Offensive Scheme Q&A Thread

steebu

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
553
We can talk til we're blue in the face - and it's fun! But ultimately, we have to dissect and discuss what the man in the blue shirt does every Saturday. Personally, I don't think we'll ever see the diamond again, partly because we never saw it again to like we did against Duke (despite it's success) but mostly because during the radio show someone said, "I'm glad we're getting back to the option" and PJ replied with, "I am, too." Anecdotal, to be sure, but I believe PJ has guys who will run "his" offense and not say, "The triple option isn't my thing."
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,675
We can talk til we're blue in the face - and it's fun! But ultimately, we have to dissect and discuss what the man in the blue shirt does every Saturday. Personally, I don't think we'll ever see the diamond again, partly because we never saw it again to like we did against Duke (despite it's success) but mostly because during the radio show someone said, "I'm glad we're getting back to the option" and PJ replied with, "I am, too." Anecdotal, to be sure, but I believe PJ has guys who will run "his" offense and not say, "The triple option isn't my thing."
I wonder if he addressed the team by saying "Anybody else who thinks the triple option ain't your thing can leave right now..."
 

GTNavyNuke

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
7,787
Location
Poquoson Virginia
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.

I would like to see yards per attempt and yards after catch. I would think that taking out the YAC so that you only have how far the ball was thrown for a completion would be interesting. For us, I think short passes can look a lot better since we should get more YAC given the other teams selling out on the run .....
 

danny daniel

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,104
I've read repeatedly in this forum that the center position is the most difficult to learn and execute in this CPJ offense. I have also read repeatedly that O linemen take two or three years to master this offense and that is the excuse for Devine, Fromayan, and some of the highly touted freshmen like Klock, Stickler, and Brown to not have played thus far. How is it that Marshall with 4 weeks of practice has played extensively and has been given good reviews for his performance. Before camp he was not mentioned as a likely freshmen candidate to play this year. Did somebody misjudge Marshall's ability (both physical and mental) that bad or is all this "it takes extensive time" for an O linemen to learn this offense just not true? I am happy for Marshall but am beginning to question what has repeatedly been said about our OL development.
I'm just having a hard time understanding why Devine and O'Reilly and Klock have not seen PT when we so desperately need OL depth.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,487
Marshall has been the SINGLE exception to the "rule" you refer to. So??????? I think what you refer to has been a bit overblown but there is little debate that experience in / with the system matters. Take a look at Griffen's recent article in the AJC if you would like to hear it directly from someone involved.
 

Bruce Wayne

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,870
I've read repeatedly in this forum that the center position is the most difficult to learn and execute in this CPJ offense. I have also read repeatedly that O linemen take two or three years to master this offense and that is the excuse for Devine, Fromayan, and some of the highly touted freshmen like Klock, Stickler, and Brown to not have played thus far. How is it that Marshall with 4 weeks of practice has played extensively and has been given good reviews for his performance. Before camp he was not mentioned as a likely freshmen candidate to play this year. Did somebody misjudge Marshall's ability (both physical and mental) that bad or is all this "it takes extensive time" for an O linemen to learn this offense just not true? I am happy for Marshall but am beginning to question what has repeatedly been said about our OL development.
I'm just having a hard time understanding why Devine and O'Reilly and Klock have not seen PT when we so desperately need OL depth.

Or there are many more options for explanations then the strict dichotomy you propose?

Ferreting out the various causes within individual cases and trying to come up with a really broadly applicable "rule" like "it takes a long time to learn to play in this OL" and "it doesn't take a long time to learn . . . " seems a fruitless endeavor to me. I don't see how one can form really strong opinions on the "rule" or "principle" at stake about getting game time snaps on the offensive line?

Also two games that were technically close until the fourth quarter and had a below average number of total snaps just isn't enough data anyway.

Oh! and as far as concerns about depth go. I really was bothered that our defensive starters would be so worn down late in games under Groh and their performance was clearly suffering as the game wore on . . . and yet he did not work backups in more. But in these first two games I do not think I have seen the offensive line starters clearly wearing down and performing worse as the game wore on. Hence, I am not as concerned about our depth or whether the backups have been getting real game experience to this point. I recognize it is good to get them some (out of injury concern and other reasons as GTNavy Nuke listed elsewhere) and obviously CPJ has indicated the same. But I don't think it is all that big a deal at this stage. Let's check back on the issue after the next 2 games.
 

Papa Doc

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
78
Location
Gainesville, GA
Or there are many more options for explanations then the strict dichotomy you propose?

Ferreting out the various causes within individual cases and trying to come up with a really broadly applicable "rule" like "it takes a long time to learn to play in this OL" and "it doesn't take a long time to learn . . . " seems a fruitless endeavor to me. I don't see how one can form really strong opinions on the "rule" or "principle" at stake about getting game time snaps on the offensive line?

Also two games that were technically close until the fourth quarter and had a below average number of total snaps just isn't enough data anyway.

Oh! and as far as concerns about depth go. I really was bothered that our defensive starters would be so worn down late in games under Groh and their performance was clearly suffering as the game wore on . . . and yet he did not work backups in more. But in these first two games I do not think I have seen the offensive line starters clearly wearing down and performing worse as the game wore on. Hence, I am not as concerned about our depth or whether the backups have been getting real game experience to this point. I recognize it is good to get them some (out of injury concern and other reasons as GTNavy Nuke listed elsewhere) and obviously CPJ has indicated the same. But I don't think it is all that big a deal at this stage. Let's check back on the issue after the next 2 games.

On point BW. Besides, for the past few years the OL has suffered many games lost to injury, many of those sitting so far will likely play by the end of the year unless the decision to hold on to their RS regardless of need is made.
 

gtg936g

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,061
the runner can be tackled for negative yards. Bubble screens can be quick hitters above the line of scrimmage.


I would think a DE dropping into the alley would be in a good position to disrupt the play. Most bubble screens rely on getting WRs out in front to block. I think we would have to vary formations we use to set the screen wall for the safety and CB.
 

ibeattetris

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,477
I'm not sure on the formation we used, but I recall us running the tunnel screen with DT. I still don't think a true bubble screen has enough advantages over rocket toss to take time away from practice to implement.
 

stylee

Ramblin' Wreck
Featured Member
Messages
603
We have bubble screens in the playbook. I recall running them vs Miami in 2008.

Also those tunnel screens. I remember hill and DT both running those
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
We have bubble screens in the playbook. I recall running them vs Miami in 2008.

Also those tunnel screens. I remember hill and DT both running those

That's interesting ... It would seem that we would run them more especially against aggressive defenses that try to blitz the gaps.
 

Buzz776g

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
466
This may be a banal question and if so I apologize, especially to those who know X's and O's far better than I do, but Zach Laskey's return made me think about it.

Do we have a play in the playbook that would use 2 B-backs and perhaps a tight end(ish) type position? If so could it be run from under center?
 

ibeattetris

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,477
This may be a banal question and if so I apologize, especially to those who know X's and O's far better than I do, but Zach Laskey's return made me think about it.

Do we have a play in the playbook that would use 2 B-backs and perhaps a tight end(ish) type position? If so could it be run from under center?
I formation?
 

stylee

Ramblin' Wreck
Featured Member
Messages
603
We ran the Power-I formation in 2008 and 2009 but have not since then.

I don't think we'll see anything like what you're asking about. The closest would be if we did a half-bone look, where one A-Back stops his motion just before he gets behind the BB. We did it some last year.
 
Top