After reading various sites/podcasts, including IT and 3rd and Longhorn (GREAT SHOW!!) it appears it was a result of bad gameplanning and the OL just not showing up very well.
ASU did exactly what was anticipated in terms of how they would defend the run, and what they have done all year. In fact they had to given their size disadvantage. They slanted their DL to shoot the gaps, and brought down their safeties and LBs and had overwhelming numbers at the LOS.
And we ran the scheme we have run mostly the latter part of the season: outside zone. It was doomed to failure. ASU’s scheme was perfect for it. The outside zone relies on one-on-one matchups in space for the blockers and the RB finding a crease. Our OL could not deal with the speed of their smallish DL; ironically it’s easier for the OL to get on DL who are bigger in space than smaller quick DL. Additionally ASU simply had more numbers and there were no creases to exploit.
If anything we (as advised by the folks at the aforementioned sources) should have run more downhill gap schemes (attacking particular gaps) so the OL could fire off on the DL and push them out of the way, or inside zone.
But we didn’t do that. I guess Sark figured we could just push the ASU defenders around and stick with what had been working.
As for OSU, outside zone won’t work there either. Their DEs are too fast and big and will set the edge and blow up the play before it can get going.
So, hopefully, we will run more downhill gap attacks and inside zone; also look to see more of Jerrick Gibson than we have seen all year. Further, their LBs are better at dropping into coverage than they are on run fits. Oregon ran outside in the Rose Bowl and we know how that turned out.
Just my two cents.
ASU did exactly what was anticipated in terms of how they would defend the run, and what they have done all year. In fact they had to given their size disadvantage. They slanted their DL to shoot the gaps, and brought down their safeties and LBs and had overwhelming numbers at the LOS.
And we ran the scheme we have run mostly the latter part of the season: outside zone. It was doomed to failure. ASU’s scheme was perfect for it. The outside zone relies on one-on-one matchups in space for the blockers and the RB finding a crease. Our OL could not deal with the speed of their smallish DL; ironically it’s easier for the OL to get on DL who are bigger in space than smaller quick DL. Additionally ASU simply had more numbers and there were no creases to exploit.
If anything we (as advised by the folks at the aforementioned sources) should have run more downhill gap schemes (attacking particular gaps) so the OL could fire off on the DL and push them out of the way, or inside zone.
But we didn’t do that. I guess Sark figured we could just push the ASU defenders around and stick with what had been working.
As for OSU, outside zone won’t work there either. Their DEs are too fast and big and will set the edge and blow up the play before it can get going.
So, hopefully, we will run more downhill gap attacks and inside zone; also look to see more of Jerrick Gibson than we have seen all year. Further, their LBs are better at dropping into coverage than they are on run fits. Oregon ran outside in the Rose Bowl and we know how that turned out.
Just my two cents.
