Vols offense looked at as gimmick

[sjt18]

Schematically, yes. Can it work with 53 old dudes? Probably not

How old are you? Serious question. There is NO physical reason most NFL worthy athletes can't do this. If they're still in the NFL at 30 then they are physical exceptions to the norm any way.

 

[Vol865]

How old are you? Serious question. There is NO physical reason most NFL worthy athletes can't do this. If they're still in the NFL at 30 then they are physical exceptions to the norm any way.

I'm 31. How many years of collegiate and professional football are on your body? There are plenty of reasons you are choosing to ignore that I've already mentioned. Roster size is 32 players less than college, talent drop off from rotating players, fatigua/wear and tear from excessive snaps, wearing out your own defense in a league where it'simportant, etc.

I'm a big believer in this offense being a legitimate offense at the collegiate level and I think the schemes work regardless but the reasons mentioned above are my opinion of why it wouldn't work in the NFL. I'm taking absolutely nothing away from Heupel or the offense. There are other challenges that make it difficult at the least.

 

[sjt18]

I'm 31. How many years of collegiate and professional football are on your body?

By your theory that there is a certain number of plays a guy has in his body before being done... it would seem that those who appear in the playoffs most often would have the shortest careers. But that's not true. It would be interesting if you actually had evidence that collated the number of plays per game someone plays or the total number of plays per season to the length of their career. I don't suspect a correlation while you apparently do.

There are plenty of reasons you are choosing to ignore that I've already mentioned. Roster size is 32 players less than college, talent drop off from rotating players, fatigua/wear and tear from excessive snaps, wearing out your own defense in a league where it'simportant, etc.

Not ignoring. Just not seeing any proof from you establishing relevance. You would need to prove that more snaps per season and per game shortens a player's career. You have claimed it. You have done nothing to prove it.

I'm a big believer in this offense being a legitimate offense at the collegiate level and I think the schemes work regardless but the reasons mentioned above are my opinion of why it wouldn't work in the NFL. I'm taking absolutely nothing away from Heupel or the offense. There are other challenges that make it difficult at the least.

And I disagree. I am significantly older than you. I have seen the evolution of the game multiple times now. I can remember when the wishbone was a dominant college O... and when certain Os were taboo in the NFL because they threatened the "white" QB model. Not that all were white but the demand that they be a pocket passer and NOT rely on or even show their mobility often.

It will evolve again. Winning matters and someone will try the tempo control O out to see if they can win with it. It might fail. You might even be able to prove that players on O get injured more often or else have shorter careers. Right now, you are making assumptions and presenting them as "facts".

 

[Vol865]

By your theory that there is a certain number of plays a guy has in his body before being done... it would seem that those who appear in the playoffs most often would have the shortest careers. But that's not true. It would be interesting if you actually had evidence that collated the number of plays per game someone plays or the total number of plays per season to the length of their career. I don't suspect a correlation while you apparently do.

Not ignoring. Just not seeing any proof from you establishing relevance. You would need to prove that more snaps per season and per game shortens a player's career. You have claimed it. You have done nothing to prove it.


And I disagree. I am significantly older than you. I have seen the evolution of the game multiple times now. I can remember when the wishbone was a dominant college O... and when certain Os were taboo in the NFL because they threatened the "white" QB model. Not that all were white but the demand that they be a pocket passer and NOT rely on or even show their mobility often.

It will evolve again. Winning matters and someone will try the tempo control O out to see if they can win with it. It might fail. You might even be able to prove that players on O get injured more often or else have shorter careers. Right now, you are making assumptions and presenting them as "facts".

The roster size is less than college. Fact.
There is a salary cap in the NFL. Fact.
Both of those reasons make it harder to have serviceable depth at every position. Fact.

More plays are more opportunities for injury/fatigue. You can say it's an assumption but it's common sense.

The Chiefs just won the SB with young players pretty much everywhere on offense and Eagles are about the same.

The assumptions I'm making are most NFL players won't want to take the risk and don't see the need in doing it. So yes, some assumptions but not all.

 

[volsrock09]

If you're a Tennessee Vols fan who's spent even a little bit of time on social media in the last six months, you've likely seen plenty of opposing fan bases throwing shade at Josh Heupel's offense.
For reasons I don't understand, there's a narrative that Tennessee's offense just throws the ball deep down the field and does little else. Vols fans know that's nowhere close to being the case.


https://atozsports.com/nashville/tennessee-vols-news-false-heupel-ut-football

If all they do is throw it deep, why couldn’t they stop them.

 

[sjt18]

The roster size is less than college. Fact.

And that proves nothing except they have 53 players and if someone gets hurt then they pick someone up or promote someone from the practice roster.

There is a salary cap in the NFL. Fact.

So? That does not restrict tempo.

Both of those reasons make it harder to have serviceable depth at every position. Fact.

Which proves absolutely nothing about what we're discussing. In fact, Heupel generally plays one QB. He may play 7 or 8 OLs. 3 WRs will get 90% of the snaps. He'll play a couple of TEs and rotate 2 or 3 RBs. That is pretty close to EXACTLY what most NFL teams have and do.

More plays are more opportunities for injury/fatigue. You can say it's an assumption but it's common sense.

No it isn't. It is an assumption... more like a guess and not all that good of one. We've seen a lot of injuries at UT over the last 15 years. The injuries under Heupel playing tempo have been no worse than before and in fact they've been better overall.

The Chiefs just won the SB with young players pretty much everywhere on offense and Eagles are about the same.

The assumptions I'm making are most NFL players won't want to take the risk and don't see the need in doing it. So yes, some assumptions but not all.

Yeah. You are reading your own bias into it and making guesses based on your assumptions.

 

[Vol865]

And that proves nothing except they have 53 players and if someone gets hurt then they pick someone up or promote someone from the practice roster.
So? That does not restrict tempo.
Which proves absolutely nothing about what we're discussing. In fact, Heupel generally plays one QB. He may play 7 or 8 OLs. 3 WRs will get 90% of the snaps. He'll play a couple of TEs and rotate 2 or 3 RBs. That is pretty close to EXACTLY what most NFL teams have and do.

No it isn't. It is an assumption... more like a guess and not all that good of one. We've seen a lot of injuries at UT over the last 15 years. The injuries under Heupel playing tempo have been no worse than before and in fact they've been better overall.


Yeah. You are reading your own bias into it and making guesses based on your assumptions.

53 players=less players=less depth during the game when you can't sign players

I'm pointing out the cons and you're acting like there are none. Have a good day.

 

[Ned Ray McWorkher]

Assuming you have a qb that is capable, and a helluva running back, this offense could work in the NFL. The lack of top level wide recievers and potential injuries to those wideouts would then be the only major impediments. Your starting group would have to remain extremely healthy all season, and particularly towards the end of the year. With 3-7 more games (if you make the SB) and about half the roster size of a college team, that's asking a lot.

 

[GulfCoasterVol]

Go Faster !!! Pour on More Gimmickery !!!! Just Win !!! Faster !!!!
Attack Attack Attack !!!!!

 

[VAVol85]

Complete gimmick…no other team should even think about trying to hire our coach. Just leave Heupel with us and let us suffer.

 

[WaywardVol]

Complete gimmick…no other team should even think about trying to hire our coach. Just leave Heupel with us and let us suffer.

I dismissed Heupel’s offense as a gimmick. I’ll take 11 wins in a gimmick offense and day of the week. When the defense catches up, watch out!!

 

[ConantheVolbarian]

I could care less what anyone thinks about our offense under Heupel. He's winning at this point and that's what is important to me. The last understanding I had neither the SEC nor the NCAA awards any form of style points based on the offensive sets you run.

The only points that matters are the ones on the scoreboard at the end of the game. Heupel has already put down Bama and will produce a win over UGA soon imo.

Oh yes! Uncle Lou is going to break another TV. Lmao

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I dismissed Heupel’s offense as a gimmick. I’ll take 11 wins in a gimmick offense and day of the week. When the defense catches up, watch out!!

Serious question. Why is it a gimmick? When it’s based off of sound principles?

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Assuming you have a qb that is capable, and a helluva running back, this offense could work in the NFL. The lack of top level wide recievers and potential injuries to those wideouts would then be the only major impediments. Your starting group would have to remain extremely healthy all season, and particularly towards the end of the year. With 3-7 more games (if you make the SB) and about half the roster size of a college team, that's asking a lot.

I don’t think you could use those extra wide sets all the time in the NFL.

 

[Delmar]

Serious question. Why is it a gimmick? When it’s based off of sound principles?

Exactly. One man’s “gimmick” is another man’s innovation. As far as scoring points goes, they don’t take pictures. They just want to know how many are on the scoreboard. If you can’t stop it, don’t whine. Try harder.

 

[UT-Rex]

Game tied, 49 Tennessee Alabama 49

a. bama, for the go-ahead score, missed FG wide right ... Tennessee's ball, game still tied

Gimmick offense ?? ...

b. Play 1, :15sec remaining ... 1st and 10 from bama's 32 ... bama rushes only 3 / drops 8 back ... Hooker connects with Keyton

Gimmick offense (against 8 pass defenders) ?? ...

b. Play 2, :08sec remaining ... 1st and 10 mid field ... bama rushes 3, with 2 LB's set watching elusive Hooker ... Hooker connects with McCoy / McCoy on the ground at the 30, with :02 remaining / Tennessee TO called

Gimmick offense ?? ...

c. Play 3, :02 on clock ... Tennessee FG from the 30 ... FG Tennessee ... Tennessee for the win, 52-49.

Gimmick offense ?????

 

[SpookyAction]

Schematically, yes. Can it work with 53 old dudes? Probably not

I think without a doubt the majority of NFL players have a lot more stamina than the VOLS roster.
It doesn't mean Heupel's offense will work, but it could if a NFL coaching staff wanted to push their opponents.
I am ok with us disagreeing. I think it could work professionally. It would depend on a team's personnel.

 

[MiramarVol]

The forward pass was also seen as a gimmick back in the early days.

 

[OrangeTsar]

The definition of gimmick implies trickery or sleight of hand with the assumption being that once the mark figures out the secret, the gig is up. Which begs the question, why haven’t other teams been able to figure out the “gimmick” and put a top to it?
Gimmicks by definition only work for a limited time unless the mark is an idiot.

 

[Volbrando]

I don't care how the offense is looked out, as long as it's looked at with more points on the board at the end of the game vs their competitors

 

[aRmo]

The definition of gimmick implies trickery or sleight of hand with the assumption being that once the mark figures out the secret, the gig is up. Which begs the question, why haven’t other teams been able to figure out the “gimmick” and put a top to it?
Gimmicks by definition only work for a limited time unless the mark is an idiot.

South Carolina fans are under the assumption they have figured out the "Gimmick" offense. IMO the only reason its called a Gimmick is because its different. Idk if you watched the colorado spring game but their WRs were outside the numbers aswell. More teams are going to adopt this style of offense because its hard to defend. Georgia defends it well because they have a cabinet of 5* dudes on their team that are just better than our WRs. You can say the same about Alabama but the mentality of Alabama has gotten softer over the years. Personally, idk what offense we run. JUST WIN.

 

[Sea Ray]

It's definitely a gimmicky offense and I was a skeptic when Heupel was hired but now that I've seen it in action, I'm a believer that it works. Who'd want to go back to a Butch Jones or Derek Dooley offense? It's very tough to prepare for and Heupel knows how to coach it.

 

[overseasorange2]

 

[JRich]

Everything new and innovative is usually at first viewed as a gimmick.

Haters are just mad that they didn't think of it first.

 

[OrangeTsar]

And even if it were a „gimmick“, football isn’t like figure skating where you get style or difficulty points. A touchdown is six points regardless of how complicated the play that produces it. Just win baby.