Problems with the Offense

#26
#26
With all the disillusionment with Butch and Hurd since Saturday, this has been a quality thread.

The offense is a jumbled pastiche. Hated it from day one but decided to see what happened in year four.

How the geniuses on the BSiA don't realise that when Dobbs has a few good runs he gets into rhythm and the intermediate passing game improves I don't know. The Northwestern con-job will grate on me forever.

It's their (his) way or the highway. Well, bye Felicia. Cumberland Avenue is right over there.
 
#27
#27
majic73 said:
I have seen alot on here about fire Debord , fire the O line coach ect. I think the problems goes much deeper than that and I don't think that doing those things will necessarily fix the problems. Debord is an I form , smash mouth coach...this scheme is not his baby. Its Butch's.

This idea that this is a 'zone read' spread could not be further from accurate. We run the zone concepts some ...but not often. We also run wheel route and gap schemes some ...but we are not a 'gap scheme' spread. When I think of a zone-spread scheme I think of Oregon, where every play is predicated off the zone read.

This system is much more complex. It is based out of the 4 vertical concept..but the passing scheme with some variation is a layered west coast scheme. The idea is to spread the defense vertically and horizontally and allow you to run a power running game with only 5 blockers...hence the zone blocking scheme, which in theory will allow you to put more hats at the point of attack than there are defenders.

In order to run an effective west coast passing tree, you need a QB that makes quick decisions, is accurate, and consistent. Think Joe Montana, Peyton Manning. The ball is gone and on target in 2.4 seconds.

Dobbs cannot complete intermediate passes consistently. The defenses do not respect the the passing game. You then get 6 or 7 defenders in the box. 5 O linemen cannot block 6 or 7. The running back and / or running QB cannot make consistent gains when there are more defenders than blockers. They cant get second level, even if the backers fall to a soft zone they have not sold out on the pass and can attack down hill on the run.

To say that this is a QB dependent system is an understatement. What concerns me most of all...is that at this point the coaches must know what Dobbs is and is not capable of . They have to know that Hurd is a pound it between the tackles guy. So why are we hand cuffed to this system that is a fail with the guys we have ? Dobbs , Hurd , Wolfe...would all be excellent I form guys . Dobbs on roll outs , ROPs , real option ..Hurd with enough blockers at the point of attack would dominate. If you dont want to go that far...just add additional blockers , H backs , become a zone read offense to take advantage of Dobbs skill set.

The answers are there , somebody just seems bent on doing it there way
Click to expand...
so, what i get out of this, if what you say is true, is that we've recruited and played players ill suited with the skill sets needed to run the offense this staff wants to run.

well, that's great. i feel better. everything's fine.
 
#28
#28
majic73 said:
I like that you filled in the gaps and added to. To clarify ...I said the passing tree is 'variation' of a layered west coast. They prefer intermediate to short passing and very rarely go deep. I think it would be a better 'system' if it was reliant on the inside zone instead of a mish mash of concepts. I have never been a huge fan of systems that build the run off of the pass. I would rather see an attack that can exploit your opponents weaknesses. Having 4 receivers when you can't deliver to one receiver is a waste . Go with two or three and add the blockers. Overall, I think this offense is too complex for all but the most sophisticated QB and it is easily tripped up by SEC caliber defenses.
Click to expand...

100% agree. Bring in more blockers (2 TE sets, etc) every once in a while and at least give the running back a chance. If opposing teams are going to load the box, either bring extra blockers or bring in new wrinkles to slow down the defense from just crashing the line of scrimmage and our gaps. (disclaimer: I hate this phrase. How many times have we heard Debord talk about adding new wrinkles before each game only to see the same predictable offense?) There is just no imagination and teams know it. The 3 headed rushing attack last year worked, but now the blueprint has been exposed and teams know how to beat it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#29
#29
Eddie Vol Halen said:
With all the disillusionment with Butch and Hurd since Saturday, this has been a quality thread.

The offense is a jumbled pastiche. Hated it from day one but decided to see what happened in year four.

How the geniuses on the BSiA don't realise that when Dobbs has a few good runs he gets into rhythm and the intermediate passing game improves I don't know. The Northwestern con-job will grate on me forever.

It's their (his) way or the highway. Well, bye Felicia. Cumberland Avenue is right over there.
Click to expand...

Might as well use this Magnolia address: 100 E Magnolia Ave
 
#33
#33
Thanks majic73 for the analysis. Good job.

I'd like to offer some additional thoughts as well. When all this talk of the I formation, Hurd, and broken promises started, I went back an looked at the bowl and Appy State games concentrating on the "I" plays. Whenever they were in the I set, Dobbs was under center, Hurd was the single deep back, and Wolf was in the backfield as a blocker, but not in front of Hurd. The other set was a pistol set with Dobbs in the shotgun and Hurd a couple of yards deeper. Usually Wolf or Ellis were in the backfield as a blocker lined up behind the OT or slightly outside of the OT. It was clear that Hurd felt much more comfortable from the I or pistol and was usually more effective.

The problem with those sets were that the defense knew that if Dobbs was under center, it was a running play and loaded the box. The pistol was a little less obvious. When you have a QB who has accuracy problems putting him under center only makes the problem worse because it takes a second or so for him to set up and read the defense. You want to play Dobbs in the shotgun so he has that extra time. I just don't believe that Deboring had the luxury to play the I. Pistol maybe but not the I. And we all saw how Muschump loaded the box and challenged Dobbs to beat them against a zone.

Also complicating the issue is the OL. When the box is loaded, they simply can't give Dobbs the time to find open receivers. But that is a whole different topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#34
#34
The bottom line is that this coaching staff has always relied on trickery or a system to win games. They've never relied on talent to win, so they don't know how to assess players' abilities and coach to their strengths.

"No coach has ever won a game by what he knows; it's what his players know that counts." — Bear Bryant

Save
Save
Save
Save
Save​
 
#36
#36
I think you are over thinking it. No offense is very good when the QB does not throw accurately. That's the difference between 2nd half against UF and the SC game.
 
#37
#37
VAVolsFan2009 said:
Thanks majic73 for the analysis. Good job.

I'd like to offer some additional thoughts as well. When all this talk of the I formation, Hurd, and broken promises started, I went back an looked at the bowl and Appy State games concentrating on the "I" plays. Whenever they were in the I set, Dobbs was under center, Hurd was the single deep back, and Wolf was in the backfield as a blocker, but not in front of Hurd. The other set was a pistol set with Dobbs in the shotgun and Hurd a couple of yards deeper. Usually Wolf or Ellis were in the backfield as a blocker lined up behind the OT or slightly outside of the OT. It was clear that Hurd felt much more comfortable from the I or pistol and was usually more effective.

The problem with those sets were that the defense knew that if Dobbs was under center, it was a running play and loaded the box. The pistol was a little less obvious. When you have a QB who has accuracy problems putting him under center only makes the problem worse because it takes a second or so for him to set up and read the defense. You want to play Dobbs in the shotgun so he has that extra time. I just don't believe that Deboring had the luxury to play the I. Pistol maybe but not the I. And we all saw how Muschump loaded the box and challenged Dobbs to beat them against a zone.

Also complicating the issue is the OL. When the box is loaded, they simply can't give Dobbs the time to find open receivers. But that is a whole different topic.
Click to expand...

I agree with you ! I dont think there is a silver bullet that will fix everything. The I form may no be a reality for Dobbs and I get that. But running a system that would require Montana, Manning, Drew Breez to master is not helping. These wrinkles could be to change the passive zone blocking to an aggressive zone scheme . Drop a receiver and keep an H back . Run the pistol more. Make the outside zone the basis of the offense .

SC had such little respect for the passing game that at times they had one DB covering 2 routes ...soft zone and following Dobbs eyes.

In a world where guys like Tebow and Vince Young were stars ...there is an answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#38
#38
This offense was designed for small schools to compete with big boy schools. It is supposed to be a shell game. Who's got the ball? The offense was to slow defenses to make them think and help o line against bigger stronger D lines. This offense only works IF THE QB RUNS THE BALL A 1/3 of the time! If the QB doesn't run then this offense Is Not effective, there is not deception, simple as that. If QB does not run nor can pass the question is why is he in there and why are we attempting this so called scheme? We have rocket scientist at QB but this is not rocket science. RUN THE QB OR PUT IN A PASSING QB. #Govols go 4-0
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#40
#40
majic73 said:
I have seen alot on here about fire Debord , fire the O line coach ect. I think the problems goes much deeper than that and I don't think that doing those things will necessarily fix the problems. Debord is an I form , smash mouth coach...this scheme is not his baby. Its Butch's.

This idea that this is a 'zone read' spread could not be further from accurate. We run the zone concepts some ...but not often. We also run wheel route and gap schemes some ...but we are not a 'gap scheme' spread. When I think of a zone-spread scheme I think of Oregon, where every play is predicated off the zone read.

This system is much more complex. It is based out of the 4 vertical concept..but the passing scheme with some variation is a layered west coast scheme. The idea is to spread the defense vertically and horizontally and allow you to run a power running game with only 5 blockers...hence the zone blocking scheme, which in theory will allow you to put more hats at the point of attack than there are defenders.

In order to run an effective west coast passing tree, you need a QB that makes quick decisions, is accurate, and consistent. Think Joe Montana, Peyton Manning. The ball is gone and on target in 2.4 seconds.

Dobbs cannot complete intermediate passes consistently. The defenses do not respect the the passing game. You then get 6 or 7 defenders in the box. 5 O linemen cannot block 6 or 7. The running back and / or running QB cannot make consistent gains when there are more defenders than blockers. They cant get second level, even if the backers fall to a soft zone they have not sold out on the pass and can attack down hill on the run.

To say that this is a QB dependent system is an understatement. What concerns me most of all...is that at this point the coaches must know what Dobbs is and is not capable of . They have to know that Hurd is a pound it between the tackles guy. So why are we hand cuffed to this system that is a fail with the guys we have ? Dobbs , Hurd , Wolfe...would all be excellent I form guys . Dobbs on roll outs , ROPs , real option ..Hurd with enough blockers at the point of attack would dominate. If you dont want to go that far...just add additional blockers , H backs , become a zone read offense to take advantage of Dobbs skill set.

The answers are there , somebody just seems bent on doing it there way
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
#42
#42
Everyone wants to focus on the offensive scheme and ignore the facts. We can't block. Our receivers can't separate from bump & run or catch consistently. Our QB can be a great passer or poor passer for any given game. Position coaching is the issue. Or perhaps the position coaches are not getting enough time to teach. When we do these things well the offense is great and Debord looks like a genius.
 
#43
#43
It all starts upfront, if the line blocks then UT can move the ball, remember the Texas A&M game? The line blocked and the offense had almost 700 yards.
 
#44
#44
majic73 said:
I have seen alot on here about fire Debord , fire the O line coach ect. I think the problems goes much deeper than that and I don't think that doing those things will necessarily fix the problems. Debord is an I form , smash mouth coach...this scheme is not his baby. Its Butch's.

This idea that this is a 'zone read' spread could not be further from accurate. We run the zone concepts some ...but not often. We also run wheel route and gap schemes some ...but we are not a 'gap scheme' spread. When I think of a zone-spread scheme I think of Oregon, where every play is predicated off the zone read.

This system is much more complex. It is based out of the 4 vertical concept..but the passing scheme with some variation is a layered west coast scheme. The idea is to spread the defense vertically and horizontally and allow you to run a power running game with only 5 blockers...hence the zone blocking scheme, which in theory will allow you to put more hats at the point of attack than there are defenders.

In order to run an effective west coast passing tree, you need a QB that makes quick decisions, is accurate, and consistent. Think Joe Montana, Peyton Manning. The ball is gone and on target in 2.4 seconds.

Dobbs cannot complete intermediate passes consistently. The defenses do not respect the the passing game. You then get 6 or 7 defenders in the box. 5 O linemen cannot block 6 or 7. The running back and / or running QB cannot make consistent gains when there are more defenders than blockers. They cant get second level, even if the backers fall to a soft zone they have not sold out on the pass and can attack down hill on the run.

To say that this is a QB dependent system is an understatement. What concerns me most of all...is that at this point the coaches must know what Dobbs is and is not capable of . They have to know that Hurd is a pound it between the tackles guy. So why are we hand cuffed to this system that is a fail with the guys we have ? Dobbs , Hurd , Wolfe...would all be excellent I form guys . Dobbs on roll outs , ROPs , real option ..Hurd with enough blockers at the point of attack would dominate. If you dont want to go that far...just add additional blockers , H backs , become a zone read offense to take advantage of Dobbs skill set.

The answers are there , somebody just seems bent on doing it there way
Click to expand...

Great post and also explains what makes our line look worse than they really are
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top