CDP play calling

[BainbridgeJacket]

Yeah if all it was is shear girth and weight total then the cast of featured guests on “My 600lb life” would all be highly recruited 5 star ️ players and our coaches should screen national video footage of all buffets within a. 5 hour radius of the Atl and wheel those jokers in here and build a insurmountable wall of flesh.

I mean, it's not the worst idea

 

[33jacket]

What I'm taking from this is the new scheme is harder and more time consuming to learn, is that correct? Or is it that it's just different and therefore a larger learning curve.

If we didn't look at much film before, yet we were an effective offense as a whole, that leads me to believe the old system was more efficient and effective overall.

Way different more checks more complex alot of reading and switching

No. We didn’t look much at film because no one runs what we did. It was so different there was nothing to go off of. How many times u hear the opposition say tech week is so different throw everything u learn out the window and create a new d. The old system was effective and it wasnt too like any offense. It was just way different. Our film was last years game and thats not easy to go off of all the time.

What we are trying to run now, or eventually, has proven to put up equally prolific numbers. If it wasnt. Then the only top offenses would be options with a huge gap behind em and thats never the case.

With proper recruiting and coaching we can certainly put out an equally awesome o.

Proof? Ralph fridgein.

 

[True2GT]

Way different more checks more complex alot of reading and switching

No. We didn’t look much at film because no one runs what we did. It was so different there was nothing to go off of. How many times u hear the opposition say tech week is so different throw everything u learn out the window and create a new d. The old system was effective and it wasnt too like any offense. It was just way different. Our film was last years game and thats not easy to go off of all the time.

What we are trying to run now, or eventually, has proven to put up equally prolific numbers. If it wasnt. Then the only top offenses would be options with a huge gap behind em and thats never the case.

With proper recruiting and coaching we can certainly put out an equally awesome o.

Proof? Ralph fridgein.

I'm not disagreeing. And I acknowledge recruiting is better and am happy about that. Do we have those linemen, however, in this coming class to do as you say and be able to run this more complex scheme? And when I say run this scheme, I mean to the levels of being able to win championships. Time will tell.

 

[Sidewalking]

Results.

 

[danny daniel]

Can someone please give me tangible reasons as to why he did not do a good job? And I don’t mean stuff like, well, he could have done this or that. Or because the offense wasn’t good. Please brake down what was bad, give examples from film etc. I keep seeing people complain but not give actual tangible reasoning. its just opinions from what I’ve seen.

We had no short yardage (big people) package and none for the red zone. Our poor performance in this area was on the OC. We failed to use our best personnel Oliver as one of the runners in this situation.

We routinely called a pass on first down (70% incompletes or thereabouts) and with 2nd and 10 we ran in the A-gap usually for a yard leaving us in third and long which we were then unsuccessful 70% or so. This was predictable and repeated over and over during the season.

We ran multiple wide receiver screens (and I believe only one or two to our best chance...Oliver) with Brown as our primary blocker (he was not effective and in fact was injured trying to block on this play at least 3 times). We needed a flex player (like Cottrell or a 200 lb WR) in the game to block on this play and a runner like Sanders or Oliver as the receiver.

We failed to run reverses or reverse passes anytime.

With our poor passing (QB and Oline issue) we should have run until stopped much more often. We too often wasted downs early with our poor passing which then took away our chance to move the chains by running.

We needed more counters, reverses, and options in our run calling. We were too predictable and conservative. Our most successful run game came when Mason just ran over people.

On third down we often passed short of the line to gain for a first down. Our QB also often ran out of bounds just short of the line to gain. The OC needed to correct this.

This is only my opinion based on watching all the plays in all the games. Our OC seems to set an offense formation and then draw on his vast experience to locate the weaknesses in the D alignment. He then calls a play (often the D changes after the call so he loses his "advantage"). His play calling does not appear to be based on the field position, down and distance, or sequence of playcalling to set up something. It certainly does not lead to moving the chains consistently. It just seems to be his best judgement for the formation "mismatch" that he sees. It just drives me crazy. Maybe an NFL quality passing combo with an NFL Oline would make his playcalling look better. It certainly did not work with our current roster.

 

[Ash]

His play calling does not appear to be based on the field position, down and distance, or sequence of playcalling to set up something. It certainly does not lead to moving the chains consistently.

I agree with much of your post, but this part is the key: When people say "You can't tell anything about how the OC is doing from this season" that is not true. Take out personnel and execution and looking at play calling. We ran the experiment and saw the results: A constant string of 3andOuts. Offense stuck in the mud, putting pressure on the D to win the field position battle.

 

[alagold]

It is easy to blame the OC for ALL Offensive problems-- but he SHOULD get a bunch.It is he that puts the guys in the positions and then decides what to run based on their skills -vs that opponent. You don't REALLY know if the guys that play ARE good enough to execute but if they AREh decent then there was a LOT of poor decisions with what we saw on the field in 3rd down % and then scoring.

I know that is all somewhat subjective but one specific example of poor planning is the flex position.There is a ATL list with the FLEX position but the guys listed on it basically DID NOT PLAY that position or really much at all on Off. How can you show an offense with that in your scheme and then not use it? More than a bit wishy-washy.

 

[bobongo]

I agree with much of your post, but this part is the key: When people say "You can't tell anything about how the OC is doing from this season" that is not true. Take out personnel and execution and looking at play calling. We ran the experiment and saw the results: A constant string of 3andOuts. Offense stuck in the mud, putting pressure on the D to win the field position battle.

How on earth do you judge results without taking into account personnel and execution? You're judging one factor by the results without taking the other factors into account. Not a very scientific experiment.
You can't just look at play calling without taking into account the skills of those available to execute the plays.

 

[33jacket]

I'm not disagreeing. And I acknowledge recruiting is better and am happy about that. Do we have those linemen, however, in this coming class to do as you say and be able to run this more complex scheme? And when I say run this scheme, I mean to the levels of being able to win championships. Time will tell.

this scheme is no more complex than any NCAA offense now that uses pro concepts in zone. Lets not act like this is THAT big a deal. Its just a bigger deal coming from the OL we have plus what amounts to a true freshman QB; and lets face it a few OL walkons and injuries with that learning curve.

The lineman we are recruiting now are the body types we need vs some of what we have, of course will need to learn and mature too, but they will be doing it from day one, with the proper body types, and hopefully some of what they did in high school translates quicker....

In my view, the left side of the line with Quinney and Defoor should be ok after this year under their belt. Its the other 3 and QB that needs to jump big.

 

[Ash]

How on earth do you judge results without taking into account personnel and execution? You're judging one factor by the results without taking the other factors into account. Not a very scientific experiment.
You can't just look at play calling without taking into account the skills of those available to execute the plays.

We could see after the season is over that there was very little variance in the method of playcallng from the first game to the last. This controls for execution mistakes.

 

[BainbridgeJacket]

this scheme is no more complex than any NCAA offense now that uses pro concepts in zone. Lets not act like this is THAT big a deal. Its just a bigger deal coming from the OL we have plus what amounts to a true freshman QB; and lets face it a few OL walkons and injuries with that learning curve.

The lineman we are recruiting now are the body types we need vs some of what we have, of course will need to learn and mature too, but they will be doing it from day one, with the proper body types, and hopefully some of what they did in high school translates quicker....

In my view, the left side of the line with Quinney and Defoor should be ok after this year under their belt. Its the other 3 and QB that needs to jump big.

Let's face it, it isn't exactly like the OL was receiving much praise in the previous couple of years either.

 

[bobongo]

We could see after the season is over that there was very little variance in the method of playcallng from the first game to the last. This controls for execution mistakes.

No, it doesn't. And what exactly was the "method of playcalling" that was so little varied? Looked varied enough to me. I saw lots of variation and little was working. That tells me it isn't the playcalling that's so much at fault. An offense doesn't click without the line, and the line was weak. I have never seen, ever, an offense that worked well with a weak offensive line. Never happened.

 

[Scubapro]

No, it doesn't. And what exactly was the "method of playcalling" that was so little varied? Looked varied enough to me. I saw lots of variation and little was working. That tells me it isn't the playcalling that's so much at fault. An offense doesn't click without the line, and the line was weak. I have never seen, ever, an offense that worked well with a weak offensive line. Never happened.

It looked like he threw out what ever he could at random hoping something would work.
IMHO He didn't have a solid plan of action. We can blame injuries (which were many) or we can blame undersized/skilled lineman (Which is an issue) but we are talking about is play calling and scheme. I thought the first series against Duke was masterful. However, the rest of the game and all other games he didn't seem to have any rhyme or reason to the calls he made.

 

[True2GT]

this scheme is no more complex than any NCAA offense now that uses pro concepts in zone. Lets not act like this is THAT big a deal. Its just a bigger deal coming from the OL we have plus what amounts to a true freshman QB; and lets face it a few OL walkons and injuries with that learning curve.

The lineman we are recruiting now are the body types we need vs some of what we have, of course will need to learn and mature too, but they will be doing it from day one, with the proper body types, and hopefully some of what they did in high school translates quicker....

In my view, the left side of the line with Quinney and Defoor should be ok after this year under their belt. Its the other 3 and QB that needs to jump big.

You stated that what we are doing on o line now requires more film study and that we have done little to none previously. That alone makes it more complex without much more explanation.

And just because everyone else does it, doesn't mean everyone else can have good offenses. Off the top of my head, I can only think of Wisconsin being able to produce the type of line we want with the level of recruits we have at that position.

 

[bobongo]

It looked like he threw out what ever he could at random hoping something would work.
IMHO He didn't have a solid plan of action. We can blame injuries (which were many) or we can blame undersized/skilled lineman (Which is an issue) but we are talking about is play calling and scheme. I thought the first series against Duke was masterful. However, the rest of the game and all other games he didn't seem to have any rhyme or reason to the calls he made.

Random calls without rhyme or reason would seem at least to have the advantage of keeping them guessing. You can't separate play calling and scheme from personnel. You really can't just take personnel out of the equation. If you keep them guessing but still can't go anywhere, that suggests something lacking in the personnel department. Next year, when this young offense is another year bigger and stronger and more experienced, and with some new players who are going to help us out, I'll bet the play calling is going to look a lot better.

 

[iceeater1969]

Year 1 -
Start season
Sr center injured but playing and hiking low balls. Then Walk on takes over.

Last game where we are clearly playing a great defense.
Try rsr Scott Morgan - hikes low balls past qb . A little later Qb is scrambling out what looks like a gap between guard tackle for a gain, but does not have ball tucked away ="turn over" .
Execution failures like above make calling tough, but we sure did very little play calling to get pressure off the middle.

For example
(brown jet sweep or fake jet sweep w wheel route or ditto with Oliver . He could have passed. , etc)

imo, during off season cgc and cdp will need to review every play call to look for systemic errors.

 

[TheFlyest]

Lack of identity.
Lack of flow.

Team should have been much more read option/run heavy. Run. Play action. Run.
That should have been the formula.

 

[Ash]

Random calls without rhyme or reason would seem at least to have the advantage of keeping them guessing.

You would think that. But the opposing defenses were not fooled much of the time so we went 3 and out. A lot.

 

[awbuzz]

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

Obviously [emoji6]

Surprise them and score. Unless you can literally manhandle them the offense is always looking for an "advantage".

 

[bobongo]

You would think that. But the opposing defenses were not fooled much of the time so we went 3 and out. A lot.

That assumes the sole reason was that they were not fooled, and had nothing to do with the personnel. It would be like saying that the reason Southern Miss scored only 7 points against Alabama is because they didn't fool their defense. You're just completely discounting personnel issues as having anything to do with it. It's frankly absurd.