We've been doing it all wrong [UPDATED]

[WARNING: Wonky football analysis post] [UPDATED: I had the percentages transposed for BC. Thanks to Mod34b for the heads up.]

Mgoblog has a contributor who does a lot of interesting work on football analysis. His latest post explains how the traditional down and distance philosophy is outdated. Wisconsin -- with their very successful QB and RB combo -- is the test case, but there is a lot that BC could apply. A quick summary is that a passing play from a QB has a better upside than one from an elite RB and that a premier running back is overrated.

Now even without great players like Russell Wilson and Montee Ball, balance on offense is outdated. BC needs to be more aggressive and make our passing game more explosive.

I know Spaz doesn't call the plays, but his selections of Coordinators and his endorsement of their approaches, shows he's more comfortable with a "balanced" attack. I would hope that Doug Martin would open things up, but his one year at New Mexico State was also very run heavy. Below are some reference points. And what does it say about BC, when Wisconsin -- the Big Ten team used as an example an of old school approach on offense -- looks pass happy compared to BC and New Mexico State.

Run/Pass mix
BC 2011 -- 57.42% run, 42.58% pass
BC 2010 -- 56.93% run, 43.07% pass
BC 2009 -- 57.35% run, 42.65% pass
New Mexico State 2011 -- 49.72% run, 50.28% pass
Wisconsin 2011 -- 35.01% run, 64.99% pass

Martin has said the right things about next season. He runs a West Coast, single back offense but is less about scheme and more about taking advantage of the team's best players. I don't know enough about New Mexico State to judge if a heavy dose of run made sense. Let's hope he does want to take advantage of our best players because that would mean plenty of passing from Rettig to Larmond and Pantale.

No ignoring offensive failure

As defenders and critics of Spaz get more entrenched in their respective stances, I suggest we look at the objective issues. The biggest is the failure of the offensive side of the ball under Spaz. In an era of video game scoring, BC remains unable to put points on the board. In 30 games against FBS opponents, Spaz's teams have only scored more than 20 points nine times. They are averaging over that time 18.5 against FBS opponents. BC has failed to exceed 20 points for nine-straight FBS games. We were fortunate that Spaz's first two teams used defense to cover up this glaring issue. That's not the case of late.

Now there are a whole host of reasons as to why the offense has struggled. But all those issues cannot rationalize the end results. We are failing on offense. We are failing in how we plan it, how we execute it, how we teach it, and how we practice. When the parts are greater than the whole and areas of weakness are not addressed through recruiting or schemes, then you are failing.

Spaz's background has been defense. But as head coach it is also his job to empower the offensive decision makers and help them build for success. We are not doing that.

Focus on the positive. Let's hope we get better soon, but ignoring the elephant in the room is not going to change the scoreboard.

Season in Review Part I: Biggest Dissappointments

This has always been one of the tougher pieces to write because you hate picking on the players. So in this case, I will factor in some other facets of the program. Here are the Biggest Disappointments of the 2010 season.

1. Game Management. I know I am considered a Spaz hater and major critic, but I think even his biggest supporters would admit the Spaz's in game management and use of timeouts is troubling. We had multiple games where we had timeouts and clock before the half and elected to burn time. We wasted way too much time on some possessions only to settle for a field goal (Clemson). We failed to use time outs in close game (Duke) to preserve time in case the opponent scored and we needed to answer. It was just mind numbing. Don't get me started on ever going for it or using a surprise play on special teams. That sort of thinking doesn't fall into the "we know what we are" mindset. I am sure Spaz can rationalize his management. If you think your team is limited, you want to do whatever you can to protect them. I would argue that a limited team that has trouble scoring needs to maximize their chances. Settling for a field goal or taking a knee wastes valuable scoring opportunities. No one really presses Spaz to explain his game management so I don't expect things to change in 2011. I hope that with a maturing team and a maturing QB he can use every opportunity we have.

2. Offensive Line U. We never looked like a unit that had four returning starters. We never looked like a unit that had two NFL draft picks. Part of the problem arose from training camp when we shuffled players around. Part of the problem was inconsistency from certain players. When the scheduled softened up and we moved Richman back to guard and Spinney to Center, things finally clicked. I even think we looked better with Cleary at RT. But then many of the same old problems arose against Nevada. BC had problems with speed and assignments. I will acknowledge that our one dimensional offense didn't help the OLine. Since the opposing Defenses didn't respect our ability to pass, our Line was often left to block seven or eight unrushing guys. But that doesn't excuse the general inconsistency. We have talent. We have a tradition. Was it the scheme? Was it the coaching? We'll find out in 2011.

3. The passing offense. I was going to complain about our failure to use the Tight Ends in the passing game, but what's the point? How can you gripe about one position, when you only had 180 completions on the entire season? We were only good for 13 completions a game. This is in 2010 when all the rules enable passing. This is in an era when teams play uptempo and the very pace of play enables extra snaps that should naturally feature a pass attempt or two. We were so flawed at one of the basic offensive concepts that we only completed 180 passes in a 13 game season. If you want to look on the bright side, it was a three completion improvement over 2009! Some will say our passing numbers with Crane/Davis were also bad. But 2008's offense was better and Crane and Davis also produced positive rushing yards. At the end of the day, we were terrible at throwing the ball in two years under Tranq. We used five different starters at QB and never developed even a few fundamental plays. Thankfully it should get better next year.

New offensive coordinators: real and imagined

When you are 108th in total offense nationally and last in scoring within your conference, making a change at Offensive Coordinator seems like a smart move. When your offensive coordinator turns 71 in the spring, having a new name in mind makes sense. Yet Rivals.com Mike Farrell is predicting that Gary Tranquill will return to BC as offensive coordinator in 2011. Let me say that this is the opposite of everything I have heard. I was always told that Tranq was taking it year to year and unlikely to return. Even in the past few weeks I have heard that Tranq would be retiring again. The only gossip I've heard that might support what Farrell is saying is that Spaz would like Tranq to come back. But everyone else, including Tranq himself, is thinking retirement. Regardless, I will stick to my prediction that Tranq will retire.

But the pending change leads us into one of the great parlor games of the BC offseason: picking our new offensive coordinator. I always assumed it would be current WR coach Ryan Day. Many said Spaz preferred current TE coach Dave Brock. Now there is speculation that internal promotions would be fallback options and Spaz would rather bring in an outsider. So here are some real candidates and some speculative and satirical ones.

Real
Ryan Day
Pros: Considered bright young coach with head coach potential. Worked with some of the most influential offensive minds in football.
Cons: Never called a game before. No one knows how or what he would tweak from our current system.


Dave Brock
Pros: Has called plays at this level. Key recruiter for our current and future QBs. Would run an offense most similar to Tranq's.
Cons: Would run an offense most similar to Tranq's. Brock sat next to Tranq in the box while this offense sputtered along. That does not disqualify him, but it makes you wonder if he would have done anything differently.

Sean Devine
Pros: Has called a game before. Knows how to run a wide open, high tempo offense.
Cons: Never called plays at this level. Just because he followed Chip Kelly and has Chip Kelly's playbook doesn't mean he can make BC into Oregon. Mixed results coaching our OLine.

Ben Sirmans
Pros: While he doesn't have the BC roots as deep as Ryan Day, like Day, Sirmans is a well regarded coach who has been around many good offensive systems.
Cons: Never called plays. Never designed an offense.

Frank Cignetti, Jr.
Pros: Suddenly looking for a job after Pitt cleaned house. Followed Tranq at UNC so he knows how to follow him and transition to his system. Has a prostyle and balanced attack that would fit with our current roster. Would be the outside name that many desire.
Cons: No connection to Spaz. Pitt's offense has been criticized for many of the same issues we have (redzone, boring style, etc).

Matt Canada
Pros: Probably out of a job at Indiana. Runs a pass happy sort of prostyle offense. Led the Big Ten in passing.
Cons: No connection to BC. No connection to New England. No connection to Spaz. The reason I mention him is that he is the type of guy who might be available and he has called plays before and could probably elevate the play of our current QBs.

Noel Mazzone
Pros: Current Arizona State OC. Has called plays at a BCS level. May be looking for work depending how the dominoes in the coaching carousel fall. Worked with Gene's son while at the Jets. Runs a pro style that would fit our roster.
Cons: No obvious connection to Spaz. No connection to New England. Might not want to job hop.

Imagined
Mark Whipple
Pros: Proven play caller. Knows the region well. Knows the ACC. Runs a style of play that would fit for BC.
Cons: Miami had inconsistency issues too. [This was floated to me as a real possibility but I can't ever see it happening. I don't think Whipple would come back and work for Gene. I don't know if Whipple would work at a place where he could have been Head Coach. I also don't know if Spaz would welcome someone who, if he succeeds, could be a threat to take Spaz's job.]

Paul Peterson
Pros: Passing Game coordinator for a FCS school. Alum.
Cons: No BCS experience. No FBS experience. [A blogger can dream, can't he? If you are going to go with an young unproven guy, you go with Day.]

John DeFilippo
Pros: NFL and college experience. Could run a prostyle offense. Knows BC. Worked with some of the current staffers.
Cons: No play calling experience. [Jags considered hiring John D when he first came aboard but everyone thought it wasn't the right time or situation. Now? What the hell? Everyone thinks Gene is calling the shots. Let's just take it to the next level!]

Galen Hall
Pros: Play calling experience. Seasoned veteran. Can run different types of offenses. Turns 71 in August as opposed to April baby Tranq.
Cons: Wouldn't lower the average age of current staff. [If Spaz's wants an outsider with experience to match Tranq, Hall is his only answer...who is still alive.]

As I said, I expect Tranq to retire and Brock or Day to get the job. I hope that if Spaz does look outside the current staff he makes a hire who won't try to change everything. We have the pieces in place to take big leaps forward offensively. I would hate to start from scratch again.

Predictability is offensive

I haven't loved the play calling by Tranq, but felt the bigger problem on offense is lack of execution and using a grab bag of plays and offensive philosophy. But some are starting to feel that BC is entirely predictable and at this point our players are tipping plays:

The stop of the Eagles' Montel Harris was particularly pivotal on Saturday --- and Maryland saw the play coming.

"The guards were kind of giving away their stances the whole game, so the two guards were pretty heavy up front," linebacker Alex Wujciak said. "I think we knew they were going to run the ball. Coach [Don] Brown had an awesome call for it."

Long time reader Patrick M. has a sobering assessment of our offensive ineptitude. Here is his research (which was already posted on Eagle Action):

BC is 112th in the nation in total offense --- which happens to be the worst performance of any BCS-conference school. We are converting 26.7% of the time on third down. We have been absolutely shut down by the ND defense --- 81st in the country --- and the NC State defense, 47th in the country.

There's only one ACC team that is even close to BC for offensive ineptitude --- Maryland. Maryland has converted 28.9% of third downs this season...so, they're not much better than us, perhaps owing to the fact that they too have a freshman QB. In fact, they weren't better than us until yesterday when they converted 10 out of 19 3rd downs. That stat, of course, does not include the 2 out of 3 4th downs they converted; those two were on the same TD drive, and one was a 4th and 7, where we gave up a nearly uncontested 8 yard pass.

We have scored 14 touchdowns on offense this season. To pick a point of comparison, let's go with Dana Bible at NC State: they have scored 30 touchdowns. That is, the offensive coordinator that we wanted to run out of town has been more than twice as effective as Mr. Gary Tranquil.

We have gotten 103 first downs this season, a little more than 14 per game. Thankfully, that doesn't make us the worst BCS conference team --- only second worse, as Vanderbilt is even more futile. Of course, I'm not sure we should be comparing the ACC Atlantic defenses to those of the SEC, but that's a more subjective matter. Maryland has only gained 104 first downs this year --- although that did not stop them from marching out to a 24-7 lead.

So, if you thought you were watching a historically poor BC performance this season --- you are. I have not tracked back to the 1995 and 1996 D.H. seasons, and those (judging by the scores in our media guide) had a similar level of offensive ineptitude. But we are undoubtedly watching the worst offensive performance in more than 15 years ---- and quite likely in more than 20.

Finally, and scarily, BC's groupings might be tipping off the other team. Also from Eric Hoffses at Eagle Action:

Each game I personally chart each and every play noting whether it was a run or passing play and what type of personnel package was in the game. In the 2nd half I noticed something disturbing---Maryland cornerbacks were turned towards the line of scrimmage with their backs to the sidelines on 1st downs when they saw anything but 11 personnel on the field. I thought to myself that this was pretty gutsy. However after analyzing some data I can see why the cornerbacks were lined up like that.

First, let's look at 1st down play calling. I took every first down play, regardless if the play was negated by a penalty or not to see if there were any trends. Out of 28 1st down play calls, BC had 18 running plays and 10 passing plays. Granted one of the running plays was actually a play action pass call that Rettig had to escape the pocket and run out of, but it might have been more effective to see that run to pass ratio closer to 50/50. Also, those statistics might be skewed a little bit since BC was forced to pass so much in the 4th quarter.

My problem was less with the ratio of runs to passes on 1st down, but more with how they came. The Eagles started the game by running on 8 1st downs in a row. With Harris running pretty effectively wouldn't that have been the perfect time for a play action pass?

Perhaps the most troubling thing to me though is how predictable the Eagles were with their personnel packages. Out of Rettig's 33 pass attempts, all but one was run with 11 personnel (1 RB, 1 TE) on the field. The one pass play not run with 11 personnel, came out of 12 personnel (1RB 2 TE). In 12 personnel BC had 1 pass attempt and 8 rushing attempts. Out of 21(2 RB, 1 TE) personnel the Eagles had 3 rush attempts, out of 22 (2 RB 2 TE) personnel they had 6 rush attempts, and out of 23 personnel they had 2 rush attempts.

So let's break all of this down. When BC did not have 11 personnel on the field they had 1 pass attempt and 19 rushing attempts. If I can notice that do you think the Maryland defensive coaches did?

Still think talent is the main issue here?

Pathetic

Where do I start?

This team is not as bad as it has looked the past two weeks. Spaz will do a TOB impression and lower expectations with the media. He'll play down our talent and make it seem like things are much worse than they are. But the problems we have start with the coaching. The final possession before the half was either incompetence or cowardice. Neither is good.

Our offensive line -- the lifeblood of this program -- is in shambles. That is not a talent issue either.

But regardless or how you feel about Xs and Os or talent or QBs, this team is not even fun to watch.

I feel sorry for Chase Rettig. He wasn't given much to do and looked promising with what he did. The defense looked good in stretches, but clearly started in a fog.

I still think our schedule is forgiving enough for us to go to a bowl game but we will never win the ACC with Spaz as head coach. He won't take the risks or manage the game or season in go for broke mentality. He loves BC but he shouldn't be our head coach.

Like the TOB era, I don't think we will ever bottom out under Spaz. Instead we'll just have frustrating football for a few years.

I'll hopefully be in a better mood Sunday and will have my second viewing thoughts and grades late Sunday night.

Rettig to start

As I said on Twitter last night, Rettig will start this weekend. The coaching staff is remaining coy for a variety of reasons, but I've heard confirmation from some pretty good sources. I don't know if or when Spaz will make the official announcement but barring some unforeseen issue or injury, Chase Rettig will make his BC debut as a Boston College starter this Saturday night.

[Eds note: I don't like "breaking news" like this because of the flack and blowback I get if wrong, but I think this is pretty solid.]

The right move is to start Rettig

I tweeted the Rettig news this morning as soon as I heard it. BCMike asked if Chase would started and I replied that I couldn't confirm. Come to find out, Spaz is leaving the job open for Marscovetra or Rettig. This opens up a whole (welcome) can of worms that we will discuss and digest all week. Although he is getting thrown under the bus by some fans too, I have not given up on Marscovetra yet. But I think the move this week should be to start Rettig. Here is why: it's Notre Dame. This game means everything and it means nothing.

Everything. Rettig will be under the most intense spotlight you can imagine. He will make his first college start in primetime in a game that means more to BC fans than any other. He will be taking on college football's most revered program. If he can handle the pressure and succeed, you have the foundation for a great career. Conversely there is so little downside.

Nothing. Notre Dame is bad this year and has a porous defense. The game means nothing in the ACC standings. If he has a rough day you can always bring in Marscovetra in the second half.

As important as the starter is the attitude and plan of the coaching staff. Shinskie and many parts of the offense were not good on Saturday, but I think we didn't do anyone any favors with our game plan. I understand that execution is part of it, but so are adjustments and finding some basic concepts and plays that work. BC didn't do enough of that on Saturday.

I can't speak to Spaz's motivation or why he mishandled the QB spot so far. But I can say that this season is still very manageable and still has the recipe to be special. We have a very good defense and a very forgivable schedule. I understand that Rettig might be a disaster. That is the chance you take and that is the responsibility Spaz took on when he made the move from DC to head coach.

But this is BC. Strange things can happen. If we are going to have one of those special, "how did this happen," runs, it starts this Saturday and it starts with Chase Rettig.

What a waste

We wasted a great defensive effort today. Especially from Albright, KPL and Herzy. We also wasted a whole half. Shinskie was melting down, but if you are going to bring in Marsco why handcuff him with play calling designed to kill clock not spark a comeback? We also wasted the first two games, because we clearly have a QB issue and we never gave Marscovetra (or Rettig) serious snaps to get them ready for ACC play.

This game and situation reminded me a lot of the 2008 loss to Georgia Tech. In that game we outplayed the Jackets but our QB cost us. We rebounded and road a great defense to the ACC Championship Game. Our D is very good, I just don't know if our coaching staff can "smoke and mirror" enough out of our offense to win games.

Second viewing thoughts and grades will come out late Sunday night.

Rettig: redshirt or ready?

In his the notes section of his latest column, Conroy mentioned the true freshmen who may still see playing time this year:

Spaziani spent the week getting longer looks at some true freshmen that will see some action.

Spaziani didn’t mention any numbers, but linebacker Steele DeVitto has been on the bubble. The staff also wanted to give a long look to wide receivers Shakim Phillips and Alex Amidon, both of whom missed most of training camp with hamstring injuries.

“Because of our situation, depth-wise and where we are in the program, we’re going to have to play some of these guys on special teams and put them in backup roles,” said Spaziani. “We know we’re going to need them down the road and we don’t have the luxury of (redshirting).” . . .

Not mentioned is true freshman quarterback Chase Rettig. Surprisingly the idea of whether they should redshirt Rettig is still being kicked around the Yawkey offices. But the staff knows they are reaching the point of no return. Using him with say only six games left is a waste. You either use him now and let him take his lumps or groom him as planned and let him play next year.

This decision would be much easier if Shinskie showed a bit more consistency. Rettig's continued improvement also muddles the situation.

Virginia Tech will be the test. Shinskie got better against Kent State, but we still don't know if he can be that good every game. If he can hold up against the Hokies and execute the offense, Rettig will redshirt. If the offense sputters again, this debate will go into overdrive next week.

Where is the Wildcat?

As BC struggled to establish the run on Sunday, I kept wondering why didn't we use the "Bazooka" (Tranq's version of the Wildcat). Last year it was a relatively effective tool and created big plays against NC State. I can only think of two reasons:

1. We are 'saving it' for bigger/ACC games. I can sort of understand this reasoning. The games against Weber State and Kent State were never really in doubt. Putting one of our key plays on tape for future opponents wouldn't have been worth the potential big play we would have against our first two opponents. While I understand this argument, I don't agree with it. I think it would have been better to practice it in live situations. I also think the beauty of any play is to use it, put it on tape and then add a counter or variation against future opponents.

2. We don't have the personnel for it. Montel was the key, but Rich Gunnell and Jeff Smith were also part of the formations. We did use Clyde Lee in motion on the play but never gave him the ball. He was always a decoy. I know we have practiced it this summer. Let's hope that it is not buried because they don't like the player options. Lee, Flutie (as a passer), Finch and Swigert could all compliment Montel in using the Bazooka this year.

What to make of Shinskie's stats?

Last year when Jags kept excusing Chris Crane's play because he was a "rookie" I felt it was a cop out. This season I am more willing to accept the "rookie" tag as an excuse for Shinskie. Crane had four years in the program and two with Logan. Shinskie was in Spring Training in Florida this March while our team was installing Tranq's offense. There is a difference. My concern with Shinskie though is that we seen progression followed by regression. I was hoping for the learning curve to be on a steep uptick by now. But let's not use eye balls to decide where Shinskie is. Instead I will dig up a chart from last year. It is not totally apples to apples since Shinskie had cameo appearances outside of his seven starts that are in his stats below but does give a good benchmark of where he is relative to our past QBs.

QB	W-L	Attempts	Comp Pct	Yards	Passing TDs	INTs	Rushing TDs
Brian St. Pierre	6-1	180	55%	1,186	15	6	0
Quinton Porter	4-3	182	59%	1,293	14	5	1
Paul Peterson	6-1	194	61%	1,496	13	6	0
Matt Ryan	6-1	246	59%	1,621	9	7	5
Chris Crane	6-1	200	57%	1,249	6	10	9
Dave Shinskie	5-2	203	53%	1,495	12	9	1

Does this confirm what many of us are "seeing?" I would say that based on the stats you can say that Shinskie's not as accurate as he needs to be. He is aggressive though and willing and capably of going long.

This weekend Shinskie will face a very good defense with a ball hawking reputation. Let's hope he has another progression and is ready for the challenge. To win the division we can't have "rookie" mistakes.

Video previews and other links

Once you start playing Top 10 teams, you get more attention. First CBS talks about the game (thanks to Phil for the link) and Yahoo weighed in too.

Tranquill's turn in the spotlight as the Globe and the Virginia media profiled him.

The Notes section of this article reports that McCluskey should be back on the field Saturday.

BCDraft interviewed Bowman.

How to ruin the best OLine in the ACC part 2

As you will see the offensive line was not the only problem yesterday, but the breakdowns up front and the failure of our coordinator to react all come back to confusion and execution on the offensive line. These shots are all from Shinskie's second and thankfully final series.

1st and 10
-- At this point Clemson has no respect for our passing game and has put 8 in the box. We will see this all year until we prove we can exploit it.

-- We run a trap with the three interior guys moving. Ricky Sapp -- the guy Doc Walker circled is unaccounted for. In theory the play is going away from him. The hope is he will be too late or someone will rub him and keep him from the play. This is tougher to do when there are 8 in the box and the Tigers were smelling blood.

-- Here is where it starts to breakdown. Cleary (77) is ready to clear a hole. The right side is okay. Claiborne is a little behind but has a position on his man. Tennant and Castonzo are doubling the DE and letting Sapp run free. Is that the design? I don't know. I would hope Tennant would occupy his man and Castonzo would jump out on Sapp. Why aren't they reading and adjusting?

-- At this point Sapp is through. Claiborne has lost his man and the right side is losing.
-- Harris is toast.


2nd and 13
-- Clemson is loading the box again. We have two TEs which should offer extra protection if needed.

-- Clemson drops one of their 8 back. This takes away some of the big play.

-- Good straight forward pass blocking. It can be done! Now the problem is Shinskie. He never looks off Anderson.

-- This pass is completed. It is positive. Put enough of these together and you actually have an offense. But no, we used many more slow to develop plays.

3rd and 10
-- This is the final play of Shinskie's day. It had a breakdown in protection and in QB play. It is an obvious passing down and Clemson has 7 in the box.

-- The right side of the line is fine. The first mistake though is Cleary looks to his right and starts to get out of position to the uncoming defenders. To make it worse, Clemson is overloading and sending three guys at the gap between Cleary and Castonzo. Ugh.
-- Hope is not lost. Castonzo makes a strong move to fill the hole. Clearly recovers to get the trailing guy. Our receivers start to get open. The ball needs to start coming out.
-- Harris makes a huge block to give Shinskie that much more time. (BTW, our running backs have been great pass blockers under Sirmans.) Yet the ball is not out!!! Look, guys were open.
-- We had a breakdown. We had a two seperate saves from two of our best (Harris and Castonzo) yet Shinskie takes the sack. As I said, multiple problems but it started with protection.

How to ruin the best OLine in the ACC part 1

We have four returning offensive lineman. Three of those four earned all ACC honors last season. Coming into today's game they had a combined 63 starts. They looked lost today and I am afraid they don't know what to do. That's coaching. Now our coaches have plenty of experience and should be able to turn things around. My fear though is there is too much going on and we are doing nothing well. I am also a bit concerned about things like spacing and execution. This stuff should not be happening three games into the season with a mostly experienced group. The execution is probably due to too many varied schemes (part Tranq, part Logan) and four different QBs splitting time. Here are a few of the issues. (I may add more as I continue to go through the rewatch).

First Quarter. 3rd and 17. BC calls a draw that gets blown up.
This was the first real cowardly call of the game. But I can understand why we did it. The draw is low risk. It should be easy to execute and it plays to your strengths: the line and Harris. However, we failed to execute. Here are some issues:
-- Doesn't Harris seem awfully deep? This might make it seem like he is staying into block and sell the draw, but it also means he has to cover a lot of ground just to get to the line of scrimmage.

-- Anderson releases downfield and takes a defender with him. Now Clemson only has five guys in the box!! Although this doesn't guarantee a first down, it should at least mean a decent gain. But you can already see problems. Lapham (on the right side) is drawing his man downfield away from the play. That's good. However, the rest of the line is clustered at the line of scrimmage? This is a draw. These guys have runs thousands of draws. What are they doing? They should also being drawing/driving their men downfield too. There should be a big hole. Yet Clemson -- with only five in the box -- is ready to gobble up the runner.

-- Castonzo won his matchup. But the three interior guys (two of who were all ACC) shuffled around and left three defenders ready to crush Harris. Ugh.


1st and 10. Basic run play. Offensive line is asked to do something (pull I think? but it is so sloppy you can't be sure) and leave Haden out to dry.
Pulling and trapping is a staple of many offenses. Gary Tranquill might have multiple plays that call on it. One problem though...our guys have not been drilling in this for two years. Should we have these plays in our playbook? Can you do this and still mix in zone? Does anyone have clue what is going on? Take a look:
-- Clemson has five men on the line. That is problem No. 1. Do we audible? Have any counters? If so we didn't use them.

-- The play starts off ok. Richman, Claiborne and Pantale all block down and win their battles. Castonzo doubles the End with Anderson. I don't love the decision but you can live with it (I would prefer if one of them went to the second level). The real problem is that Lapham and Tennant are supposed to pull and clear the way. Yet Tennant doesn't disengage quickly enough and Lapham is a big dude who is probably never going to cover that much land quickly enough.

-- So now Haden is heading towards a hole with two Clemson guys waiting for him. Tennant and Lapham are never going to get there. Haden decided to kick it out and go around the end but was tackled for a loss.



1st and 10. Shinskie's first drive. 1st use of one of Logan's staples: the zone option read.
We are struggling. We haven't moved the ball. Someone (Tranq?) decides to go and use one of the plays that worked well for BC last year. Only we use it with the one guy who wasn't around in the Logan days in Shinskie!?!? But once again I think these guys have so much going on in their heads, they are screwing up basic things like spacing. Take a look:
-- Look how big the space is between Tennant and Claiborne! What's going on? Both are smart and experienced. Why is this happening? It screams lack of repetition or confusion. The Clemson DT picks up on it and gets right in the gap.

-- At the snap he is already by Claiborne. But the play is not totally lost. A good QB who knows this play might be able to make something out of nothing. But instead we have a relief pitcher who hasn't played football since 2002. Now if Tuggle had been in there, he might have done something...after all he saw film of Crane and Tuggle dealing with this same situation last year.

-- Claiborne is beat. Lapham is blocking air. Haden is about to be lunch. Since the end is starting to crash though a running QB who knew the offense might have kept it himself and tried to make positive yards.

-- Yet Shinskie gives it to Haden and we have another negative play.


I may have more of this, but you get the point. There is too much going on with the team and our experienced guys are lost. There is more talent than we saw today, but we need the staff to quickly put together a plan that plays to their strengths!

When the coaching staff has their come to Jesus meeting Sunday, it is on Spaz, Day and Sirmans to speak up and get us back on track. They know what can work with these guys. They know what drills will work. They are the carryovers. They have to help bridge the gap. If they don't we will have serious issues.

Lift For Life update and other links

The team's fundraiser in honor of Herzy is Thursday. Please support the guys and the cause. Here is a clip of Chris Fox promoting the event. (HT BC All Access)

The ACC TV talk remains a focus. The Charlotte Observer and the AJC both had articles on the topic. The key will be hoops. But as the BCI guys showed, BC is holding its own revenue wise under the current plans.

Spaz spoke highly of our new OC Gary Tranquill.

Some of our unheralded recruits are now ranked by the major services.

Getting to know Gary Tranquill and other links

The Globe produced a solid piece on Gary Tranquill. It echoed many of the good things we are hearing. It sounds like Tranquill can be a good mentor to the young QBs and will build an offense around what works. My concern was never about Tranquill's ability to groom kids or provide a veteran presence. My concern remains the productivity of his offense and if he can make lemonade out of the lemons. Saturday will be our first glimpse of how things will look.

HD listed some ACC darkhorses. BC was not included. She does realize that there is talent on offense.

The BC women lost to Duke in the opening round of the ACC Lacrosse tournament.

This blogger has Brace ranked as the 55th best prospect and Raji as the 14th.

What's old is new again on offense

Spaz talked to HD today and gave her a high level overview of the new offense. He mentions less passing, more traditional running, and more "pro style." All of that is vague enough to not really tell us anything. The only concern for me is the running game. I hope we don't completely abandon the zone scheme and stretches. Because our OL coach, line and backs are all comfortable in that style.

Spaz didn't tip his hand on the QB front either. Word is that Davis remains on top of the depth chart but isn't really standing out.

I remain optimistic about next season but predict a lot of 9-7, 13-10 type of games.

Chip Kelly -- influencing BC football from 3,000 miles away

Outside of Lane Kiffin, no new coach is getting as much press as Oregon's Chip Kelly. Considered the latest college football offensive genius, Kelly is the next big thing. Lost among all the hoopla is that the only staff outside the Pac 10 with three of Kelly's former colleagues and proteges is Boston College. What does it mean when you have the pupils working under a different leader and coordinator. We will soon find out, but first let's look at the Kelly guys in Boston and what they bring to the table.

Ryan Day is the known commodity among BC fans. Just 30, he is considered the rising star. He reportedly turned down opportunities from Mississippi State, Florida, and the chance to join Jags in Tampa. Kelly even makes reference to Day joining him in Eugene if not for some timing and move issues. While at BC Day has been a very good position coach and a hard working recruiter. While nothing has ever been formally announced, it is rumored that he'll be the next offensive coordinator when Tranquill retires (for the third time).

Day gets all the pub, but Sean Devine has the resume closest to Kelly's. In fact, he took over the play calling duties at UNH when Kelly left for Oregon. While he never reached the offensive heights Kelly did in 2005, UNH was 17-8 in Devine's two seasons as OC and scored as often as most of Kelly's Wildcat offenses. Devine won't be calling plays, but he will be using the same blocking scheme as the Ducks. This is important as it provides continuity to Jack Bicknell Jr.'s (yet another former UNH assistant) teachings. Having spent the most time actually working with Kelly, you hope that Devine will share the same drive to learn about other offenses and relentlessly recruit. The BC OLine coaching job has been a great springboard in the past. Combine that with everyone looking for the next Chip Kelly and you have to consider this a great platform for Devine's career. If his veteran line plays well, he'll join Day as a hot coaching name.

The final branch of the Kelly tree in Boston is Mike Dawson. Dawson spent most of his time at UNH on the defensive side of the ball, so he had the fortune (or misfortune) of going against Kelly every day in practice. Those experiments, gadgets and new looks -- Mike Dawson saw them first. The UNH defenses were never dominant, but that might not be relevant for Dawson's new role as special teams coordinator. You'd hope Kelly's experimentation bug bit him and he brings fresh ideas and good excecution to a BC unit that he struggled under the past two staffs.

What does it all mean? BC has disciples of the hottest name in college football working under one of the most experienced Head Coach-Offensive Coordinator combos in DIA. These guys may all share Kelly's ambition and perspective, but a big reason for Kelly's success was the encouragement and freedom he received from Sean McDonnell and later Mike Bellotti. Will Spaz and Tranq do the same for their young turks? Ideally these guys will have the freedom and BC will succeed and eventually have a transition like Oregon's. How Spaz mentors and works with the UNH clique will probably be the biggest factor in the success of failure of his first two seasons. Let's hope he gives Bellotti a call.

Tranquill's old boss weighs in

Here is a Q&A with John Bunting that has been kicking around for a few days. In it Bunting heaps praise on our new offensive coordinator. He also speculates on how BC will deal with Tranquill's age when recruiting players.