In defense of a "predictable" offense

#27
#27
Vol423 said:
Thanks. I re-read my post and noticed that mistake also. Kansas State toasted the UT defense for a cool 35 points.
Click to expand...

I understand. I try to repress all memories of that train wreck as well.
 
#28
#28
GAVol said:
They probably weren't the prototypical option offense in that they were pretty diverse with Donovan McNabb at QB, but they did run a ton of freeze option.
Click to expand...
Correct. The freeze option out of the I was the Syracuse offense for the McPherson/Pasqualoni era.
 
#29
#29
It's easy to forget about the option that Syracuse ran that day due to the insane 3rd down conversions that Donovan McNabb kept pulling off.
 
#30
#30
I watched that game and it was Mcnabb's arm that burned us plus some nice runs by him not his backs so much. We did Win that game.
 
#31
#31
GAVol said:
It's easy to forget about the option that Syracuse ran that day due to the insane 3rd down conversions that Donovan McNabb kept pulling off.
Click to expand...
The play where he shakes off Al Wilson, then throws about a 50 yard strike is the best play I've ever seen a QB make against Tennessee.
 
#32
#32
hatvol96 said:
The play where he shakes off Al Wilson, then throws about a 50 yard strike is the best play I've ever seen a QB make against Tennessee.
Click to expand...

Exactly the play I was thinking of. That game was one giant headache defensively.
 
#33
#33
GAVol said:
Exactly the play I was thinking of. That game was one giant headache defensively.
Click to expand...

I think against any other QB, UT would have had 10 sacks that day and it would have been a blowout. But McNabb is the reason it took a last second FG to win that one.
 
#34
#34
GAVol said:
Exactly the play I was thinking of. That game was one giant headache defensively.
Click to expand...
People forget how good Syracuse was that year. They drilled Michigan in Ann Arbor and beat a decent Miami team by about 17,986 points.
 
#35
#35
hatvol96 said:
The play where he shakes off Al Wilson, then throws about a 50 yard strike is the best play I've ever seen a QB make against Tennessee.
Click to expand...

I still can't believe Philadelphia Eagle fans booed him, when the Eagles selected him in NFL draft in '99
 
#36
#36
I'll bump this thread up to the top, since I think the discussion here was good and it bears more assessment with the "predictable" comments on the Florida game.
 
#37
#37
good thread.

reportedly TN has used the same playbook since the 1960's.

there is something to be said for nebraska's KISS approach vs. complexity. how many times does the play not work because of a player's mental error as opposed to a physical error?
 
#38
#38
emainvol said:
The thing is, even if you know the option is coming, it is unpredictable by design. A well executed option is nearly impossible to stop (see: Air Force)
Click to expand...

7 other teams seemed to have no trouble stopping Air Force last season.

The weakest excuse I've ever heard was that crap we heard before and after the Air Force game and it should have been a warning sign to most fans about what was to come this season. Chavis can't defend the option.
 
#39
#39
Something that hardly ever gets mentioned in these types of coaching "scheme" threads is the issue of where execution comes from.

Coaching is essentially teaching. When players are taught properly and prepared mentally and physically to execute the plan, success usually follows to the extent the players are talented enough to maximize it.

It's one thing for a scheme to be fancy and look good in the film room, it's another to communicate that information to the player in a way that they understand it instinctively to the point of automation. If the players don't understand it all, then it appears as if they aren't executing "what they were told to do in practice."

I'm constantly amazed at the TN coaches who almost condescendingly brag about how not surprised they were at what the opposing team does in a game, only to be followed by comments of the players about all the difficulties presented from the other team. Josh McNeil is a perfect example from the FL game.

When your team looks lost for an entire game, that's coaching. When Tony Bono drops a hold on a field goal from the 3 yard line, that's player execution.

Osborne and his ilk were and are master teachers. I think that's one of the biggest differences.
 
#40
#40
"corn don't grow at all on rocky top" thats the problem. those boys back in the day at Nebraska were corn fed. they were some of the biggest strongest whitest guys in the nation. also very well coached and execusion was perfect.
 
#41
#41
I've listened to a ton of Vol games over the years driving between Little Rock and Jonesboro. The national champion team was fairly predictable they just had the horses to knock the crap out of anyone in their way.

I watched ASU run the wishbone for a decade. A good defense forces an option team to do what the defense wants them to do because it is read based. Show them what it takes to get them to run it the way you want them to run it and they'll do it on a true option play.

Texas Tech and Hawaii are doing the same thing except through the air. They beat the snot out of inferior teams but against good disciplined teams they are still lacking.

The wishbone depended on a linebacker making the wrong read and failing to stay home or having someone get out there and put him on his duff. The fancy "high tech" offenses of today count on on D-back, nickle back or linebacker screwing up or having a receiver that just flat out runs them.

Run correctly either offense will only gain little bites of real estate unless you either are physically better or the defense screws up.

You out-wit an opposing coach only a couple times per game so you either better be physically better or you better take advantage of those times they are so wrong the door is open.
 
#42
#42
hatvol96 said:
Look at Nebraska's record in the '80s against Florida State, Oklahoma, and Miami. The Nebraska run in the mid '90s had more to do with them upgrading the quality of athlete they put on the field, especially defensively, than it did with anything they did schematically.
Click to expand...

It was the Blackshirts.

Ohiovol, I am afraid you miss my point about predictability anyway. Hat touched on it a bit, but the bottom line is this. Unless you have the athletes, your scheme cannot be predictable.
 
#43
#43
Lexvol said:
It was the Blackshirts.

Ohiovol, I am afraid you miss my point about predictability anyway. Hat touched on it a bit, but the bottom line is this. Unless you have the athletes, your scheme cannot be predictable.
Click to expand...
Adapt to the personnel.Not our staff we like running our heads into the same brick wall over and over:banghead2::banghead2:
 
#44
#44
Liper said:
Something that hardly ever gets mentioned in these types of coaching "scheme" threads is the issue of where execution comes from.

Coaching is essentially teaching. When players are taught properly and prepared mentally and physically to execute the plan, success usually follows to the extent the players are talented enough to maximize it.

It's one thing for a scheme to be fancy and look good in the film room, it's another to communicate that information to the player in a way that they understand it instinctively to the point of automation. If the players don't understand it all, then it appears as if they aren't executing "what they were told to do in practice."

I'm constantly amazed at the TN coaches who almost condescendingly brag about how not surprised they were at what the opposing team does in a game, only to be followed by comments of the players about all the difficulties presented from the other team. Josh McNeil is a perfect example from the FL game.

When your team looks lost for an entire game, that's coaching. When Tony Bono drops a hold on a field goal from the 3 yard line, that's player execution.

Osborne and his ilk were and are master teachers. I think that's one of the biggest differences.
Click to expand...

Terrific post.

My own personal philosophy with coaching is that, at the beginning of every year, you start from the most basic level and build on that. This includes the Lombardi idea of holding up a football and saying "To start with, this is a football." As the story goes, Max McGee responded the first time with "Whoa, slow down coach, you're going too fast."

The most success I have ever been a part of as a coach is when the staff meets in the preseason to get on the same page. This would include a discussion on the part of position coaches with the coordinators about what basic techniques will be taught and also various ideas of how to prepare game plans, coordinate personnel, etc.

Where I was part of the worst success involved excessively intricate game plans and an inordinate amount of time devoted to that, always at the expense of re-hashing technique and basic fundamentals. My idea, particularly with the linemen I coach, is that going through basic steps, hand position, and leg drive is something to be done every day. It bugs me to squander individual position time in order to devote to "Okay, here's these new 12 plays that the head coach wants put in."

The more team time is needed, usually to synchronize timing with new plays, the less individual position time there is. Individual position time is vital to proper technique and fundamentals; frankly I always found team time to be more of a waste because there's so much down time that should be ironed out in individual time.
 
#45
#45
OHIO VOL:

Finally, someone I hear speaking my language! You obviously have a hold on this from the coaching perspective, which is a nice addition.


I'm always amazed at the calls for Fulmer (or insert coach) to "get after them" or "have some fire in their belly" or "he can't motivate good enough" or any of those other ambigious nonstarters. As if yelling at some guy to try harder will magically overcome the fact that he is either doing it wrong or doesn't understand what he's supposed to do to begin with.

I believe our offense suffers from overly and unnecessarily complicated minutae that is both hard to teach young players and even harder to execute at full speed in a dynamically fast moving and changing game. Once we turn up the speed on the opponents, the worse it looks. It even looked that way when Peyton was here.
 
#46
#46
Liper said:
OHIO VOL:

Finally, someone I hear speaking my language! You obviously have a hold on this from the coaching perspective, which is a nice addition.


I'm always amazed at the calls for Fulmer (or insert coach) to "get after them" or "have some fire in their belly" or "he can't motivate good enough" or any of those other ambigious nonstarters. As if yelling at some guy to try harder will magically overcome the fact that he is either doing it wrong or doesn't understand what he's supposed to do to begin with.

I believe our offense suffers from overly and unnecessarily complicated minutae that is both hard to teach young players and even harder to execute at full speed in a dynamically fast moving and changing game. Once we turn up the speed on the opponents, the worse it looks. It even looked that way when Peyton was here.
Click to expand...

Ironically, I remember having this conversation with a die hard, knowledgable Nebraska fan circa 1997. It seemed that often, Peyton and the receivers were not on the same page because he was making adjustments, and they were not.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top