Some Meta Thoughts On UCLA’s Pre-Season "Scrimmages"
The Bruins held their second mini scrimmage of this summer camp yesterday. According to Jon Gold, it sounds like the offense shined a little bit this time around. Apparently the team in white picked up 3 TDs including 2 from Jet Ski:
* Both of Franklin's touchdowns were short-yardage, one for three yards, one for four, but he had a few other nice plays. He had a 22-yard gain on a beautiful screen pass and scored on the next play, and he had a couple of runs up the middle that elicited a cheer.
* The big bruiser on Tuesday, though, was Malcolm Jones. Jones had a seven-yard run that should have gone for two, breaking two or three tackles, and a very nice draw play that went for more than 20 yards, with three more broken tackles. I've written before about "football speed" - maintaining the same speed even in pads - and Jones has it. He initiates contact, but his legs are so strong that he basically bullies himself forward. It's the difference between a one-yard loss and a two-yard gain, and that means everything.
* Richard Brehaut was solid but not spectacular, save for a 25-yard touchdown pass to Taylor Embree on the first play of the scrimmage. It wasn't the prettiest throw, but it was delivered to a spot that only Embree could reach, and that's a big change for Brehaut, who often had trouble with precision last season. He's improving, and he is solid as the No. 2 QB.
Read rest of Gold notes here. The description of our offense as "much improved" certainly sounds certainly encouraging. More from the LA Times:
The Bruins had 77 yards rushing during the red-zone scrimmage, a considerable improvement from Saturday's lost-in-the-wilderness performance during the first scrimmage.
Quarterback Richard Brehaut threw two touchdown passes. Twice the Bruins converted on third-and-long plays. Jones skittered outside for 23 yards on a third-and-20 play. Franklin made an impressive 17-yard run on a screen pass on third-and-10. [...]
True, the first-team offense did go against the second-team defense at times. But moving the ball was a "confidence builder," Brehaut said.
It is good to hear the offense making some plays after it struggled a bit because of self-inflicted mistakes on Saturday. Here is the catch though. As mentioned the coaches were scrimmaging the number 1 offense against our number 2 defense. On Saturday when our offense struggled to get in rhythm we had the 1s on both sides going up against each other and not surprisingly the defense got the better of our offense. During spring game this year, we also had the 1s going against each other and the defense also got the better of our offense.
UCLA is going to hold its scrimmage this Saturday. I am guessing the coaches will have the 1s going at it and it will not be a surprise if the defense gets the better of the offense again. I was really interested in hearing the thoughts of veteran practice goers on this topic.
Let me throw out some additional thoughts which you can take in before chiming in on this. I don't really follow the scrimmages and practices of other schools. So I don't have a good handle the breakdown on whether other programs had their number 1 offense square off against their number 1 defense. Although this detail from Scott Wolf few days ago was very interesting:
Carroll usually let the first team square off against the second team, which sometimes made it difficult to determine how improved a quarterback or linebacker might be until the season started.
But Kiffin let the first-team offense face the first-team defense in Sunday's initial scrimmage from Howard Jones Field, and the defense clearly flexed its muscles.
The starting offense generated only one touchdown in the scrimmage and starting tailback Allen Bradford lost five yards in six carries.
The conventional wisdom around these camps seem to be that defense generally have an upper hand against offense. As Sean Westgate mentioned in his interview with Gold, while the defensive guys have to work on reacting (and using techniques), the offensive guys have to get used to each other and get in rhythm.
So it is difficult to get a handle on exactly where our offense (or defense) is by watching these practices
I do think during Pete Carroll era Southern Cal used to put a lot of emphasis on ginning up excitement and buzz around their scrimmages. One of the reasons he had 1s going against 2s because the offense would get gathered crowd (not to mention recruits) all fired up. By comparison at UCLA we have gotten used to vanilla scrimmages where coaches stuck to conservative playbook and have the 1s going against each other.
So the question I have is whether it is worth for CRN to "loosen" up the scrimmage a bit by having going 1s against 2s and also open up his offensive playbook. I am not sure about the answer. Personally, I understand the need to take the cautious route making sure we are minimizing the risk of injuries and not showing all our cards. On the other hand, I could also see an argument that CRN and his coaches need to put on a show to get the crowd all excited. Not to mention if the offense looks well, it has the potential to generate positive press for nimrod reporters who to date have not shown any kind of sophistication in terms of taking in the big picture.
Another reason, I bring this up is no matter what happens this Saturday, we have to keep the big picture in mind. If the offense has few good plays and then defense tightens up in battle between 1s, we shouldn't be drawing any kind of drastic conclusions (positive or negative) like we see in the tradmed. Then again everyone who reads this blog already kind of knew that.
BTW in case you didn't know by now, our official scrimmage is scheduled for this Saturday at Drake Stadium starting at 5pm. You can see the full practice (tentative) schedule here.
Anyway, just thought I throw this up as discussion point. Would love to hear everyone's thoughts on this.
GO BRUINS.
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
if the goal is to win games
then I don’t see why you wouldn’t go 1s on 1s. It gives the best players the best competition. Sure we could rack up a ton of yards on 2nd and 3rd stringers, but face a wakeup call in our first game; playing against weaker competition may engender confidence and may also engender complacency and bad habits.
Meanwhile, for all the false confidence we could be giving our 1s on O, imagine how despondent the 2s on O will feel getting dominated by the 1s on D… do you want your backups to be tentative when they enter a game?
Just a personal reaction. Perhaps if the scrimmage showmanship is what sells out all the season tickets, then do whatever you need to do. It just seems hucksterish to me – to paraphrase Ty from the college rankings thread, “if you need to see our first string O put up some points on our second team D to decide whether or not to come to games, we don’t want you”…
+1
Abusing the bench players make look crowd to the crowd, but in reality its taking the easy way out. Maybe once in a while to mix to things up, or show the 2’s what they need improve on.
I agree with britishbruin.
According to the times, the 1’s were going against the 2’s at times. I wasn’t really paying attention to this, but it did seem that the 1’s were going against the 1’s quite a bit. And we need to remember #1 qb was out during most of this.
To add on to what britishbruin said, the defense, imo, also needs to go against the best offense.
Go Bruins!
A good balance of both
It looks to me like an offense should practice against the 2s just to get the plays and timing down. Then, they should face off against the 1s as a form of test, like midterms, to gauge their progess and improvement. Games are like finals.
There clearly has to be a good balance of both if we are to improve. If we improve, we win games, and if we win games we put butts in the seats.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
+1!!
I agree that it should be a combination of both. A lot of what I have been hearing during camp is that rythm plays a large part in offensive success. I think that hplaying against the #2 defense part of the time will allow the 1s on offense to develop rythm, trust in each other, timing etc. Then you hone it and put it to the test by going up against the 1s on defense. That way you find out where the real strengths and weaknesses are, identify bad habits, etc and go back to the drawing board if necessary. Plus it keeps scrimmaging fresh. Certain personnel matchups won’t become stale and predictable betwen the players.
I like what Britishbruin said
and I will add this. The best way to generate good publicity is by winning on Saturdays. If that means more one on one then so be it. Carroll could have done one on ones all through his era at SC and had ‘lackluster’ practices, but nobody would have questioned his theoretical practice philosophies because for the most part he was winning games.
Winning is the best recruiting tool, and whatever CRN feels gets us better prepared for games, I am all about. Oh i like what MexiBruin said too.
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
Question and proof positive about the injury risks
I realize we are talking about the “camp” situation of 1 against 2. But once the practices are closed and we start the more direct preparation for the KSU game, I would assume 1 would practice against 1 more often. Or am I out to lunch entirely on this assumption?
This would allow for the higher level of preparation of 1 versus 1 but we wouldn’t see it as much because it would be in a closed practice. A good journalist should ask CRN about why 1 is playing 2 so much and does that change once practices are closed.
In terms of injuries, I remember seeing one of our QBs getting absolutely hammered in the Spring “Game” at the Rose Bowl two years ago. I was watching ATV. The defensive call was for the left CB to blitz. ATV was scrimmaging against a terrible offensive line—ours—so he gets in the backfield in a nano-second and BAM! ATV launches the QB. The QB is knocked upside down so his cleats are sticking up into the sky and all of this occurs while he is airborne. (Last year, because of the injury issue, at the spring Rose Bowl game, tackling the QBs was banned by CRN.)
My point is to validate the injury analysis. And 1 versus 1 competition can increase the risk of those injuries.
Thanks for raising the issue.
by peggysue69 on Aug 18, 2010 8:22 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Injuries will happen
It doesn’t matter if your going against the scout team. Injuries will always happen. And actually the train of thought is the opposite of what’s been posted. You are more likely to get hurt going aginst the twos and threes because there’s a false sense of security there. When going against the twos and threes our ones will typically not go full speed or with the same intensity as they would with the ones. And there’s more of a chance of injury in that situation.
And Peggy, what will typically happens come preparation time is the ones face the scout team a lot more often in order to learn what our opposing offense and defenses will run. There’s no sense in our defense running against our own offense if we are preparing for a different style of play.
The slime bags across town have had a lot more quality depth than we have in past years and because of this their ones could scrimmage their twos without really missing a beat. Once our program gets to that level I am all for it, because it makes your twos that much better. But until the disparity between first and second string dwindles, we need to make our starters the best they can be.
injuries are an interesting one
on the one hand, I think you are right that when you don’t go hard you are more likely to get hurt.
On the other hand, your QB shouldn’t be taking any hits against the 2s and 3s at all.
by britishbruin on Aug 18, 2010 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions
love the Malcolm Jones info
Reminds me of Deshaun Foster, that guy always went down while moving forward. Hopefully Malcolm stays away from the free cars though ;-)
by RealisticBruinFan on Aug 18, 2010 8:52 AM PDT reply actions
I'm going to the scrimmage on Saturday...
and I can’t wait to see Jones in person. Based on what I have been hearing in the press and on this site, I have visions of Toby Gerhart in my mind. I guess I’ll find out on Saturday, but those of you who have seen him I look forward to your thoughts.
Let the pros handle it
We have some of the best coaches in the country tutoring our footbal players. Let’s let them coach and due what they due best. They know how to prepare the football squad for the season. All the Monday morning quarterbacking in the world won’t get us ready to beat down KSU.
Analytical takes
Folks are offering analysis. This is not monday morning qbs to undermine coaches. We are thinking it out. If you don’t have anything of substance to offer that is fine but don’t discourage others from offering analytical takes. Thanks.
by Nestor on Aug 18, 2010 10:25 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
2nd teamers can also rise to the occassion
one point I have not seen is that with occasional 2 vs 1s, you give an opportunity to a talented young second teamer to feed off the increased competition, getting stoked, and rise up to the competition.
it’s a great way to see which young talent is going to step up and compete AND
it gets all the second teamers and depth good reps against better competition, which will help them a lot.
This is a good point
You have to at least sometimes throw the 2nd team against the 1st team. Otherwise, how would you ever know when any of the 2nd teamers are ready to play when they’re called upon?
right
though it might make more sense to rotate people – that 3rd string corner might be awesome, but if the QB has all day in the pocket against the 3rd string line, he’s still eventually going to get beaten on that long bomb on the receivers 5th move…
Obviously an exaggeration – but seeing that the second team linebacker can do a good job of chasing down a man when another second stringer missed a tackle doesn’t necessarily show that the second team linebacker can play the role he would be asked to play in the first team. The issue is that football is a team game, and while you can make something out of clear one-on-one contests (e.g. if the 2nd string end beats the 1st string guard one-on-one and gets pressure on the QB), it might be hard to assess the more nuanced play with full 1s on full 2s. But that is presumably why they do rotate people in and out of the different strings to see what they can do alongside the best…
by britishbruin on Aug 18, 2010 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions
For that I tend to go by the saying that they use in golf
You can’t win a tournament on Thursday, but you can lose one. In the same vein, a second stringer can’t automatically usurp someone’s position with just a couple of good rotations, but a couple of bad rotations might show definitively what a certain player needs to really work on in order to move into the first string.
With regard to the 1s vs. 2s
I’ve played lots of organized basketball and very little organized football, so if I’m comparing apples to oranges with the following thought please let me know.
Perhaps the first team offense that’s doing some fine tuning has to practice against the second team defense in part because defenses have a natural advantage in intersquad play. Again, this may not apply to football so much but I remember back in my basketball days how easy it was to cheat on defense due to the fact that you knew all the offense’s plays inside and out. As a general rule of sports offense is proactive and defense reactionary but the nature of intrasquad play might upset the balance somewhat (i.e. defensive reaction times are slightly quicker). Therefor when an offense is working out the kinks it might be counterproductive to play against an opponent that is similarly athletic and knows what’s coming.
probably slightly less applicable than in basketball
as in basketball you are obviously playing both offense and defense yourself, but still relevant.
How much time do the offense and defense spend segregated from each other? If the defense is practicing how to shut down a pro-style offense over on the other side of the field, it’s not obvious how much more of a handle they would have on the new, exciting, innovative RickVolver (NeUzi? NUzi?) offense than other folks. But if the defense gets a good look at it every day, that would make it tough.
by britishbruin on Aug 18, 2010 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Pistol?
What is the thought pattern in converting to the Pistol offense? I have been following Nevada for a number of years and the system can work well with the right players in the right situation. Is your qb really mobile enough to make it work?
Still quite concerned...
From other blogs: "…Riley had a forced fumble on the fourth play of the scrimmage – and added an interception in the red zone later… and the Bruins’ D had several tackles for a loss. … The offense did commit several penalties "
I’m ecstatic on one hand that some of our young defensive stars are doing well, but I’m more than a little worried with all the turnovers and penalties. That’s two turnovers right there (there could have been others) from about 20 plays – or 10%. Our offense is going to face at least 3 or 4 tougher defenses than we have, so we can’t say, “oh this is the toughest D they’ll face.”
They NEED to protect the ball, a 10% turnover rate coupled with “several penalties” could spell doom. C’mon fellas, play smart and mistake-free and we should be fine.
Easy money and faithless women, red-eye whiskey for the pain...
I trust the coaches.Lets see if they get this one right

by 





















