Offensive Gameplan

[Techster]

Jordan Mason has quietly had a very strong 2019. He runs with power and is faster than some give him credit for. Kudos to the kid.

How the hell does our OC not get him more than 11 touches against an FCS opponent? Things like this are why so many of us our frustrated with our staff.

I was going to make a post dedicated to offensive schemes base on our personnel (and may still), but one of my biggest complaints about our OC is his inability to make use of the playmakers we have.

IMO, these guys are being under utilized:

RB Mason
WR A Brown
WR M Carter
QB/WR Oliver
TE Davis
QB Graham

Those guys are legit FBS playmakers, but we are not creating matchups to get them the ball. How many times have we motioned Brown into the slot or backfield to give him a mismatch with a LB in space, or 1v1 on a wheel route?

How many times have we targeted undersized DBs or slow safeties against Carter.

IMO, Davis is being wasted. He's been open in the seams and we just can't get him the ball. Motion Brown into the same side as Davis, and make a defender choose between Davis and Brown and I promise we are going to win that conflict a LOT of times.

Line up Davis in the backfield in the I, with Oliver/Graham at QB and Mason dotting the I, and run option off Davis as a blocker...change it up, and fake option to dump it off to Davis. We are not creating enough option read conflicts, and I don't see us setting up defenders for failure off previous plays.

As others have noted, we are not making use of quicker hitting plays. Everything is slow to develop, and it has nothing to do with a decimated OL. In fact, our play calls with a decimated OL has been really bad.

We have players...and we need to get them the ball. Let them make plays.

 

[gtg391z]

Playmakers are useless when you can't block. Offensive schemes are irrelevant when you can't block. We should have been able line up and run the ball Saturday for 5yrds a carry. The defensive front of Citadel looked like Clemson's front. We were getting stuffed and sacked when we tried to pass.

I agree we have to get back to the option with Oliver or Graham as QB. All the plays must hit fast. The problem with Oliver is he did not looked good with the mesh in the Clemson game.

 

[1939hotmagic]

It's not like we're not:

If you believe that Tech's current hot mess of an offense is a scheme or system (as opposed to occasionally having some plays drawn from one) is akin to the gun-triple option of Davidson, ok. In that case, Patenaude and Collins are doing a masterful job of camouflaging it as a NFL-ish/whatever spread offense. I propose calling the current "scheme" the "junk drawer shotgun spread." Perhaps they could put "ATL" and/or "404" in front of the scheme name, so long as the word "option" isn't used. Branding is important!

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

It’s way to late to change anything with the scheme this year. That would just compound our problems monumentally. The scheme can work imo. CDP has made some good play calls. Biggest correction that needs to be made is to stop subbing in QBs in such a spastic manner. I think that alone would cure a lot of ills.

Then lean on what has been working. TO, Mason, and WR mismatches (some games it may be with jump balls to our bigger WRs...some it may be with speed like Brown). But find the mismatches, exploit them, and lean on what has been working. We didn’t do those things very well Saturday.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

If you believe that Tech's current hot mess of an offense is a scheme or system (as opposed to occasionally having some plays drawn from one) is akin to the gun-triple option of Davidson, ok. In that case, Patenaude and Collins are doing a masterful job of camouflaging it as a NFL-ish/whatever spread offense. I propose calling the current "scheme" the "junk drawer shotgun spread." Perhaps they could put "ATL" and/or "404" in front of the scheme name, so long as the word "option" isn't used. Branding is important!

I hear what you are saying and you have reason to be frustrated. But there are some good plays to utilize in what CDP does. We just have to execute better and avoid self inflicted wounds.

We have OL issues and a QB “controversy”. The former has to be endured largely. We are badly mismanaging the latter though imo.

 

[LargeFO]

It’s way to late to change anything with the scheme this year. That would just compound our problems monumentally. The scheme can work imo. CDP has made some good play calls. Biggest correction that needs to be made is to stop subbing in QBs in such a spastic manner. I think that alone would cure a lot of ills.

Then lean on what has been working. TO, Mason, and WR mismatches (some games it may be with jump balls to our bigger WRs...some it may be with speed like Brown). But find the mismatches, exploit them, and lean on what has been working. We didn’t do those things very well Saturday.

Good post. I’ve been guilty myself of automatically pinning everything on Dave. I do think you’re correct about the QB roulette though.

 

[InsideLB]

At this point, with the offensive line injuries we have had I would go run heavy with play action off the run. Stretch the field, open things up underneath. Use Oliver as a Wildcat QB mostly running with the rare pass. Use LJ to run Mason mostly with the rare keeper to keep teams honest, then run the vertical routes. Once they respect the vertical routes mix in some underneath stuff. Try and possess the ball and rest your defense.

No, it's not what we ultimately want to do. But given the injuries we've had, trying to do what we want to do ultimately is going to be very tough.

Also, try Oliver at RB some, in the slot, get him touches, use him as a decoy after.

 

[jandrews]

Can't blame everything on CDP but there has been some weird play calls in the first 3 games. TO and Mason were running all over Citadel. Then we try a TE screen where Camp doesn't even look like he knows he is supposed to block. Also, the triple option play in overtime looked so slow. I would rather have run quick hitters.

Honest question for everyone, has LJ shown he can do anything different than TO? and vice versa? I see it one way but I could be very opinionated on this. TO accounted for 119 total yards against Citadel while LJ accounted for 96. Against USF TO accounted for 59 yards while LJ accounted for 81 yards. I liked what I saw when we were running the option plays with TO and Mason in the backfield. However, I am in the camp I don't want to switch TO out during a 3rd down. I'm not sure about passing but if the only test he had was against Clemson I think he deserves another try.

 

[lv20gt]

Given that the new coaching staff, particularly for offense, presumably has a philosophy of fitting the offense to the players -- it seems to this mere fan that in transition year 1, you stick to a run-heavy offense (as has been done) but keep plenty of option features; year 2, less so; year 3, even less so, as the players recruited for the previous regime eventually move on.

So your solution is to put back in the offense we just decided to transition away from.

You don't phase out parts of old offense. It's just wasted time. You phase in parts of the new offense as the pieces get to where they need to be, but it makes no sense to dedicate time or resources to running a system you don't plan to run long term.

 

[slugboy]

Can't blame everything on CDP but there has been some weird play calls in the first 3 games. TO and Mason were running all over Citadel. Then we try a TE screen where Camp doesn't even look like he knows he is supposed to block. ...

I'm gonna assume that Camp blocked in practice. If he didn't in practices, then don't call that play. If he did it right in practice, then it's reasonable to think he'll do the right thing in the game.
That play was a strange one to me--typically a bubble screen like that is one that you throw to a shifty runner or fast playmaker like a Josh Blancato with good blockers in front.

 

[gtg391z]

Yes, because CPJ ran a CCG's offense until we could run the 3o. Whats funny is I don't think this team would be good running the 3o.

 

[Technut1990]

Jordan Mason has quietly had a very strong 2019. He runs with power and is faster than some give him credit for. Kudos to the kid.

How the hell does our OC not get him more than 11 touches against an FCS opponent? Things like this are why so many of us our frustrated with our staff.

Imagine if he had a lead blocker or the threat of a pass

 

[Technut1990]

I was going to make a post dedicated to offensive schemes base on our personnel (and may still), but one of my biggest complaints about our OC is his inability to make use of the playmakers we have.

IMO, these guys are being under utilized:

RB Mason
WR A Brown
WR M Carter
QB/WR Oliver
TE Davis
QB Graham

Those guys are legit FBS playmakers, but we are not creating matchups to get them the ball. How many times have we motioned Brown into the slot or backfield to give him a mismatch with a LB in space, or 1v1 on a wheel route?

How many times have we targeted undersized DBs or slow safeties against Carter.

IMO, Davis is being wasted. He's been open in the seams and we just can't get him the ball. Motion Brown into the same side as Davis, and make a defender choose between Davis and Brown and I promise we are going to win that conflict a LOT of times.

Line up Davis in the backfield in the I, with Oliver/Graham at QB and Mason dotting the I, and run option off Davis as a blocker...change it up, and fake option to dump it off to Davis. We are not creating enough option read conflicts, and I don't see us setting up defenders for failure off previous plays.

As others have noted, we are not making use of quicker hitting plays. Everything is slow to develop, and it has nothing to do with a decimated OL. In fact, our play calls with a decimated OL has been really bad.

We have players...and we need to get them the ball. Let them make plays.

Watch out you are dangerously close to saying we have talent, totally gonna blow the rebuilding theme

 

[1939hotmagic]

So your solution is to put back in the offense we just decided to transition away from.

You don't phase out parts of old offense. It's just wasted time. You phase in parts of the new offense as the pieces get to where they need to be, but it makes no sense to dedicate time or resources to running a system you don't plan to run long term.

Collins wants to transition to a spread offense in which the shotgun (or pistol) is used -- no more QB under center except, perhaps, under exceptionally rare conditions. OK, moving to a "gun-triple" would've accomplished that fairly big step immediately, it's hardly "putting back in the offense we just decided to transition away from." However, since most of the current players have been immersed in an option scheme the past few years, great, you wouldn't have to build an offense 100% from scratch. It hardly seems all that radical to have about four series/packages of plays modified from a system with which the players have some familiarity, while also having another four to six series/packages of plays from the new standard/generic contemporary "system" the staff wants to implement. And God forbid that the new staff might've found out that having some variations of older option packages could be nice to have -- not unlike Ralph Friedgen using it as a change-up within his multiplicity of approaches to move the ball back in the day.

It's moot now, anyway. Now we can just cross our fingers and hope that, eventually, Tech's offense will be generally successful despite running pretty much the same generic offense most everyone else uses, probably with nominally better (10 places higher) recruiting classes than those of the past decade.

[For the record, I detested Paul Johnson's not have a shotgun series to use on third- and fourth-and-forever downs, as well as his dogged refusal to revisit the passing side of the "run-and-shoot" offense from which his double-slot option spread was born. In fact, earlier this year Navy brought in a guy from Hawaii to incorporate more run-and-shoot concepts into their offense. https://navy.rivals.com/news/introducing-the-run-and-shoot ]

 

[Techster]

Watch out you are dangerously close to saying we have talent, totally gonna blow the rebuilding theme

There's talent. We just need to put the football in the hands of those with talent...which we are not.

CPJ had talent in 2008, and he was rebuilding to his program and the direction he wanted to take GT.

You can have talent and rebuild. It's not mutually exclusive.

 

[Technut1990]

There's talent. We just need to put the football in the hands of those with talent...which we are not.

CPJ had talent in 2008, and he was rebuilding to his program and the direction he wanted to take GT.

You can have talent and rebuild. It's not mutually exclusive.

I absolutely agree but the theme being put out there is that it is what it is because we lack the players. I think it is what it because we aren’t using what we have correctly AS we rebuild. I think we are trying to force the mentality that this year and next are rebuilding years so don’t expect much. I expect to win as we rebuild

 

[lv20gt]

Collins wants to transition to a spread offense in which the shotgun (or pistol) is used -- no more QB under center except, perhaps, under exceptionally rare conditions. OK, moving to a "gun-triple" would've accomplished that fairly big step immediately,

Yeah, if we wanted to run the gun triple it'd have been a smoother transition. But unless we want to do it long term it makes no sense to put it in.

It hardly seems all that radical to have about four series/packages of plays modified from a system with which the players have some familiarity, while also having another four to six series/packages of plays from the new standard/generic contemporary "system" the staff wants to implement.

You don't think it is radical to spend half your practice time to plays and packages you don't intend to utilize long term? Yeah, what could possibly be wrong with installing a side offense for a year. That'll be easy.

 

[jgtengineer]

Yeah, if we wanted to run the gun triple it'd have been a smoother transition. But unless we want to do it long term it makes no sense to put it in.



You don't think it is radical to spend half your practice time to plays and packages you don't intend to utilize long term? Yeah, what could possibly be wrong with installing a side offense for a year. That'll be easy.

Its not really a side offense, just shifting the base play (from a zone rpo to a zone triple with play action). You'd still have your line zone blocking, you'd just make sure you were getting your speedy slots in position for pitches. the line concepts can be taught with a little more tolerance for error. For example we've ran about 5 different triple concepts this year.

 

[bobongo]

Playmakers are useless when you can't block. Offensive schemes are irrelevant when you can't block. We should have been able line up and run the ball Saturday for 5yrds a carry. The defensive front of Citadel looked like Clemson's front. We were getting stuffed and sacked when we tried to pass.

I agree we have to get back to the option with Oliver or Graham as QB. All the plays must hit fast. The problem with Oliver is he did not looked good with the mesh in the Clemson game.

Absolutely. If you have talented "skill position" players but a porous OL, it's all for naught.

 

[gt02]

It’s way to late to change anything with the scheme this year. That would just compound our problems monumentally. The scheme can work imo. CDP has made some good play calls. Biggest correction that needs to be made is to stop subbing in QBs in such a spastic manner. I think that alone would cure a lot of ills.

Then lean on what has been working. TO, Mason, and WR mismatches (some games it may be with jump balls to our bigger WRs...some it may be with speed like Brown). But find the mismatches, exploit them, and lean on what has been working. We didn’t do those things very well Saturday.

What is DP's scheme? Not trying to be an ***, just don't know.