Offensive Scheme Q&A Thread

alaguy

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,117
We basically seem to have a passing attack problem.When you are under 50% for 5 of 6 yrs something is wrong.
One of the things wrong is the blocking concepts/execution.Oddly I was looking at 2 of the MOST successful "passing plays of the yr" listed at SB Nation- Waller catching long ball on Ga and Godhigh catching ball up sideline vs clem- and NEITHER was blocked correctly- Vad just stood in threw it well enough.Some def guy came free to rush while at least one of our blockers(OL or Bback) picked up wrong guy or 2 blocked one guy and left another def guy free to rush.
I was happy to see the big completion but if this was our "successful plays" I hate to see our bad ones.Blocking like this gives a QB jumpy feet and a too early release which kills your passing %..
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
The question comes down to Offensive philosophies. Would you rather have a 65% completion rate when you're throwing mostly 5-10 yard passes or a 45% completion rate when you're throwing mostly 30-40 yard passes? Remember also that the longer passes often times result in TD's as well.

Can we get 55%+ with a mix of both ??
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,886
Location
North Shore, Chicago
I think that's what happened Tevin's senior year.

TW'11 74 completions for 1,652 yards, 49.3%
TW'12 75 completions for 1,222 yards, 56.4%
VL'13 82 completions for 1,561 yards, 45.6%
 
Last edited:

GTNavyNuke

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
7,554
Location
Poquoson Virginia
We basically seem to have a passing attack problem.When you are under 50% for 5 of 6 yrs something is wrong........

Other than poor passing blocking, QB inaccuracy and receiver drops; we've had a great passing attack. Every year I expect all three to get better. Last year, our receivers seemed to catch a lot more of what made it to them. So maybe this year we'll get improvement in the OL and QB. I don't know any way to statistically determine which passes were catchable and which weren't, so it's just an opinion.

I still don't understand why Vad got so much worse last year with his passing accuracy. The first play of the Ole Miss game where he threw a quick screen over the WRs head (no rush) typifies the loss of accuracy. But Vad had some beautiful passes on the run too. Just inconsistent.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,967
We basically seem to have a passing attack problem.When you are under 50% for 5 of 6 yrs something is wrong.
One of the things wrong is the blocking concepts/execution.Oddly I was looking at 2 of the MOST successful "passing plays of the yr" listed at SB Nation- Waller catching long ball on Ga and Godhigh catching ball up sideline vs clem- and NEITHER was blocked correctly- Vad just stood in threw it well enough.Some def guy came free to rush while at least one of our blockers(OL or Bback) picked up wrong guy or 2 blocked one guy and left another def guy free to rush.
I was happy to see the big completion but if this was our "successful plays" I hate to see our bad ones.Blocking like this gives a QB jumpy feet and a too early release which kills your passing %..

It seems to me that yards/attempt is a much better measure than completion % for assessing passing attack. We've been 1 or 2 in the nation in yards/attempt 2 of the last 3 years.
 

alaguy

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,117
It seems to me that yards/attempt is a much better measure than completion % for assessing passing attack. We've been 1 or 2 in the nation in yards/attempt 2 of the last 3 years.

maybe it is but-
with our OFF basically a run Off,the THREAT of the pass is a major consideration in how you def our attack,if the def doesn't think you can complete a pass then their aggressiveness increases against the run and WILL stop the run.Plus with a low completion rate it leaves our run OFF in even a BIGGER hole to get a first down. So if you can't throw and catch enough,the DEF is willing to risk our beating you on long passes.
btw-it seems to methe uga game is the only one that our long passes were a major factor
 

bravejason

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
307
We basically seem to have a passing attack problem.When you are under 50% for 5 of 6 yrs something is wrong.
One of the things wrong is the blocking concepts/execution.Oddly I was looking at 2 of the MOST successful "passing plays of the yr" listed at SB Nation- Waller catching long ball on Ga and Godhigh catching ball up sideline vs clem- and NEITHER was blocked correctly- Vad just stood in threw it well enough.Some def guy came free to rush while at least one of our blockers(OL or Bback) picked up wrong guy or 2 blocked one guy and left another def guy free to rush.
I was happy to see the big completion but if this was our "successful plays" I hate to see our bad ones.Blocking like this gives a QB jumpy feet and a too early release which kills your passing %..

The sub-50% team pass completion percentage is not new. 2004-2007 were all sub-50% team pass completion years. 2000-2001 were 60%+, and 2002-2003 were in the low-to-mid 50%.

I know CPJ likes to emphasize pass efficiency over pass completion percentage, but I think that once the completion percentage drops below 50%, defenses start to stop respecting the pass, regardless of the yards-per-completion statistics.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,886
Location
North Shore, Chicago
maybe it is but-
with our OFF basically a run Off,the THREAT of the pass is a major consideration in how you def our attack,if the def doesn't think you can complete a pass then their aggressiveness increases against the run and WILL stop the run.Plus with a low completion rate it leaves our run OFF in even a BIGGER hole to get a first down. So if you can't throw and catch enough,the DEF is willing to risk our beating you on long passes.
btw-it seems to methe uga game is the only one that our long passes were a major factor
I wasn't choosing one over the other, just pointing out the differences in philosophy. However, at 45% completion percentage with the down field throws, the safeties are not going to crowd the box. That's too high a percentage for "big-play" possibility to leave it to the corners one-on-one and have to turn-and-chase the A-Backs releasing from the line. The closer the safeties are to the line, the faster the QB can get an open pass to a streaking A-Back. The throws don't have to be that strong or accurate that close to the line. If 25% of our passes are TD's because the safeties crashed too hard, we'll win every game we play. Safeties will eventually move back, and that'll open up the running game.

(at least that's how it's supposed to work)
 

GTNavyNuke

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
7,554
Location
Poquoson Virginia
Amount other problems with our passing game the past few seasons is that we can pass when we don't need to, but can't pass when we do need to.

Thus our stats look good in average completion, but those completions largely came when they weren't needed to win the game.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,886
Location
North Shore, Chicago
That goes back to a comment I made a while back in another thread. Our offense hasn't changed much over the past 6 years in terms of statistics, what has changed has been the clutch-ibility of the offense, in other words, how they performed when they absolutely had to. We haven't been clutch in a while.
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393
I know we are getting back to our roots running the football... I'm curious if CPJ goes back to Diamond at all if any...


 

zhavenor

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
468
Hi, my first post here. I would like to know what causes people to be infatuated with the diamond formation? It is a compressed formation that is as limited in its passing as the wishbone. Note I'm not talking about the Ski gun but the actual diamond formation. I'm not trying to get into an argument but trying to figure it out.
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393
Hi, my first post here. I would like to know what causes people to be infatuated with the diamond formation? It is a compressed formation that is as limited in its passing as the wishbone. Note I'm not talking about the Ski gun but the actual diamond formation. I'm not trying to get into an argument but trying to figure it out.
I am by no means "infatuated" with any formation. However, what I personally like about the diamond is that it brings another dimension to the run game. Examples of the plays that we have ran from it are the off tackle run and the inverted read option. We also passed fairly well from it in the Duke game... ^watch video above. Just having it as another set to go to in addition to the traditional Flexbone set is a plus in my book.
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393


Here is a pic of the 49ers running the off-tackle run. IIRC watching the 49ers run the diamond is what sparked CPJ's initial interest in looking into it.
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393


And here is the read option. Inverted and regular. Of course this is more of a strong look and not the balance diamond. But you get the point.
 

zhavenor

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
468
I am by no means "infatuated" with any formation. However, what I personally like about the diamond is that it brings another dimension to the run game. Examples of the plays that we have ran from it are the off tackle run and the inverted read option. We also passed fairly well from it in the Duke game... ^watch video above. Just having it as another set to go to in addition to the traditional Flexbone set is a plus in my book.
Thanks for the reply. I didn't necessarily mean to single you out, as I have seen others on here bring up the formation before. Thanks for helping me understand where you're coming from.
 

zhavenor

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
468
My only thought/initial question ^ is wonder if CPJ is going to use it anymore...
Perhaps I'm projecting... but I think CPJ came to the realization that perhaps he added too many things to the offense last year, and possibly several years prior, which led directly to the poor play of the offense and offensive line in particular. It is true that the added formations and pools of plays that they add make more work for the defense in preparation for the offense, but at some point if you keep adding things it will reduce your overall effectiveness. I would guess that the Diamond formation is out except maybe for the bowl game next year. Pistol might be used but I would guess even that would be more sparingly than last year as well. Again I am a fan of less is more so it is very probable that I'm projecting onto CPJ what I would like to hear. Your position on the Diamond formation and what it adds is a reasonable one as well.
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393
Perhaps I'm projecting... but I think CPJ came to the realization that perhaps he added too many things to the offense last year, and possibly several years prior, which led directly to the poor play of the offense and offensive line in particular. It is true that the added formations and pools of plays that they add make more work for the defense in preparation for the offense, but at some point if you keep adding things it will reduce your overall effectiveness. I would guess that the Diamond formation is out except maybe for the bowl game next year. Pistol might be used but I would guess even that would be more sparingly than last year as well. Again I am a fan of less is more so it is very probable that I'm projecting onto CPJ what I would like to hear. Your position on the Diamond formation and what it adds is a reasonable one as well.

You are probably right. I was just curious. I am suffering from off-season anxiety. If I do have a partiality to the diamond its that it is a balanced formation like the Flexbone. I love formations like this (i.e. pistol spread).

At the end of the day all I care is that we win the game. But I like talking x's and o's too.
 
Top