Option Football

JacketFan137

Banned
Messages
2,536
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?!?!
not quite the same thing. by this point lane had already had multiple p5 head coaching gigs at usc and tennessee. he had also won a title at bama as the oc in 2015. at fau he didn’t recruit that spectacularly but he was one of the first coaches to really capitalize on the transfer portal and took a lot of former high rated talent from sec schools that was buried on depth charts.

comparing him to chadwell is a massive leap
 

VRTechFan

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
84
So the HC thread devolves into option talk and the option thread devolves into HC talk... lol.

I just came here to talk about B-backs after watching the TaxSlayer highlights. CPJ once told a buddy of mine that Adrian Peterson was the best BB ever, not because of his 40 yard dash time, but because of his 10 yard dash. They actually timed that, and AP had an initial 10 yard burst that blew everybody else away. Didn't matter what his 40 time was. I think Mills was similar... hit the hole quick and good pad level.

Anyway... I love that offense. And I don't mean the under center flexbone. Just the 3-O, in whatever formation. I miss it. The rule changes have hurt it somewhat, but it will forever be an equalizer and schematic advantage that I just find beautiful to watch.
Amen!!
 

yeti92

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,178
not quite the same thing. by this point lane had already had multiple p5 head coaching gigs at usc and tennessee. he had also won a title at bama as the oc in 2015. at fau he didn’t recruit that spectacularly but he was one of the first coaches to really capitalize on the transfer portal and took a lot of former high rated talent from sec schools that was buried on depth charts.

comparing him to chadwell is a massive leap
We are comparing G5 recruiting to G5 recruiting, there is no leap at all. Kiffin should have been able to recruit well above Chadwell with all his P5 and NFL experience, but he didn't. Try making an honest argument for once in your life.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,993
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? ;)

PassRushTotaFirsPenaTurn
SplitGCmpAttPctYdsTDAttYdsAvgTDPlaysYdsAvgPassRushPenTotNo.YdsFumIntTot
Offense916.026.660.3227.41.847.8267.45.63.074.3494.96.79.214.12.025.36.661.60.30.91.2
Defense920.632.962.5222.21.439.1155.84.01.272.0378.05.39.79.71.620.96.249.30.80.71.4
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.
I do not care at all, but recruits hear that BS and believe it. If kids don’t believe they can get to the NFL in our system then we are not going to recruit well.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,993
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.
I honestly thought after Dwyer got drafted that we would have 4-star rb’s lined up waiting to play B-back for PJ, never happened but you are right we got great production from that spot practically every year. Give me 2-star Zach Laskey all day long but on the other hand having a real super-star makes PJ’s offense go into hyperdrive
 

SoMsJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
170
When have we recruited well against Clemson and FSU or at the top of the ACC. By that logic no coach is qualified.
PROVEN P5 coaches that have recruited at a high level are qualified. There is no reason that GT cant recruit at the top of the ACC given the level of talent available in the metro area and surrounding states. By your logic, GT can never recruit better than average.
 

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,129
Location
Atlanta, GA
PROVEN P5 coaches that have recruited at a high level are qualified. There is no reason that GT cant recruit at the top of the ACC given the level of talent available in the metro area and surrounding states. By your logic, GT can never recruit better than average.
No, by my logic, we will never recruit at the very top of the ACC (Clemson or FSU) because we never have. What you are asserting i said is not what I said.
 

CEB

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,760
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."

Since we all know it’s impossible to recruit to the option, let’s get the recruiting out of the option thread.
;)
I said this earlier in this thread ( I think this thread) but offense out of pistol / gun doesn’t hit between the tackles quickly. Watching this film, there was not a single run between the tackles from pistol or diamond during first half. Everything attacking the middle was under center. That’s what I see in a lot of these RPO shotgun / pistol approaches; nothing gets vertical quickly. It’s a “flat” approach to attacking the LOS. I’m not using proper terminology; just one idiots observation.
I did see in the second half that we went up the middle a couple times. Almost looked like they were called, not optioned... couple were straight QB draws and the BB dives didn’t appear to be reads. Maybe they were constraint plays because the D picked up on the same thing.
At any rate, with this approach and other spread approaches, I don’t know why you don’t quickly hit the middle from time to time... you’ve got the d spread out to create that weakness... right?
 

Longestday

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
2,856
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.
I see you added "some form" of the triple option to obfuscate 40% average passing plays. I think you could have said it better by saying: "He has a triple option play and, therefore, he is guilty of being a triple option coach".
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,919
I see you added "some form" of the triple option to obfuscate 40% average passing plays. I think you could have said it better by saying: "He has a triple option play and, therefore, he is guilty of being a triple option coach".
Moreover, the amount of $ spent on the previous coach and his transition away from the TO is a sunk cost; it should not be a factor in determining what is our best approach going forward. It will not cost us any more $ to go with any given scheme that our next coach applies, despite the bad outcome of our prior decisions.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,720
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.
Way too much is made of the transition. It was Geoff's pre-emptive excuse.
Georgia Southern ran a gun option for six years, went 3-9 last year, and this year they're 5-4 after abruptly "transitioning" out of it.
They've scored 59, 45, 21, 34, 30, 33, 45, 28, and 31 points in their nine games.

 

Richard7125

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
465
I see you added "some form" of the triple option to obfuscate 40% average passing plays. I think you could have said it better by saying: "He has a triple option play and, therefore, he is guilty of being a triple option coach".
hahaha. You are mistaking me for someone who is against Option football. I'm not. The point i was trying to make in my post is he plays a lot of Option. The announcers were constantly talking about his Option offense. I simply don't see the big donors endorsing a coach that plays that much Option football. I think Chadwell is a really good coach. I just don't think he is a realistic candidate. I'm not sure why that is so controversial.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,919
Way too much is made of the transition. It was Geoff's pre-emptive excuse.
Georgia Southern ran a gun option for six years, went 3-9 last year, and this year they're 5-4 after abruptly "transitioning" out of it.
They've scored 59, 45, 21, 34, 30, 33, 45, 28, and 31 points in their nine games.

I wondered about that from the beginning but was willing to give Geoff the benefit of the doubt. In hindsight, I think it was part of his contract negotiating tactic and ADTS bought into it.
 

Ibeeballin

Im a 3*
Messages
6,082
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

When got influencers and respected guys say this, you are already coming with one arm tied behind your back

 

Skeptic

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,372
imho, any offense that works is a fun offense to watch.

As beautiful as CPJ's flexbone was when it was working, it was horrible to watch when it wasn't working.
It was no secret with Johnson that he often spent the first half surveying the landscape, and the second half getting serious. There was a Navy website that warned us: get ready for some really boring first half football. And nobody was ever better than Johnson in reading and predicting offenses. TWo games that really stand out are Georgia, down 28-12 at half and blew them out to win late, and Miss. State, a game that should have warned us off Collins, when Tech just ran wild. True, Collins was gone, and true, he was lucky somebody else got blamed for his defense. For such an esteemed institution, Tech can really be stupid.
 

wrmathis

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
961
Location
Bonaire GA
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 miss godhigh, Laskey, and Smelter
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,121
Location
Augusta, Georgia
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.

All of this and no mention of Days/Laskey? ;)
 
Top