MIATL
Senior
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2012
- Messages
- 3,167
I'm going with "someone ran the wrong route".
Unless FSU was in cover 0, there is no way that route combo makes any sense.
I wonder if S. Coley was supposed to come across, underneath the post/corner-out combo from Dorsett and Walford???
(same route Lu illustrates for WR Coley, but no changes to OC Coley's play design)
That would explain why Kaaya was looking to the middle of the field to make the throw, and would be consistent with how he would read the coverage, high to low.
The TE motion makes it clear it's, at least, man-under coverage. You let Walford and Dorsett clear the middle of the field, as both are the inside receivers ... Then throw to Coley coming across.
Waters sits wide, keeping his corner occupied and requiring some awareness from the other safety (depending on safety coverage). Dorsett is going deep, taking his cover and the safety ... Also keeping the other safety deeper if it's cover-2. That's 4 dbs covering 2 WRs. Walford runs the out (a 5th defender), and is the 2nd read if the safety to his side drops down to cover the middle, and doesn't stay high. Coley has to beat his man (6th defender) running the cross.
I think Kaaya read the safety coverage correctly, but expected Coley to come across the middle. I also think they needed the back to stay in because they knew the crossing read would take 6 in protection to give the time needed against 4 or 5 rushers.
If Coley runs that route, Walford is the 2nd read, depending on how they cover. But if the 7th defender (LB) drops to cover the middle cross, instead of spying the RB, Walford is likely the primary ... As long as Dorsett takes the safety to that side deep enough.
But because Coley never comes across ... and in fact, stays short enough and wide enough to render Walford's route useless ... Kaaya just chucks it downfield to Dorsett, and hopes for a completion similar to the UGA vs. Auburn finish last year.
I don't know, man. It's a risky leap to conclude that Stacy Coley just ran the wrong route and should have been coming across the middle. The reasons:
1. Walford still ran a relatively short out to the sticks. If Coley is supposed to come across, the routes should look a lot more like what I drew up in the 2nd picture.
2. They brought Duke across the formation to chip, meaning they moved the LB shadowing him closer to where Kaaya would have had to hit Coley coming across.
3. If you run a shallow or intermediate crossing route from one side, it's sensical to run a vertical route on the other side, where Waters ran a quick in. The reason would be to further clear the field for room to run.
I think it was just a poorly designed play and, frankly, it's not the first time we have some weird route combinations.
Fair points ... That Waters' route, in particular, is tough to explain.
But I think the idea may have been to bring that LB across the formation and throw behind him. Similar to the play-action we run when we bring Coley or Clive across the formation, and throw behind the DE. I think that's the play design, except it targets the safeties and MLB. Bring Duke across the formation, to the side were you have just motioned, and all the action is heading that direction.
But, again, Waters' not challenging the other safety does mean Kaaya would have had to place a perfect ball.
Of course ... I'm not sure there are any play calls for 4th and 9 that won't require excellent ball placement, or the receiver to "make a play".
Credit to FSU ... They were in good defensive position. Man-under, cover-2 is a helluva defense when you have the athletes to run it and you know the opposition is passing the ball.