FB: Duke v BC Post Game Thread

[loran16]

There are a lot of reasons why we lost this game. But ultimately, the coaching did us in.

HUGE NEGATIVES:
1. Minor Negative, kicking a FG while down 15 does nothing.
2. WHY THE HECK WAS CONNETTE IN THE GAME SO DARN OFTEN, ESPECIALLY IN THE RED ZONE?!

Listen, I understand if you want to run...that's conventional. It'd be silly, but conventional. Connette is a worse passer than Renfree. He didn't have a single good run all game. WHY PUT HIM IN?!

Waste of 1st and 3rd downs on the final 1st and goal....just unbelievable.

[duke09hms]

TERRIBLE play call by Cut.

Renfree drives this team down the field to the BC 5 yd line.
On 3rd and goal, we take him out (wtf?) and put in Connette who misses an open Helfet in the endzone.
On 4th and goal, Renfree back in, pass batted down.

Game, set, match.

This loss is entirely on the coaches.
Why go with something on 3rd and goal with 50 secs left if it hasn't worked ALL GAME?!

This game was eminently winnable, and Cutcliffe blew it.

[loran16]

TERRIBLE play call by Cut.

Renfree drives this team down the field to the BC 5 yd line.
On 3rd and goal, we take him out (wtf?) and put in Connette who misses an open Helfet in the endzone.
On 4th and goal, Renfree back in, pass batted down.

Game, set, match.

This loss is entirely on the coaches.
Why go with something on 3rd and goal with 50 secs left if it hasn't worked ALL GAME?!

This game was eminently winnable, and Cutcliffe blew it.

You forget, Connette was in on 1st down too and lost a yard on 1st and goal.

[Bob Green]

The big defensive TD put us in position to win the game but ultimately we couldn't score a TD in the Red Zone on BC's defense. Just like the Maryland game, settling for field goals wasn't enough to secure a victory. This one is frustrating for the team as they fought hard, never gave up, but came up short. It's a tough game.

I don't agree with the play call on 3rd down and goal at the end, but who am I? Coach Cutcliffe has forgotten more about football than I will ever know.

[Devil07]

That was beyond frustrating. That game was completely winnable. I can only imagine how frustrated Renfree must be right now. I fully support Coach Cut, but we needed this win and having Connette in for the 1st and goal and especially the 3rd and goal was just a terrible decision. This win would have been huge from a momentum standpoint, and instead we're left with another one that we let slip away.

[peloton]

Tough game for the Devils, but the team once again showed toughness and heart. I agree - this loss is on Coach Cut and the staff. Connette hadn't been effective against BC all game and we went to the well (at least) once too often with that package. It's not going to be effective against all teams - change the offense when the situation requires it. I sure wish our offense had been more productive in the red zone but credit BC's stingy defense. My hat's off to their team and congrats to the Eagles and their fans.

[duke09hms]

I was watching on espn3 with Warrick Dunn commentating. At HALFTIME, he was saying Duke should go away from the Connette package since it hasn't worked all game.

I'm all for having dual-threat QBs but am strongly against switching them out every other play on the most important drive of the game. Especially when Connette hadn't done anything all day, and Renfree was the reason we even stood to win the game!

Great job team, way to fight back. Sorry the coaches cost you the game.

[TheDevilMadeMeDoIt]

Amen! This is totally the coach's fault. On ESPN the announcers kept commenting that the Conette package was not working. I would have to go back and look, but it seemed that Renfree drove us down the field all day long. THen we would get close, put in Connette and bog down. Doing it a few times in the first half was frustrating, but continuing the same old crap in the second half was idiotic. I have nothing against Connette, but if that package doesn't work stay with the hot hand. At least we have improved enough that I am now getting really pissed when we lose, even though I have 39 years of experience in the frustration that is Duke football. I forgot to add that at least things are looking up defensivly.

[Duvall]

The big defensive TD put us in position to win the game but ultimately we couldn't score a TD in the Red Zone on BC's defense. Just like the Maryland game, settling for field goals wasn't enough to secure a victory.

I disagree. Settling for field goals left Duke in a position to win in the second half; they just failed to execute.

[Bob Green]

I disagree. Settling for field goals left Duke in a position to win in the second half; they just failed to execute.

We are saying the same thing. I'm not questioning the decision to kick the field goals, I'm commenting we lost the game because we couldn't score Red Zone touchdowns. In chat today, I stated kick the field goal all three times we did.

[Dukeface88]

There are a lot of reasons why we lost this game. But ultimately, the coaching did us in.

HUGE NEGATIVES:
1. Minor Negative, kicking a FG while down 15 does nothing.


Gotta disagree here. If we didn't get points on that possession (which is more likely than not if we go for it), we need 2 TDs and a 2-point conversion just to tie. As it was, the field goal gave us a shot to win at the end. On the other hand...


2. WHY THE HECK WAS CONNETTE IN THE GAME SO DARN OFTEN, ESPECIALLY IN THE RED ZONE?!

Listen, I understand if you want to run...that's conventional. It'd be silly, but conventional. Connette is a worse passer than Renfree. He didn't have a single good run all game. WHY PUT HIM IN?!

Waste of 1st and 3rd downs on the final 1st and goal....just unbelievable.

I'm definitely with you on this one. Connette had negative rushing yard on the day, and the option wasn't working for us at all (which isn't really Connette's fault - the run game was pretty bad in general). If you're going to do the 2-QB routine, you've got to go with the hot hand.

On the positive, the defense seem to be playing somewhat better. There some blown pass coverages, but the run defense was actually pretty good.

[OZ]

I just got home from the game... more frustrated than ever. We had the team to win this game; what we didn't have were wise decisions on the part of the offensive staff.

After the first two trips into the red zone and Connette trotted out with the same PREDICTABLE PLAYS AND THE SAME PREDICTABLE results, those of us in our area felt that would be the end of that. It was obvious that BC had come prepared for Connette.

Then the third time and the fourth, with same results, you have to figure that the staff had finally succeeded in fulfilling the definition of insanity.

Cut can rant all he wants about this game... the problem today was with those wearing headphones, not with those wearing helmets.

I don't write here too often, but, this just sucked! Sorry for the rant.

[Cockabeau]

I can't believe we still went to Connete in the 3rd and 4th quarter. I cannot believe it.

[buddy]

My frustration level is off the chart. I thought we were supposed to have a brilliant offensive coaching staff. I can (and did) call our plays today. If I can, the BC coaches could. All day long we had the five to seven yard pass available. We refused to take it. I suppose it would have been unsporting. Instead, we had to continue to prove that we couldn't run. Four times in the red zone, four times we put in Connette, four times we fail to get a touchdown. What does it take for the coaching staff to realize their plan isn't working. The players played their hearts out, and deserved to win. They were betrayed by their coaches.

[OldPhiKap]

1. The FG was the right call. As is, it put us in a position to win.

2. Re: Connette -- for some reason, the O line looked great against BC all day except when Connette was in. Then, they had three players in our backfield. So I don't pin this on Connette. Nor do I blame the coaching staff -- that is obviously what they think works in the red zone. It worked great the last two weeks. They would not have had him in if they thought a different package would have been superior. Renfree didn't get us in the end zone, either.

So, I would have loved to win this game but we came up a bit short. I think Cut did what he felt was right with the personnel we have. Those short Renfree passes work great in the open field, but don't leave you much inside the 10.

[Bob Green]

They were betrayed by their coaches.

I believe you're guilty of an overstatement. Using "betrayed" is a bit much. I disagree with some decisions made today in regard to play calling/strategy; however, I'm sure the staff thought it was the proper course of action at the time. I suspect Coach Cutcliffe and staff will be engaged in a lot of Sunday morning quarterbacking tomorrow.

[buddy]

I believe you're guilty of an overstatement. Using "betrayed" is a bit much. I disagree with some decisions made today in regard to play calling/strategy; however, I'm sure the staff thought it was the proper course of action at the time. I suspect Coach Cutcliffe and staff will be engaged in a lot of Sunday morning quarterbacking tomorrow.

We'll have to agree to disagree. The coaching staff appears to be unable to adapt to situations on the field. Game plans are fine, but as in warfare, many game plans do not survive contact with the opposition. Despite their red zone play calling not working all day, the coaches kept with it. The players deserved better. Since our last bowl game, we are 33-147. Playing by the book, sticking to the plan, has produced that record. I realize that most of that was pre-Cut. But for those of us sitting in the stands, it is more of the same old, same old. The worst kind of losing is boring, predictable losing. And that is what we did today.

[OZ]

OldPhiKap wrote:

2. Re: Connette -- for some reason, the O line looked great against BC all day except when Connette was in. Then, they had three players in our backfield. So I don't pin this on Connette. Nor do I blame the coaching staff -- that is obviously what they think works in the red zone. It worked great the last two weeks. They would not have had him in if they thought a different package would have been superior. Renfree didn't get us in the end zone, either.



My guess is the reason the "O" line looked bad when Connette came
in was BC KNEW what was coming... as did all 57 of us in the stands. Look at the film.. when the ball was snapped, BC had four down linemen, three up close LBs, two rather shallow DBs and two deep safetys. They were in the backfield because they were keying on Connette, disregarding a pass or a handoff. No "O" line is going to be able to successfully block that.

In fairness to Renfree - "Renfree didn't get us into the end zone,either" - when he came in, Duke had either lost or gained no yardage; it was third down; and it was a definite passing situation; which, made it a bit less difficult for BC to defend.

We obviously disagree as to the coaches... that's cool. I just think the Connette - Tebow play needs some variation to it. Today, it fooled no one.

[Faison1]

Being a contrarion, I have decided to take the glass-is-half-full approach in this thread (although I couldn't believe Connette was in the game on 3rd down on the 4 yard line....I was keeping track on ESPN.com):

This season, Duke has been so close to getting to the 6 win mark....I have to believe next year looks very bright since the team is so young.

[DownEastDevil]

I'm not coming on here to bash the coaching staff, but it is very frustrating to see Renfree drive them to the red zone all day then see them turn to a predictable running game against the #3 defense in the nation against the run. Why not give Renfree a chance to punch it in? I thought about all the what ifs on that long ride home.

[Wander]

This season, Duke has been so close to getting to the 6 win mark....I have to believe next year looks very bright since the team is so young.

I agree we're heading in the right direction, but how are we "so close to the 6 win mark" this season? We're likely to end up 3-9 on the season, 1-7 in the ACC.

And, again, the coaching staff has us in a great direction overall, but the Connette thing today is possibly the worst coaching move I've ever seen in college football.

[sandinmyshoes]

All I can say is tough loss. I felt like we should win this game going in. Just a tough one. :(

[fuse]

Bummed about the loss, but the silver lining is that this is where my hopes for Duke football lie- being competitive in every game and with an opportunity to win at the end.

I feel badly for the team as this game was winnable but sometimes the breaks don't go our way.

-g

[Faison1]

I agree we're heading in the right direction, but how are we "so close to the 6 win mark" this season? We're likely to end up 3-9 on the season, 1-7 in the ACC.

And, again, the coaching staff has us in a great direction overall, but the Connette thing today is possibly the worst coaching move I've ever seen in college football.

So close, as in we should'a/could'a won the Wake, Maryland, and BC games. If we had won those games, we would have 6 wins by now....

[Devilsfan]

One thing for sure it can only get better for our defensive backfield. There's one player that if practice makes you better he should be unbelievable by his senior year. Coaches seem to look for his number and then have their QB throw his way.

[Olympic Fan]

I think we should step back a moment and put the Connette/Renfree decision into context.

We lost the Maryland game laregly because in the first half we made four first-half trips to the Red Zone and had to settle for field goals on the first three ... Renfree threw an INT on the other.

After that game, Cut started working on the Connette package. He had used it before, but after Maryland, it became our primary Red Zone offense. And it worked very very well .. until today. Duke came into the BC game leading the ACC and third in the nation in Red Zone success rate.

My point is that I don't blame Cut for using the Connette package in the first half. Okay, it didn't work -- on two Red Zone possessions in the first half, Connette ran four plays and lost a total of 16 yards (counting a 5-yard procedure penalty). Renfree twice came in for third and long plays, but was unsuccessful both times.

At this point, I do think it should have been obvious that BC had the Connette package well scouted and well defensed. I DO blame Coach Cut for using it again in the second half -- especially on the last possession, when he had tried it three times in the Red Zone without a single successful play (note: Connette did have one good play outside the red zone, when he faked the run and passed to Juwan Thompson).

I wish Renfree could have had those last four shots from inside the 10. I suspect that when Cut watches the film, he'll kick himself for not adjusting to what BC was doing.

[Dukeface88]

I agree we're heading in the right direction, but how are we "so close to the 6 win mark" this season? We're likely to end up 3-9 on the season, 1-7 in the ACC.

And, again, the coaching staff has us in a great direction overall, but the Connette thing today is possibly the worst coaching move I've ever seen in college football.

3 of our losses are by less than a touchdown. So yeah, three plays separate us from 6-3 (although a pessimist could say we're two plays away from 1-8).

I think this is our main issue now. We're competitive in most our games, but we aren't able to put BCS-level teams away yet. That means our winnable games are coming down to 50-50 shots at the end.

Also, some of the gnashing of teeth is getting a bit overblown. I disagree with the Connette play, but we shouldn't be calling for a coach's job over one call. Coaches have off games just like players do. Anyone saying Renfree should have been kicked off the team post-Army would have been told they were being ridiculous; this isn't any different.

[CameronBlue]

A lot of criticism has been directed toward the coaching staff in this thread re: Connette and from my perspective some of the play selection was questionable. Duke, content to pick away at the corners for short yardage gains didn't test the BC linebacking corps with passes across the middle until late in the 3rd Q but it's hard to argue that Duke's passing game was ineffective (70% completion rate, 300+ yards): But as with any loss there are a lot of contributing factors. To name just a few:

1. Duke was unable to mount a pash rush of any sort allowing the BC QB eons of time to pick apart the secondary. 2 passing TDs, no sacks, no interceptions is a big reason Duke lost.

2. Duke receivers twice fumbled failing to wrap up the ball after a catch, the second one deep in Duke territory leading to BC's 3rd TD

3. Duke's secondary put in a better performance today but they continue to make stupid decisions. If you're in man to man coverage and the play is 40 yards across the field and moving AWAY from you just what are you going to accomplish by trying to provide run support? Russ Cockrell who is already good and getting better, hurt the team by dropping coverage allowing his man to get behind him for a long 3rd down completion. A similar lapse in coverage occurred on BC's 3rd TD when BC completed the pass against DOUBLE coverage. Good grief. Stay with your man! What can be simpler? (Props to Cockrell for his block on the one defender who could've prevented the Fumble-TD run by Campbell.)


4. If your offense can't score a TD you usually don't win.

[TheDevilMadeMeDoIt]

What's the old saying about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. It sure applies to our offense today with Conette coming in. I'm not calling for the coahches head. I think Coach C is an excellent coach. But sometimes even great coaches get stubborn and stick with the same thing when it is not working. If this was a game where nothing worked, then I can understand that you keep trying. But, offensively the short passing game was working, the run was not. So keep passing even in the red zone. It was our only chance to succeed. I hope Cut is man enough to at least admit the coaches let down the players. Did anyone hear his postgame? Did he offer any mea culpa?

[Highlander]

The one thing I will say is that the student section was fairly well represented, and stayed for the entire game.

Duke had a chance to win, but came up a play short to Boston College. A win today would have been Cut's biggest at Duke so far, but when it came time to make a play to decide the game, BC made it and Duke didn't.

I wish Renfree had had 4 shots at it from the 9 at the end of the game instead of splitting them with Connette, but who's to say that would have worked either.

Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda. Sigh. Next play.

[OldPhiKap]

I think we should step back a moment and put the Connette/Renfree decision into context.

We lost the Maryland game laregly because in the first half we made four first-half trips to the Red Zone and had to settle for field goals on the first three ... Renfree threw an INT on the other.

After that game, Cut started working on the Connette package. He had used it before, but after Maryland, it became our primary Red Zone offense. And it worked very very well .. until today. Duke came into the BC game leading the ACC and third in the nation in Red Zone success rate.

My point is that I don't blame Cut for using the Connette package in the first half. Okay, it didn't work -- on two Red Zone possessions in the first half, Connette ran four plays and lost a total of 16 yards (counting a 5-yard procedure penalty). Renfree twice came in for third and long plays, but was unsuccessful both times.

At this point, I do think it should have been obvious that BC had the Connette package well scouted and well defensed. I DO blame Coach Cut for using it again in the second half -- especially on the last possession, when he had tried it three times in the Red Zone without a single successful play (note: Connette did have one good play outside the red zone, when he faked the run and passed to Juwan Thompson).

I wish Renfree could have had those last four shots from inside the 10. I suspect that when Cut watches the film, he'll kick himself for not adjusting to what BC was doing.

Good points, although I would add that I think Cut tried to do some different things from the Connette package -- a number of flair packages, for example. I think the idea was to use the red zone package, with wrinkles. Too bad it didn't work, but again I think this is a work in progress.

[Scorp4me]

When did we start calling it the Connette package? I hate it! lol

[gep]

I think this is our main issue now. We're competitive in most our games, but we aren't able to put BCS-level teams away yet. That means our winnable games are coming down to 50-50 shots at the end.

If I recall correctly, I think that one of the initial goals for Duke football when Coach Cut was hired, is to be competitive in most of our games, unlike the previous (many) years. We have apparently reached that goal. Of course, now that Duke is so close to winning a few of these close, competitive games, the desire is to win a few of these.

As Faison1 posted earlier, next year should be better. The football "program" is definitely headed in the right direction.

Whether we fans believe it or not, I gotta believe that Coach Cut is calling plays that he feels gives Duke the best chance (even if I don't agree with the end of the BC game), kinda like going conservative in the 2nd half of the Navy game (I think that was the one). I think Coach K has called some of those plays in the past that fans have strongly disagreed with too (I don't want to be negative, but imagine if Brian's miss and Haywood's shot lost the game for Duke...)

[loran16]

If I recall correctly, I think that one of the initial goals for Duke football when Coach Cut was hired, is to be competitive in most of our games, unlike the previous (many) years. We have apparently reached that goal. Of course, now that Duke is so close to winning a few of these close, competitive games, the desire is to win a few of these.

As Faison1 posted earlier, next year should be better. The football "program" is definitely headed in the right direction.

Whether we fans believe it or not, I gotta believe that Coach Cut is calling plays that he feels gives Duke the best chance (even if I don't agree with the end of the BC game), kinda like going conservative in the 2nd half of the Navy game (I think that was the one). I think Coach K has called some of those plays in the past that fans have strongly disagreed with too (I don't want to be negative, but imagine if Brian's miss and Haywood's shot lost the game for Duke...)

Listen, just because K or Cut are veterans of the game doesn't mean they do everything right. (You see this in baseball all the time...baseball managers are terrible at strategy, and yet they still get hired.) I think most people here would in the Butler game have not asked Z to miss.

Similarly, here....put it this way. I was posting on BC Interruption during the game, and they were thrilled everytime Connette was in BEFORE THE PLAY played out. That should tell you how effective it was.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

When did we start calling it the Connette package?
It is called the Connette package by the coaches because that's what it is. Plays designed for him to run (and pass) when he's in.

I too don't think it should have been used on the last series because it hadn't worked all day, and Renfree would have had a better shot at making a play with 4 chances instead of only 2.

I think, and perhaps hope, that one of the reasons that our running game was so poor today was because of how beat up our lineman are and they were playing on pure guts and determination.

But let me go back to our first offensive series where we got to inside the 5 yard line, I believe when Renfree completed the long pass to Connor Vernon early in the first quarter. The players run down the field to catch up and "the Connette package" goes in, the play is about to get snapped, and the refs blow the whistle with about 11 seconds left on the play clock because THEY are not all in position for the play to commence. This absolutely screws us. We've changed quarterbacks on the fly as the teams have run down field. Maybe BC noticed the change, maybe they didn't. Maybe the players on the field have noticed the change of QB's, maybe they haven't. Maybe they're in position to defend the Connette package, maybe they aren't. But after the refs stop the play for another 30 seconds while they get themselves ready, there's no question that the BC defense is ready for Connette and they stop him cold, as they do all day. We got screwed by the refs on that first play, and we might have scored on that first play if we'd have gotten to run it unimpeded with the confusion of the moment. Different ballgame if we had. Something to consider.

[Dukeface88]

Listen, just because K or Cut are veterans of the game doesn't mean they do everything right. (You see this in baseball all the time...baseball managers are terrible at strategy, and yet they still get hired.) I think most people here would in the Butler game have not asked Z to miss.

Similarly, here....put it this way. I was posting on BC Interruption during the game, and they were thrilled everytime Connette was in BEFORE THE PLAY played out. That should tell you how effective it was.

I'd agree that no one should be immune from criticism, and we should be able to express our disagreement with the coaches on any particular play call. However, there's a line between saying "I think the coach made a bad decision" and "I think the coach is incompetent" that I think we shouldn't cross (you haven't, but I think some other posters have).

Edited to add:




I think, and perhaps hope, that one of the reasons that our running game was so poor today was because of how beat up our lineman are and they were playing on pure guts and determination.


I think we should also credit BC; their run defense has been quite good this season (best in the conference actually). It isn't really surprising that we struggled against it.

[loran16]

I'd agree that no one should be immune from criticism, and we should be able to express our disagreement with the coaches on any particular play call. However, there's a line between saying "I think the coach made a bad decision" and "I think the coach is incompetent" that I think we shouldn't cross (you haven't, but I think some other posters have).

Edited to add:



I think we should also credit BC; their run defense has been quite good this season (best in the conference actually). It isn't really surprising that we struggled against it.

Competency is the wrong way to put it.

Cutcliffe is undeniably great at creating a good pass offense through teaching the kids their roles and preparing them for games. And he's definitely improved our run game. These are all clear improvements on our previous coaches, and it shows on the field.

That doesn't mean that's great at in-game strategy and adjustments...I find that he's way too conventional at times in not abandoning the run at times (for example we had a 3rd and 2 in our own territory at one point and we attempted to run with Jay up the middle...a terrible call) or his other pre-set strategies. The Connette package may not be conventional, but Cut's use of it in the Red Zone certainly is predictable, and he should adapt to the situation by abandoning it when it's not working, or calling it more often when it IS working.

This doesn't mean he's incompetent. It does suggest a tactical flaw that bothers us, especially in these games.

[devildeac]

It is called the Connette package by the coaches because that's what it is. Plays designed for him to run (and pass) when he's in.

I too don't think it should have been used on the last series because it hadn't worked all day, and Renfree would have had a better shot at making a play with 4 chances instead of only 2.

I think, and perhaps hope, that one of the reasons that our running game was so poor today was because of how beat up our lineman are and they were playing on pure guts and determination.

But let me go back to our first offensive series where we got to inside the 5 yard line, I believe when Renfree completed the long pass to Connor Vernon early in the first quarter. The players run down the field to catch up and "the Connette package" goes in, the play is about to get snapped, and the refs blow the whistle with about 11 seconds left on the play clock because THEY are not all in position for the play to commence. This absolutely screws us. We've changed quarterbacks on the fly as the teams have run down field. Maybe BC noticed the change, maybe they didn't. Maybe the players on the field have noticed the change of QB's, maybe they haven't. Maybe they're in position to defend the Connette package, maybe they aren't. But after the refs stop the play for another 30 seconds while they get themselves ready, there's no question that the BC defense is ready for Connette and they stop him cold, as they do all day. We got screwed by the refs on that first play, and we might have scored on that first play if we'd have gotten to run it unimpeded with the confusion of the moment. Different ballgame if we had. Something to consider.

That's not the only time they screwed us. Didn't lose the game for us but the 2 pass interference calls against us were unbelievable, the 1st one leading to a BC touchdown a couple plays later, IIRC. Fortunately, a couple plays after the 2nd one, we ran a fumble back about 95 yds. Then there's the no call against BC on our last drive where they had a guy draped all over Vernon and no whistle. Sigh. Even if it had been called, we still might have ended up with the Connette package for 2 plays with 1st and goal from their 9 with about 90 seconds to play.

[Dukeface88]

Competency is the wrong way to put it.

Cutcliffe is undeniably great at creating a good pass offense through teaching the kids their roles and preparing them for games. And he's definitely improved our run game. These are all clear improvements on our previous coaches, and it shows on the field.

That doesn't mean that's great at in-game strategy and adjustments...I find that he's way too conventional at times in not abandoning the run at times (for example we had a 3rd and 2 in our own territory at one point and we attempted to run with Jay up the middle...a terrible call) or his other pre-set strategies. The Connette package may not be conventional, but Cut's use of it in the Red Zone certainly is predictable, and he should adapt to the situation by abandoning it when it's not working, or calling it more often when it IS working.

This doesn't mean he's incompetent. It does suggest a tactical flaw that bothers us, especially in these games.

Fair enough. I certainly agree that Cut is fairly conservative in his play calling, and this sometimes works against us. And as I said, I don't think anything you've said has been unreasonable, even if I might disagree with a couple of things (like taking the field goals). The poster I was mostly referring to seems to have been disappeared from the thread (either that, or I'm getting my forums mixed up).

[OZZIE4DUKE]

That's not the only time they screwed us. Didn't lose the game for us but the 2 pass interference calls against us were unbelievable, the 1st one leading to a BC touchdown a couple plays later, IIRC. Fortunately, a couple plays after the 2nd one, we ran a fumble back about 95 yds. Then there's the no call against BC on our last drive where they had a guy draped all over Vernon and no whistle. Sigh. Even if it had been called, we still might have ended up with the Connette package for 2 plays with 1st and goal from their 9 with about 90 seconds to play.
Yeah, but judgment calls are judgment calls, good, bad or indifferent, and they went against us. Too bad and I wish they had gone the other (our) way, but they didn't. But the incompetence of not being ready when we were and were trying to legally hurry up and run a play in a timely fashion just royally screwed our strategy.

[killerleft]

I was watching on espn3 with Warrick Dunn commentating. At HALFTIME, he was saying Duke should go away from the Connette package since it hasn't worked all game.

I'm all for having dual-threat QBs but am strongly against switching them out every other play on the most important drive of the game. Especially when Connette hadn't done anything all day, and Renfree was the reason we even stood to win the game!

Great job team, way to fight back. Sorry the coaches cost you the game.

Warrick Dunn? Warrick Dunn? I love me some Warrick Dunn. Why isn't he coaching us instead of Coach Cut?!

Well, he's a commentator for an internet football event, that's why. Get a grip, man. The guy four rows behind me who kept yelling, "Facemask! Facemask!" every other play agrees with you, too.

We lost the game. But I love me some hindsight. Since virtually every play that doesn't work is in some sense the wrong call, I salute you, sir. You are a genius.

I was really disappointed, too, guy. But pointing fingers right after the game is not the best of things to do. Why not be pleased with the fact that a combination of coaching and playing had our team in position to win the game at the end?

[loran16]

Warrick Dunn? Warrick Dunn? I love me some Warrick Dunn. Why isn't he coaching us instead of Coach Cut?!

Well, he's a commentator for an internet football event, that's why. Get a grip, man. The guy four rows behind me who kept yelling, "Facemask! Facemask!" every other play agrees with you, too.

We lost the game. But I love me some hindsight. Since virtually every play that doesn't work is in some sense the wrong call, I salute you, sir. You are a genius.

I was really disappointed, too, guy. But pointing fingers right after the game is not the best of things to do. Why not be pleased with the fact that a combination of coaching and playing had our team in position to win the game at the end?

Seriously dude? It's hardly hindsight when the people watching the game (check the chat or the BC Intteruption live-thread) couldn't believe that Connette was in the game at those times before the play results were known.

This isn't a situation where a coach goes for it on 4th down and 1 and then in hindsight we say, oh he shouldn't have gone for it because he missed....no, this is a situation where it was clear to everyone that it wasn't working, yet we wasted 2 players out of 4 goal line plays at the end doing it.

[duke09hms]

Warrick Dunn? Warrick Dunn? I love me some Warrick Dunn. Why isn't he coaching us instead of Coach Cut?!

Well, he's a commentator for an internet football event, that's why. Get a grip, man. The guy four rows behind me who kept yelling, "Facemask! Facemask!" every other play agrees with you, too.

We lost the game. But I love me some hindsight. Since virtually every play that doesn't work is in some sense the wrong call, I salute you, sir. You are a genius.

I was really disappointed, too, guy. But pointing fingers right after the game is not the best of things to do. Why not be pleased with the fact that a combination of coaching and playing had our team in position to win the game at the end?

Haha, love it when things are (willfully?) misunderstood. I'm as strong a Cutcliffe supporter as any other and think he's done great at building our program, but that HARDLY means he's a perfect coach and above any criticism. I'm sure he would agree.

Yes the coaching and playing were great to put us in position to win, which makes these terrible decisions that voluntarily handicapped us even more painful and gut-wrenching.

This is hardly told-you-so hindsight. Using Connette for 2 downs with us at 1st and goal from the 9 is effectively taking Renfree and the offense out of rhythm and only giving Renfree 2 shots at the endzone. When it hasn't worked ALL GAME it makes about as much sense as calling a RB dive play on 3rd and 20.

Man, when I saw Connette trotting out there for 3rd and goal, my heart just sank. The team and Renfree deserved a better playcall.

[killerleft]

Haha, love it when things are (willfully?) misunderstood. I'm as strong a Cutcliffe supporter as any other and think he's done great at building our program, but that HARDLY means he's a perfect coach and above any criticism. I'm sure he would agree.

Yes the coaching and playing were great to put us in position to win, which makes these terrible decisions that voluntarily handicapped us even more painful and gut-wrenching.

This is hardly told-you-so hindsight. Using Connette for 2 downs with us at 1st and goal from the 9 is effectively taking Renfree and the offense out of rhythm and only giving Renfree 2 shots at the endzone. When it hasn't worked ALL GAME it makes about as much sense as calling a RB dive play on 3rd and 20.

Man, when I saw Connette trotting out there for 3rd and goal, my heart just sank. The team and Renfree deserved a better playcall.

I misunderstood nothing. We lost. So we both wish different plays would have been called, obviously.

Your heart sank when Connette came out. Mine didn't. You win, I guess. Always go with your heart.

I say neither of us knew what would happen. Renfree didn't complete passes at key times, Connette miscued at key times. If we could have mounted a pass rush of any consequence, we might have won easily.

What I do know is that some people need a scapegoat after a loss, and some don't.

And, finally (for loran): BC Interruption... too bad those guys don't watch all of our games. Coach Cut would have an invaluable tool if we could get him to link to them.:rolleyes:

[loran16]

I misunderstood nothing. We lost. So we both wish different plays would have been called, obviously.

Your heart sank when Connette came out. Mine didn't. You win, I guess. Always go with your heart.

I say neither of us knew what would happen. Renfree didn't complete passes at key times, Connette miscued at key times. If we could have mounted a pass rush of any consequence, we might have won easily.

What I do know is that some people need a scapegoat after a loss, and some don't.

And, finally (for loran): BC Interruption... too bad those guys don't watch all of our games. Coach Cut would have an invaluable tool if we could get him to link to them.:rolleyes:

"All our games" isn't relevant. We know connette can be useful. But you have to adapt to the situation, and clearly the situation was that it wasn't effective in that game and is was obvious to EVERYONE as the game went on.

This isn't about scapegoating. This is about the fact that we were all questioning a decision that seemed awful at the time it was made. No offense, but if your heart didn't sink when Connette came out you really have low expectations for this team. We expect them to win these games, especially in that situation. Please put away the blue tinted glasses to acknowledge the fact that this was a poor choice. There's really no disputing that fact, like at all.

[DU82]

That's not the only time they screwed us. Didn't lose the game for us but the 2 pass interference calls against us were unbelievable, the 1st one leading to a BC touchdown a couple plays later, IIRC. Fortunately, a couple plays after the 2nd one, we ran a fumble back about 95 yds. Then there's the no call against BC on our last drive where they had a guy draped all over Vernon and no whistle. Sigh. Even if it had been called, we still might have ended up with the Connette package for 2 plays with 1st and goal from their 9 with about 90 seconds to play.

Unbelievable? That's a bit strong. Watching live, the first one was right in front of me, and our guy pushed enough to get noticed, and got called. Especially after their receiver dove (or fell) just missing the ball. The second one, before the fumble, our guy pulled the receiver (that's how he was in better position to catch the ball.). Then on the third play, I thought their defender didn't touch Vernon until the ball arrived. Close, but either just as or just after. that was my thought after watching the replay as well.

Let's not blame the refs, even though I was screaming at them too.

[loran16]

To be fair to the refs, after not calling Defensive PI on a drive, 2 plays later they didn't call offensive PI when Vernon clearly pushed the other guy who had a good bead on a pick.

What comes around goes around. We lost the game. The refs didn't.

[Cockabeau]

Its not scapegoating when everyone watching the game including the eloquent Warrick Dunn surmised that the Connete thing wasn't going to fool anyone this time and wasn't working at all. Its one thing to do it at various junctions but to put Connete in at the goal killed all the momentum Renfree had at that point.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Certainly I was disappointed with losing yesterday. The win was within reach, but it just didn't happen.

It would be easy to focus on this game alone and feel let down over what might have been in one game, but I choose the long term view before moving on to the next game. I can't agree with some of the criticism of what the coaches and/or players could/should have done, but I view the passion in the comments as indicative of progress. Our hopes and aspirations for football have been raised.

It's mid November and many of us are still engaged in the season and talking about what's happening on the field.

One point that I don't recall seeing mentioned yet is one I view as a positive. I don't remember seeing Dr. Moorman or any other physician go out on the field to check on a fallen player. Considering the recent injury reports, that's a plus! Conner Vernon and Austin Kelly playing rather than watching on the sidelines was a plus.

[davekay1971]

Simple post: congratulations to the team for the valiant effort yesterday, putting themselves in position for a 3rd straight win. On to Ga Tech, then time to put the last nail in the misery of UNC's cheatin' season.

[Highlander]

Well, he's a commentator for an internet football event, that's why. Get a grip, man. The guy four rows behind me who kept yelling, "Facemask! Facemask!" every other play agrees with you, too.


He must be related to the guy behind me who kept yelling "Challenge it Coach!" after every pass interference penalty. A lady in front of me finally turned around and told him "you can't challenge pass interference."

[CameronBornAndBred]

Everything has already been said, but still pitching in my 2 cents.
No offensive touchdowns, that was rough and is still hard to swallow knowing that not all of our missed opportunities were due to BC's defense, some were simply due to poorly executed plays. On to the next game.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

He must be related to the guy behind me who kept yelling "Challenge it Coach!" after every pass interference penalty. A lady in front of me finally turned around and told him "you can't challenge pass interference."
Yeah, it does help if you know the rules before you start complaining about the calls.

I think I'm going to call Coach Cut and offer to call a few plays week after next for the carolina game. Come to practice that week to know what's in the play book, sit upstairs with the OC, then at the appropriate times whisper in his ear - "throw a post to Vernon", or "tackle eligible, end around triple reverse option pass". :cool: OK, that might be a little much, but it could make things interesting and would certainly be fun and make things less predictable for the defense. Let me call 4 to 6 plays in the game.

I heard Vernon say on the news that if the last pass hadn't been knocked down at the line he would have caught it for the winning touchdown. Don't think so - he was tightly double covered from what I saw re-running the play in slow motion. The ball would never have gotten to him, in fact I think the ball would have been behind him too.

[killerleft]

As was mentioned during the internet coverage, Duke has had trouble getting touchdowns in the red zone. Our short passing game is, of course, not as effective down there because the DBs have the endline as a staunch defender.

That being said, the touchdown was easy (again, in hindsight). On the fourth down play, if Sean would have faked the actual pass we had two guys who would have been wide open behind the defenders. The key DBs were following Sean's eyes on the play and reacted at his first arm movement.

The lack of running success was really our downfall. With the short passes easier to cover, Cutcliffe tried to alleviate that by having our best running QB in the game at times. Connette was the QB on the 19 yard pass play that got us to the nine yard line, setting up the final sequence.

[devildeac]

Yeah, it does help if you know the rules before you start complaining about the calls.

I think I'm going to call Coach Cut and offer to call a few plays week after next for the carolina game. Come to practice that week to know what's in the play book, sit upstairs with the OC, then at the appropriate times whisper in his ear - "throw a post to Vernon", or "tackle eligible, end around triple reverse option pass". :cool: OK, that might be a little much, but it could make things interesting and would certainly be fun and make things less predictable for the defense. Let me call 4 to 6 plays in the game.

I heard Vernon say on the news that if the last pass hadn't been knocked down at the line he would have caught it for the winning touchdown. Don't think so - he was tightly double covered from what I saw re-running the play in slow motion. The ball would never have gotten to him, in fact I think the ball would have been behind him too.

We don't need you calling plays;). You're much better in the parking lot and in the stands than in the booth/on the sidelineshttp://crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/beer.gif. We need the coaches to be calling the plays they have worked on in practice for the last several weeks that would put a "wrinkle" in what has been used the last several weeks, especially the one(s) that was/were talked about at Brunchgate that AM that involved Connette and, well, you know to which one I am referring;). Would it have worked? Don't know but it may well have been better than the results we saw repeatedly yesterday.

[Devilsfan]

I thought if we abandoned the running back at qb (momentum killer as another said) we would have won. Just one other question. What's our star receiver doing fighting for more yardage on our own twenty. Someone please tell our guys we're Duke and we are supposed to be smart guys. Go down. Don't try to be a super hero (it's a team sport) and wind up getting stripped or worse hurt. I like the fight in the guy but....

[OZZIE4DUKE]

We don't need you calling plays;). You're much better in the parking lot and in the stands than in the booth/on the sidelineshttp://crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/beer.gif. We need the coaches to be calling the plays they have worked on in practice for the last several weeks that would put a "wrinkle" in what has been used the last several weeks, especially the one(s) that was/were talked about at Brunchgate that AM that involved Connette and, well, you know to which one I am referring;). Would it have worked? Don't know but it may well have been better than the results we saw repeatedly yesterday.
We'll talk more about this at the game tonight...

[jimsumner]

One side of the argument.

The so-called Connette package had worked the previous week against Virginia. Duke had practiced this all week with the expectation of using it successfully against BC. You trust your preparation, you go with what you practice.

The other side of the argument.

No battle plan survives contact with the enemy. With the exception of one play late in the game, BC had defensed the Connette package into irrelevance all game long. Accept that and move on.

Full disclosure. At the time, I thought Duke had a better chance of scoring with Renfree at QB than with Connette at QB.

Ultimately, it's a results-based business. If it works, it's the right call. If it doesn't, it wasn't. It didn't work.

[pbc2]

A couple thoughts on this thread:

1. Cutcliffe is getting a lot of blame, but probably more than he deserves here, since he doesn't actually call the offensive plays. Sure, he's involved, but the actual playcalling is made by Coach Roper. Just thought that was worth clarifying here.

2. The players and fans aren't immune to a little criticism as well. In my view, Duke did not become the aggressor until the Campbell play. There was a lack of energy in the stadium and on the sideline up until that point. We were mostly just playing with BC, who wasn't particularly inspired, either. I think the opportunity to have jumped out to a 1st half lead was there, and we didn't take advantage. Some of it may have been overly conservative playcalling, some may have been due to a good BC defense, but a lot was just a general lack of urgency/energy.

Tough loss, but we have another opportunity to improve Saturday in Atlanta.