Offensive Evolution, yea or nay?

[33jacket]

Cool. I guess that I don't see it as a new complexity when it happens based on my understanding of how cpj has been making play calls. I could be wrong on that.

I think you have to go back to this simple premise. It is more complex to change your scheme during a series without the coaches talking to you...doing it on the fly via playcalling vs making that adjustment on the sideline with staff or at halftime. The complexity isn't the fact the plays are new or complex. The complexity is the fact its harder on the players to do it via the above than what we had in the past which was sideline/halftime coaching. What it means, is the players really know what they are doing...and can handle the extra tweaks without having to be coached up.

that is the complexity. Its harder on the kids. When the kids don't know what they are doing...you can't do the above...etc etc.

 

[AE 87]

I think you have to go back to this simple premise. It is more complex to change your scheme during a series without the coaches talking to you...doing it on the fly via playcalling vs making that adjustment on the sideline with staff or at halftime. The complexity isn't the fact the plays are new or complex. The complexity is the fact its harder on the players to do it via the above than what we had in the past which was sideline/halftime coaching. What it means, is the players really know what they are doing...and can handle the extra tweaks without having to be coached up.

that is the complexity. Its harder on the kids. When the kids don't know what they are doing...you can't do the above...etc etc.

How do you know that alternative blocking schemes were not part of pregame planning and practicing? My assumption is that the line has certain play calls practiced up and ready beforehand. It's not, iiuc,"we're going to change how you block this play, listen-up," but simply different line calls which have been prepared.

 

[33jacket]

How do you know that alternative blocking schemes were not part of pregame planning and practicing? My assumption is that the line has certain play calls practiced up and ready beforehand. It's not, iiuc,"we're going to change how you block this play, listen-up," but simply different line calls which have been prepared.

because paul can't always predict well what the D is going to do against our O; and numerous times stated such. He can guess, but normally we work on our sets and adjust in game. That is why he is a master of in game adjustments. He has to be. He has little tape on teams we don't play alot vs us, and DC's rotate against the teams we do play that we rarely/purely gameplan vs a D week in and week out. We prepare to do what we do and guess at looks, but more times than not we guess at a few looks and adjust on the fly at gametime depending on the looks the D gives. This is why having experience at QB and OL is so important for Paul. It gives him way more things to pick from mid game to adjust...hence my point about complexity.

Some teams, like VT for instance, we know more about. But a Pruitt UGA. Or a Miss St. Or even FSU...we guess...and adjust on the fly.

Its the nature of what we do. Its one reason D's struggle against our O too. Because of the fact we don't just do the same thing week in and week out. We adjust on the fly with blocking schemes.

heck I remember paul saying they didn't do anything we thought they would and he threw out the whole gameplan. Can't remember the game....but its an example of what I refer to.

 

[Skeptic]

heck I remember paul saying they didn't do anything we thought they would and he threw out the whole gameplan. Can't remember the game....but its an example of what I refer to.

You know, I remember him saying that though I can't remember the game, either. But at the time I cataloged it with other Johnson observations. One of which was, after turning the ball over just before half with a TD lead, he said at halftime that he expected to score to make it a two score lead, and something like, "And we would get the kickoff to start the half and open it up ..." It is one of the most confident things I ever heard a coach say. But your "adjust on the fly" observation kind of confirms the Navy football blogger warning about some boring first halfs .. until he adjusted at halftime.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

that is the complexity. Its harder on the kids. When the kids don't know what they are doing...you can't do the above...etc etc.

This is what I was getting at when I started the thread. How much of set back will it be with new skill guys? I suspect we'll be doing a good deal less at the beginning til they get up to speed.

 

[ATL1]

Side bar.

When I spoke with Tevin this weekend at the barbershop he was overly optimistic about the O. Advising that as long as the OLine and JT are there everything else will basically play itself out. We didn't get into complexity of offense or anything like that, but he did share he felt JT should be put in the gun more. He felt it would give Jet more ability to see the field and go through his progressions on passing downs. Basically saying JT is a good passer. FWIW

 

[AE 87]

because paul can't always predict well what the D is going to do against our O; and numerous times stated such. He can guess, but normally we work on our sets and adjust in game. That is why he is a master of in game adjustments. He has to be. He has little tape on teams we don't play alot vs us, and DC's rotate against the teams we do play that we rarely/purely gameplan vs a D week in and week out. We prepare to do what we do and guess at looks, but more times than not we guess at a few looks and adjust on the fly at gametime depending on the looks the D gives. This is why having experience at QB and OL is so important for Paul. It gives him way more things to pick from mid game to adjust...hence my point about complexity.

Some teams, like VT for instance, we know more about. But a Pruitt UGA. Or a Miss St. Or even FSU...we guess...and adjust on the fly.

Its the nature of what we do. Its one reason D's struggle against our O too. Because of the fact we don't just do the same thing week in and week out. We adjust on the fly with blocking schemes.

heck I remember paul saying they didn't do anything we thought they would and he threw out the whole gameplan. Can't remember the game....but its an example of what I refer to.

Even though I'd prefer to have plays in front of us to discuss, I'll accept that we changed blocking scheme for the same play during the same half.

My position is that this happens by the play call including a reference to a partcular blocking scheme by name or number or something. This reference is meaningful because they've learned it and practiced it at some point. I don't consider that complex and think we've been doing it from the beginning to some extent.

As I understand it, you are suggesting that someone is drawing up brand new schemes on the sideline (or in the huddle? ) and asking them to do it without ever practicing it. Now, this sounds crazy to me, so I suspect that I've misunderstood.

Please explain where you see the new blocking schemes being ddetermined and how they are communicated to the linemen.

 

[Skeptic]

Side bar.

He felt it would give Jet more ability to see the field and go through his progressions on passing downs. Basically saying JT is a good passer. FWIW

What is that phrase covering this? Something involving "hell" and "freezes over"? He tried it once, didn't like it. And with nine school offensive records in '14, it's hard to think they were wrong in deep-sixing the shotgun.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

What is that phrase covering this? Something involving "hell" and "freezes over"? He tried it once, didn't like it. And with nine school offensive records in '14, it's hard to think they were wrong in deep-sixing the shotgun.

I can see it used on obvious passing downs like 3rd and 15+, especially with a true blocker in Skov in the backfield. The idea of it being used on early downs........... you're dead on.

 

[Enuratique]

Maybe @Enuratique can post a link to the blog to which he refers. However, I'll try and give a shot at answer.

First, I'm going to make an assumption: the inside veer (our standard triple option) is still the primary or base play for the offense running from the flexbone.

So, I'm going to interpret "single most important play" as being in addition to the inside veer. I suspect that the rationale behind this assertion goes something like this: teams defending the base offense will often focus on tackles and backside linebacker crashing down to stop the B-Back dive and flowing the mike and some secondary strong against the QB and Pitch motion. The midline has enough A-Back motion to draw the perimeter pursuit, reads the DT and uses an Off Guard, and a lead A-Back to block interior linebackers and lingering secondary. So, I suspect that it makes the argument that it's a most important compliment to the inside veer for one of the more effective defensive strategies.

http://footballislifeblog.blogspot.com/

And specifically about midline:
http://footballislifeblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/mailbag-volume-1.html?m=1

 

[33jacket]

As I understand it, you are suggesting that someone is drawing up brand new schemes on the sideline (or in the huddle? ) and asking them to do it without ever practicing it. Now, this sounds crazy to me, so I suspect that I've misunderstood.
.

no, not saying that at all, so yes you misunderstood...Let me walk through this slowly since I can see you are not following me.

lets say paul has 100 blocking iterations in his "playbook". Lets say the team practices 50 within the season. Lets say week 7 of the season, the team reps 15 plays/assignments in preparation based on a D alignment guess. Lets say the D doesn't do anything those 15 plays were designed for and now we have to switch it up. But the D being used, also isn't great for the 50 we have repped the prior 7 weeks. So now paul has a great adjustment. To exploit the D. but its in the 50 or so plays or iterations we havent' repped much of the past 7 weeks. Maybe its something we touched on last year. Or touched on in spring, but nothing that is fresh in the mind.

With this team, paul can go into those 50 plays/iterations, we haven't repped much and use them in game quickly, since we have the experience, knowledge, talent to exploit the D on the OL and at QB. This is what makes it more complicated/complex for the kids and look as such on the field in tape.

In years past, Paul stated, he has and knew the adjustment, but didn't feel comfortable calling it as the team probably couldnt' handle it. This could be the QB. It could be the knowledge of the OL. In some cases it may be halftime he has to go over the adjustment and new assignments based on the D look so everyone is on the same page.

This is far different than just digging up that play and calling it with the confidence the team can do it.

So he dumbs his system down, or smartens it up based on the capability of the team. And the in-series and in game adjustments come quicker and are more complex in a smart team/QB case than in maybe a Vad Lee system for instance....

There is no one who draws up a random play on the sideline and uses it. I don't even know why you would think along those lines. We are talking about making adjustments that are more deep and complicated into the depths of the playbook. Of course they are "plays". They are always plays.

 

[AE 87]

http://footballislifeblog.blogspot.com/

And specifically about midline:
http://footballislifeblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/mailbag-volume-1.html?m=1

Thanks, and hey, I was right.

 

[Skeptic]

http://footballislifeblog.blogspot.com/

And specifically about midline:
http://footballislifeblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/mailbag-volume-1.html?m=1

Between stuff like this, Birddog, and 33Jacket, I am starting to at least glimpse the offense. But I am just guessing that if a Bull Durham-type movie is ever made for football, it won't have Paul Johnson in the locker room, screaming about a simple game, and "See the ball, run the ball ..." Really a complex scheme down underneath, when all the casual fan sees on top is keep or pitch.

 

[AE 87]

no, not saying that at all, so yes you misunderstood...Let me walk through this slowly since I can see you are not following me.

lets say paul has 100 blocking iterations in his "playbook". Lets say the team practices 50 within the season. Lets say week 7 of the season, the team reps 15 plays/assignments in preparation based on a D alignment guess. Lets say the D doesn't do anything those 15 plays were designed for and now we have to switch it up. But the D being used, also isn't great for the 50 we have repped the prior 7 weeks. So now paul has a great adjustment. To exploit the D. but its in the 50 or so plays or iterations we havent' repped much of the past 7 weeks. Maybe its something we touched on last year. Or touched on in spring, but nothing that is fresh in the mind.

With this team, paul can go into those 50 plays/iterations, we haven't repped much and use them in game quickly, since we have the experience, knowledge, talent to exploit the D on the OL and at QB. This is what makes it more complicated/complex for the kids and look as such on the field in tape.

In years past, Paul stated, he has and knew the adjustment, but didn't feel comfortable calling it as the team probably couldnt' handle it. This could be the QB. It could be the knowledge of the OL. In some cases it may be halftime he has to go over the adjustment and new assignments based on the D look so everyone is on the same page.

This is far different than just digging up that play and calling it with the confidence the team can do it.

So he dumbs his system down, or smartens it up based on the capability of the team. And the in-series and in game adjustments come quicker and are more complex in a smart team/QB case than in maybe a Vad Lee system for instance....

There is no one who draws up a random play on the sideline and uses it. I don't even know why you would think along those lines. We are talking about making adjustments that are more deep and complicated into the depths of the playbook. Of course they are "plays". They are always plays.

Fair enough then. If I now understand correctly, we agree on what happens: coach sends in a line call from the playbook. For some reason it seemed you were disagreeing with me on that point. My mistake.

I think we also agree that some of the difference we see stems not from an increased complexity to the offense per say but the capability of the players. Drive blocking and down blocking are not more complex than scoop blocking but may have a lower success rate with smaller OL, eg.

We apparently disagree only on whether he's calling plays which haven't been practiced in weeks. I find that an odd assumption and question how a fan in the stands could tell.

 

[IronJacket7]

IMO... I think your offense should always be evolving. At least to some degree.

 

[Boomergump]

no, not saying that at all, so yes you misunderstood...Let me walk through this slowly since I can see you are not following me.

lets say paul has 100 blocking iterations in his "playbook". Lets say the team practices 50 within the season. Lets say week 7 of the season, the team reps 15 plays/assignments in preparation based on a D alignment guess. Lets say the D doesn't do anything those 15 plays were designed for and now we have to switch it up. But the D being used, also isn't great for the 50 we have repped the prior 7 weeks. So now paul has a great adjustment. To exploit the D. but its in the 50 or so plays or iterations we havent' repped much of the past 7 weeks. Maybe its something we touched on last year. Or touched on in spring, but nothing that is fresh in the mind.

With this team, paul can go into those 50 plays/iterations, we haven't repped much and use them in game quickly, since we have the experience, knowledge, talent to exploit the D on the OL and at QB. This is what makes it more complicated/complex for the kids and look as such on the field in tape.

In years past, Paul stated, he has and knew the adjustment, but didn't feel comfortable calling it as the team probably couldnt' handle it. This could be the QB. It could be the knowledge of the OL. In some cases it may be halftime he has to go over the adjustment and new assignments based on the D look so everyone is on the same page.

This is far different than just digging up that play and calling it with the confidence the team can do it.

So he dumbs his system down, or smartens it up based on the capability of the team. And the in-series and in game adjustments come quicker and are more complex in a smart team/QB case than in maybe a Vad Lee system for instance....

There is no one who draws up a random play on the sideline and uses it. I don't even know why you would think along those lines. We are talking about making adjustments that are more deep and complicated into the depths of the playbook. Of course they are "plays". They are always plays.

Well said. Having watched a good bit of replay etc, I would say this is very much true. My reply to the intial question raised would be like this: CPJ forms a very detailed offensive game plan which has a certain amount of stuff in it that he hasn't run for a while. He does this in order to be difficult for opposing DCs to prepare for. In practice that week, (my guess is that) CPJ will spend about half the time repping our bread and butter plays and about half on the new stuff, which may include new formations, new blocking assignments, or even new plays. During that "new play" time CPJ will not only practice the new plays but also some counters to the new plays which he will use only if the opposing DC does some good "in-game" adjustments. This process repeats each week and the wrinkles used the prior week go back on the shelf and a new set is devised. Naturally, if you repeat this process enough times, those wrinkle plays are easier to implement when they come back off the shelf rather than being installed the first time. This is where experience and intelligence of the players comes in handy. After even the greater passing of time, with highly experienced players, these plays can be called during game action with very little prep time, possibly just a reminder between series on the sideline.

So, in a very long winded kind of way, I would say our offense HAS become more complex with the passing of time. I would say, that if you counted the total number of unique offensive plays run in 2014, it would be greater than the number run in any prior year. I haven't actually counted, but I would be stunned if it wasn't the case.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

There is no one who draws up a random play on the sideline and uses it. I don't even know why you would think along those lines. We are talking about making adjustments that are more deep and complicated into the depths of the playbook. Of course they are "plays". They are always plays.

I do all the time for my son's 5 on 5 flag football team.

Btw, thanks a ton for your full post. It's exactly what I suspected and nobody was even hinting at before you.

 

[AE 87]

I do all the time for my son's 5 on 5 flag football team.

Btw, thanks a ton for your full post. It's exactly what I suspected and nobody was even hinting at before you.

So, to be clear then, you are saying that it will be harder for RS and tr Fr to contribute this year because CPJ is calling OL schemes which they haven't practiced for 7 weeks?

I feel like I'm in Bizzaro world. CPJ has been our coach for 7 years and has articulated his philosophy several times: find out what the kids can do and then call plays to give them the best chance at winning.

I think I agree with most of @Boomergump 's post, but he agreed with the notion that CPJ is calling unpracticed line plays, so I don't know.

Anyway, I'm clearly nuts cause yall are making sense to each other.

 

[AE 87]

Double

 

[InsideLB]

I don't see the offense as a whole undergoing a radical change or evolving or becoming more complex over time, except for the organic growth that all schemes undergo in response to general changes in college football/coaches adding to their knowledge base/etc. Johnson has always put in plays to suit certain players (BB draws with Dywer (he also tried a lot of screens that never worked), pistol with Tevin, trap options with Dwyer, fades to Waller, etc).

LAST year, BY THE END OF THE SEASON, PJ ran a larger variety of plays and blocked them a larger variety of ways.

The bottom line is he did this because the players he had could execute without the vanilla base suffering. The team had the right attitude, focus, want-to, coachability, athleticism, experience, depth/competition etc. A better team can do more.

Every year will be different. Last year we had a new QB, many new faces on the OL, and experienced skill guys all over the place. The new QB and the new OL we had could--by the end of the year--handle new plays and tweaks with aplomb.

2015 is the opposite: we have all new skill guys, but are experienced at QB and OL. If the new skill guys can get 'er done we'll see similar complexity by the end of the year. If they can't Johnson will focus on being able to do the basics well first.

Option teams have higher winning percentages in the second half of seasons for a reason. They typically have mastered their base stuff and are able to add in a lot of curve balls.

In the bigger picutre we did do some stuff with pacing last year that likely will stick around given the changes in the game, and we practiced HUNH but didn't use it due to defensive depth. Maybe this year?