PDA

View Full Version : Punting formation not working!!!!!


bisoneer
10-11-2009, 03:50 AM
What is with the wacky punt formation with 3 guys lined up in front of the punter... a big rush pushes them into the punter. Tonight 2 punts were blocked, one for each team, UNI used same formation. Who is the rocket scientist who decides this formation is better than the single up man formation??
spelunker64
10-11-2009, 03:53 AM
What is with the wacky punt formation with 3 guys lined up in front of the punter... a big rush pushes them into the punter. Tonight 2 punts were blocked, one for each team, UNI used same formation. Who is the rocket scientist who decides this formation is better than the single up man formation??

I believe they in-acted this formation, made popular by Wake Forest, last year. It was intended to reduce the amount of blocks...
roadwarrior
10-11-2009, 03:55 AM
We almost blocked their second punt too.
ndsubison1
10-11-2009, 03:55 AM
this formation is actually better then the standard punt formation... most teams in the country now do this formation
bisoneer
10-11-2009, 04:06 AM
this formation is actually better then the standard punt formation... most teams in the country now do this formation

So what are we doing wrong with it? What is better about it than the single blocker? Why did Prevlitz go running to then right and then kick it, was it a design fake or a bad snap?
HooliganBison
10-11-2009, 04:15 AM
So what are we doing wrong with it? What is better about it than the single blocker? Why did Prevlitz go running to then right and then kick it, was it a design fake or a bad snap?

Snap was perfect, he rolled out looking like he wanted to pass(WTF) then booted it into the guys chest.
bisoneer
10-11-2009, 04:16 AM
Snap was perfect, he rolled out looking like he wanted to pass(WTF) then booted it into the guys chest.

TV sports guy said he "bobbled" the snap, I thought it looked like a botched fake, but why fake it from your own 20?
North Side
10-11-2009, 04:56 AM
I am not a fan of the punt formation (wakeforest?) doesn't seem like there is a good way to run a fake with this formation. I am a fan of the good ol' standard formation.
rdh701
10-11-2009, 01:55 PM
From my viewpoint, Prelvitz definitely bobbled the snap.:smh:
yippie
10-11-2009, 02:26 PM
this formation is used to get the front 7 out to cover a punt faster, but you need to have three tough guys in the shield area to not give up any ground when they get hit.
bisonmike2
10-11-2009, 02:39 PM
TV sports guy said he "bobbled" the snap, I thought it looked like a botched fake, but why fake it from your own 20?

this is from the same coaching staff that ran a fake fg on a 4th and 18, down by 2 scores against SIU. I don't know either.
A1pigskin
10-11-2009, 02:55 PM
Horrible, horrible, and horrible.
*Bisonrube
10-11-2009, 04:37 PM
He bobbled the snap...tried to do a roll out punt...and he looked at the defense before he decided to try to punt also. Text book performance from the punter.

I can't speak for Wake Forest...I know that the Bison suck at this formation.
We can barely line up for it...last week we had the same issues.

I did like the post-game interview."Coach Bohl identified a weakness in their punt formation...and we took advantage of that" (paraphrasing) He however did not notice he is using the same formation:)

GO BISON
99Bison
10-11-2009, 04:44 PM
Bohl show said we messed up the play via audible...
1. We called wrong audible - I think the wrong side shifted.
2. Then bobbled the snap.
3. Then rolled over to punt into the non shifted side "per the audible call".


My question is this... first of all, whomever calls the audible should be like what, we can't do that, that's total blockage. Second question, if I am a coach on the sideline and I see the wrong shift happening why do I not run directly to the ref and call timeout?
X-Factor
10-11-2009, 05:03 PM
The blocked punt was clearly all on Prelvitz. He had ridiculously slow kick mechanics. We need to go back to a scholarship punter again, because while Prelvitz is adequate at times, 10 yard punts and blocks just are not acceptable.
TbonZach
10-11-2009, 05:07 PM
I thought it looked like a botched fake, but why fake it from your own 20?

IIRC, there was a certain former NDSU punter faked within the 20 and everyone praised him.
CarringtonBison
10-11-2009, 07:12 PM
IIRC, there was a certain former NDSU punter faked within the 20 and everyone praised him.

big difference-he saw a WIDE OPEN uncovered receiver and took advantage of it. That was not present here. Terrible, terrible. Very big momentum killer (put us behind by a TD-again chasing).
stevdock
10-11-2009, 07:22 PM
It was not a botched fake. It wasn't even a fake punt. The advantage to this formation as was stated is to be able to get downfield quicker to cover the punt. Another thing is that if there is not a rush on the punter, the wall of 3 and the punter can do a roll out punt/fake option. Once they start to rollout if there is no pressure they keep going until there is pressure. UNI ran it perfectly later in the game when we didn't come after it. The problem with the block was that it was obvious they were at least set up to come after it, so it should have been a regular punt instead of a rollout.

If this formation is executed properly, the advantages do outweigh the disadvantages. But just like most of the rest of the season and team, execution failed miserably.
CarringtonBison
10-11-2009, 07:26 PM
It was not a botched fake. It wasn't even a fake punt. The advantage to this formation as was stated is to be able to get downfield quicker to cover the punt. Another thing is that if there is not a rush on the punter, the wall of 3 and the punter can do a roll out punt/fake option. Once they start to rollout if there is no pressure they keep going until there is pressure. UNI ran it perfectly later in the game when we didn't come after it. The problem with the block was that it was obvious they were at least set up to come after it, so it should have been a regular punt instead of a rollout.

If this formation is executed properly, the advantages do outweigh the disadvantages. But just like most of the rest of the season and team, execution failed miserably.

UNI did not execute it well either. Watching their punter warm up, he has a BIG leg, nearly scraping the ceiling of the dome. His "roll out" punt was about 10 feet above the ground, and only because of a very generous series of bounces, went 40 yards. May get better downfield coverage, but IMO takes distances off punts.
clenz
10-11-2009, 07:29 PM
UNI did not execute it well either. Watching their punter warm up, he has a BIG leg, nearly scraping the ceiling of the dome. His "roll out" punt was about 10 feet above the ground, and only because of a very generous series of bounces, went 40 yards. May get better downfield coverage, but IMO takes distances off punts.
You are more likely to get more roll from a rugby punt.


I don't like the rugby punt either. Our punter is a true freshman, and I want to see his big leg continue to develop the normal way.
stevdock
10-11-2009, 07:46 PM
UNI did not execute it well either. Watching their punter warm up, he has a BIG leg, nearly scraping the ceiling of the dome. His "roll out" punt was about 10 feet above the ground, and only because of a very generous series of bounces, went 40 yards. May get better downfield coverage, but IMO takes distances off punts.

Wasn't that the one that was downed on the 1 ft line though or am I thinking of a different one??
CarringtonBison
10-11-2009, 07:55 PM
Wasn't that the one that was downed on the 1 ft line though or am I thinking of a different one??

that was a different one. That one is the one that was nice and high, but McNorton didn't field it and it rolled very nicely (for them) down to the 1 ft line. It should have been at the 13-15 yd line but instead....
stevdock
10-11-2009, 08:49 PM
that was a different one. That one is the one that was nice and high, but McNorton didn't field it and it rolled very nicely (for them) down to the 1 ft line. It should have been at the 13-15 yd line but instead....

You're right. The rollout punt went down the sideline to 15-20 yard line.
TbonZach
10-11-2009, 09:47 PM
big difference-he saw a WIDE OPEN uncovered receiver and took advantage of it. That was not present here. Terrible, terrible. Very big momentum killer (put us behind by a TD-again chasing).

I wasn't saying that it was botched (I agree that it was) but bisoneer asked why we would fake it within our 20. That's what I was referring to.
LITTLEGUYSINGREEN
10-11-2009, 10:53 PM
So what are we doing wrong with it? What is better about it than the single blocker? Why did Prevlitz go running to then right and then kick it, was it a design fake or a bad snap?

I was listening to the radio the first half while pheasant hunting. Scotty called it as a fake. It sounds like they tried to fake it, but it was botched so Prevlitz tried to make something out of nothing.

IMO these types of plays are not Prevlitz's strong points.
westnodak93bison
10-12-2009, 01:43 AM
I'm not a fan of the formation. Seems to me it just gives a potential punt blocker a running start to get some extra vertical and closer to the punter rather than worrying about somebody flying in from either side. Also, I dont believe a single NFL team uses it so that tells me it can be beat far too easily.