B Back

[awbuzz]

I liked the no huddle look and quickness. Maybe we'll mix that in this year. But as pointed out, if you go three and out it hurts more with the no huddle than the standard huddle just because we chew up less time off the clock.

 

[Techster]

It's hard to explain, but Dwyers stride is so fluid. Once he gets in the open field, there is no wasted energy. It truly is a thing of beauty.

Dwyer was a pretty good track athlete in HS as well as a football star. I believe he finished 2nd in the state in the 100m one year. That stride is a sprinter's stride...he had a great kick after about 20-30 yards where he just accelerates past people. It's the same thing you see from Snoddy...though Snoddy has a problem getting past the first 20-30 yards to kick in that other gear we saw when he raced JT.

 

[ATL1]

Teams that run a similar system out the gun have no problem with smaller backs. I don't see why this would be that big a problem for GT either.
& if height and weight would make that big an impact in being a bback then we really in trouble with JT at QB.

 

[Techster]

I'll tell you someone in college football that actually had interest in GT that would have been a stud BB: Kenyan Drake at 'Bama. Played with the Days brothers at Hillgrove. I think he would have been every bit as good as JD. Unfortunately, he'll be like the 3rd RB at Bama because the Tide is so deep at the position.

 

[awbuzz]

Hope he does well enough this year that we get to see some of that speed in action!

 

[ATL1]

I'll tell you someone in college football that actually had interest in GT that would have been a stud BB: Kenyan Drake at 'Bama. Played with the Days brothers at Hillgrove. I think he would have been every bit as good as JD. Unfortunately, he'll be like the 3rd RB at Bama because the Tide is so deep at the position.

He regrets his decision.

 

[crl85]

He regrets his decision.

Someone else who will almost certainly regret his decision is Brendan Douglas. He will be buried under the depth chart, and would have been very good in our backfield.

 

[awbuzz]

Someone else who will almost certainly regret his decision is Brendan Douglas. He will be buried under the depth chart, and would have been very good in our backfield.

... after next year, assuming he's sill buried, I'm sure he will.

 

[GT Tennessee]

He regrets his decision.

If you know him you might want to do some recruiting of your own and get his butt here. He would kill in our offense

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

One problem solver to the D crashing down on the line is to throw over the D. QB and WR have to make the play though. And yes, we struggled with this in particular last year.

 

[takethepoints]

Oh, the pain, the pain. Between Dontae Aycock (a sure AA at QB for us, imho) and Douglas (he'd have killed at BB) I can never be sure which one disappointed me most. Aycock, I suppose, but it's a photo finish.

Well, I never understood why Douglas made the switch. He isn't big enough to play LB or fast enough for safety in their D scheme. He also isn't fast enough to be a pure TB and it was certain (as it has proved) that by the time Gurley finished they would have a new TB prospect they liked better. Sooooo … he rides the pines or porks up and becomes a OG in the backfield. What a waste of talent!

 

[Boomergump]

One problem solver to the D crashing down on the line is to throw over the D. QB and WR have to make the play though. And yes, we struggled with this in particular last year.

Throwing the ball over top of the blitz is a tried and true football fundamental. We need to develop our ability to handle this. You are right.

 

[ATL1]

To throw over the D during a blitz.
1. QB needs time to throw.
2. Receiver needs time to run route.
3. Line (protection) has to hold up long enough to with stand the blitz.

Usually teams have quick routes for the QB & Receiver to handle this.
Particularly throwing to the voided area left by the blitzer.
Quick slants would eat some of those crash blitzes up but we are ineffective.

 

[33jacket]

I liked the no huddle look and quickness. Maybe we'll mix that in this year. But as pointed out, if you go three and out it hurts more with the no huddle than the standard huddle just because we chew up less time off the clock.

The way you run hurryup (no huddle doesn't mean hurryup necessarily..) at Tech is you do it when you get a first down or when the play nets more than 5 yards. This way you avoid the 3 and out syndrome and still get the benefit of hurryup and keep the D on its heels.

This is not hard to do or figure out. You just have to want to do it. The 3 and out thing is a BAD excuse; and a mental block to lack of creativity IMO.

If you hurryup on first down, guess what? No 3 and out...you just got a 1st down.
If you hurryup after 5+ yard gains, guess what? 3rd and 3 or 2nd and 5, severely easier to get the next first down and the % in your favor...so you no huddle and hurryup.

This is really simple. And we should do it every game. You get a first down...you go fast rush to the line to keep the D personnel and scheme the same and simple, look to the sideline and get your checks and snap the damn ball. Of course, to do this you need sideline signalling GASP. No way....paul shuttles his plays. So we need to add that too.

 

[ATL1]

Bryan Cook used the no huddle when he was offensive coordinator at Cal Poly.
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2012/10/24/2274036/cook-continues-to-cater-offense.html

You can read more about his version of the triple option he developed at Cal Poly here;
http://mustangnews.net/football-preps-for-big-entrance-into-big-sky/

"Cal Poly’s version of the triple option is a fast-paced offensive scheme based off of the defenses reaction to the ball being snapped. Instead of blocking defensive players at the point of attack, the Mustangs try to read the players and move the ball into the defense on three different angles. The three options are allotted between three players who all have the opportunity to run the ball. The ball can be moved with: the dive component, which basically goes directly into the defense; the off-tackle component, which allows the quarterback to run the ball; or the pitch component, which uses a quick, skilled running back to move the ball to the edge. "

 

[InsideLB]

Hell even if they dont hurry up and just do the check to the sidelines part that can tip off a blitz for the OL....

 

[AE 87]

@33jacket It is possible to make your point without suggesting that our coach has "a mental block" or "lack of creativity." Why do feel the need to stress @John and @CuseJacket on how strictly to enforce the no personal attacks policy?

We've also used new formations and sideline signals. So, the suggestion that CPJ isn't creative or resourceful enough is false. The issue is rather philosophical, whether their use is ultimately helpful.

 

[ATL1]

If you care to look at what his offense looked like
Highlights (You may want to mute)

junior

senior

They used a lot of different formations one of them looked very interesting out the gun.

 

[33jacket]

@33jacket It is possible to make your point without suggesting that our coach has "a mental block" or "lack of creativity." Why do feel the need to stress @John and @CuseJacket on how strictly to enforce the no personal attacks policy?

We've also used new formations and sideline signals. So, the suggestion that CPJ isn't creative or resourceful enough is false. The issue is rather philosophical, whether their use is ultimately helpful.

oh no I do think Paul has little creativity. I will stand by that. Its not an attack. Its an opinion of me and his coaching style. We have not signaled plays in from the sidelines yet...i don't recall seeing this. If we have then maybe its just 2minute, but even then don't recall seeing it...if you have tape of this point it to me I would like to study it (is it just call play 2 vs play 1 in the huddle or a true sideline signal)????

We tried new formations but never really committed...i don't mean just gametime. I mean it feels like we came up with a new formation and only 3 plays out of it...and thats it...then stopped practicing new stuff out of it etc...and gave up on it because everyone could defend those 3 plays. That is what it felt and feels like. Again, I do look at our offense and see very little tweaks. I do have to say, one is he did allow OT to 2 point stance at some point being here...so that was good. But in general with the better athletes you can get at Tech I would like to see more creativity on using em. How about a jet sweep with outside zone blocking using Snoddy who lined up in the slot (ala deanthony thomas at oregon). Or how about a better screen game package. Just small things. How about a few TRUE 3-4 WR sets and plays out of that? We can do that...just don't. Why not? Using 3-4 WR in a pass situation is better than 2 WR and 2 AB since WR practice being a WR constantly. AB don't. We just need to be more creative.

As far as the personal attach policy. IIRC that is against other posters, not stating I think our coach has no creativity. If I said our coach is a xyz in vulgar manor that would be a personal attack. But saying someone has no creativity to me is a bit minor....

 

[iceeater1969]

Will the thread is drifting to an interesting place about creativity, I would like to add a point to the idea of a bigger bb (6' 225 plus) that still has some initial acceleration. During the game the smaller bb will hit the hole and if wrong mesh read occurs and be crushed by the dt or lb . The larger bb will at least make this be a draw or possibly a short gain. The former fires up the defense. Also the smaller bb is a joke at pass blocking ( 1 on 1 with lb) . Since this year we have smaller but faster qb a bigger would seem to make more sense. IMO wanting a return of Dwyer is not practical. Give me the drip drip 4 to 6 yds and the occasional 15 yds out of the bb and the play calling will make the edges and counters and passes effective.

Creativity verses time management? I feel that head coach should have progressed past being the on field play caller( let me listen to reads by the guys in the booth, then tell one of the two new each play rb the play info - I'm on tv and the announcer says look no play book) . While calling plays - no discussions where are occurring with defense others about adjustments and no time for encouragement. This would seem to be the coaches job.