All year ? It's game 2. If you didn't take the opportunity that presented itself there you'd be crazy. You might only get a look like that once or twice a game.
The only thing perfect in that play was the positioning of the defender. You have two plays to burn time and earn a first down at basically mid field. With the offense sputtering as it was...it seems that ball control and short passing routes were the move viable options. I admit I am no coach...but a second game Riley Leonard hadn't established his skill set within this offense to opt for lower percentage plays. While the execution was bad....the play calling wasn't much better. jmo
Poorly coached ? That's a leap and quite frankly incredibly stupid. I guess Craig is poorly coached because he committed the exact same holding penalty two weeks in a row ? This coach bashing is absurd. You said a long time ago you played in college. If that's indeed true you would know how things work. Every play call that isn't successful isn't a bad call. Sloppy technique is on the player. If all eleven win their respective battles you likely will have a positive outcome.
No kidding. Do you think he was coached to throw that trajectory ? The guy is in his final year of eligibility. He knows he screwed up. A horrible throw. No one could forsee it. Looked to me that he knew he had the play and rushed his throw. Bad mistake at an inopportune time.
I love your example because yes it was poorly coached by rudolph. Did you not see craig ask the official what he did wrong like he didn't realize grabbing the jersey from the outside is obvious holding? 2 games in a row now on big gains called back due to poor coaching and execution. Yes some of it is on the player, but if a player keeps making the same mistake you do something about it.
Was he coached properly to throw the correct trajectory? That wasn't just slightly off trajectory and distance. Both being that far off is absurd.
Really ? A guy in his last year of college eligibility needs coached on something so fundamental. You are really showing a true lack of understanding. This isn't junior high. Horrible throw. Solely on the QB. End of story.
That might've been a good call if Hartman had been the QB. He was a good deep ball thrower. But unfortunately, Leonard isn't. But all 3 of our backups are probably better than Leonard at making that throw as well.
Why is it poor coaching ? If anything it's lazy technique. Craig knows the rules. No one is teaching it that way. Your arguments are nonsensical and suggest coaching is the sole reason they lost. I absolutely guarantee the staff coached last week the exact same way they coached prior to the opener. Programs at the highest level are incredibly structured. Routine is paramount. It's a highly regarded and respected staff. They didn't forget what got them there. They had stinker. It happens.
If that's your take, and i'm fine with that. Why the F was he brought to ND and still playing the 2nd half? It's how he threw last year, he was terrible throwing vs A&M, and terrible vs NIU in the first half?
The staff is accepting repetitive failure from the same players over and over. We have enough depth to pull people. It doesn't have to be a permanent pull, but a " you play like that again, you'll be right back out".
It's TWO games. Correctable for sure. As a former o lineman myself I'm guessing Craig didn't even realize his hand placement. Happens a lot out in space especially with receivers blocking.
Define " accepting " ? Are you for benching players after every mistake. You have good plays and bad plays in games as a player. The goal is to win way more than you lose. Unfortunately bad plays that incur penalties are magnified.
Yes, Hartman, Angeli, MInchey, Carr, even Buchner could've made the throw. I don't mean they would've completed the pass. I think they all could've thrown higher and farther than Leonard.
Freeman just said in his PC that they didn't get OLine holding corrected from week 1 to week 2 in practice, and they went back and realized they need to get these corrected in practice, and if they see it in practice keep coaching until its right.
Well there you go, awesome play call. Cost us the game, but no matter. Hate the player, not the game. Or however that expression goes....
Riley is the easy one to touch on. He had a good pocket a lot and scrambled out of it, poor reads, poor passes, poor decisions, poor footwork, etc. Yes he plays super hard, and will fight for extra yards running. But they accepted all of his mistakes 2 weeks in a row. His play at QB the first two weeks is buchner/pyne level. We got him to ensure we weren't there!
This is exactly correct. A significant error, certainly at the point of the game with a slight lead for ND. To me, the other most significant mistakes were LBs pass coverage on their RB, particularly the long pass TD play and another that went for approx 40 yards on their second field goal drive. Both passes complete to Brown with less experienced LBs in coverage. Ten points for Northern Illinois primarily on these two plays. The final interception ultimately led to a FG as well with a shorter field after the Int return yards.
The gameplan was much better vs. A&M. We stuck with the running game and ran for 198 yds, and it was enough to win, with good defense. But against NIU, we started out running on the first drive and scored. Then we started passing after that. And it didn't work. Then in the 3rd quarter, Love has a great 34-yard TD run. Then he only touched the ball once after that. He's our best offensive player; he should be getting the ball a lot more than that.
Your last point was somewhat asked to freeman in a soft way. Love had 1 touch the last 23-24 minutes of the game. WTF
Stick to your day job.
If there was ever sport seemingly that AI would be ripe to take over, like with play calling for instance, football is seemingly it. Or maybe not though, maybe football is a sport that is almost infinitely complicated, in its own unquantifiable way. And you're better off with a wonky coach who totally knows the playbook himself back to front, indeed who probably wrote it himself, and can tap his own intuition whenever he feels the impulse, or his survival sense kicks in and he knows just when to defy the statistical imperative of that particular down and distance. And which is solely the province of organic human intelligence, and a computer will never possess it. Despite what the evangelists say.Soccer has so called X statistics. Basically the probability of an assist or goal happening...derived through exhaustive data an AI. You know if an attempted play is a smart or dumb play, with some contextual adjustment.
I'm not sure if football has this. But man, that play call seems glaringly dumb. Late, 1 point lead, needing to burn clock, a poorly performing QB? Really? I bet some stats would argue against this.
As I keep saying, I am no Xs and Os expert. But even I see what a terrible call that was. Necessitating near perfect execution, which seemed improbable and risky.
Finally, you can always generally claim execution on any play. In any sport. Hence being judicious.
Banal stuff.
I agree I think it was a good call, the play failed because of execution not because of the play itself !
Right, so the AI will instantaneously offer up a small bevy of play-call options, based on down, distance, quarter, players on the field, the current wind speed and direction, every conceivable applicable variable, ordered in the highest probability of success, and the coach just presses the screen on his iPad. That does sort of take the humanity out of it.I do AI for a living. Lots of python programming, feature engineering, LLMs now. But I agree: it's not human intelligence, which involves quantum phenomena, including quantum collapse and retroactive causality from future to past...powering consciousness and free will. AI in contrast is a so called Turing machine base digital state.
Fancy way of saying AI won't beat human coaches...but like you suggest, coaches can benefit greatly from AI, especially in football, which operates from fixed positions in a series.
AI is best is narrowly defined tasks needing brute force computing to score probabilities.
Lounge chair critics.Soccer has so called X statistics. Basically the probability of an assist or goal happening...derived through exhaustive data an AI. You know if an attempted play is a smart or dumb play, with some contextual adjustment.
I'm not sure if football has this. But man, that play call seems glaringly dumb. Late, 1 point lead, needing to burn clock, a poorly performing QB? Really? I bet some stats would argue against this.
As I keep saying, I am no Xs and Os expert. But even I see what a terrible call that was. Necessitating near perfect execution, which seemed improbable and risky.
Finally, you can always generally claim execution on any play. In any sport. Hence being judicious.
Banal stuff.
Very interesting. A lot of playcalling is designed through scheme. The plays are designed to do certain things against certain looks as well as how specific players are playing. I don’t think a computer can see that. The human just knows this. He sees it and makes the call which makes the computer redundant/unnecessary. The coordinators are also teaching the players what to do in practice.
There's a time to be conservative and a time to let it rip. Analytics ruin a coach's gut IMO. If they are too analytically driven. And I believe it gives them a straw man when they fail. "Well the analytics said" hogwash. They are a tool but should not be the defatco decision maker.
Agree and I think a coach should just instinctually know when to go for 2 or not or go for it on 4th. There are some scenarios that take some more thinking, but generally, it’s pretty obvious though I’ve never made these decisions myself.
Fyi to all, the TV broadcast I believe was mistaken and ND had no timeouts. I believe Freeman talked about this in the presser.
