After watching the Notre Dame game for a second time and looking back at FSU last year, I have an opinion about the offensive lulls that I don't think anyone has offered yet. The boom or bust nature isn't necessarily a player/mistake issue. I believe it's schematic. First, it was obvious that Notre Dame had the snap count timed which aided middle blitzes in the first half. That has to be due to how plays are triggered which isn't a player thing. Second, the wide receiver stacks aren't effective. Notre dame paid little mind to the formations and it never provided a numbers advantage. Also, defenses in general are better at blowing up screens from that formation. I'm not saying they shouldn't be used, but the amount of usage should change. Third, it appears that the way passing plays are set up limit options. Perhaps only 1 person of four is actually supposed to be thrown at, or the play is only to 1 side and if the defense gums that first option up, there isn't even a second option. There's no high low concepts, no short comebacks where the receiver can catch and make a move it's all too specific. The perfect example is Parchment's touchdown. When the play starts, he's actually a dead route, useless. Travis is directed by the play to only look left, and quickly fire to a target but that's immediately shut down and he has to pull a Houdini act. Parchment to his credit immediately activates and runs a slant, shallow drag and voila, touchdown. Are there ever any plays minus all the roll out action that looks like the end of that play? Receiver is tasked with beating a db with his route, gets inside and catches a slant or a hitch? Where are those plays? It seems like any successful pass play has to be a shot play schemed for that 1 option. Have I accurately explained my point?