What was the difference in Weber vs. MSU?

Donate To GopherHole
highwayman

highwayman

Knows Less Than Coaching Staff
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
7,904
Reaction score
1,581
Points
113
My theory is three fold--

1) Letting him roll out -- more time to survey the field.

2) Throwing long -- we probably attempted more long throws in this game than in the first 8 combined. It allowed the medium 10-20 yard routes to open up.

3) Losing Decker -- probably the biggest of all. I think Weber relied too much on number 7. It was actually a liberating experience for Weber. He looked around, found the open guy, threw the ball. McKnight never sees this game with a healthy Weber. McKnight showed incredible speed closing on the bomb in the 4th. Decker never catches up to that ball.

I hate to say it, but losing Decker makes Weber a better QB...
 

MSU didn't put nearly as much pressure on as PSU, OSU, or wiscy did. He had that extra second to find a man, and it paid off. That extra second is always apparent when big games by tight ends happen... and Tow-Arnett had a great one.
 

MrGopher said:
MSU didn't put nearly as much pressure on as PSU, OSU, or wiscy did. He had that extra second to find a man, and it paid off. That extra second is always apparent when big games by tight ends happen... and Tow-Arnett had a great one.
Click to expand...

Big props to the OL, and the rollout/waggle/bootlegs, great way to buy time and let receivers work their routes
 

Definitely agree on #1 and #2. Hate to lose Decker, but Weber seemed to survey the field more Saturday night. I do think throwing downfield opened up the routes underneath.
 

I think it's a lot more to do with the play of the o-line than rolling out. The Decker factor also is a good point. He's not telegraphing anymore, or even if he is, he's telegraphing to a different receiver depending on the given play.
 


theory #4 - Losing Decker made us less one-dimensional, and created a bigger challenge for MSU to develop a defensive game plan.

Past teams knew that if they could neutralize Decker our offense would stall. MSU didn't know what to prepare for. My guess is that Dantonio and his staff spent a lot of time in practice figuring out how to defense our wildcat scheme and #5. To their credit they did a good job of taking that away from us, but they never had a solution (or an adjustment) for McKnight, Tow-Arnett, or any of the other receivers that stepped up. The opening play to Bennett was a thing of beauty, too. Brewster gets a lot of crap on this board (and sometimes deservedly so) for his gaffes, but he should get some props for outcoaching MSU.

I agree with others that losing Decker is a definite negative, and I wouldn't wish injury on any player. But him not being in the lineup probably does speed the development of several other players. Including maybe Weber. It'll be interesting to see how Illinois gameplans us. I also agree in particular that our OL stepped it up a notch. Hopefully they can continue this level of play vs. Illinois, and maybe lose a few of the false starts along the way
 

Pass blocking was 100% better.

I also agree on throwing downfield. Weber seems to be more accurate on routes in the middle 1/3 of the field. He has trouble throwing to the sidelines.
 

The blocking was much improved. He had some nice time. outside of that Dontario commented that we did a good job at running plays that gave us nice one to one matchups. Took their safety help out of the play. This was the "out coached" he referred to.
 

I think much of the past criticism of Weber is that he locked onto Decker - he didn't see the field well at all. That resulted in him not seeing open receivers, missing opportunities, etc. With no Decker, there wasn't anyone for him to lock onto - he was forced to try to see the whole field.

He clearly settled on Tow-Arnett as his primary go-to guy. I hope he doesn't shift his tunnel-vision to TA. Weber had a great game - I hope he looks back on the game long enough to understand why.
 



awag777 said:
I think it's a lot more to do with the play of the o-line than rolling out. The Decker factor also is a good point. He's not telegraphing anymore, or even if he is, he's telegraphing to a different receiver depending on the given play.
Click to expand...

I think the jury is still out on the O-line. I think the rolling out gave him that extra second and helped the line block differently. The far side DT, DE, and even the farside LB have to go a lot further and take a lot more to get there.
 

highwayman said:
I think the jury is still out on the O-line. I think the rolling out gave him that extra second and helped the line block differently. The far side DT, DE, and even the farside LB have to go a lot further and take a lot more to get there.
Click to expand...

There were also few if any true drops. That's quite a confidence builder for a QB.
 

highwayman said:
I think the jury is still out on the O-line. I think the rolling out gave him that extra second and helped the line block differently. The far side DT, DE, and even the farside LB have to go a lot further and take a lot more to get there.
Click to expand...

I agree that the jury is still out but many of the downfield passes were play action straight dropback and not rollout. Play action pass blocking is very difficult for an offensive lineman.
 




Too Long in the Wasteland said:
theory #4 - Losing Decker made us less one-dimensional, and created a bigger challenge for MSU to develop a defensive game plan.

Past teams knew that if they could neutralize Decker our offense would stall. MSU didn't know what to prepare for. My guess is that Dantonio and his staff spent a lot of time in practice figuring out how to defense our wildcat scheme and #5. To their credit they did a good job of taking that away from us, but they never had a solution (or an adjustment) for McKnight, Tow-Arnett, or any of the other receivers that stepped up. The opening play to Bennett was a thing of beauty, too. Brewster gets a lot of crap on this board (and sometimes deservedly so) for his gaffes, but he should get some props for outcoaching MSU.

I agree with others that losing Decker is a definite negative, and I wouldn't wish injury on any player. But him not being in the lineup probably does speed the development of several other players. Including maybe Weber. It'll be interesting to see how Illinois gameplans us. I also agree in particular that our OL stepped it up a notch. Hopefully they can continue this level of play vs. Illinois, and maybe lose a few of the false starts along the way
Click to expand...


I'll leave all the more technical stuff to you guys, but I think this was a big part of it--they didn't know what to prepare for, without Decker being on the field.
 

UUUUUUUHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

MNCH said:
Hello?!?! Troy Stoudamire??!!
Click to expand...

I see, I see, well now:(:(. That moment HAD been completely blocked out of my mind. It doesn't exist in my memory. It doesn't exist in my HOUSE. I even fast- forwarded through that section on the DVR. So, Mr. Debbie Downer-like smarty-pants you with your memory, your eye-sight and your fancy pants typing skills. All I'd like to say to you is "tanks for nuthin Noonan"!:banghead::banghead:
 

Iceland12 said:
I see, I see, well now:(:(. That moment HAD been completely blocked out of my mind. It doesn't exist in my memory. It doesn't exist in my HOUSE. I even fast- forwarded through that section on the DVR. So, Mr. Debbie Downer-like smarty-pants you with your memory, your eye-sight and your fancy pants typing skills. All I'd like to say to you is "tanks for nuthin Noonan"!:banghead::banghead:
Click to expand...

Me, too. I even fast forwarded on the DVR. I think we actually scored on that play, but it was called back for holding. I think.
 

#x, play action, I don't remember the offense utilizing this as much prior to MSU and Weber played it well. He was Chris-Weinke-1999-crimiNoles-NC-eque
 

Weber was playing for his job, if he sucked again it may have been his last college start. He was motivated not to lose his role and the motivation seemed to have worked for at least one game.
 

Obviously it was the presence of Halloween ghosts from the past.

Bayfieldgopher said: I heard Adam Weber will be dressed to look like Mike Hohensee, Kevin Whaley as Laurence Maroney, Cedrick McKinley as Karon Riley, Marcus Sherels as Willie Middlebrooks and Traye Simmons as Jack Brewer.
 

I agree that letting him rollout and better OL protection were key differences. Would the rollouts be even more effective in slowing down the defense if Weber actually did run more like he did the first two years?
 

Iceland12 said:
I see, I see, well now:(:(. That moment HAD been completely blocked out of my mind. It doesn't exist in my memory. It doesn't exist in my HOUSE. I even fast- forwarded through that section on the DVR. So, Mr. Debbie Downer-like smarty-pants you with your memory, your eye-sight and your fancy pants typing skills. All I'd like to say to you is "tanks for nuthin Noonan"!:banghead::banghead:
Click to expand...

Sorry to bring it up but I hope that will be the worst drop of the season.
 

MNCH said:
Sorry to bring it up but I hope that will be the worst drop of the season.
Click to expand...

I'd bet that the number of Gopher fans with a DVR who used the fast-forward on that play is way beyond 46%!:)

"In the middle of a story about DVR use and its impact on the TV business in this past Sunday's New York Times, reporter Bill Carter relayed this interesting tidbit:

Against almost every expectation, nearly half of all people watching delayed shows are still slouching on their couches watching messages about movies, cars and beer. According to Nielsen, 46 percent of viewers 18 to 49 years old for all four networks taken together are watching the commercials during playback, up slightly from last year. Why would people pass on the opportunity to skip through to the next chunk of program content? The most basic reason, according to Brad Adgate, the senior vice president for research at Horizon Media, a media buying firm, is that the behavior that has underpinned television since its invention still persists to a larger degree than expected. “It’s still a passive activity,” he said."
 

I think that we will see a different Weber the rest of the season. Without Decker he has to find the open receiver, and not lock on the best rec in the BT. He still eyeballed some, but much better on check downs and throwing on time. By throwing on time, the line didn't have to hold their blocks for 5-6 sec. And they are improving on pass blocking, but Weber throwing on time helps alot too.
 

As Harvey Keitel said in the movie Pulp Fiction, "Let's not go and start patting each other on the back just yet." Although he didn't say patting each other on the back. He used a phrase not condusive to this family oriented message board. Anyway, I digress.

I can't believe we've gotten to the 2nd page of this thread and nobody has mentioned MSU's pass defense. They came into the game ranked very low both in the Big Ten and nationally in their pass defense. Simply put, it's poor at best. Doesn't anyone think that our sudden success through the air might have been in large part to the Spartan's inability to defend? After all, our passing game has been pathetic all year. All of a sudden it's great?

Unless we continue this brilliant air attack in our remaining 3 games, I'll assume it was the poor defensive unit MSU put on the field to be the reason for our success here. I just don't buy the fact that Eric Decker on the bench made us a better passing team. It doesn't make a lot of sense when you think about it. We'll know more in the coming weeks, I guess.
 

highwayman said:
My theory is three fold--

1) Letting him roll out -- more time to survey the field.

2) Throwing long -- we probably attempted more long throws in this game than in the first 8 combined. It allowed the medium 10-20 yard routes to open up.

3) Losing Decker -- probably the biggest of all. I think Weber relied too much on number 7. It was actually a liberating experience for Weber. He looked around, found the open guy, threw the ball. McKnight never sees this game with a healthy Weber. McKnight showed incredible speed closing on the bomb in the 4th. Decker never catches up to that ball.

I hate to say it, but losing Decker makes Weber a better QB...
Click to expand...

He had excellent protection all night long!
 

For sure the o-line was the difference, that is why we saw so many deep balls weber finally had time to throw them. also more creative play calling and blocking schemes heavily influenced the 'new weber'. I look forward to seeing if they can keep it up the rest of the year.
 

Obvious

I think not having Decker in there may be a help to our offense but it's not fault of his own.

1. Brew put too much pressure on Fisch in having the offense focus on Decker. Fisch even talked it about how it was a freeing expereince not having to spend the whole week looking for ways to get Decker open.

2. Weber was focused to much on his roomate when passing the ball. Not having Decker on the field forced Weber to look at other options. Now he's looking at guys in single coverage rather then forcing it into Decker who is triple coverage.
 

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the fact that Weber's had a glove on his throwing hand.

And we saw the best deep ball throws from Web all year. Not saying this was the difference maker, but it may have been a factor...
 

highwayman said:
My theory is three fold--

1) Letting him roll out -- more time to survey the field.

2) Throwing long -- we probably attempted more long throws in this game than in the first 8 combined. It allowed the medium 10-20 yard routes to open up.

3) Losing Decker -- probably the biggest of all. I think Weber relied too much on number 7. It was actually a liberating experience for Weber. He looked around, found the open guy, threw the ball. McKnight never sees this game with a healthy Weber. McKnight showed incredible speed closing on the bomb in the 4th. Decker never catches up to that ball.



I hate to say it, but losing Decker makes Weber a better QB...
Click to expand...

The other two are results of the first. It was far to easy for Weber to try and work it to Decker. Been mentioning that most of the season. Now he, Fisch and the rest of the wrs have to step it up...Still kinda wondering what is going on with Carpenter. Is he still adjusting to the BT from JC?
 

I still think we'll hear from Carpenter before the year is done. When you look at Carpenter, Green, Stoudlmire, Mcknight, and Allen this has to be the fastest group of recievers we have ever had on the field for the U. I know during Wackers days we had a couple really fast ones but not five guys like we have now. Next year our passing game should be the best in the Big Ten.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom