I'll confess right now that I watched the first quarter of last night's game and listened to the fourth quarter (God bless you, Don Fischer; I have missed you). I missed the second and third quarters. Based upon what I saw and heard, though, I am questioning the play calling from last night's game. Perhaps those of you that saw or heard the whole thing, and may be more familiar with the pistol can educate me.
Seems to me that an advantage of the pistol, having the quarterback in the backfield, rather than under center, is that it gives you the opportunity to adjust and adapt more readily, and do multiple things from the same set. Perhaps that's a misunderstanding on my part.
In last night's game, McCray showed that he has the lateral speed to get outside and make cuts up the field. I suspect that Willis has the same (and should have been given the opportunity to show that, even after putting the ball on the ground). I suspect that Burgess and Payton, God love them, do not. Still, it seemed that the disproportionate majority of the run plays were called between the tackles. Part of that blame lies with the O-line, which has to do a better job of blocking. However, if they are not doing that, then the play callers need to recognize that, adapt, and run outside or some pass plays to the flat to move outside the tackles.
In the passing game last night, IU did a great job of playing to it's strenghts in the first half -- primarily its big receivers and Chappell's strong arm. Again, I did not follow the third quarter, but I assume that EKU was able to make adjustments and take away the wideouts. It seems, then that IU failed to adjust and use screens or the tight end or something else.
EKU seemed to know what was coming. Either IU's playbook is razor-thin, or the play callers (Canada?) need to do a better job of recognizing the adjustments and making their own. Let me know if you think I am missing something.