to run that system no matter what. Scripted play calling for drives is an example, there just isn’t much deviation. I think that is why our offense looks more in sync because we run the same system and style of play every week. That also the reason we will straight skull #### some teams up and down the field, then some weeks we just hit a brick wall when we meet up against that team that we don’t match up well against then we don’t adjust.


Re: Coaching was THE difference in the game.


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 2:12 PM
 

well said


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier

[4]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 2:03 PM
 

I re-watched the game and noticed something. Spurrier will go to the same play over and over till you stop it at which point he throws deep. The Chad on the other hand stops running the successful plays for done unknown reason. Hot Rod gashed them all night yet had only 14 carries. Why? In fact the only people to run the ball were Tajh and Hot Rod. By contrast, Sukolina had 6 different people run the ball. Which goes to my second point- creativity. We have none. Nada. Zip. The Clemson offense this was very predictable.

You're right about one thing here...Clemson's offense IS very predictable. Not so much your offense, but your scheme and approach to the game. It's been like that during the entire five game stretch. Your entire gameplan on defense is to stop our big play maker. In 2010 you guys went into that game exactly as you went into this one. STOP MARCUS LATTIMORE (2010) and MIKE DAVIS (2013). It's almost like your entire philosophy is "I'll take a loss, but I'm not going to let _ _ _ _ _ beat me" ! Spurrier keeps going to it for one simple reason. Not because it works for us, but because you're successful in stopping it....He's known that you're going to sell out to stop (whoever) and his play calling is to use (whoever) as a decoy and we execute our plan around it. In 2010 your entire D/line and backers were stacked to shut down the read option to Marcus, and you guys left your corner to stop Alshon Jeffery one on one. Spurrier kept handing to Marcus, hand it to Marcus ....Play action and go over the top to A Jeff. You guys didn't adjust, and we kept on doing it. .... 2011 your entire gameplan was to shut A Jeff down. It worked to perfection until late in the game, but in doing so, you had him covered underneath and deep, and left all kinds of room for Shaw to dump it off to Buster Anderson or to run it himself. You guys never backed off the approach, and Spurrier kept throwing at A Jeff, then dumping off to the Check down guys, or Connor just ran it. ... Same plan this year with Davis. Spurrier knew you were going to sell out up front to stop him, and he knew that if you didn't adjust to it, he was going to keep going to Davis between the tackles, and forcing you to pinch in to stop him, and Connor had a field day outside the tackles. .. Spurrier knew you couldn't shut down both. On defense, Same thing for the last four years. Get in Boyd's grill early, and he gets antsy in pressure. Eventually he gets happy feet in sure passing situations and makes mistakes. Blaming Morris / Venables isn't the source. Neither were there in 2009 or 2010, yet it was basically the same approach the last couple of years. There's only one direction to look. I'm assuming Swinney has the majority of say so when coming up with the offensive and defensive approach to the games.


The loss to $CU had nothing to do with coaching....


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 2:04 PM
 

it was entirely due to player execution, or the lack thereof, by Clemson.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Sometimes good things fall apart so better things can fall together.


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 2:07 PM
 

Spurrier actually kept running straight up the middle even though it was gaining no yards. I'm guessing this was to keep 7 in the defensive box so he could run and pass with Shaw against 4.


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 3:10 PM
 

Clemson purposely rushed 11 times in the first half and 14 times in the second half. I did not count any sacks in the rush attempts.

Now, when you are down, you throw the ball to quickly catch up. Not sure why everyone says that the rush was abandoned...it wasn't


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 3:18 PM
 

Excuse me, the Tigers did not run the ball 25 times in the game. Look at the stats. They had the Line of Scrimmage under control in the second half and Morris chose not to run it down their throats which anybody would have done every play until the coots stopped it! He chose not while SOS on the other side chose Shaw to run the QB draw until we stopped it and Venables defense set calling did not stop him once!!!


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 3:23 PM
 

Another thing regarding the rushing game, we run very well because we are such an effective spread team

We rushed well this past Saturday because we mixed thing up pretty evenly (right at 50/50 run/pass), had we over played our hand and kept going to the ground game it would have gotten shut down

regarding Shaw, they didn't decided to run it until we stopped it. They switched to a QB run game because we bit on the decoy which was Davis. Now once they switch to it and it worked over, and over of course they stuck with it, but they did not come out of the gate running the QB.


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier

[1]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 4:32 PM
 

Excuse me, the Tigers did not run the ball 25 times in the game. Look at the stats. They had the Line of Scrimmage under control in the second half and Morris chose not to run it down their throats which anybody would have done every play until the coots stopped it! He chose not while SOS on the other side chose Shaw to run the QB draw until we stopped it and Venables defense set calling did not stop him once!!!

Not talking smack, Serious question for you:
Is Chad Morris a total idiot or void of any football knowledge whatsoever ? ... I ask because your AD pays this guy $1.3 mil to run the offense, and this is the second year in a row I've heard Clemson fans say after the game that the loss to The Gamecocks was (in part) due to Morris abandoning the running game that was working well. If you have a guy calling your offense and paying him a million+, it would seem that he could figure that kind of thing out OR learn from it after getting beat by it the year prior. ...AND, why does it seem that he does OK against every other team on your schedule, but when it comes to the rival game he forgets the basics of Offensive play calling.


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 5:06 PM
 

More likely that SC was game planning on D to stop the pass game and decided to give up some runs to prevent getting burned deep. The SC D did a good job disguising this IMO, giving the look of playing to run stop often, but dropping the LB's into pass coverage after the snap. It is subtle yet effective and the DC can send in a signal at anytime to send the LB's into run coverage. Not as simple or easy to call the correct play against in reality. Much is on the shoulders of Taj to decide after the snap and on the OL to protect or run block properly. Taj was sacked 5 times, mostly from 4 man rushes, though SC did send a LB blitz in a few times.


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier

[1]
Posted: Dec 4, 2013 5:02 PM
 

According to clemsontigers.com, there were 29 rushes. I did look at the stats. Take out the sacks and you have 25 rushes. 11 in the first half and 14 in the second. How did we abandon the run?


Re: Play calling: Morris vs Spurrier


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 5:58 PM
 

Exactly WP85. We played a deep cover 2/tampa 2 defense most of the game & didn't blitz much at all. The gameplan was the same as it has been the past few years against y'all. Get pressure with the front 4 & take away the deep passes. The coaches also knew Morris/Boyd would get impatient & not just settle for what we were giving you. (The underneath stuff and/or runs.)

The deep shell worked, as there was really only one big pass play completed. Sammy's 50+ yard catch & run. Your RB got 84 of his yards on 4 carries, but was held to around 2.5 ypc on his other 10. (That kid played his heart out btw. He was one of the only few on your O that didn't look nervous or pressing too hard.) And we got pressure with our front 4, as we sacked Boyd 5 times & hit him a # of other times. He panics when the he knows the other team can get pressure on him.


Morris Wasted the First Half


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 8:01 PM
 

including the opening drive by insisting on passing while we were gashing Sc with the run. Similar in the second half, we get deep in SC running the ball and then Morris insist on throwing, ends up with a sack and grounding penalty.

Fourth quarter, down 7 with 4 minutes remaining, first play, pass, interception. This after watching Tajh panic all night and run into sacks.


Re: Morris Wasted the First Half


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 9:57 PM
 

we were down 14 at this point with under 4 min left.


Tiger rock - nice post, I agree


Posted: Dec 4, 2013 8:50 PM
 

Also, some on here complaining about abandoning the run on the first drive......it should be apparent to everyone by now that the first 10-15 plays of the game are written in stone. The sequence of the plays for the first drive have been practices likely ad nauseum during the week, so no matter what seemed to be working the best it was predetermined what the next play call would be.

And this goes to my point for this thread and it supports what Tigerrock said......Morris's entire method of play calling during the game seems predetermined based on the down/distance and field position. Morris has his giant play sheet that tells him what to call for each situation......it seems it doesn't matter that the previous 3 times play X was run it got 8 yards, because if it's 3rd and 7 and play X is only run in 1st down situations then play X won't get called because it's not listed in the 3rd and long play choices on Morris's sheet.

On the other side of the field is Spurrier and he's got a sheet of paper in his hand which I assume has some plays written on it and he seems to refer to it some, but as the game goes on he looks to be calling plays on the fly with no predetermined plan.....I assume this is because he is calling plays that have been working during the game or plays that he believes will work based on what the defense is doing even though the plays may not have been intended for the game.


Re: Tiger rock - nice post, I agree


Posted: Dec 5, 2013 1:12 PM
 

Exactly Sludgemuffin,

Spurrier calls play based on the defense he see

Morris calls plays based on his own system


Replies: 37  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: (2) Section UE...$3000 for the pair. Email if interested. Go Tigers!!

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
3422 people have read this post