lack of passing game

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
I'd venture to say that we've had a guy running wide open on 60% of our pass plays. I can't tell you how many times I've said, "THERE HE IS!", just to see us take a sack, or throw it somewhere else or incomplete. It's not the scheme that's the issue, it's the execution that's been the problem.

Have you ever stopped to think that maybe the reason the QB is constantly under pressure in this system is due to scheme?
  • That we spend most of practice & game time run blocking rather than pass blocking?
  • That your traditional "big body, quick step" guy in most systems is on the outside where speed rushers come from, yet in this defense he's an interior lineman because of the need to be able to block the big, interior linemen on run plays? And that leaves your smaller guy to try and handle the opposition's best pass rushers?
 
Messages
166
I've yet to see conclusive evidence that snaps out of shotgun = greater offensive success. I think some guys both on this board and abroad would rather have an offense they can brag to their friends about than one that can keep them in games...
 

RussianOffense

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
83
Every sign is we are returning to basics this year. We will rush it without apology. No more appeasing stupid fans or whining QBs with silly plays. Half will be dive or QB follow, and we might have lowest passing attempts in NCAA.
 

danny daniel

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,104
I was rewatching the NC game where the AB (Bostic) got penalized on a pass attempt to him because he was not an eligible receiver. He was lined up in the overshifted wide slot, but was on the line of scrimmage and the WR on that side was outside of him also on the LOS. This in itself appeared to be an isolated mistake, but I have noticed in other viewings of our recent games that the wide slot AB will sometimes line up on the LOS on running plays.....a dead giveaway that it is a running play and not a pass. This looks like a glitch in our scheme we need to fix?
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393
The bottom line for me is that this offense is seen by the vast majority of high school athletes, of which I work with, as gimmicky and behind the times.

Even though it is a very effective offense at times, it hasn't done us any favors on the recruiting trail. Negative media...

A "select few" high school kids find it intriguing. Even when we succeed on the field our offense doesn't provide the sexy look that an Auburn or Oregon offense does.
 
Messages
2,077
Every sign is we are returning to basics this year. We will rush it without apology. No more appeasing stupid fans or whining QBs with silly plays. Half will be dive or QB follow, and we might have lowest passing attempts in NCAA.
Well, if we win, as we did with that strategy in 2008 and 2009, happiness abounds. But if our quarterback can't make the reads, if Smelter proves to be less a threat and blocker than Demaryius Thomas, if Custis is not quite as good as advertised and quite a bit less than Dwyer, well, there will be carping. I don't care if we have the lowest passing attempts as long as we win. I do, however, feel that we need some passing threat in order to win most of our games. I don't need sexy, I need relentless, I need clock management, I need red zone success, I need a defense that provides extra possessions and excellent field position. As of today we're undefeated.
 
Messages
2,077
I was rewatching the NC game where the AB (Bostic) got penalized on a pass attempt to him because he was not an eligible receiver. He was lined up in the overshifted wide slot, but was on the line of scrimmage and the WR on that side was outside of him also on the LOS. This in itself appeared to be an isolated mistake, but I have noticed in other viewings of our recent games that the wide slot AB will sometimes line up on the LOS on running plays.....a dead giveaway that it is a running play and not a pass. This looks like a glitch in our scheme we need to fix?

I think it is by design, isn't it? The WR covering the AB on the line of scrimmage. I don't think we particularly care whether we are telegraphing that we intend to run. We intend to run almost every down.
 

alaguy

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,117
Is this what we ran in 2009?
That was the era of the MAN-a 220 lb bludgeon of death named Nesbitt.With a 3rd/4th and 2 , it was the era of the automatic first down and continued drive.(important----also in the red zone) He just about beat clem into a bloody mess.
It will take a capable Oline and a similar guy.Not sure we have either now.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,675
That was the era of the MAN-a 220 lb bludgeon of death named Nesbitt.With a 3rd/4th and 2 , it was the era of the automatic first down and continued drive.(important----also in the red zone) He just about beat clem into a bloody mess.
It will take a capable Oline and a similar guy.Not sure we have either now.
I liked Nesbitt a lot, too. However, I liked Tevin, as well. (They had different strengths and weakness, and, something often overlooked, a much different supporting cast.) I think the "automatic" in short yardage was a bit overblown for Nesbitt and a bit underblown for Tevin. It would be interesting to see a side by side comparison of the two in short yardage situations.
 

presjacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
577
I liked Nesbitt a lot, too. However, I liked Tevin, as well. (They had different strengths and weakness, and, something often overlooked, a much different supporting cast.) I think the "automatic" in short yardage was a bit overblown for Nesbitt and a bit underblown for Tevin. It would be interesting to see a side by side comparison of the two in short yardage situations.
I like Tevin too, but Nesbitt got the yard on 4th down in OT against WF and Tevin didn't against Miami. Unfair or not, I think those two plays influence a lot of people's opinions of the two.
 

danny daniel

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,104
I think it is by design, isn't it? The WR covering the AB on the line of scrimmage. I don't think we particularly care whether we are telegraphing that we intend to run. We intend to run almost every down.

I cannot see it is by design as there is no advantage. Let me try a better explanation. This overshifted wide slot by the AB is seldomly used but occours sometimes in long yardage possession downs (3rd or 4th and long) where most teams would be in pass mode (you are right in that we may run instead). If we pass we lose a receiver, or get a penalty, if the AB is on the LOS. If we run it is to cross up the defense because we are "showing" pass; however, with the AB on the LOS we are tipping "run" . This is not the best formation to run if the defense is expecting run because it limits our plays and we lose a blocker. I hope this is more clear.
 

bravejason

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
307
I cannot see it is by design as there is no advantage. Let me try a better explanation. This overshifted wide slot by the AB is seldomly used but occours sometimes in long yardage possession downs (3rd or 4th and long) where most teams would be in pass mode (you are right in that we may run instead). If we pass we lose a receiver, or get a penalty, if the AB is on the LOS. If we run it is to cross up the defense because we are "showing" pass; however, with the AB on the LOS we are tipping "run" . This is not the best formation to run if the defense is expecting run because it limits our plays and we lose a blocker. I hope this is more clear.

Actually, it is by design. I don't know why exactly. I guess is it has to do with getting better blocking angles against a certain defensive alignment.
 

danny daniel

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,104
Actually, it is by design. I don't know why exactly. I guess is it has to do with getting better blocking angles against a certain defensive alignment.

The wide slot man is out in space....no one near him to block. Usually the DB covering him is head up and not very close. There is no advantage for him being on LOS or one yard back as far as a blocking advantage. Maybe you are not in tune with the alignment I am refering to.
 

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
That's what opposing defenses will be saying (with the same sense of foreboding) when they see us on the schedule. The absolute beauty of our offense, when it's clicking, is a sense that the defense is powerless to stop it. Just when they gear up to stop the punishing ground attack, we hit them over the top. Beautiful!

University of Iowa says hello. ;)

Will I be happy? Yes, I'll be happy that we won more games. I always hate it when Tech loses.

Will I find the offense interesting? No, not myself personally.

I've had season tickets now for the past 11 seasons. Over the past 2 seasons, I've made one game in person each year (Virginia Tech last year). Every other game, I give my tickets away to other people I know whom are Tech fans but don't have season tickets. Sometimes, I send families who have kids that are Tech fans. I always want to make sure there is someone that's a Tech fan in my seat there cheering. But personally, I find this style of offense monotonous, one-dimensional and not entertaining. So, rather than be frustrated to the point that I'm ready to pick fights with opposing fans, I have simply decided to forego attending in person most games.
 

thwgjacket

Guest
Messages
969
University of Iowa says hello. ;)

Will I be happy? Yes, I'll be happy that we won more games. I always hate it when Tech loses.

Will I find the offense interesting? No, not myself personally.

I've had season tickets now for the past 11 seasons. Over the past 2 seasons, I've made one game in person each year (Virginia Tech last year). Every other game, I give my tickets away to other people I know whom are Tech fans but don't have season tickets. Sometimes, I send families who have kids that are Tech fans. I always want to make sure there is someone that's a Tech fan in my seat there cheering. But personally, I find this style of offense monotonous, one-dimensional and not entertaining. So, rather than be frustrated to the point that I'm ready to pick fights with opposing fans, I have simply decided to forego attending in person most games.
I don't know if you watched that game but our O was definitely not clicking against Iowa. We weren't blocking anyone. Iowa had the 9th best scoring defense in the country that year and was 9th in yards given up per game. If your point is that great defenses stop all kinds of offenses then I agree with you. If you are using Iowa to try and show that our offense can be stopped by a great defense then that goes for the 12 other types of offenses they faced that year. They held Penn State to ten points that year in Happy Valley. Penn State went 11-2 in 2009, but since Iowa held them to 10 they should have scrapped their offense. Is that what you are trying to prove with the Iowa reference?
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,675
University of Iowa says hello. ;)

Will I be happy? Yes, I'll be happy that we won more games. I always hate it when Tech loses.

Will I find the offense interesting? No, not myself personally.

I've had season tickets now for the past 11 seasons. Over the past 2 seasons, I've made one game in person each year (Virginia Tech last year). Every other game, I give my tickets away to other people I know whom are Tech fans but don't have season tickets. Sometimes, I send families who have kids that are Tech fans. I always want to make sure there is someone that's a Tech fan in my seat there cheering. But personally, I find this style of offense monotonous, one-dimensional and not entertaining. So, rather than be frustrated to the point that I'm ready to pick fights with opposing fans, I have simply decided to forego attending in person most games.
I guess you missed the "when clicking" part.
 
Top