My favorite part of this game was the Washington fans storming the field despite the fact they were at Washington State, after last year when Washington State stormed the Washington field
To see this play broken down is a real treat. I was yelling at the TV to watch out for the fake and now that I understand what happened, I can appreciate just how good this was executed. Well done Cougs, and Go Huskies!
I hope you realize how much you have changed the way so many people view the game. I personally now get upset when the announcers don’t cover the kicking game with anywhere near the depth that you do. Amazing work.
That’s Coach Whit baby! Best special teams coordinator out there. Unfortunately, unlike the Washington State Cougars, my first college “punt” snap was a fake punt called by Coach Nick Whitworth which resulted in an interception :/
NCAA rules always confuse me!! So on a special teams play you can have 11 eligible guys on the field? Also - what makes it "special teams"? The presence of a punter or the fact that #38 lined up in a punting position? Or something else?
Can’t say for certain, and commenting here to get a clarifying notification, but my understanding (based off of high school experience) is that every valid formation has five ineligible receivers, five eligible receivers, and a quarterback (in this case a punter). AFAIR, the ineligible receivers are dictated based off of how they line up on the LOS, and also whether they’re “covered” by other players on the line - why a tight end can lineup on the LOS next to a tackle and be eligible, while the tackle isn’t. So I *think* that what is happening here is that by shifting the shield guys to the line, they become ineligible, while the linemen, in a traditional sense, are eligible because they’re technically off of the line. But it’s been a decade since I played football and I never actually understood that rule completely since we always deferred to coach’s knowledge. Would love to see Isaac break it down logistically.
Not sure if the coach was also thinking this, but Washington only having one timeout left in the first quarter makes it unlikely that they call a timeout to deal with the confusion.
That play was a thing of beauty. Would have liked to have seen a better outcome for the apple cup but still excited about haberer going forward. Would have possibly changed the momentum of the game if Henley had been able to take that in for 6
Just to be clear, they have eight men on the lIne, so #82 and #86 are ineligible, right? So the Huskies have five guys covering one eligible wide receiver and one eligible back?
@@greglist2991 I was trying to find the NCAA rule. As far as I can read, eight men on the line are allowed, just six of them will be ineligible and thus can't go downfield or touch a pass. I think this play is okay?
@@p-sz disagree. Any college refs out there? Cuz I recall recently seeing a flag for TE being covered, which was same call w 8 men on line cuz the WR was on line too. Think this rule is meant for clarity for D, otherwise it would be chaos(who to cover), would be play based on deception rather scheme.
I think another piece of genius here is the fact that Washington only had 1 timeout left in the 1st quarter so the likelihood of them using it to regroup is slim to none.
The linemen aren't eligible. That lineman was eligible because he was the END next to the guard. Because of the formation some of the upbacks who went out for the screen were covered and therefore not eligible
I came to say the same thing, only the guy on the end was eligible. I thought this was a stupid explanation for a fake punt. The defense was confused, that’s all.
#1 is eligible since he is the last player on the line on that end, but does he have to report in as an elligible receiver? Also, is he legal to be at tackle with that number?
The only thing in the rules is the number of people on the line. Anyone can line up at "tackle" or "guard". Those positions are not defined by the rules.
I don't think "tackle" matters--there's no rule that the ineligible players have to be in any particular location, just not the first or last. He is the last/first player on the line, so therefore he is a receiver.
@@TheKingOfToast no. Players have to wear a number that corresponds to their position. Offensive linemen are something like 60-69. I don't remember exactly.
@@TheSpanishInquisition87 I believe this rule has changed recently. It definitely has changed in the NFL, but not sure if/how it has changed in college. God, I love CFB.
@@TheSpanishInquisition87 its 50-79 and thats to designate "offensive lineman" it has no bearing on who can line up where. The only rules are >there must be at least 7 players on the line >the players on each end must be eligible receivers (not numbered 50-79) >all other players on the line must be ineligible (numbered 50-79) The rulebook does not have a "tackle" position. The person snapping the football could be a wide reciever and the entire offensive line could be lined up to his right and that wide receiver would still be eligible.
Except for when the offense subs the defense is given time to sub. You see some defenses taking their sweet time to get it right. Occasionally the defense is so slow, the play clock runs so low the offense is forced to take a timeout or delay of game.
How do they make a lineman an eligible reciever? I thought a lineman can never be an eligible reciever? Dont they need 5 men on the line not as recievers?
Wazzu still gets annihilated and then has to have SECURITY AND TAPE around the midfield logo to prevent the storm and flag plant that they did in the Huskies stadium last year. Now that's just low.
Why does it need to be 4th and short/ the defense needs to know its a fake? Why wouldn't it work in 4th and medium or why wouldn't it work if defense was expecting a punt?
You need the defense to stay on the field so each player can have the rules specified in the video. If their punt return unit is out there they may set up a return which would have someone specifically over the guy they want to throw the ball to attempting to block him so it could mess up the look they were going for. Hope that makes sense. Could've worked, wouldn't have been this easy though
Let's keep in mind that in spite of this the Huskies, as usual, beat WSU's collective ass. But I guess Coug fans got to hold on to what little they can. LOL
Sorry, I should have been more clear, any of these linemen, based on the formation can be eligible as long as they're on the end, so in this case #1 was eligible
That's next level thinking, using an obvious threat of a fake punt to conceal... a fake punt. I'm in awe of someone who can think like this.
My favorite part of this game was the Washington fans storming the field despite the fact they were at Washington State, after last year when Washington State stormed the Washington field
Storming the field? The rush was so weak they don't even have a video on TH-cam of it 😂
Stormed, more of a meander. They couldn’t penetrate the dozen campus security officers around the logo.
To see this play broken down is a real treat. I was yelling at the TV to watch out for the fake and now that I understand what happened, I can appreciate just how good this was executed. Well done Cougs, and Go Huskies!
I hope you realize how much you have changed the way so many people view the game. I personally now get upset when the announcers don’t cover the kicking game with anywhere near the depth that you do. Amazing work.
"Legendary arm talent."
That's quality work there, sir. 😆
Legendary. Spin rate just friggin off the charts. And right on the numbers. Starting QB on most teams...fo sho.
Congratulations. Nicely explained and broken down for the best understanding.
Dude, your insights and break-downs of these plays is outstanding!
He made a few big mistakes on who was eligible and who wasn’t…in fact it was the same problem the defense had.
That’s Coach Whit baby! Best special teams coordinator out there. Unfortunately, unlike the Washington State Cougars, my first college “punt” snap was a fake punt called by Coach Nick Whitworth which resulted in an interception :/
Oof, where did you have the pleasure of playing for him?
@@IsaacPunts Texas State!
Thing of beauty. Awesome stuff
On my way through Pullman to visit family for Christmas. This was great. Go cougs.
Thanks for the breakdown and analysis.
This is seriously clever, big brain stuff.
Wholesome excitement from punting, get you a daddi who loves you as much as he loves punting
So it’s a …. Fake fake punt? Nice!
NCAA rules always confuse me!! So on a special teams play you can have 11 eligible guys on the field? Also - what makes it "special teams"? The presence of a punter or the fact that #38 lined up in a punting position? Or something else?
Same. Was wondering what made the lineman eligible receivers. Not being down and a special team setup?
I’m not sure about the rules exactly, but I know on a fake fg a lineman can be an eligible receiver in the NFL
If I’m not mistaken they aren’t linemen in this set. The three shield guys became the linemen when they lined up in front of the receiver.
@@Triaz357 yeah that makes sense. Hence the defense thinking screen pass. Thanks for your input and clearing that up
Can’t say for certain, and commenting here to get a clarifying notification, but my understanding (based off of high school experience) is that every valid formation has five ineligible receivers, five eligible receivers, and a quarterback (in this case a punter). AFAIR, the ineligible receivers are dictated based off of how they line up on the LOS, and also whether they’re “covered” by other players on the line - why a tight end can lineup on the LOS next to a tackle and be eligible, while the tackle isn’t. So I *think* that what is happening here is that by shifting the shield guys to the line, they become ineligible, while the linemen, in a traditional sense, are eligible because they’re technically off of the line. But it’s been a decade since I played football and I never actually understood that rule completely since we always deferred to coach’s knowledge. Would love to see Isaac break it down logistically.
Not sure if the coach was also thinking this, but Washington only having one timeout left in the first quarter makes it unlikely that they call a timeout to deal with the confusion.
Beautiful: make it look like an obvious fake punt, so that it’s very surprising when it is a fake punt.
GO HUSKIES!!! 💜⭐️. That was a great win 😝
imagine not even going to UW and being a fan 😮 GO COUGS
I love the longer videos !
That tight end was actually a linebacker. Daiyan henley
GO COUGS!!! That was the most entertaining first half in apple cup history! 55 points and 6 lead changes and WSU went 4/4 on 4th down
When you said you loved the Washington Cougars, my first thought was the not football team. LOL
That play was a thing of beauty. Would have liked to have seen a better outcome for the apple cup but still excited about haberer going forward. Would have possibly changed the momentum of the game if Henley had been able to take that in for 6
Just to be clear, they have eight men on the lIne, so #82 and #86 are ineligible, right? So the Huskies have five guys covering one eligible wide receiver and one eligible back?
😂 in analysis, forgets to mention refs missed an illegal formation call. You’re correct only 7 men on line scrimmage, and 4 in backfield vs 8 + 3.
@@greglist2991 I was trying to find the NCAA rule. As far as I can read, eight men on the line are allowed, just six of them will be ineligible and thus can't go downfield or touch a pass. I think this play is okay?
@@p-sz disagree. Any college refs out there? Cuz I recall recently seeing a flag for TE being covered, which was same call w 8 men on line cuz the WR was on line too. Think this rule is meant for clarity for D, otherwise it would be chaos(who to cover), would be play based on deception rather scheme.
@@greglist2991 Maybe you're right, but what's the rule? All I see is rule 7-4-a.
@@p-sz dunno exact rule. Just recall seeing in game. We need a legit ref.
Brilliant breakdown!
Great breakdown.
"Nick New it would work."
🤔🤔🤔
I think another piece of genius here is the fact that Washington only had 1 timeout left in the 1st quarter so the likelihood of them using it to regroup is slim to none.
The linemen aren't eligible. That lineman was eligible because he was the END next to the guard.
Because of the formation some of the upbacks who went out for the screen were covered and therefore not eligible
I came to say the same thing, only the guy on the end was eligible. I thought this was a stupid explanation for a fake punt. The defense was confused, that’s all.
#1 is eligible since he is the last player on the line on that end, but does he have to report in as an elligible receiver? Also, is he legal to be at tackle with that number?
The only thing in the rules is the number of people on the line. Anyone can line up at "tackle" or "guard". Those positions are not defined by the rules.
I don't think "tackle" matters--there's no rule that the ineligible players have to be in any particular location, just not the first or last. He is the last/first player on the line, so therefore he is a receiver.
@@TheKingOfToast no. Players have to wear a number that corresponds to their position. Offensive linemen are something like 60-69. I don't remember exactly.
@@TheSpanishInquisition87 I believe this rule has changed recently. It definitely has changed in the NFL, but not sure if/how it has changed in college. God, I love CFB.
@@TheSpanishInquisition87 its 50-79 and thats to designate "offensive lineman" it has no bearing on who can line up where.
The only rules are
>there must be at least 7 players on the line
>the players on each end must be eligible receivers (not numbered 50-79)
>all other players on the line must be ineligible (numbered 50-79)
The rulebook does not have a "tackle" position. The person snapping the football could be a wide reciever and the entire offensive line could be lined up to his right and that wide receiver would still be eligible.
was that not 8 men on the LOS by adding all 3 shield men to the LOS?
That’s what I thought too. But noticed the last player on right is not on LOS. Notice where is feet are to player next to him.
Except for when the offense subs the defense is given time to sub. You see some defenses taking their sweet time to get it right. Occasionally the defense is so slow, the play clock runs so low the offense is forced to take a timeout or delay of game.
And no he fakes no he fakes the fake he thinks about faking -coach Kline water boy
the coach was playing 4d chess on this play
Well explained
Where my Dawgs at? WOOOWOOO
Or, if you're Nebraska, you line up on 4th and 1 and punt like good little boys. Every time.
How do they make a lineman an eligible reciever? I thought a lineman can never be an eligible reciever? Dont they need 5 men on the line not as recievers?
You need to make special team matter merchandise
Go Cougs!
Why are the down lineman eligible receivers?
The left tackle is eligible because he is on the end of formation. Notice the receiver/ back in the backfield behind him. It’s an unbalanced line.
That’s sick
Might want to re-analyze
Wazzu still gets annihilated and then has to have SECURITY AND TAPE around the midfield logo to prevent the storm and flag plant that they did in the Huskies stadium last year. Now that's just low.
Not all of the linemen are eligible, just #1 since he is the end in that formation.
Great video!
Why does it need to be 4th and short/ the defense needs to know its a fake? Why wouldn't it work in 4th and medium or why wouldn't it work if defense was expecting a punt?
You need the defense to stay on the field so each player can have the rules specified in the video. If their punt return unit is out there they may set up a return which would have someone specifically over the guy they want to throw the ball to attempting to block him so it could mess up the look they were going for. Hope that makes sense. Could've worked, wouldn't have been this easy though
It looks to me like they only have 3 men in the backfield on this formation. It should have been an illegal procedure call on State.
There's no minimum number of players required in the backfield.
They may have made a good play here, but wsu will always bow down to Washington
you may have had something to say but its so fast nobody could follow you....do you get paid by the word?
he was so wide open i'd have gotten in my own head and thrown the ball like 10 yds short, or maybe overthink it sommore and rifled it 10 yds long haha
Can you please adjust your sound so it's not constantly peaking? Makes it hard to listen to...
"Legendary arm talent" LOL, he could QB for the Houston Texans
Let's keep in mind that in spite of this the Huskies, as usual, beat WSU's collective ass. But I guess Coug fans got to hold on to what little they can. LOL
How is this a legal formation? 8 men on the LOS.
God I love football
Or just defensive fail by #58
Am I blind, or are there two players with uniform #1? One leaves the field, and another one comes on to make the catch. 🤯
gosh, yep great play.... what was the final score, again?
😞😞😞
But don't you dare look at the final score! Oof!
Cmon man 😭 Don't remind me us Cougs had a rough apple cup and bowl game
You misspelled knew
someone finally caught it, I realized this after upload
Idk man, looks like a lucky first down to me
thank you for your valuable analysis
@@WhatsY0UTUB3 :)
That's 58 fault the punter ain't even holding the ball like about to punt!!
In this situation your linemen are eligible receivers? That's the only point you lost me
Sorry, I should have been more clear, any of these linemen, based on the formation can be eligible as long as they're on the end, so in this case #1 was eligible
@@IsaacPunts Thanks man, appreciate the direct reply. Love your content!
Knew, not new.
This is great content. More of this, stop doing the stupid breakdown with inappropriate jokes
0:10
Excellent video and subject matter not a fan of either team just interesting Content
Great fake. Didn’t help in the end. Go Dawgs
Get a mic bro