Final Score: Arizona 20, UCLA 17 | Box Score (PDF)
When word that Khalil Tate was not going to play began to break in the hours leading up to kickoff, I did not get that empty feeling that some may have felt. Instead, I saw plenty of opportunity for the Wildcats in giving the ball to Grant Gunnell for his first collegiate start.
The first thing I did was reconsider what UCLA’s strengths and weaknesses are defensively. Quite frankly, they do not have many overall strengths. The most glaring weakness was their lack of pass defense, especially covering the middle of the field and losing track of receivers in the secondary.
Factoring in Gunnell, I saw opportunity for the Arizona coaches to keep a similar game plan in place that they would have if Tate were healthy. The only area of the playbook that would truly be scraped would be the designed quarterback runs. Otherwise, Gunnell has been running most of the same playbook since his arrival in the spring.
If I had a concern with Tate entering in the game, it would have been his ability to see open plays and hit receivers in the middle areas of the field. It’s not his strength as his eyes are usually further down field or he is looking into the intermediate areas to use his own legs when a play starts to break down.
While the X-factor effect of Tate’s dynamic running ability was gone, my initial though was: Gunnell is a 6-foot-6 pocket passer that will have clear windows to deliver the football. For the most part, that proved to be very true.
The first-time starter was put into a position of success early. Noel Mazzone called a pair of jet sweeps to Brian Casteel to open the game, totaling 31 yards. Statistically, these were counted as passes, since the ball is “passed” forward. However, they were effectively run plays to stretch the UCLA linebackers sideline-to-sideline to respect the outside runs. This is what would open up windows to pass throughout the game by stretching the middle level of the defense.
Gunnell’s first half was what you would expect: inconsistent. He delivered some good passes, missed on several (including a couple open fades in the red zone) and had a couple plays where his receivers did not help him. The first was a drop by Cedric Peterson on the opening drive, and later Stanley Berryhill III hauled in a third down conversion only to work backwards and keep the Wildcats short of a first down.
When the first half was all said and done, Arizona trailed 7-6. Gunnell was an unspectacular 17-of-29 for 170 yards passing, with about 40 of those yards on the designed sweeps that were not true pass attempts.
Despite the deficit, I felt really good about where Arizona was considering the defense had shut out UCLA after the initial drive. I mentioned to a couple people in the press box that I bet offensive coordinator Noel Mazzone was loving his halftime conversation with Gunnell in the locker room.
The reason was Gunnell and the Wildcats had left plenty of plays out there in the first half, but they were only trailing by one. Mazzone knew his young quarterback was settled into the game by now and they could hone in on a few simple concepts to exploit the Bruins in the second half.
The notion came to fruition right out of the gates. After UCLA extended the lead to 10-6 on the opening possession of the third quarter, Mazzone dialed up a perfect play call on Arizona’s first play from scrimmage with Gunnell tossing to Bam Smith up the sideline for a 75-yard touchdown.
Gunnell continued to build off that throw the rest of the game. He was 12-of-15 for 182 yards after halftime, including 8-of-8 for 81 yards in the fourth quarter. Not to mention, he gained 12 yards running the ball in the second half (sacks not included), after gaining none in the first half.
All of this said, I have not touched on the single most impressive part of Gunnell’s performance: he did not turn over the football!
It was far from a perfect performance, but it was the type of performance the Wildcats desperately needed to keep the young season on track. And they did it with their All-American running back, J.J. Taylor, also sidelined.
Certainly the question now turns back to the health of Tate and, to a lesser extent, Taylor. Arizona’s best chance at success likely includes a healthy Tate. Will he be ready to return to action this week? We wait and see.
Either way, Gunnell proved, for the time being, that he is not intimated to play at this level. There was a quiet confidence out there on the field even in some more of his erratic freshman moments. Those growing pains will continue, but so will the learning process. And learning through victory beats learning through defeat anytime.
Now, let’s reexamine the five pregame keys I listed in my Friday prediction.
Run to Win (which team successfully establishes the run?)
Despite what the stat sheet says, I am calling this one a push.
Sure, the Bruins outgained the Wildcats, 217-99, in net rushing. But that doesn’t tell the whole story.
Arizona opened the game with a pair of jet sweeps to Casteel that produced 31 quick yards. Those were effectively run plays even though they count as passes because the ball is technically passed forward to the player in motion. Throughout the game, I counted 40 yards gained on four of these plays to either Casteel or Tayvian Cunningham.
Then there are 14 lost rushing yards at the end of the game when the Wildcats took a knee to run out the clock. Adding those yards back into the rushing total, and including the 40 yards on sweeps, you can count 153 true rushing yards. You could also add back 12 more yards from sacks, pushing the running total up to 165 yards.
On the other side, UCLA quarterback Dorian Thompson-Robinson used his legs early to spark the Bruins to an opening score. He gained 40 of his 63 total rushing yards on two plays on that initial drive.
After that first drive, the Bruins gained 149 rushing yards the rest of the game. They averaged only 4.26 yards per carry over those last 10 possessions, paced by a 36-yard run by Joshua Kelley in the third quarter after Thompson-Robinson left with an injury.
In the end, Arizona may not have won this game with its ground game. Much of that can be credited to the Bruins committing numbers to stop the run and forcing a rookie quarterback to make throws. And the absence of both Taylor and Tate contributed to the decline in rushing output significantly.
However, UCLA was unable to consistently run the football after the opening drive of the game. The Bruins ended up passing 42 times against 43 total runs, and lost their starting quarterback at the end of the first quarter.
Win middle of the field (offense and defense)
This goes as a win for the Wildcats.
The key matchup I was looking at between Arizona’s offense and the UCLA defense was the Wildcats’ slot players against the Bruins’ linebackers and safeties.
Mazzone wasted no time manipulating the second and third levels of the UCLA defense by opening the game with consecutive jet sweeps to Casteel. This got the linebackers moving side to side so they could not always key on stopping the run between the tackles and defending soft passing zones over the middle.
As the game wore on, Gunnell was most consistent passing to middle of the field. I tallied him at 11-of-18 passing for 139 on the slats, skinny posts, curls and other crossing routes caught either between the hashes or on routes coming back to the middle of the field from inside the numbers.
In the end, Arizona’s primary slot receivers (Casteel, Cunningham, Jamarye Joiner) totaled 14 catches for 101 yards in the game. Not to mention, overall distribution was strong for Gunnell and the offense. Nine Wildcats had at least 30 yards either rushing or receiving, with Bam Smith totaling 35 rushing and 99 receiving.
Defensively, the Wildcats got off to a slow start, allowing Thompson-Robinson to slip upfield and into space for 40 yards on two runs. It moved the chains, and the Bruins capitalized on the momentum with an early touchdown, which is something they seem to do frequently.
From there, Arizona’s pass rush became more disciplined. The big plays with Thompson-Robinson’s legs were neutralized for the most part. The linebackers, safeties and corners were also quite physical challenging short and intermediate routes throughout the game.
There were a few missed tackles and poor angles, but overall it was a solid effort in this regard. In the end, the Wildcats had more answers defensively than the Bruins had answers because they limited big plays, especially in the middle of the field.
Limit big plays (defense/special teams)
This was one of the three biggest factors in the game. Along with no turnovers and winning field position (which we’ll talk about later), Arizona won the battle of big plays.
UCLA produced just four offensive plays of 20+ yards, with none longer than Kelley’s 36-yard run. This was a testament to Arizona’s defense doing a sound job winning in the middle of the field, evidenced by the fact the Bruins had only two pass plays of 20+ yards.
One of the keys was neutralizing the electric Demetric Felton, who led the Pac-12 in all-purpose yardage entering the game. I was surprised Felton was not utilized more, but even when he had the ball, Arizona did a good job corralling him. He finished with 40 yards of offense on six runs and two receptions.
Along with this, Arizona did not give up big plays on special teams. Lucas Havrisik’s big leg did not allow UCLA to return a kickoff, and the Bruins gained only 11 yards on two punt returns.
When you win field position like Arizona did and you limit big plays, it puts a lot of stress on an offense to consistently move the football down the field and finish drives. UCLA has struggled in this regard and did so again.
This was a decided advantage for Arizona, which scored on a big play (75-yard touchdown pass to Bam Smith) of its own.
Don’t let DTR get comfortable (defense)
The first impression was an uncomfortable one for Arizona. Thompson-Robinson looked like he picked up right where he left off in Pullman, leading UCLA to an opening score.
From that point on, the Wildcats settled into the game and DTR settled into the inconsistent quarterback we’ve seen much of the last two years. That allowed Arizona to dial up some pressure, pick off a pass and ultimately knock DTR out of the game with an apparent injury late in the third quarter.
UCLA was very balanced offensively, running 43 times and passing 42 times. While that balance may seem like it kept Arizona off balance, it wasn’t the case. DTR and the Bruins couldn’t establish consistent offense and never had good field position.
They averaged only 5.2 yards per play on their 85 snaps. Run plays averaged 5.0 (and closer to 4.0 after the opening drive), while passing plays mustered only 5.4 yards per attempt and 10.4 yards per completion. Compare that Gunnell’s 8.0 yards per attempt and 12.1 yards per completion.
In addition to Arizona mixing up pressure and containing DTR running the ball after that first series, the secondary made it difficult to find open receivers. Arizona was credited with seven pass breakups and the one interception against DTR and the passing attack.
Win special teams
An old saying in football is “you gotta be sound in the kicking game”. For once, Arizona was very sound in the kicking game.
I wrote in my Friday preview that Arizona would win if several things happened. I concluded those thoughts with:
“Don’t underestimate the importance of the kicking game in this one to help win field position and force the Bruins to either make big plays or sustain drives the length of the field.”
This is exactly what Arizona did to perfection on Saturday night.
Thanks to Havrisik’s touchbacks and Matt Aragon’s impressive night punting, UCLA never started a drive past its own 25-yardline. It helped create a nine-yard advantage in average starting field position. UCLA started at its own 20-yardline on average, while Arizona opened drives on average at the 29-yardline.
That is nearly an entire first down advantage Arizona had offensively or defensively on each possession of the game. Combine that with no offensive turnovers and limiting UCLA’s big plays, it was a complete and total win for Arizona.
The one blemish would be Havrisik’s first field goal try, which sailed right from 34 yards. Otherwise, he was successful from 40 and 41 yards.
Meanwhile, Aragon turned in a career-best night punting. He averaged 47.4 yards per punt, placing three inside the 20-yardline. He was also close to keep a couple of other punts inside the 10 that went for touchbacks.
The combined efforts of Havrisik and Aragon limited the Bruins to 11 return yards in the game (all on two punt returns). This had been a significant strength for UCLA which was one of the nation’s top special teams return teams in the country.
An unsung hero in all of this is freshman snapper Seth MacKeller who seems to have won the snapping duties on both short and long snaps. All of his snaps Saturday night were crisp, and he even got down the field for a tackle in punt coverage. This was a position question mark coming out of camp, but credit to McKeller for his work to win the job and perform at a high level at a position that usually only gets talked about if something bad happens.
Lastly, there’s the timeout. Kevin Sumlin played the timeout game to perfection at the end of the game. With two remaining, he used one timeout prior to JJ Molson’s game-tying field goal attempt. The kick was good, but the play did not count because of the timeout. Sumlin could have used another time out to ice Molson again, but he did not. Molson’s final try sailed right, missing from 39 yards.
Credit to Arizona for a strong special teams performance that was absolutely critical to win the Pac-12 opener, especially without two of the league’s most dangerous offensive players in Tate and Taylor.
Get the latest content from Dry Heat Sports by following on Facebook (@DryHeatSportsAZ), Twitter (@DryHeatSportsAZ) and subscribing below.
You can also follow Blair’s personal Twitter account @BlairWillisUA.
0 comments on “UCLA at Arizona Game Review”