Clarification from CJ

[shakes3858]

Everyone seems to be going on and on about CJ saying that only a percentage of McCall's playbook is designed to beat man coverage. I would think that a playbook would have a percentage of plays to beat man, a percentage of plays to beat cover 2 or 4, a percentage of plays to beat cover 3, a percentage of plays to beat blitzes, and a percentage of plays to beat prevent. I don't think this was CJ saying we don't have enough plays to beat man. I think it means that when teams are playing man against us, we're limited to the portion of the playbook that is designed to beat man. I don't know how everyone has taken it the other way, except for lots of people wanting confirmation on their predetermined position that McCall is the worst human being on the planet.

So Lou, is there any chance you can call CJ and get clarification on what he actually meant? I'll try to ask as well, but if I come back with an answer, most on the board are going to say I made it up. If you get the answer, most will take it at face value.

 

[NUQB18]

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify what I meant.

My comments are not intended to be a knock on McCall. There are limited options for ANY offensive coordinator for what you can run against man to man.

Every OC has the same man-to-man plays from team to team. It comes down to getting the best matchups for your best skill players and giving them an opportunity to "win" those matchups. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to win those matchups often enough and (in my opinion), I don't think that is McCall's fault.

If we are able to start winning those one on one matchups, teams will shy away from playing man coverage, and they will play zone. OC's have the opportunity to get creative when they're game-planning against zone defenses and McCall, specifically, is very good at creating game plans against zone.

In sum, you don't really have much of an opportunity to really gameplan against man. All you can do is put your best players in good matchups, which McCall has done, and then all you can do from there is tell your players to go win. We have to win one on one matchups, plain & simple. And that has to come from a refusal to be covered by our receivers, not from the OC.

Does that make sense?

 

[NUQB18]

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify what I meant.

My comments are not intended to be a knock on McCall. There are limited options for ANY offensive coordinator for what you can run against man to man.

Every OC has the same man-to-man plays from team to team. It comes down to getting the best matchups for your best skill players and giving them an opportunity to "win" those matchups. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to win those matchups often enough and (in my opinion), I don't think that is McCall's fault.

If we are able to start winning those one on one matchups, teams will shy away from playing man coverage, and they will play zone. OC's have the opportunity to get creative when they're game-planning against zone defenses and McCall, specifically, is very good at creating game plans against zone.

In sum, you don't really have much of an opportunity to really gameplan against man. All you can do is put your best players in good matchups, which McCall has done, and then all you can do from there is tell your players to go win. We have to win one on one matchups, plain & simple. And that has to come from a refusal to be covered by our receivers, not from the OC.

Does that make sense?

I will clarify on the next Northwestern Huddlecast.

 

[NJCat83588]

I will clarify on the next Northwestern Huddlecast.

CJ, I have thoroughly enjoyed your work with TJ on Huddlecast this season. You guys do a great job. I love your dry sense of humor and willingness to speak candidly about what you see. Look forward to more good stuff next season!

 

[shakes3858]

Thanks CJ

 

[Turk_rivals223269]

One thing we can all say is that whatever the limitations of the offense may be, McCall did a very very poor job in regards to Vitale in the most important game of the year. As the 2nd team All-Big10 TE, it seems to me that our offensive coordinator further limited our playbook or production by trying to 'trick' Tennessee by 'bait and switching" Vitale with Vault, where the "Vs" didn't at all mean Victory.

 

[Deeringfish]

One thing we can all say is that whatever the limitations of the offense may be, McCall did a very very poor job in regards to Vitale in the most important game of the year. As the 2nd team All-Big10 TE, it seems to me that our offensive coordinator further limited our playbook or production by trying to 'trick' Tennessee by 'bait and switching" Vitale with Vault, where the "Vs" didn't at all mean Victory.[/QUOTE
I think he cut his hair and lost his strength.

 

[pawildcat_rivals209725]

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify what I meant.

My comments are not intended to be a knock on McCall. There are limited options for ANY offensive coordinator for what you can run against man to man.

Every OC has the same man-to-man plays from team to team. It comes down to getting the best matchups for your best skill players and giving them an opportunity to "win" those matchups. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to win those matchups often enough and (in my opinion), I don't think that is McCall's fault.

If we are able to start winning those one on one matchups, teams will shy away from playing man coverage, and they will play zone. OC's have the opportunity to get creative when they're game-planning against zone defenses and McCall, specifically, is very good at creating game plans against zone.

In sum, you don't really have much of an opportunity to really gameplan against man. All you can do is put your best players in good matchups, which McCall has done, and then all you can do from there is tell your players to go win. We have to win one on one matchups, plain & simple. And that has to come from a refusal to be covered by our receivers, not from the OC.

Does that make sense?

Certainly does make sense. It's not unlike basketball coaches who have to have both a man "O" and zone "O." I enjoy your insights and enjoyed watching you play.