Option Football

[Augusta_Jacket]

aside from the fact that user did not say that to begin with, you have to understand that recruits will just get told this offense doesn’t present a path to the nfl, they aren’t gonna get enough touches cause the love is too spread out and plenty of other negative slants. whether it is true or fair unfortunately does not matter. perception is everything

Every other team out there is going to "negative recruit" us no matter what coach or scheme we run. They used to take calculus books to our recruits back when our offense was the same as everyone else's. I really don't put any stock into the negative recruiting angle. Either the offense works or it doesn't and the coach can either recruit or he can't. I highly doubt that JBatt is focusing on what other teams are going to do and instead is determining what is we are going to do. If we're worried about negative recruiting, the other teams have already won.

 

[Richard7125]

I think a lot of the negative posters regarding aspects of the Triple Option are using it only as tool to try and blackball Chadwell as a legitimate candidate maybe to push their candidate on this board such as those who want Sanders or O'Brien. However, it is obvious by the poll that most want Chadwell.

I posted this earlier but it might have been in another thread. I didn't know anything about Chadwell prior to the App State game last Thursday. The handful of TO experts on this board will explain in excruciating detail how his offense is more than Triple Option, but to everyone else (including the announcers of the game) 75% of Coastal Carolina's offense was some form of triple option football. I just don't think Ga Tech is OK with spending $23m and the last 4 years going through the biggest transition in the history of college football to go back to a TO offense. I have no doubt Chadwell is a really good coach, but right or wrong, i don't see him as a realistic possibility at Tech.

 

[Techster]

One of the criticisms of Chadwell is he's only successful at Coastal because of Grayson McCall. Well, that theory is about to be tested:

 

[JacketOff]

aside from the fact that user did not say that to begin with, you have to understand that recruits will just get told this offense doesn’t present a path to the nfl, they aren’t gonna get enough touches cause the love is too spread out and plenty of other negative slants. whether it is true or fair unfortunately does not matter. perception is everything

And you guys are severely blowing the negative recruiting angle out of proportion. Coastal throws for the 43rd most yards per game in the country. That’s more than: Texas, Nebraska, LSU, Oklahoma, Stanford, Utah, Clemson, Notre Dame, Arkansas, West Virginia, South Carolina, Michigan State, Baylor, Kansas, Virginia, Pitt, Texas A&M, Louisville, NC State, Wisconsin, Auburn , Florida, annndddd….. OLE MISS!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you want to explain how some janky, high school, scheme based, triple option, un professional, no chance in the NFL, can’t attract players offense is putting up more number through the air than offensive god, guru, and innovator Lane Kiffin’s offense?? As well as some of the biggest recruiting schools, and largest brands in college football?

Literally the only people saying Chadwell’s offense and his scheme won’t be able to attract top tier talent is freaking Georgia Tech fans. Literally everybody else in the country is talking about Chadwell and GT being a match made in heaven. But freaking Tech fans are too GD embarrassed to be associated with an offense that’s a little bit different than what UGA runs. For ****s sake, Chadwell’s offense is literally running the same concepts as Kiffin’s, and are even more successful through the air. Not to mention (as I’ve pointed out time and time again), Chadwell has increased Coastal’s recruiting prowess over his tenure there.

There are some other issues that could arise with Chadwell, him being allegedly tied to his entire staff at CCU is incredibly concerning. But there are some of y’all (not a lot, mainly like 3 or 4) who are living in some weird alternate universe where GT is a recruiting powerhouse and Chadwell is just CPJ with a mullet. Neither of those things are true.

 

[BCJacket]

Maybe counterintuitive, but the 2013 pistol stuff was far more elementary than our base flexbone offense. It was easier to "figure out" in the sense that there was less going on in the running game. The passing game was pretty much the same - at Duke, Vad had two touchdown passes out of pistol, one to Smelter, one to Godhigh. Both were on the passing concept "Switch," where the A-Back and WR replace each other (you'll recognize it - the WR bows in and then gets vertical, the a-back wheels outward and gets vertical) and then have a few options based on coverage. This was an extremely common play for us from the under-center look. Interestingly, on the pass to Smelter, the A-Back was aligned like a traditional slot, while the pass to Godhigh was off the "triangle" pistol backfield that was our more standard pistol look. The downside of that triangle loaded backfield was you don't have 4 immediate vertical threats to dictate coverage, but we clearly made it work well enough.





Our running game out of pistol was based off of a frontside read of the end-man-on-line-of-scrimmage ("EMLOS"), where the QB can give to the A-back coming across his face or keep it into the B-gap. In one sense, it was like an inverted veer read; very Cam Newtonish. There was a backside guard pulling around that one. It was a nice dumb powerful play. I don't know how many counters we had drawn up for it, given the short shelf life of the thing. We didn't show a bunch.

Did Vad leave because we went away from the pistol? I don't know. It seems unlikely to me. Rewatching the 2013 Duke game (and some of what he did v. Georgia that year), I am reminded of how talented Vad was when he was on. The guy had a big arm and really great touch (again, when he was on). But I don't think he was going to beat out JT in 2014. And JT in 2014 clearly didn't need the pistol look to thrive.

The "what might have been" part of 2014 for me isn't the shotgun or pistol stuff or whatnot. JT was perfect from under center. It's that it would have been cool to throw it 15-17 times a game with that WR duo, rather than 10-12. But we had such a deep roster of A-Backs, B-Backs, and JT running the ball, so it's hard to say WHEN we should have been throwing it.

In 2017 and 2018, I wouldn't have thrown more. Heck, one could argue we threw too much in 2018, given our limitations. I don't know if going back to the 2013 pistol would have done much for recruiting, given the fact that we weren't equipped to really throw the ball out of any formation. That strikes me as less about recruiting QBs than it does really bad luck at the position.

Back to present. I would obviously love to see Monken or Bohannon, but I bet Chadwell could do good things with Pyron, who I love already. He's got "it."

I was one of the 12 people in the stands at Duke that day and it was beautiful. Vad looked like the future in that game. But he got rocked against UNC the next week and never looked the same. JeT was so deadly running the flexbone, and the vertical passing game, there was no reason to try anything else with him. CPJ never had another QB that was a really viable passing threat after him. Would've loved to have seen what CPJ and (a healthy) Lucas Johnson could've done...

 

[slugboy]

aside from the fact that user did not say that to begin with, you have to understand that recruits will just get told this offense doesn’t present a path to the nfl, they aren’t gonna get enough touches cause the love is too spread out and plenty of other negative slants. whether it is true or fair unfortunately does not matter. perception is everything

Triple Option is a play, but when it's applied to an offensive scheme, it's applied to the Paul Johnson flexbone. Triple Option is what he said.

I haven't heard people calling Chadwell's offense a "high school offense" other than the people on this board that have decided that it's Paul Johnson 2.0, mostly without actually watching it.

There have been a lot of colleges over the last 30 years that other coaches said "didn't offer a path to the NFL" that put plenty of players into the NFL. For the last three years, or at least two of them, other coaches have been saying that we won't put players in the NFL running our current offense (that everyone else runs). Do you know why? Because we were losing and looking bad doing it.

We put a ton of defenders into the NFL running Tenuta's blitz-heavy defense that other fans and coaches said was a gimmick defense. NFL coaches loved our players because they were well-coached.

No one cares if you have a good system and your players are ready to play in the big leagues.

Good coaches graduate good players. Get good coaches and ignore what other people say.

 

[FlatsLander]

Maybe counterintuitive, but the 2013 pistol stuff was far more elementary than our base flexbone offense. It was easier to "figure out" in the sense that there was less going on in the running game. The passing game was pretty much the same - at Duke, Vad had two touchdown passes out of pistol, one to Smelter, one to Godhigh. Both were on the passing concept "Switch," where the A-Back and WR replace each other (you'll recognize it - the WR bows in and then gets vertical, the a-back wheels outward and gets vertical) and then have a few options based on coverage. This was an extremely common play for us from the under-center look. Interestingly, on the pass to Smelter, the A-Back was aligned like a traditional slot, while the pass to Godhigh was off the "triangle" pistol backfield that was our more standard pistol look. The downside of that triangle loaded backfield was you don't have 4 immediate vertical threats to dictate coverage, but we clearly made it work well enough.





Our running game out of pistol was based off of a frontside read of the end-man-on-line-of-scrimmage ("EMLOS"), where the QB can give to the A-back coming across his face or keep it into the B-gap. In one sense, it was like an inverted veer read; very Cam Newtonish. There was a backside guard pulling around that one. It was a nice dumb powerful play. I don't know how many counters we had drawn up for it, given the short shelf life of the thing. We didn't show a bunch.

Did Vad leave because we went away from the pistol? I don't know. It seems unlikely to me. Rewatching the 2013 Duke game (and some of what he did v. Georgia that year), I am reminded of how talented Vad was when he was on. The guy had a big arm and really great touch (again, when he was on). But I don't think he was going to beat out JT in 2014. And JT in 2014 clearly didn't need the pistol look to thrive.

The "what might have been" part of 2014 for me isn't the shotgun or pistol stuff or whatnot. JT was perfect from under center. It's that it would have been cool to throw it 15-17 times a game with that WR duo, rather than 10-12. But we had such a deep roster of A-Backs, B-Backs, and JT running the ball, so it's hard to say WHEN we should have been throwing it.

In 2017 and 2018, I wouldn't have thrown more. Heck, one could argue we threw too much in 2018, given our limitations. I don't know if going back to the 2013 pistol would have done much for recruiting, given the fact that we weren't equipped to really throw the ball out of any formation. That strikes me as less about recruiting QBs than it does really bad luck at the position.

Back to present. I would obviously love to see Monken or Bohannon, but I bet Chadwell could do good things with Pyron, who I love already. He's got "it."

Watching this back Lee looked like he had to really work hard on every pass. His throwing motion is really slow and wide. Never noticed until now.

 

[JacketFan137]

y’all have kinda ran with what i have said as if i have determined we should not hire chadwell based on it. i’m pointing out a negative here that is something we would face with him. i have struck a nerve because i have offered some criticism of the option/option based coach which is a big no no here

is it going to break the program? no. but it’s something to consider with the long list of negatives and positives that every coach has. chadwell has been pretty underwhelming recruiting wise and it is a legitimate question if he will be able to keep up with uga and clemson on the field. scheme alone gets you so far, so it is fair to be concerned with his recruiting and whether that is due to his scheme or his own shortcomings as a recruiter.

as i have said countless times (even though i’m an option hater to a few mush brains on here) if chadwell is hired i will be happy but will enter with the same level of skepticism i would with any tech coach.

 

[SoMsJacket]

Tell me you've never watched Chadwell's offense without telling me you've never watched Chadwell's offense.

I have watched Chadwell's offense several times including some video reviews of his scheme. He uses several concepts of the Flex option mixed with a solid passing game, unlike CPJs Flexbone run based system. My comment was "I have reservations about his recruiting ability" and if he can recruit against Clemson and FSU. He is not recruiting those level of players today and he is an unknown to the southeasters recruits. It's the negative connotation of an "Option" based offense. I'm not criticizing Chadwell's scheme, but whether he can recruit the top of the ACC and sustain that level.

 

[kittysniper101]

y’all have kinda ran with what i have said as if i have determined we should not hire chadwell based on it. i’m pointing out a negative here that is something we would face with him. i have struck a nerve because i have offered some criticism of the option/option based coach which is a big no no here

is it going to break the program? no. but it’s something to consider with the long list of negatives and positives that every coach has. chadwell has been pretty underwhelming recruiting wise and it is a legitimate question if he will be able to keep up with uga and clemson on the field. scheme alone gets you so far, so it is fair to be concerned with his recruiting and whether that is due to his scheme or his own shortcomings as a recruiter.

as i have said countless times (even though i’m an option hater to a few mush brains on here) if chadwell is hired i will be happy but will enter with the same level of skepticism i would with any tech coach.

He's gone from 10->8->7->5->3->3 in the Sunbelt recruiting against his peers while transitioning up from FCS. I mean what do you want out of him as a recruiter? He still has to sell a program with little history, in a crappy area, with a crappy fanbase in a lower G5 conference. Tashard Choice must have been a sorry recruiter never even getting a 4-star to North Texas. Or maybe it could be that there's inherent pros and cons to recruiting to a specific school that are really hard to change even for a good coach.

 

[stylee]

I was one of the 12 people in the stands at Duke that day and it was beautiful. Vad looked like the future in that game. But he got rocked against UNC the next week and never looked the same. JeT was so deadly running the flexbone, and the vertical passing game, there was no reason to try anything else with him. CPJ never had another QB that was a really viable passing threat after him. Would've loved to have seen what CPJ and (a healthy) Lucas Johnson could've done...

Right. I remember seeing Marshall against Tennessee and thinking his accuracy looked pretty good on some plays despite not having much oomph to his throws. But he wasn't consistently accurate on the mid-length and short throws thereafter, so the lack of the deep ball hurt worse. It was tough to keep the safeties back. JFN was not a pinpoint passer but he could throw a nice 50-yard bomb (and it didn't hurt to have Bebe going deep for those). In the Marshall era, Jeune was a nice deep threat despite a relative lack of speed because of his ability to locate and go up for a throw. Ah, well.


Did Lucas ever play in the regular season? I seem to recall a spring game where he busted a very long run. I wanted him to be the guy.


FWIW, I don't think calling Chadwell a "triple option guy" would be much of a ding as far as having GT go back to the "triple option." For the vast majority of people, the negative of CPJ's offense really did just come from it being under center, lol. Chadwell's offense is very different in other ways too, but 99% of people have no idea what any of this stuff means ---- what they see is where the QB is in relation to the center, and that's pretty much the most meaningful thing to them. "Evolving" a scheme - like the flexbone - just means moving it to the pistol or shotgun, generally.

For a genuine evolution or change, try to watch an Air Force game replay from this year. They're superficially a flexbone triple-option looking team, but what they're up to this season is quite different. I'm not sure if it's just because that Roberts kid at B-Back is a stud or if it's permanent.

 

[UgaBlows]

I have watched Chadwell's offense several times including some video reviews of his scheme. He uses several concepts of the Flex option mixed with a solid passing game, unlike CPJs Flexbone run based system. My comment was "I have reservations about his recruiting ability" and if he can recruit against Clemson and FSU. He is not recruiting those level of players today and he is an unknown to the southeasters recruits. It's the negative connotation of an "Option" based offense. I'm not criticizing Chadwell's scheme, but whether he can recruit the top of the ACC and sustain that level.

We have almost never held our own recruiting vs. Clemson and FSU, But I believe that Chadwell’s offense can make up for a lot for that vs. running a standard college RPO offense. Imo if he can recruit 4-5th in the ACC he will win a helluva lot of games here.

 

[UgaBlows]

FWIW, I don't think calling Chadwell a "triple option guy" would be much of a ding as far as having GT go back to the "triple option." For the vast majority of people, the negative of CPJ's offense really did just come from it being under center, lol. Chadwell's offense is very different in other ways too, but 99% of people have no idea what any of this stuff means ---- what they see is where the QB is in relation to the center, and that's pretty much the most meaningful thing to them. "Evolving" a scheme - like the flexbone - just means moving it to the pistol or shotgun, generally.

that and not having the B-back right behind the QB with his hand in the dirt makes a big difference in how media and uninformed fans will perceive the offense. Plus run/pass ration is prob close to 50/50

 

[JacketFan137]

He's gone from 10->8->7->5->3->3 in the Sunbelt recruiting against his peers while transitioning up from FCS. I mean what do you want out of him as a recruiter? He still has to sell a program with little history, in a crappy area, with a crappy fanbase in a lower G5 conference. Tashard Choice must have been a sorry recruiter never even getting a 4-star to North Texas. Or maybe it could be that there's inherent pros and cons to recruiting to a specific school that are really hard to change even for a good coach.

his classes don’t really standout even at the g5 level. does that mean things won’t change at tech? no, but it is a very important question he needs to answer and the fact that he (allegedly) won’t be bringing anybody but his current staff is a concern to me.

i don’t care what scheme is being run if we don’t have the athletes to compete with uga and clemson at least occasionally then the coach should not come here.

so we shall see if he is here or not, but it is a fair concern and one of the only things that gives me a little hesitation with chadwell. that said can’t let perfect be the enemy of good. if he is the best candidate that wants to come tech then welcome aboard but i still have some questions as should anyone that is being objective

 

[slugboy]

that and not having the B-back right behind the QB with his hand in the dirt makes a big difference in how media and uninformed fans will perceive the offense. Plus run/pass ration is prob close to 50/50

If you win and look good, does anyone care what you run or what your run/pass ratio is?

Auburn and other schools would LOVE to have Kiffin. He runs somewhat less than twice as much as he passes, and the majority of their yards are from rushing.

Do you think he cares what anyone says about his offense?

		Pass					Rush				Tota			Firs				Pena		Turn
Split	G	Cmp	Att	Pct	Yds	TD	Att	Yds	Avg	TD	Plays	Yds	Avg	Pass	Rush	Pen	Tot	No.	Yds	Fum	Int	Tot
Offense	9	16.0	26.6	60.3	227.4	1.8	47.8	267.4	5.6	3.0	74.3	494.9	6.7	9.2	14.1	2.0	25.3	6.6	61.6	0.3	0.9	1.2
Defense	9	20.6	32.9	62.5	222.2	1.4	39.1	155.8	4.0	1.2	72.0	378.0	5.3	9.7	9.7	1.6	20.9	6.2	49.3	0.8	0.7	1.4
Difference		-4.6	-6.3	-2.2	+5.2	+0.4	+8.7	+111.6	+1.6	+1.8	+2.3	+116.9	+1.4	-0.5	+4.4	+0.4	+4.4	+0.4	+12.3	-0.5	+0.2	-0.2

Provided by CFB at Sports Reference: View Original Table
Generated 11/9/2022.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

his classes don’t really standout even at the g5 level. does that mean things won’t change at tech? no, but it is a very important question he needs to answer and the fact that he (allegedly) won’t be bringing anybody but his current staff is a concern to me.

i don’t care what scheme is being run if we don’t have the athletes to compete with uga and clemson at least occasionally then the coach should not come here.

so we shall see if he is here or not, but it is a fair concern and one of the only things that gives me a little hesitation with chadwell. that said can’t let perfect be the enemy of good. if he is the best candidate that wants to come tech then welcome aboard but i still have some questions as should anyone that is being objective

He did say "He still has to sell a program with little history, in a crappy area, with a crappy fanbase in a lower G5 conference"

So He qualified it as to why it does not stand out but is more than competitive. I would argue he recruits decently based upon the qualifications of his limitations.

Interesting how you just glossed over that and painted with broad strokes about how poor he is.

 

[stylee]

that and not having the B-back right behind the QB with his hand in the dirt makes a big difference in how media and uninformed fans will perceive the offense. Plus run/pass ration is prob close to 50/50

Yea, the B-Back thing made for good negative recruiting fodder. We never really suffered at the position (who was our worst starting BB? Skove, maybe, but that was just a couple of games) but also missed on a few game breakers. Mason and Howard were mighty good at the end of the CPJ era, as were Marshall and Benson. There's the Mills saga, which was sad because he had the potential to be the best BBack not named Dwyer, IMO. Who was that one highly touted recruit at BB who never got to play? Can't remember his name.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

I have watched Chadwell's offense several times including some video reviews of his scheme. He uses several concepts of the Flex option mixed with a solid passing game, unlike CPJs Flexbone run based system. My comment was "I have reservations about his recruiting ability" and if he can recruit against Clemson and FSU. He is not recruiting those level of players today and he is an unknown to the southeasters recruits. It's the negative connotation of an "Option" based offense. I'm not criticizing Chadwell's scheme, but whether he can recruit the top of the ACC and sustain that level.

When have we recruited well against Clemson and FSU or at the top of the ACC. By that logic no coach is qualified.

 

[awbuzz]

If you win and look good, does anyone care what you run or what your run/pass ratio is?

Auburn and other schools would LOVE to have Kiffin. He runs somewhat less than twice as much as he passes, and the majority of their yards are from rushing.

Do you think he cares what anyone says about his offense?

		Pass					Rush				Tota			Firs				Pena		Turn
Split	G	Cmp	Att	Pct	Yds	TD	Att	Yds	Avg	TD	Plays	Yds	Avg	Pass	Rush	Pen	Tot	No.	Yds	Fum	Int	Tot
Offense	9	16.0	26.6	60.3	227.4	1.8	47.8	267.4	5.6	3.0	74.3	494.9	6.7	9.2	14.1	2.0	25.3	6.6	61.6	0.3	0.9	1.2
Defense	9	20.6	32.9	62.5	222.2	1.4	39.1	155.8	4.0	1.2	72.0	378.0	5.3	9.7	9.7	1.6	20.9	6.2	49.3	0.8	0.7	1.4
Difference		-4.6	-6.3	-2.2	+5.2	+0.4	+8.7	+111.6	+1.6	+1.8	+2.3	+116.9	+1.4	-0.5	+4.4	+0.4	+4.4	+0.4	+12.3	-0.5	+0.2	-0.2

Provided by CFB at Sports Reference: View Original Table
Generated 11/9/2022.

This ^^^

 

[yeti92]

Since Lane Kiffin gets mentioned a lot, let's look at his recruiting classes at his G5 stop, FAU. Now keep in mind, Lane had extensive prior P5 experience at UT and USC, as well as experience in the NFL - he should be a top notch recruiter then right? Oh wait, not a 4 star in the bunch. 3 and 2 stars all day long. Did anybody tell Ole Miss beforehand?!?!