CDP play calling

[smokey_wasp]

If I had time to go review game film I would, but I don't.... Those were just the ones off the top of my head

I hear ya, but if I took your complaints one by one, I would say the QB switching is a personnel decision, not playcalling. Shotgun on short yardage is something plenty, if not most college teams do, and the stats show it is only slightly less effective. No adjustments whatsover simply isn't true. Not tailoring the offense to our players is vague without giving an alternative.

Not scoring in 2 games is certainly a pointed criticism, and isn't this the crux of the issue? People hated the offense because it wasn't effective. The question is how much of that is on CDP vs just not having the personnel or experience. I say I need to see more to fairly judge. Others have made up their minds.

 

[Yaller Jacket]

I almost said something in the Post Game thread when it seemed like everyone was piling on the OC. I can't say I like every play he's called, but overall, I like what he is doing. It seems to me amazing that in the first year he introduced the variety of plays totally alien to what we had been running and had our guys looking like they knew what they were doing. It has probably been said over a thousand time since the season started, but let's hold off judgement until we see what the plays look like with some blocking.

 

[IronJacket7]

Those are formations. Not a scheme.

It seems like honestly the closest scheme i can say to what we ran last year was. Air Coryell mixed with read option? Most of our deep shots were Go routes out of the slot, (not even really seam routes they were bending goes with AB) Or go routes on the out outside. We did this out of gun instead of under center but the scheme of pass deep pass often is a stable of this extremely old offense (its from the lates 70s and early 80s).

Formations are part of scheme....

 

[jgtengineer]

Formations are part of scheme....

But not the scheme itself. For instance you can run Power run, Air raid and West coast all out of the same Single back 1-1 set with 3 receivers and a tight end.

 

[IronJacket7]

But not the scheme itself. For instance you can run Power run, Air raid and West coast all out of the same Single back 1-1 set with 3 receivers and a tight end.

I completely understand what you are saying. But part of a coach's "scheme" is being able to run it in through multiple formations. That was my point. I know the difference between formations and scheme.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Overall, it's the predictability. When you have overwhelming talent, being predictable doesn't matter. See Steve Sarkisian, as a great example. He did a poor job at keeping the defense guessing. I would of liked to see ball pre-movement. Maybe some half back screens, to turn aggressive teams against themselves. I would of liked to see high percentage pass plays, like quick slants. We ran too many out patterns that required good timing, arm strength and good route running. We struggled, in all those phases. I just think the offense was too basic, too predictable and too conservative. So, it wasn't a play call, it was more the overall process on how we runs the offense.

We ran a lot of pre snap movement though. We also ran slants, curls, and other high percentage throws but sometimes just couldn’t connect. I’ll also add that sometimes we had short high percentage throws WIDE open but we took chances further down field, and that’s not on CDP. The one thing I would have liked to see more of is our RB’s in the passing game, but at times we had to keep them home to help in pass pro. Another thing is, you cant run as much of a short passing game when teams have safeties in the box because they are not as worried about your passing game, it takes away passing lanes.

as far as your comment on the process I’ll add that we flipped things completely around and basically started fresh with how CDP runs his offense when he has his personnel.

 

[IronJacket7]

But not the scheme itself. For instance you can run Power run, Air raid and West coast all out of the same Single back 1-1 set with 3 receivers and a tight end.

Maybe if I word it like this...

CPJ had a OBS scheme. But he ran it through primarily Flexbone formations. You can run the OBS scheme and variations of it through any formation. Oregon, Auburn, Air Force, New Mexico, etc.....

Hence my point that I like the variation of formations used by CDP.

 

[Oakland]

Still a lot of vagueness and subjective statements in the responses so far, which is fine. It's valid to have an opinion. But I think this reinforces the OP's point.

The OP wanted examples from film. Watch the games against Temple and Virginia Tech. The offense did not score. In overtime against the Citadel, the offense did not score. There was a period where our offense did not score a point for 6 quarters. No doubt about it, the offense must put points on the board. Those should be tangible reasons.

 

[awbuzz]

I'm no offensive genius, but isn't that the object of the game?

Ding, ding, ding!!!!
Winner!

 

[smokey_wasp]

The OP wanted examples from film. Watch the games against Temple and Virginia Tech. The offense did not score. In overtime against the Citadel, the offense did not score. There was a period where our offense did not score a point for 6 quarters. No doubt about it, the offense must put points on the board. Those should be tangible reasons.

See my reply to him a few posts up. You didn't like it because it didn't work, which is a totally normal perspective for a fan to have. But it doesn't tell us anything about why it didn't work and to what extent it was playcalling or failed execution.

 

[True2GT]

Why do we have to dislike just the play calling? What if the scheme (or lack thereof) doesn't seem to work. We really seemed to regress throughout the season.

Now I will say the injury bug on the o line probably played a significant part, which is why I'm waiting until the end of next season to see the direction we are headed.

Simply asking why play calling was bad doesn't begin to dig into why we struggled on offense when we have been good to elite on that side of the ball for a while now.

 

[Jim Prather]

Ding, ding, ding!!!!
Winner!

And here I thought the purpose was to score points... Wow, I guess I really never understood the purpose of the game.

 

[Oakland]

See my reply to him a few posts up. You didn't like it because it didn't work, which is a totally normal perspective for a fan to have. But it doesn't tell us anything about why it didn't work and to what extent it was playcalling or failed execution.

OK. I would have to break down each play on film. You are right I'm looking at it as a fan. It was a bad year for our offense. We were shut out for the first time at home since 1957, we blew overtime against the Citadel, and the offense didn't score against Temple. I'm judging the OC by the end results.

 

[Coloradojacket]

So if the question is about play calling, who knows because the reason a play fails has nothing to do with what is being called. The better question is why was the offense so bad.
1. Musical quarterbacks the first part of the season
2. Lack of offensive lineman, through attrition and injury....probably the number 1 reason
3. Not utilizing known skills of players. Mason needed more carries. Oliver became non existent. Cottrell, one of our top players last year not used.
4. Not running plays that are better for the above stated conditions. More speed option etc. You can't run the ball between the tackles against UGA.....ask LSU

 

[BainbridgeJacket]

Without doing a detailed film review, it's hard to say. Observation bias, selective memory probably, but here goes:

I felt like our run game got way better as the year went along but damn if it wasn't frustrating watching us repeatedly outside zone for no or negative yards. We were going to run that play until we got it right was my impression. It was also hard at times to tell when we were running stretch vs outside zone. I don't remember running any counter and hardly any dive. I'm sure others have mentioned it, but not having a power package installed cost us some points throughout the season.

In the passing game, we could've used more seam-dig combos to create space on mid level passes. Not to say it's not in the arsenal (we completed one that I remember), but it was rare. Did we run any angle routes that anyone remembers? Hi-lo combos were rare. Scissors I don't remember seeing. Now in his defense (and Graham's), it's not like our receivers run the best routes. It seems every other spread team had give-me completions that allow them to move the chains and our guys can't post up in the right spot on 5 yard hitches. That's not really on the OC. We didn't have many threats that forced defenses to actually stretch out and our TE's weren't weapons in crowded field situations. I think it was completely ineffectual when we ran drag routes since our guys weren't going to break tackles.

My blood pressure is rising, hitting pause on my thoughts.

 

[WreckinGT]

Can you break down the film and show us why the play calling was superb but couldn't succeed because of the awful talent we have? That is what you are getting at, right?

 

[smokey_wasp]

Without doing a detailed film review, it's hard to say. Observation bias, selective memory probably, but here goes:

I felt like our run game got way better as the year went along but damn if it wasn't frustrating watching us repeatedly outside zone for no or negative yards. We were going to run that play until we got it right was my impression. It was also hard at times to tell when we were running stretch vs outside zone. I don't remember running any counter and hardly any dive. I'm sure others have mentioned it, but not having a power package installed cost us some points throughout the season.

In the passing game, we could've used more seam-dig combos to create space on mid level passes. Not to say it's not in the arsenal (we completed one that I remember), but it was rare. Did we run any angle routes that anyone remembers? Hi-lo combos were rare. Scissors I don't remember seeing. Now in his defense (and Graham's), it's not like our receivers run the best routes. It seems every other spread team had give-me completions that allow them to move the chains and our guys can't post up in the right spot on 5 yard hitches. That's not really on the OC. We didn't have many threats that forced defenses to actually stretch out and our TE's weren't weapons in crowded field situations. I think it was completely ineffectual when we ran drag routes since our guys weren't going to break tackles.

My blood pressure is rising, hitting pause on my thoughts.

+1 for specifics and content based critique.

 

[bobongo]

I'm judging the OC by the end results.

The OC is only one factor pertaining to the end results. There are some other major factors out of his immediate control.

 

[smokey_wasp]

Can you break down the film and show us why the play calling was superb but couldn't succeed because of the awful talent we have? That is what you are getting at, right?

No, he is asking people to back up their assertions. There were film breakdowns during the season showing tons of missed blocks. That doesn't equal "awful talent", but provides context for the struggles. It is possible there were multiple factors here.

 

[33jacket]

But not the scheme itself. For instance you can run Power run, Air raid and West coast all out of the same Single back 1-1 set with 3 receivers and a tight end.

we ran all those this year. The term scheme is overblown; almost every "scheme" runs versions of other schemes.

we ran a ton of power; power is a play, blocked 3-4 times differently. Its not a scheme. its a pulling G play for a run.
we ran alot of west coast concepts; these, are typically predicated on zone blocking, backside cuts, hot reads, 3 step drops etc; crossing routes
we ran option.
we ran power disguised as option

we ran all of it out of a zone blocking scheme. Its clearly a zone blocking scheme, with option concepts, and a ton of formations with the same play inside the formation. In fact, i saw alot of fridge playbook; but we don't have hamilton yet.

for those who say we were predictable and too basic. LOL are u kidding? Do you realize our guys didn't even know how to study film to block this scheme largely into the season with any efficiency. Key wasn't just teaching them the offense, how to block technique wise, he literally had to teach most of em how to study film too. Including the QB. We basically did not do as much under paul, because there was no film to study other than our own from prior years. And certainly, when we did film, it wasn't looking at anything like they do now.

If you were the coach, would you get more complex with an essentially true freshman qb, and that level of newness?? I sure as hell wouldn't. I would do my best to run similar plays I think we could block and read the right block keys, out of different formations and personnel groups....sounds like what we did.

I will say this. He like many OC had some questionable playcalls. But I am telling you go pick a random game; there are guys running wide arse open we either didn't see, or couldn't get to due to pressure, or flat missed the throw, that won't be the case soon....he isn't perfect; but man plays were there. That tells me it was a solid playcall. I still have some doubts but I think anyone in this scenario gets more time.

Certainly, I am giving him more time before piling on