The Future Potential of CPJ's Offense

Status
Not open for further replies.

GTonTop88

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,013
Location
Gibson, GA
I've heard him say a couple times that he considers the pitch game to be their short-passing game. Why have a qb drop back five yds, risk getting sacked, and only pick up three yds? When CPJ throws, he wants it to hurt. Not saying I completely agree, but that's the reasoning I've heard him give...
I think 5-8 yard passes would be more effective at stopping crowding the box. I can see the quick pitches in place of swing passes but not curl, slant, and out routes.
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393
W-L seems to me to be an ignorant way to judge an offense. Defense also plays a role.

My point exactly. Our defense has played a role and is a huge reason we are 6-3 right now instead of 4-5. Our defense has kept us in a few games this year while the offense that you rave about has been inept.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,675
Although I want to agree with this... Its debatable. We have cracked the Top 20 in Total Offense just once during the CPJ era. That was in 2009.
When Friedgen was here we were much more efficient offensively IIRC. But either way its much better that the Gailey era.
However, we are ranked in the Top 5 in rushing almost every year but this is due larger to the fact that we run the ball 85% of the time.
We had one of the best OL's in the nation under Ralph and George. That group would have made any OC look like an f'n genius. Now throw in Joe Hamilton and his cast of skill guys. Whew!
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393
Apart from 2010, we've had one of the most productive and efficient offenses in ncaa. I don't want us to change until it makes us better.

Look at your original post. "I don't want us to change until it makes us better".... ??? How do you know whether a change or new wrinkle in the offense will help make you better or efficient until you try it?

Not trying to argue AE87 but we can swap stats and opinions all day. But ask yourself one question. Are you satisfied with our current offense and its efficiency???
 

gtdrew

Banned
Messages
740
Location
Decatur
One thing I'd like to see is some swing passes to the motion-a back, but have the a back switch direction at the snap. Like, he starts in motion towards the b-back, then, at the snap, he runs a swing route away from the b-back.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,980
Look at your original post. "I don't want us to change until it makes us better".... ??? How do you know whether a change or new wrinkle in the offense will help make you better or efficient until you try it?

Not trying to argue AE87 but we can swap stats and opinions all day. But ask yourself one question. Are you satisfied with our current offense and its efficiency???

IJ, you've asked two questions here. I will respond to each with the expectation that you, in turn, will respond to mine.

1) "How do you know ..." First, my original post had two points: (1) the positive assertion that we're one of the most efficient offenses in ncaa and (2) that I don't want us to change until ... To answer your question, the OP referred specifically to increasing the run and shoot part of our offense. I was responding to that. Right now, from what I see, Vad is completing 45.6% of his passes. That's almost 4% lower than Tevin in 11 and more than 10% lower than Tevin in 12. He regularly fails to check-down his reads, which is a must in the run and shoot, and still defaults to throwing off his back foot under pressure. When given time, he still overthrows open receivers on the long ball a bit too much, imo. Now don't get me wrong, I recognize he's a RS sophomore in his first year as a starter. I think he has more upside than Tevin and expect that he will improve. I was saying that I don't want us to do more run and shoot until we can do it better based on my take on how well we're doing it now. Now as far as your question about new wrinkles (which was not what I was talking about), I say that the "until you try it" takes place primarily in practice, not in games. However, we've already added several "new wrinkles" like the diamond formation and the pistol sets and have even run some of the multi-QB plays from the other thread.

Question for you: (a) What, specifically and concretely, makes you think that we will be able to do some new thing better than what we've been practicing and focusing on for years?

2) "Are you satisfied ..." I find this question annoying. Ultimately, I'm not satisfied until we're winning every game by 50+ to 0. However, that doesn't mean that you completely change schemes or coaches etc. If you're simply posting your emotional response of how you feel, or that you won't be satisfied until we're the best, then don't introduce different standards like "top 20."

That being said, I am convinced that our offensive scheme has been pretty darn efficient. I use "efficient" as maximal productivity for minimal effort. Points/drive is a handy measure of efficiency. A team that scores 30 pts in a game in 10 drives has been more efficient than a team that scores 30 in 15 drives. I gave statistical evidence that GT been top 15 over the last two years based on that statistic. That statistic, of course, fails to account for opponent strength. Footballoutsiders ranks offensive efficiency with some measure of opponent strength, and ranked our offense as #2 in 09, #16 in 11, #26 in 12, and currently #28. That's really not that bad, considering. In 2011, we were #16 in the Fremeau Efficiency Index and #14 in straight pts/drive--and that was after all of the 07 class was gone.

My questions for you: You have repeatedly said in this thread that you don't think we're very efficient. (b) How are you defining efficient or assessing efficiency? and (c) At what standard will you deem us as efficient rather than not?

I look forward to your responses to questions (a), (b) and (c).
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,980
My point exactly. Our defense has played a role and is a huge reason we are 6-3 right now instead of 4-5. Our defense has kept us in a few games this year while the offense that you rave about has been inept.

In post #7 in this thread, you said, "I completely understand what you are saying. But regretfully I don't agree that our offense is as efficient as you suggest. Not only is this portrayed in Total Offense but in results in the Win column. "

You explicitly said that efficiency of offense was reflected in the "Win column." Which is it? or What am I missing?
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,393
Answer to A B and C.... We are not efficient on offense due to results. I am basing this on a mixture. Win/Loss results, Statistical data, and watching the games.

Also AE87 you said ultimately you are not satisfied and will not be until we are scoring 50+. So... if you are not satisfied with our offensive display then why do you continue to adamantly say we are efficient? You have lost me.... We are not a very good offensive team at all right now. We are sufficient on defense. Inefficient on offense. I love our offense (scheme) and CPJ but it is what it is and right now our offense is not good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top