Blue Zone offense solutions?

Listening to sports talk radio this morning about red zone production. The New England Patriots were the example. Last year they were #1 in the league in red zone production. This year they are second to the last. The biggest difference is TE rob gronkowski.



Relating that to BYU and the lack of TE usage, could this be a huge part of the problem? IIRC Dennis Pitta and Johnny Harline were Blue Zone beasts. IF they weren't getting the ball thrown their way the defenders had to respect them and it opened up the run game.

This year we have 2 thrown TD in the blue zone(IIRC) to JD and Mitch. Other times it's mostly running the ball or a fade to our tall WR's.(1 Td, 1 INT) Of all the times we've gotten into the Blue zone it really looks like our offense becomes easy to defend. Stack the box and play 1 on 1 vs the WR's.

Does anyone else think that getting Friel or Thompson running routes in the Blue zone would help us socre more TD's?

Throw the ball efficiently in the blue zone. That's the answer to the blue zone issues. I'll post the numbers later. Our blue zone running game is very good. Our passing game is abysmal in the blue zone. Fix that and we're averaging close to 40 points on offense.



It's really quite simple. The play calling hasn't been fine. The execution has been poor.

SpiffCoug wrote:
Throw the ball efficiently in the blue zone. That's the answer to the blue zone issues. I'll post the numbers later. Our blue zone running game is very good. Our passing game is abysmal in the blue zone. Fix that and we're averaging close to 40 points on offense.



It's really quite simple. The play calling hasn't been fine. The execution has been poor.

I'd argue that throwing to a big TE or even having a TE run a route would help the passing in the blue zone. Friel showed he had good hands last year. All our TE's are big tall guys.

Maybe Anae wants an extra blocker on the line? Byu's bread and butter on plays they needed a catch has been the TE. It seems like an obvious option to help both blue zone and 3rd down %'s.

We have a big receiver in Matthews. We threw to him in the blue zone last week for a TD. The TE position is not necessary, if you can throw to other receivers efficiently. The NE Patriots are missing their best receivers. We'll be ok with who we do have, if so better at throwing and catching in the blue zone.

stgeorgefan wrote:
...Does anyone else think that getting Friel or Thompson running routes in the Blue zone would help us score more TD's?

Absolutely. That would open up the passing game.

SpiffCoug wrote:
We have a big receiver in Matthews. We threw to him in the blue zone last week for a TD. The TE position is not necessary, if you can throw to other receivers efficiently. The NE Patriots are missing their best receivers. We'll be ok with who we do have, if so better at throwing and catching in the blue zone.

Agreed, to a point. We need to send somebody over the middle (TE or WR, it doesn't matter) as long as we get a guy behind the linebackers or to the area they vacated if they blitzed. Once they drop back/spread out to defend that, and if we get the safeties to hang out on the side of the field to help defend the receivers, the middle and flanks are wide open for running the ball. Hill, Williams, Hine (if/when he plays off injury) can run outside, and they and Lasike can run up the middle.



I just don't want our offense to get predictable.

Flashback to the Utah game.



Somebody had commented a few weeks ago that we had 13 points on 5 blue zone trips.



#1: missed field goal (33 yards, ball on Utah 16)

#2: field goal (31 yards, ball on Utah 14)

#3: field goal (29 yards, ball on Utah 12)*

#4: turnover on downs (drive started at the Utah 13 following a great Falslev punt return)**

#5: touchdown



*We had the ball, 3rd and goal at the 2, and Hill got sacked for 10 yards. That needs to be a touchdown.



**We need to convert here. 13 yards from the end zone, and we get 0 points.



If we get touchdowns there, and make the first field goal, we get an additional 14 points. If that's the case, we're running out the clock with less than 3 minutes to go, not trying to score a TD to tie the game. Taysom doesn't throw an interception 20 yards downfield. At the very least, we move the chains more and kick a field goal or down a punt inside the Utah 10. Utah would have less than a minute and a half to score 7-10 points. We win the game.



That's it. We were inconsistent all night on offense. If we use our TEs over the middle and in the seams and throw the ball like we did against MTSU and USU, we'll have better offensive production. It will open up the run game and we'll be able to move the chains.



I think our offense has more confidence now after two wins with good all-around offensive performances. At this point, they need to keep building off of that and win 7 more games by the end of November.

They need to keep doing everything they are doing but be better here. if we can improve here we are undefeated the rest of the way.

Problem is that the passing game to the slot receivers is largely dependent on passing lanes created by competent pass blocking by the OL. If the passing lanes aren't there, the majority of the routes run by the inside/slot receivers and TEs are going to rely on the *chance* that the QB can see they are/will be open at the right time in his progressions. If he can't see them open, he can't know to deliver the ball to them. Those routes are also less likely to be seen if the QB is forced out of the pocket and toward the sideline.



Our TEs will re-emerge as a key cog of the offense once our OL problems begin to find resolution.

snoscythe wrote:
Problem is that the passing game to the slot receivers is largely dependent on passing lanes created by competent pass blocking by the OL. If the passing lanes aren't there, the majority of the routes run by the inside/slot receivers and TEs are going to rely on the *chance* that the QB can see they are/will be open at the right time in his progressions. If he can't see them open, he can't know to deliver the ball to them. Those routes are also less likely to be seen if the QB is forced out of the pocket and toward the sideline.



Our TEs will re-emerge as a key cog of the offense once our OL problems begin to find resolution.

So your saying we will be better next year. 8)

snoscythe wrote:
Problem is that the passing game to the slot receivers is largely dependent on passing lanes created by competent pass blocking by the OL. If the passing lanes aren't there, the majority of the routes run by the inside/slot receivers and TEs are going to rely on the *chance* that the QB can see they are/will be open at the right time in his progressions. If he can't see them open, he can't know to deliver the ball to them. Those routes are also less likely to be seen if the QB is forced out of the pocket and toward the sideline.



Our TEs will re-emerge as a key cog of the offense once our OL problems begin to find resolution.

Unfortunately, our TE's are garbage so this won't happen. Do we have any 2 star recruits coming up anytime soon? Those are our best TE's from year to year it seems.

Blue Zone throwing:

UVA: 1 of 3 for 4 yards 1 TD 0 INT 154.53 PER

Texas; 0 of 3 for 0 yards 0 TD 0 INT 0.00 PER

Utah: 1 of 5 for 12 yards 0 TD 0 INT 40.16 PER

MTSU: 2 of 2 for 24 yards 0 TD 0 INT 200.80 PER

USU: 2 of 4 for 11 yards 1 TD 1 INT 105.60 PER (if you don't believe it was an INT, but a TD - which I do, he was 3 of 4 for 17 yards 2 TD 0 INT 275.70 PER - but alas, the real PER is 105.60).

Total: 6 of 17 for 51 yards 2 TD 1 INT 87.55 PER. (35.3% completion)



So the issue is completing passes in the blue zone.



Blue Zone rushing"

UVA: 4 for 25 yards 1 TD

Texas: 6 for 41 yards 2 TDs

Utah: 9 for 13 yards 1 TD

MTSU: 9 for 28 yards 2 TDs

USU: 7 for 14 yards 0 TDs.

I still take issue with last week's INT. That INT was simply a gift from the refs. If it wasn't a TD then it was an incomplete pass, as the USU player ripped the ball out of Cody's hands after he was out of bounds, but no way was it an INT.



However, I saw some massive improvement last week in the Blue Zone, and I think if the O-Line had blocked better on BYU's first trip in, they would've had another TD instead of a field goal. The blocking on 2nd and goal and 3rd and goal was atrocious. But that fade pass to Matthews in the end zone was a thing of beauty, and something that was missing until last week. It was also nice that we had some long passes for TD's as well as that will only further the confidence in the passing game. I hope things continue improving this week.

snoscythe wrote:
Problem is that the passing game to the slot receivers is largely dependent on passing lanes created by competent pass blocking by the OL. If the passing lanes aren't there, the majority of the routes run by the inside/slot receivers and TEs are going to rely on the *chance* that the QB can see they are/will be open at the right time in his progressions. If he can't see them open, he can't know to deliver the ball to them. Those routes are also less likely to be seen if the QB is forced out of the pocket and toward the sideline.



Our TEs will re-emerge as a key cog of the offense once our OL problems begin to find resolution.

Makes sense.

Yes, we will be better next year.