Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Auburn's Option v. Tech's Option
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Boomergump" data-source="post: 25123" data-attributes="member: 639"><p>This is a good discussion. Some thoughts:</p><p></p><p>A majority of our blocking concepts attempt to neutralize a defender for an instant because our plays are quick hitting. We cut or scissor block lineman because we want their hands down for an instant or confused for an instant on the dive. We cut on the perimeter because all we need is a gap for a second with the numbers advantage. Auburn's run plays utilize option principles to create a simple man advantage as well, but because their plays take longer to develop off the SG snap, OLs must hold their blocks longer and they really don't need to cut much. Auburn zone blocks primarily. We zone blocked a lot more this year than years past, but not to the same extent as they do. Personally, I see a couple advantages either way. The time available for the MESH off the deep snap / zone block is far greater, allowing for the QB to read plays more easily. It is more basic and it is slower, defenders are forced to commit to a greater extent, which makes it easier to execute. The TO from under center is quicker and harder to execute at the MESH point, but, in theory, it should be easier to execute blocking on the interior, AND it options off 2 players instead of 1 putting more pressure on the defense. The payoff is potentially greater but difficulty in the reads and execution are greater. It is just two different ways to play. Pick your poison.</p><p></p><p>In terms of arm strength and the QBs we have had in the system to date, this is how I see it. If you lined up JN, VL, TW, and JT on a certain spot on the field and asked them to wing it down field as far as they could (like a javelin throw) the results would be as follows: VL and JN would be about even, JT would be about 10 yards behind them, and TW would be about 10 yards behind JT. That is talking pure arm strength period and nothing more. Obviously JN was not accurate, etc. The reason there is hope for JT is that a couple of other variables fall his way. He is better than all 3 others at keeping a play alive with his feet (hugely important with our splits), he has pretty good touch, he appears to scan the field well while buying time, and finally (if rolling to his arm side) he throws very comfortably on the run. To the left side he is atrocious ( a little work on shoulder position would be good for him rolling left). With some work, and swallowing a huge patience pill, JT could develop into a lethal player. Will he? Time will tell.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Boomergump, post: 25123, member: 639"] This is a good discussion. Some thoughts: A majority of our blocking concepts attempt to neutralize a defender for an instant because our plays are quick hitting. We cut or scissor block lineman because we want their hands down for an instant or confused for an instant on the dive. We cut on the perimeter because all we need is a gap for a second with the numbers advantage. Auburn's run plays utilize option principles to create a simple man advantage as well, but because their plays take longer to develop off the SG snap, OLs must hold their blocks longer and they really don't need to cut much. Auburn zone blocks primarily. We zone blocked a lot more this year than years past, but not to the same extent as they do. Personally, I see a couple advantages either way. The time available for the MESH off the deep snap / zone block is far greater, allowing for the QB to read plays more easily. It is more basic and it is slower, defenders are forced to commit to a greater extent, which makes it easier to execute. The TO from under center is quicker and harder to execute at the MESH point, but, in theory, it should be easier to execute blocking on the interior, AND it options off 2 players instead of 1 putting more pressure on the defense. The payoff is potentially greater but difficulty in the reads and execution are greater. It is just two different ways to play. Pick your poison. In terms of arm strength and the QBs we have had in the system to date, this is how I see it. If you lined up JN, VL, TW, and JT on a certain spot on the field and asked them to wing it down field as far as they could (like a javelin throw) the results would be as follows: VL and JN would be about even, JT would be about 10 yards behind them, and TW would be about 10 yards behind JT. That is talking pure arm strength period and nothing more. Obviously JN was not accurate, etc. The reason there is hope for JT is that a couple of other variables fall his way. He is better than all 3 others at keeping a play alive with his feet (hugely important with our splits), he has pretty good touch, he appears to scan the field well while buying time, and finally (if rolling to his arm side) he throws very comfortably on the run. To the left side he is atrocious ( a little work on shoulder position would be good for him rolling left). With some work, and swallowing a huge patience pill, JT could develop into a lethal player. Will he? Time will tell. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Joshua Nesbitt wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Auburn's Option v. Tech's Option
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top