A Player's Perspective on Clemson game

ncjacket79

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,237
gtg936g said:
I am saying that CGC and Dave P have repeatedly said they want to be balanced on offense. They have also called the offense a Pro Style offense instead of just saying it is a spread offense. They are trying to distance themselves from the triple option while installing another option based offense under a different brand/label. They have given fans/recruits the illusion that this offense is designed to be balanced. The spread is a run first offense. Clemson can “force” their version to be balanced because of the talent they have. If they want to throw it and they create a mismatch on defense because of their talent then they can be successful throwing it regardless of how the other team lines up. Most of the run/pass plays in a spread work based on the correct read by the QB. The defense dictates whether the play is a run or pass based on how they line up. So, the precept that the offense is somehow designed to be balanced is a fallacy.
Click to expand...
Without getting in to the back and forth on what something should be called, coach P has always in the past been pretty balanced depending on personnel. Which is what he’s been saying all along. You adjust depending on your talent, who you play and what you do best.
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
bobongo said:
He already has.

But as for me, I'm giving a mulligan for the Clemson game. It's just the truth to say we were badly outmatched. Maybe we should have done something different, but I'm giving the coaches the benefit of the doubt. It was only one game, and it was Clemson.

Anxious to see what happens on O this week. And "anxious" is the word. We'll see what happens.
Click to expand...
The only real disappointment (besides the muffed punt) was the coaching decision on the first and goal series. The D looked much better than I had expected, the O was about what I expected, though I was anticipating more passing. Clemp was selling out stopping the run and we had no answer.
 
bobongo

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,066
Animal02 said:
The only real disappointment (besides the muffed punt) was the coaching decision on the first and goal series. The D looked much better than I had expected, the O was about what I expected, though I was anticipating more passing. Clemp was selling out stopping the run and we had no answer.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the answer when they're selling out on the run would have been to chuck the football. The only thing that bothered me was running into the teeth of an eight-man box. We'll see what happens this week.
 

gtg936g

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,142
ncjacket79 said:
Without getting in to the back and forth on what something should be called, coach P has always in the past been pretty balanced depending on personnel. Which is what he’s been saying all along. You adjust depending on your talent, who you play and what you do best.
Click to expand...

I guess I just don’t understand why being balanced matters with a spread offense. If you are running the basic RPO and the corner is firing the offense should be very slanted to passing regardless of the personnel grouping. It’s just taking what the D gives you. Why force balance if the D gives you numbers one way or another.
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,751
gtg936g said:
I agree with Ton in that the offense has to have an identity and you run what you want to be in an effort to eventually be great at it.

The frustrating part to me is I have no idea what we are trying to be. Each interview seems to have a different take on what that is. Most spread offenses are run first offenses. The pass in the RPO is based on a read, otherwise the play is a run. So, how can you say you want to be balanced if the defense dictates run/pass based on their coverage? There is a ton of option (double, triple, zone read, RPO) in the traditional spread offense. It is built on it. So, if we are getting away from the option, does that mean we aren’t running the spread? If we are too scared to call the spread an option offense, we should have just implemented the air raid to draw a clear distinction between who we were and who we are now.

I will say I thought Dave P made a good choice by starting Oliver. He has played a lot and we were on the road in a rough environment. Experience to not panic as the starting QB was needed and I think Oliver played his heart out.
Click to expand...

Pro-style spread is the key word here. In a pro style spread there is a presnap read to throw on every run. Its a little bit of an inversion of the reads. You walk up look at the defense, use motion to diagnose coverage, then either throw the ball to the quick route or run it OR audible. What makes it a spread is the formations you are doing this out of 10 personell, trips, spread flex (not flex bone means one of your "slot" guys is on the line and the outside is off, mirrored on the other side) or 11 personnel but your TE is more of an H. Good Pro-style Spread teams are teams like Romo's cowboys which ran a lot of gun and singlepack spread concepts.

the RPO becomes more PRO (get it)
 
dressedcheeseside

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,046
gtg936g said:
Maybe so. Like I said it is just a pet peeve of mine. I don’t have a problem being run heavy or pass heavy. I think you just take what the D gives you unless you have a really talented player that creates a mismatch. I thought the scripted plays we ran in the first series were a good plan, but I would like to have seen some screen plays or a quick pitch to the edge when Clemson sold out to stop the run game.
Click to expand...
They are called in game adjustments, we got used to those.
 

Lee

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
841
dressedcheeseside said:
They are called in game adjustments, we got used to those.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, like the last 3 years we played them with the best offensive mind in a generation.

You know when we had 203 total yards and 21 points last year (7 points on a pick 6 and the last td happening with 4 mins left), 230 yards of total offense and 10 points the year before (only TD happened with 4 mins left in the game), and a whopping 124 yards and 7 points the year before that (only score happened in the 4th quarter).

That’s the kind of in-game adjustments we were missing last Saturday.

It’s crazy how some of you love PJ more than you do GT. Also crazy how short some of your memories are.
 

link3945

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
100
gtg936g said:
I guess I just don’t understand why being balanced matters with a spread offense. If you are running the basic RPO and the corner is firing the offense should be very slanted to passing regardless of the personnel grouping. It’s just taking what the D gives you. Why force balance if the D gives you numbers one way or another.
Click to expand...
This is one of my big concerns about the offensive staff: it threw out a lot of buzzwords during the off-season, but never seemed to really say much. Striving for balance, I think, is kind of stupid, and I think pro-style offenses are beyond stupid at the college level. We've seen spread option offenses tear apart defenses for about 2 decades now, and we should embrace that.
 

TheSilasSonRising

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,729
Animal02 said:
People make decisions and form opinions based on what they hear people say and what the see with their own eyes and what they know are facts. When what they hear is not what they see or jive with the facts is where the issues arise.
Click to expand...

When they hear WHO says what they hear?
 
LibertyTurns

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
You know what’s crazier? People who hated CPJ more than they hated GT’s shaft and still haven‘t gotten over either. 10 years of hate is hard to forget, harder when at every turn players are bashed, achievements asterisked and now you got the same people playing HC helicopter parents. I’ll be glad when we start running non-HS offense plays so we can all just move along. CPJ is not coming back and CGC is not going away.
 

TheSilasSonRising

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,729
MWBATL said:
It requires players. Players who get interested and excited about playing at GT. Since we aren’t an SEC school, since we actually make guys go to class, maybe we better make sure we attract theme with our schemes. What we ran....didn’t exactly do that.
Click to expand...


How many did or did not sign over the weekend?
 

Beerbrewingjacket

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
84
gtg936g said:
I think everyone here wants GT to be successful and win. Some of us liked the gruff “it is what it is” attitude of CPJ. Some of us like the new age up tempo constant recruiting of Collins. We all want the same thing in the end.
Click to expand...

I hope so. I’ve just seen a lot of smugness from some on here after one game. And I’m all for calling out deficiencies. I did it plenty of times with the old staff. But, I am fully behind the new guys. Same as I was for PJ and Chan when they got here.

I believe had we come out and started throwing 30 times against that D it would have been a far greater disservice to the guys playing. The coaches are trying to put the guys in the best position to win.

Had you all been listening objectively this offseason then you wouldn’t be surprised at what we got. The staff repeatedly said they were going to run the offense based on the personnel they have. They did exactly that. The handful of times they tried to do some passing concepts TO failed. So did Lucas, albeit a short sample size. Graham did the best passing but his knock is grasp of the playbook. So the staff have to evaluate these guys in a non controlled environment. The staff are still learning what they have.

Itll evolve. I fully believe that. To make a referendum on game one is nothing short of ridiculous.

Those QBs y’all wanted to showcase passing had QBRs of 8, 9 and 48. There isn’t a single team that is at all comparable to our transition. Louisville has passing concepts last year, had TE’s on roster, etc. They were more easily equipped to handle a coaching change. We have a much steeper mountain to climb and folks need to be patient.

The staff did the right thing. Coach Thacker said today in his conference that Clemson was ready on their first series for the Temple offense with their scheme. So the coaches had the right idea. 4 turnovers kinda killed any momentum.
 
Coloradojacket

Coloradojacket

Banned
Messages
2,034
So my first question is what is a Pro style offense these days. Gailey ran a Pro style offense and it was not always productive. Fact is of all the teams out there, Bama and UGA are about the only ones running kinda of a Pro style. Qb under center some and drop back. What I do notice is a lot of teams run the ball a lot. Oklahoma, Clemson, Boise St. etc.

For USF, they can not stop the run as was apparent the other night. I think we see a 70-30 run attack and we should.
 

gtg936g

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,142
Beerbrewingjacket said:
I hope so. I’ve just seen a lot of smugness from some on here after one game. And I’m all for calling out deficiencies. I did it plenty of times with the old staff. But, I am fully behind the new guys. Same as I was for PJ and Chan when they got here.

I believe had we come out and started throwing 30 times against that D it would have been a far greater disservice to the guys playing. The coaches are trying to put the guys in the best position to win.

Had you all been listening objectively this offseason then you wouldn’t be surprised at what we got. The staff repeatedly said they were going to run the offense based on the personnel they have. They did exactly that. The handful of times they tried to do some passing concepts TO failed. So did Lucas, albeit a short sample size. Graham did the best passing but his knock is grasp of the playbook. So the staff have to evaluate these guys in a non controlled environment. The staff are still learning what they have.

Itll evolve. I fully believe that. To make a referendum on game one is nothing short of ridiculous.

Those QBs y’all wanted to showcase passing had QBRs of 8, 9 and 48. There isn’t a single team that is at all comparable to our transition. Louisville has passing concepts last year, had TE’s on roster, etc. They were more easily equipped to handle a coaching change. We have a much steeper mountain to climb and folks need to be patient.

The staff did the right thing. Coach Thacker said today in his conference that Clemson was ready on their first series for the Temple offense with their scheme. So the coaches had the right idea. 4 turnovers kinda killed any momentum.
Click to expand...

I am just a take what the D gives you kinda guy. It doesn’t matter to me if we are balanced, pass heavy or run heavy. I thought running with Tobias was a good plan. Hopefully we have a screen game going this week if needed.
 
Top