Off season musing: Short yardage for the spread

#2
#2
This has been the knock on "spread" offenses since they started using the Run and Shoot in the 80s. I really wonder if short yardage plays from the spread really get stuffed that much more than old school Power-I dive plays did. It may just be a lot easier to point at a replay and say "see. They should've gone under center, used a FB, brought in a TE etc etc etc."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coach_Z, sechamp2012, MemphisVol77 and 2 others
#3
#3
GAVol said:
This has been the knock on "spread" offenses since they started using the Run and Shoot in the 80s. I really wonder if short yardage plays from the spread really get stuffed that much more than old school Power-I dive plays did. It may just be a lot easier to point at a replay and say "see. They should've gone under center, used a FB, brought in a TE etc etc etc."
Click to expand...

I'd like to see some actual data on this. I see fans complain all the time, but I think the worse thing we can do is try to do something completely different and increase the risk of a bad snap by going under center.

I think staying in the gun actually aids our short yardage game by allowing Hooker to be a zone read or RPO threat. Neither of those can be ran under center (you can pre-snap RPO under center to be fair, but not post) and both aid our run game.

Our entire offense is built around spreading the field to open up the running game and force 1 on 1 matchups on the perimeter. Those are great things in goal line situations and I see no reason why we should change that. What we need is improved offensive line play and improved RB play. Both were lacking last season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: feathersax, Coach_Z, Orange_Crush and 1 other person
#4
#4
Vol8188 said:
I'd like to see some actual data on this. I see fans complain all the time, but I think the worse thing we can do is try to do something completely different and increase the risk of a bad snap by going under center.

I think staying in the gun actually aids our short yardage game by allowing Hooker to be a zone read or RPO threat. Neither of those can be ran under center (you can pre-snap RPO under center to be fair, but not post) and both aid our run game.

Our entire offense is built around spreading the field to open up the running game and force 1 on 1 matchups on the perimeter. Those are great things in goal line situations and I see no reason why we should change that. What we need is improved offensive line play and improved RB play. Both were lacking last season.
Click to expand...
I think some of this is execution. As you say, we spend a lot of time running plays to open it up and I'm not there for practice but I'll bet we spend little time on short yardage execution.

That makes sense for our offense but (putting on Kevlar) if you look at the fateful Purdue goal line play, you'll see some lousy execution in a short yardage, critical situation. Blocks were missed or half executed and it helped put us in a hole.

I'm not certain that's the full answer but I think simply making sure that the guys know their assignments and know their assignments matter in these situations may help.

A lot always comes down to reps. You'll execute better if this is your 16,496th time to hit your block or hole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seattle Hillbilly
#5
#5
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
I think some of this is execution. As you say, we spend a lot of time running plays to open it up and I'm not there for practice but I'll bet we spend little time on short yardage execution.

That makes sense for our offense but (putting on Kevlar) if you look at the fateful Purdue goal line play, you'll see some lousy execution in a short yardage, critical situation. Blocks were missed or half executed and it helped put us in a hole.

I'm not certain that's the full answer but I think simply making sure that the guys know their assignments and know their assignments matter in these situations may help.

A lot always comes down to reps. You'll execute better if this is your 16,496th time to hit your block or hole.
Click to expand...

We scored on that play, but I agree execution wasn't great (missed block by fullback). But you can find missed assignments on most plays for even the best of teams.

Idk they may spend a ton of time on short yardage, I really don't know. But if you have below average offensive line play (for some reason a lot of people won't accept that we did), and average RB play, you're gonna struggle in that scenario.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush
#6
#6
Vol8188 said:
We scored on that play, but I agree execution wasn't great (missed block by fullback). But you can find missed assignments on most plays for even the best of teams.

Idk they may spend a ton of time on short yardage, I really don't know. But if you have below average offensive line play (for some reason a lot of people won't accept that we did), and average RB play, you're gonna struggle in that scenario.
Click to expand...
Agree. Short yardage begins and ends in the trenches. Period. End of story.

Our OLine was a patchwork, baling wire and string situation most of the year. They shuffled, filled in, and did what they had to do to make it work but it wasn't anywhere near optimal. Without the horses, the cart doesn't roll.

I hope for more stability and that will help execution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3-2-1-Wolf and Vol8188
#7
#7
Vol8188 said:
I'd like to see some actual data on this. I see fans complain all the time, but I think the worse thing we can do is try to do something completely different and increase the risk of a bad snap by going under center.

I think staying in the gun actually aids our short yardage game by allowing Hooker to be a zone read or RPO threat. Neither of those can be ran under center (you can pre-snap RPO under center to be fair, but not post) and both aid our run game.

Our entire offense is built around spreading the field to open up the running game and force 1 on 1 matchups on the perimeter. Those are great things in goal line situations and I see no reason why we should change that. What we need is improved offensive line play and improved RB play. Both were lacking last season.
Click to expand...
When this was the topic early in the season last year, I looked online and found stats which compared short yardage on 3rd and 4th downs. The number of conversions was slightly higher when QB was under center compared to shotgun. But (from memory) is wasn't an order of magnitude higher. At best the data is a guideline and not an absolute merely because it used pro teams as the sample. I could not find any info on the college game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush and Vol8188
#9
#9
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
I think some of this is execution. As you say, we spend a lot of time running plays to open it up and I'm not there for practice but I'll bet we spend little time on short yardage execution.

That makes sense for our offense but (putting on Kevlar) if you look at the fateful Purdue goal line play, you'll see some lousy execution in a short yardage, critical situation. Blocks were missed or half executed and it helped put us in a hole.

I'm not certain that's the full answer but I think simply making sure that the guys know their assignments and know their assignments matter in these situations may help.

A lot always comes down to reps. You'll execute better if this is your 16,496th time to hit your block or hole.
Click to expand...
It's almost impossible to block at the goal line any worse than Princeton Fant did on that play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange., Rickyvol77, BDP! and 3 others
#12
#12
An upgrade in athletes at the skill positions would make this offense look better in short yardage more so than changing the personnel scheme itself IMO

A stronger back than Wright powers through on that play against Purdue.

A quicker and stronger TE than Fant hits the point of attack quicker and actually touches a defender on the play.

I would like to see them get an elite TE that could do some damage underneath in the passing game and be used in a wildcat formation similar to what the Chiefs did with Kelce some this season.

Lining up guys like The Fridge in the 80s at FB and putting in extra O line doesn't seem viable at this point.

QBs aren't used to taking snaps under center and defenses have gotten a lot more athletic over the years. So just lining up and pushing the other team into the end zone just doesn't work as much as it used to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinSmyrna and Vol8188
#13
#13
We need Jamal Lewis. Why does no one ever go over the top anymore? Was it a rule change? or no athletes?
246402.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: HalfullVol
#14
#14
Asking this offense last year to get in a jumbo set and cram it in is like asking a dog to meow. Part of the reason we were able to run it so much and so well, most of the time, was because of how we played. Insanely wide splits by our WR's spread the D out giving us favorable numbers and angles in the box. I don't think Mizzou has adjusted yet to our alignments. Going Power I on the 1 yard line is tough with our scheme. Not because it's hard or overly complicated, but you are asking guys to do certain things they aren't used to doing. Fant isn't the greatest TE in our history, but he was serviceable for what we asked him to do most of the year. He is a converted wide receiver. What he is NOT, is somebody that is skilled and comfortable coming from the backfield to kick out a defender on the end of the line. If your identity between the 20's is not the identity you have in the redzone, you don't have an identity. I don't care if we're on the +5 or the -5, we are comfortable spreading teams out and attacking quickly, and that is what we need to do.

I do like the idea of a Jumbo wildcat or big Running back package but within the conceptual framework of our offense. I think we need to put away the Power I for now. I say that, but how sweet would it be to have a package with E. Simmons as one of those lead blockers. Point and say..."run through that wall right there!"
 
#15
#15
volinSmyrna said:
Asking this offense last year to get in a jumbo set and cram it in is like asking a dog to meow. Part of the reason we were able to run it so much and so well, most of the time, was because of how we played. Insanely wide splits by our WR's spread the D out giving us favorable numbers and angles in the box. I don't think Mizzou has adjusted yet to our alignments. Going inverted wishbone on the 1 yard line is tough with our scheme. Not because it's hard or overly complicated, but you are asking guys to do certain things they aren't used to doing. Fant isn't the greatest TE in our history, but he was serviceable for what we asked him to do most of the year. He is a converted wide receiver. What he is NOT, is somebody that is skilled and comfortable coming from the backfield to kick out a defender on the end of the line. If your identity between the 20's is not the identity you have in the redzone, you don't have an identity. I don't care if we're on the +5 or the -5, we are comfortable spreading teams out and attacking quickly, and that is what we need to do.

I do like the idea of a Jumbo wildcat or big Running back package but within the conceptual framework of our offense. I think we need to put away the inverted wishbone for now. I say that, but how sweet would it be to have a package with E. Simmons as one of those lead blockers. Point and say..."run through that wall right there!"
Click to expand...

I would agree with your wildcat idea if I didn’t feel Hooker was already such a skilled runner. I’m not sure anyone on the roster adds enough additional value with their legs to make it worth losing the added value with his arm and decision making (even if he’s not perfect he gets more reps at read plays than a RB).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush and volinSmyrna
#16
#16
Vol8188 said:
I would agree with your wildcat idea if I didn’t feel Hooker was already such a skilled runner. I’m not sure anyone on the roster adds enough additional value with their legs to make it worth losing the added value with his arm and decision making (even if he’s not perfect he gets more reps at read plays than a RB).
Click to expand...
Definitely agree there. I don't know if we have anybody on the roster right now that I would want to have to take the ball out of his hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#17
#17
Vol8188 said:
I'd like to see some actual data on this. I see fans complain all the time, but I think the worse thing we can do is try to do something completely different and increase the risk of a bad snap by going under center.

I think staying in the gun actually aids our short yardage game by allowing Hooker to be a zone read or RPO threat. Neither of those can be ran under center (you can pre-snap RPO under center to be fair, but not post) and both aid our run game.

Our entire offense is built around spreading the field to open up the running game and force 1 on 1 matchups on the perimeter. Those are great things in goal line situations and I see no reason why we should change that. What we need is improved offensive line play and improved RB play. Both were lacking last season.
Click to expand...
Having offensive line depth would be a major benefit for the offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#18
#18
Tnman1 said:
We need Jamal Lewis. Why does no one ever go over the top anymore? Was it a rule change? or no athletes?
Click to expand...
I'd say that if there's one position that has gotten more athletic, it's probably D-Tackle. They attack the LOS and are just a lot harder to move than they were 20-30 years ago. You hardly ever see an Offensive Line consistently win by just going straight ahead anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coach_Z, unfrozencvmanvol and Rickyvol77
#19
#19
GAVol said:
I'd say that if there's one position that has gotten more athletic, it's probably D-Tackle. They attack the LOS and are just a lot harder to move than they were 20-30 years ago. You hardly ever see an Offensive Line consistently win by just going straight ahead anymore.
Click to expand...
On that note the defensive ends are so much more athletic and quick sometimes they get to the ball carrier right when the handoff is occurring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAVol
#21
#21
Bama and the top teams can play spread and still play power ball and get the tough yards. There is no reason for us not to have a short yardage game and play the with the qb under center in goal line and short yardage some. I get sick at my stomach when we get the ball 1st and goal inside the 2 and run shotgun 4 straight plays. Your simply conceding a good 3-5 yards before the ball is snapped. At least mix it up some. We have to get tougher in the trenches on both sides. On goal line on first down I like lining up tight, the thing is when you get a few like that a hard fake and boot leg or quick pass to tight end will work easy. But you have to make them play run, going strictly shot gun is just dumb and not very high percentage. GBO
 
  • Like
Reactions: hmanvolfan
#22
#22
Woodlawn VOL said:
Bama and the top teams can play spread and still play power ball and get the tough yards. There is no reason for us not to have a short yardage game and play the with the qb under center in goal line and short yardage some. I get sick at my stomach when we get the ball 1st and goal inside the 2 and run shotgun 4 straight plays. Your simply conceding a good 3-5 yards before the ball is snapped. At least mix it up some. We have to get tougher in the trenches on both sides. On goal line on first down I like lining up tight, the thing is when you get a few like that a hard fake and boot leg or quick pass to tight end will work easy. But you have to make them play run, going strictly shot gun is just dumb and not very high percentage. GBO
Click to expand...

Bama doesn't play with the QB under center in short yardage and goal line. Almost exclusively in the gun even on 3 and 1, or 1st and goal
 
#25
#25
From what I have seen over the past decade Tennessee could line up with a jumbo package and still not get enough push to get out of the backfield, making this formation useless. To get better in short yardage situations Tennessee needs to get more push from their offensive line or it does not matter what formation they are in. Bigger, stronger, better athletes in the trenches is what I'm sayin'.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top