RB Participation

[jgtengineer]

You know there is a formation for when you have 3 really good running backs... bobby dodd ran it. Its in our DNA. I wish i remember what it is called anyone want to throw me a bone?

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

I’m curious why no one else has brought this up. But I don’t think I’d beout on a limb in saying that our best two offensive players are Jahmyr Gibbs and Jordan Mason. But how many times were those two on the field at the same time on Saturday?

I don’t recall it happening one time. Seems like you would have some serious options with those two out there at once - and even more so, I think it’s crazy to keep Gibbs off the field more than 2-3 series a game due to his explosiveness.

Did I just miss it, or am I correct that they weren’t out there together?

I like it when two backs are in the backfield. Makes The defenses job tougher. Especially with some misdirection.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Having two backs in the backfield requires having coaches that know how to use it. Our problem is not lack of talented athletes, especially running back‘s. Everybody sees that.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

If my eyes didn’t fail me, I thought I saw Griffin in street clothes on the sideline Sat night

Interesting. I confess I wasn't really scanning the sidelines much.

 

[BurdellJacket]

You know there is a formation for when you have 3 really good running backs... bobby dodd ran it. Its in our DNA. I wish i remember what it is called anyone want to throw me a bone?

The "Belly Series" off the T formation

 

[InsideLB]

I like the idea of having Gibbs in the slot occasionally with jet sweep motion either as eye candy or to run it.

 

[WrongShadeOfGold]

If my eyes didn’t fail me, I thought I saw Griffin in street clothes on the sideline Sat night in uniform.

I sww him on the sideline in uniform. He changed numbers and is #6 now.

 

[slugboy]

I may be missing a point, but it looks like there are a few main points in this thread:

1. We have talented backs, but only have one on the field at any time, and we’d play better with more backs in the backfield
   • Variant: The flexbone got the ball to our backs, would be nice to have three backs in the backfield again
2. We stick with a straight RPO formation almost all the time, and we should vary our sets to put our opponents on their heels
   • Variant of that: Put Gibbs in the slot so that we can run an end-around misdirection play with him while defenses are keying on another RB

Point 1:
One problem about multi-back backfields is that there’s only one ball. It’s one of the big problems with football in general compared to other sports that only half the offense is even allowed to touch the ball, and most of them don’t touch the ball on most plays.
Gibbs and Mason and Smith and Griffin probably get the same distribution of running plays where they get the ball in a single-back formation as they would in a split or multi-back backfield. The difference is, when they’re not getting the ball, they’re on the sideline.
The back who isn’t getting the ball is either a diversion or a blocker, or maybe both.

If you go back to when we started with the flexbone, the B-back got the majority of the carries, the QB next, then one of the A-backs, then all of the others. If you were A-back number 2, you didn’t get your hands on the ball nearly as much as other players. As A-back number 2, your best bet was getting a pass reception, and you were usually behind one of the wide-outs. As a wide receiver, there was a receiver who got the ball and one who almost never did and was waiting their turn until next season.

Think of it like this: B-Back gets the ball 40% of the time, QB 30%, A-Back 1 20%, rest of the players 10%.

Towards the end of the flexbone era, the main ball carrier was the QB. Ironically, a lot of our frustrations yesterday were from Sims running the ball instead of hitting open receivers.

{complete aside: one of our problems right now is not running much of the playbook. We probably only got close to really running a large flexbone playbook under Tevin Washington, who is highly appreciated as a QB by a few, but was derided when he was the starter}

The problem is that the ball is a scarce resource, and it’s not allocated evenly. Putting the extra player in the backfield doesn’t solve the problem of getting more touches, which is what the player wants.

If the argument is that there are more variations with more back—there are more variations than we will ever probably use in an RPO—there are RB run/QB run/pass options out of the signature RPO play—the problem is that we aren’t executing it well, and our 1Q fumble was on a run pass option Saturday.

With split backs, it’s the same issue—one of the backs gets the ball more than the other, and eventually most OCs swap back to an I-formation or a one-back backfield because split backs doesn’t bring much. The one thing split backs does bring is left and right blockers for pass protection, and there are better formations for pass protection.

For I-formation, after Franco Harris in the 1970’s, the fullback started their unrequited love affair with the football. Maybe they’d get a pity pass reception, but it was mostly a long-distance relationship between the fullback and the football. They’re mainly an OG/TE in the backfield now.

Point 2:
I like this point a lot.
I’ll just put the main counter argument up front: If we don’t understand have haven’t fully implemented our base offense, why would we add in variations that would make it more complex for the QB and other roles to understand what their responsibilities are? We have enough trouble lining up and running the plays correctly NOW

Fridge would run 3-back backfields (he lined them up in an “I” once). He’d use a fullback or an H-back. He’d run 3 TE sets. He’d run 5 wides. Our players learned the plays and the assignments. It was fun to watch. I think it would still run well today.

We’re not substituting players in well on defense, and I think we’d probably have the same issue on offense. There’s a teaching issue, and there’s a communication issue. We’re not learning the plays and the formations, and we’re not getting the right players in and out in a timely fashion. If we have that problem on defense, we might have that problem on offense too.

TL;DR: I think schemes can help with 15% of our issues, which is worthwhile, but 85% is on fundamentals.

 

[Techster]

I like the idea of having Gibbs in the slot occasionally with jet sweep motion either as eye candy or to run it.

I like backs being motioned out to the slot, especially a back of Gibbs's skillset, because now you put the defense in a bind. Do you bring the LB out to cover the RB? You do that, and Gibbs eats up 90% of the LBs in college. Do you bring the a DB down to match Gibbs's skillset? If you do, now you've weakened the passing defense.

I don't like when backs are in the slot statically...which is to say, they start there and end there because now you give tip the defense onto what's going on. Your suggestion gets Gibbs out of a static position and creates havoc on the defense. Having Gibbs in the slot and motioning to another end creates decisions for the defense, and opportunities for the offense.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

If he had stuck with Mason we’d have run out the clock. Poor decision putting Gibbs back in on last meaningful drive.

Gibbs has more sheer ability than any back we have had in a long time going back to Dwyer and Choice. That said, with the game on the line in the fourth quarter the man I want to tote the mail is Mason. It is just that simple.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

You know there is a formation for when you have 3 really good running backs... bobby dodd ran it. Its in our DNA. I wish i remember what it is called anyone want to throw me a bone?

Straight T is what Dodd ran in the 1950s until the advent of the Split T in the late 1950s or early 1960s. Of course when your 3 backs are Leon Hardeman, Billy Teas, and Glenn Turner it is an easy offense to run with lots of misdirection, counters, and sweeps. Dodd often had them flood a zone and be wide open for an easy pass especially since Buck Martin was an All American end and commanded a lot of attention.

 

[jgtengineer]

Straight T is what Dodd ran in the 1950s until the advent of the Split T in the late 1950s or early 1960s. Of course when your 3 backs are Leon Hardeman, Billy Teas, and Glenn Turner it is an easy offense to run with lots of misdirection, counters, and sweeps. Dodd often had them flood a zone and be wide open for an easy pass especially since Buck Martin was an All American end and commanded a lot of attention.

It is, it evolved into the wishbone and later flex bone formations, Army still uses a version of the T with a very minor offset for A-back misdirection.