CDP play calling

[bobongo]

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.

It's hard to have identity and flow when your line is getting caved in.

 

[bke1984]

Well for one, the pace of play was pathetic. I can’t quite understand how we weren’t able to get lined up and run plays or signal in and quickly change plays.

My main other gripe was the lack of using play A to setup play B. The most obvious miss was play action. I saw very little of it this year. Seems like we could have done a little better had we run multiple plays out of the same look.

I didn’t expect us to be world beaters, but I figured we’d be better than bottom five offenses in the country, and no one will be able to convince me that scheme wasn’t the difference between an offense in the 80s and an offense in the 120s.

 

[LibertyTurns]

It’s not really that hard to call some different plays when the ones you’re running don’t work. At least I didn’t think it used to be hard. Whoa here’s a thought: call some plays that complement your personnel’s strengths.

 

[bobongo]

It’s not really that hard to call some different plays when the ones you’re running don’t work. At least I didn’t think it used to be hard. Whoa here’s a thought: call some plays that complement your personnel’s strengths.

If the plays you're running don't work, and then you call different ones but they don't work, the different ones are the same as the plays that don't work. So it could be said that all you did was call plays that don't work, and never called any different ones. Just sayin'...

 

[Skeptic]

I doubt there is an OC in the land who could have done better with this team and this offense. We are too accustomed to scheme beating talent, and we don't have the scheme or the talent.

 

[jgtengineer]

One thing I want to point out is that with all the youth we started being an option offense last meant nothing. Same thing with statements liek " we've been running the option 11 years!" No one on the team has been doing that. Anyone below a junior liekly was running scout team O anyway running spreads and everything else ( one of the reasons lucas was liked so much by the coaches was he was the scout QB for two years learning to emulate these systems). The only thing that matters is a 4 years cycle.

 

[WreckinGT]

I doubt there is an OC in the land who could have done better with this team and this offense. We are too accustomed to scheme beating talent, and we don't have the scheme or the talent.

Considering that we finished 127th in total offense, failed to score offensively in 2 of our games, and set the school record for punts in another, I'm honestly not sure any OC in the country could have done worse.

 

[Jim Prather]

I doubt there is an OC in the land who could have done better with this team and this offense. We are too accustomed to scheme beating talent, and we don't have the scheme or the talent.

I'll betcha everyone on this board could immediately name 3-4 coaches who could have done much more - they just don't want to admit it.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I'll betcha everyone on this board could immediately name 3-4 coaches who could have done much more - they just don't want to admit it.

The caveat was with this offense...

I doubt there is an OC in the land who could have done better with this team and this offense. We are too accustomed to scheme beating talent, and we don't have the scheme or the talent.

I don't think anyone denies that Monken or coach N would have fared better offensively, but I also don't know that that was an automatic guarantee of greatness either. As I look back, had we run the 3O under Monken or Coach N, I'd say we had the chance to beat UVA and Pitt in addition to the Citadel. Duke and Temple would have been toss-ups. Not sure about UNC and I don't think we were beating VT this year regardless. (Bud was determined to go out on a win...) In the end, though, if this rough patch gets us back to a point where we are winning consistently again, then I will be ok with it.

 

[YJMD]

Personally I haven't seen anything from the offense which stands out from the crowd in scheme. There are some Os which I feel are better schematically to put more pressure on the D. Actually, CPJs O is a version of that, but we were too limited in personnel and practice to take advantage of it.

That said, coach Ps offense is certainly complete enough to take us where we need to go with the right personnel and coaching. That's where question marks remain.

Someone posted in another thread about how CPJ adapted blocking scheme and formation to our players in 2008 which led to our more immediate success, although much of that team success was built on defensive talent. Regardless, I don't see the same here. Our challenges were doing things in a way which we just weren't good at executing and not trying some sort of transition. That said, we did adapt somewhat to our strengths over time, and I'm not opposed to an intentional transition abandoning the old ways for short term loss and long-term gain. The trouble is we heard a message that our very design is to adopt what our players are suited for and highlight their strengths instead of trying to make them fit a scheme. And to that end we started with Oliver at QB running most of the time but in a blocking scheme and against defensive alignments which made that so much harder.

Regardless, we seem to have settled on a scheme and QB capable of doing all of it (although struggling with part of it more than others), and I am not concerned about the direction we are heading.

 

[bobongo]

I'll betcha everyone on this board could immediately name 3-4 coaches who could have done much more - they just don't want to admit it.

I think there are legitimate concerns about our OC, but it's hard to judge in just one year, especially with the OL he had to work with. If we finished in the 120's, well I think we had an offensive line that probably should rank somewhere in the 120's. Lower G-5 level, I'd say, though they tried. It is what it is. Also factor in an inexperienced QB coming off academic troubles in a transition year. But it got better (UVA, NC State). There was improvement, especially on the line and at QB. It could have been worse. Imagine this year without Jordan Mason.

We'll know more next year. Help for the OL is on the way (and the ones we have will be a year older and hopefully healthier), and we now have a QB fit for this offense with a year under his belt. Next year, we should take some big strides forward. And if we have the wherewithal to do so but don't, then it will be time to go looking for a new OC.

 

[Skeptic]

Considering that we finished 127th in total offense, failed to score offensively in 2 of our games, and set the school record for punts in another, I'm honestly not sure any OC in the country could have done worse.

Then we should average it out.

 

[Skeptic]

I'll betcha everyone on this board could immediately name 3-4 coaches who could have done much more - they just don't want to admit it.

It is a football message board and so of course we can all name several coaches better than what we have. Because we are never responsible for it.

 

[Skeptic]

I think there are legitimate concerns about our OC, but it's hard to judge in just one year, especially with the OL he had to work with. If we finished in the 120's, well I think we had an offensive line that probably should rank somewhere in the 120's. Lower G-5 level, I'd say, though they tried. It is what it is. Also factor in an inexperienced QB coming off academic troubles in a transition year. But it got better (UVA, NC State). There was improvement, especially on the line and at QB. It could have been worse. Imagine this year without Jordan Mason.

We'll know more next year. Help for the OL is on the way (and the ones we have will be a year older and hopefully healthier), and we now have a QB fit for this offense with a year under his belt. Next year, we should take some big strides forward. And if we have the wherewithal to do so but don't, then it will be time to go looking for a new OC.

I suppose if one is to be an offensive coordinator one must have an offense to coordinate. Maybe next year.

 

[danny daniel]

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

Most of those three and outs were incomplete pass on first down, one yard gain on A gap run on second down, and a short 3rd down gain not getting to the line to gain. Too much rinse and repeat.

 

[danny daniel]

I doubt there is an OC in the land who could have done better with this team and this offense. We are too accustomed to scheme beating talent, and we don't have the scheme or the talent.

The scheme was too complex for the talent and the failure of the OC was to not adjust. And too often we did not have the optimum personnel on the field for the play we attempted (examples Oliver not in to run short yardage, Brown in to block on the wide screen, throwing to a slow tight end attempting to sprint to the sideline on a key third down).

 

[Scubapro]

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.

Yeah Thats not how in works IMO
You run plays using formations to utilize matchups and create mis reads by the D
Running random plays isn’t a good strategy To me he used the entire season as a big scrimmage and it showed in the results; we had ~50 three and outs and were held scoreless in half of the quarters played

 

[Coloradojacket]

So as I have said before, we are entering into a world of an experiment. Our last OC, CPJ utilized scheme over personnel. The theory being we could not consistently out talent the teams we play. Some yes but not all. We now have a new staff that believes we can out personnel, recruit, the other teams and beat them on talent. Now that being said, there are two factors that play into this. In game coaching. We know CPJ could out coach most of his opposition. Not always but a lot. So far our current staff....mmmmm yet to prove it. The other piece is player development. Strength etc. I think that toward the end of CPJs career this fell off. Example, shirtless Searcy. For this staff I think this is a plus as our guys look stronger and faster. But of course there is the in tangible part of development. Quarterback growth etc. Let the experiment begin.

 

[bobongo]

Yeah Thats not how in works IMO
You run plays using formations to utilize matchups and create mis reads by the D
Running random plays isn’t a good strategy To me he used the entire season as a big scrimmage and it showed in the results; we had ~50 three and outs and were held scoreless in half of the quarters played

I get you point, and no doubt you and others on here know a lot more about offenses than I do. I just wonder how many matchups we could have exploited, given our personnel.

My point is that the OC is only one factor affecting the results. Given our personnel issues, using results to prove the incompetence of one factor in those results is inadequate.

Perhaps the OC could have done better, but I doubt the results could have been much better. Thank our lucky stars for Jordan Mason. Without him, we're probably 0-12.

 

[gt02]

So as I have said before, we are entering into a world of an experiment. Our last OC, CPJ utilized scheme over personnel. The theory being we could not consistently out talent the teams we play. Some yes but not all. We now have a new staff that believes we can out personnel, recruit, the other teams and beat them on talent. Now that being said, there are two factors that play into this. In game coaching. We know CPJ could out coach most of his opposition. Not always but a lot. So far our current staff....mmmmm yet to prove it. The other piece is player development. Strength etc. I think that toward the end of CPJs career this fell off. Example, shirtless Searcy. For this staff I think this is a plus as our guys look stronger and faster. But of course there is the in tangible part of development. Quarterback growth etc. Let the experiment begin.

Shirtless Searcy is not really relevant. He was an AB.