What's wrong with the Offense?

#76
#76
GAVol said:
You can blame the scheme all you want, but the reality is that we just weren't very good.
Click to expand...

I think Kiffin has some talent to work with, but you're right. There is not much depth and not much experience on the offensive side of the ball. It's going to take time.

How much time? We'll find out soon.
 
#78
#78
bigdaddy said:
... but it ultimately comes down to execution by the guys on the field.
Click to expand...
Words of wisdom. The difference between CPF w/ Cut and CPF sans Cutcliffe wasn't great QB talent but an emphasis on offensive execution.

I still think Clawson would have gotten there given time... but CPF didn't have any more time.

On a side note, I agree with Voldad in that it starts with the guy at QB. You get good play at that posistion and you win.
Click to expand...

Nope. It starts with the OL. You can win with a run game a la Wisconsin and Minnesota for several years. You can win with passing a la Texas Tech, BYU, and others. You have to have the skill players to do one or the other but if you don't start with good OL play... it won't matter.

In fact, that's the genius of Cutcliffe that so many missed. He got marginal OL play, relatively slow WR's, and injury prone QB to become one of the most productive UT offenses in recent memory. People complained about his dink and dunk O... but who wouldn't have traded for it last year?
 
#79
#79
tnrunner13 said:
clearly the kid is a gifted kicker (we all remember he was money his freshman year),
Click to expand...

I don't see it. He was accurate then however he hasn't shown the leg to do kick offs or FG's at range. Unless he improves distance, he's a weak link even if he returns to what he did as a FR.
 
#80
#80
TXVol_44 said:
I just wonder about that "BS" offense...I worry becaused it worked for Richmond ok. How was our version any different? Just thinking out loud...
Click to expand...

People love the sport of beating Clawson up but he's still a quality coach. I don't think it was the system and that doesn't necessarily mean that it was the talent. It was the execution. That could mean alot of things- anything from "the players didn't respect Clawson" to "the players weren't smart enough to pick it up".

Not something that they could afford to say publicly.... but Briscoe complained after the season that the WR coach told him that it was a two year plan to get the system working.

I don't gamble but if I did my money would be on Clawson's system working at BGU and seeing him win the MAC within 4 years... maybe even before CLK wins the SEC.
 
#81
#81
How can you say it was not the system?

Fulmer said they players did not grasp the concepts, Clawsen said the same thing! It was crap! Flip Flopping O-Lineman is not the right answer. Do you remember the game against Georgia were they said they new where we were going to run by the way we were lined up? That is a BS system. Talent is there but if the system does not fit, it will fail real bad!
Our QB's have talent we need a system that fits their talent!
I mean two years ago our O-Line we had a good rushing season and then all of a sudden we had a pathetic rushing season? And did we not return all the starters from that year on the O-Line?
 
#82
#82
TXVol_44 said:
I just wonder about that "BS" offense...I worry becaused it worked for Richmond ok. How was our version any different? Just thinking out loud...
Click to expand...

couple of things - It was not the offense he ran at Richmond . It was Phil Fulmers offense as originally created by Al Saunders with 'elements' of the Clawfense. This is something from reading articles that I gather did not make Clawson happy . Most notably his comment ' sometimes as an assistant coach you are not given the opportunity to fix things...'

Not sure the REAL Clawfense was the answer at Richmond year 1 2004 3-8 / year 2 2005 9-4 / 2006 7-5 / 2007 11-3 . But it looks like in 4 years it worked out ....maybe Clason had us on the 4 year plan ???
 
#83
#83
In fact, that's the genius of Cutcliffe that so many missed. He got marginal OL play, relatively slow WR's, and injury prone QB to become one of the most productive UT offenses in recent memory. People complained about his dink and dunk O... but who wouldn't have traded for it last year?[/QUOTE]

Yeah ...but Cutt also had another quality . He found ways to work with the talent he had ( like you said ) He didn't dictate to the talent what they would do , his talent dictated what he would do . Manning - they are a shotgun , multi receiver high pass quantity play action kind of team . QB had alot of freedom at the line . Tee Martin , Lewis , Henry ? They become a power running team with a proficient short to mod passing attack . QB is managed from the sidelines . I hope Kiffin plays to his teams strengths and masks their weakness like ol' Cutt always managed to do
 
#84
#84
m37bruno said:
I mean two years ago our O-Line we had a good rushing season and then all of a sudden we had a pathetic rushing season? And did we not return all the starters from that year on the O-Line?
Click to expand...

I think what you saw last year is what happens when a marginal o-line loses an experienced QB and an OC that were both adept at covering up a lot of deficiencies.
 
#85
#85
m37bruno said:
How can you say it was not the system?
Click to expand...
Because the system worked everywhere else it was tried... including the NFL. Just because it didn't "click" in one year, doesn't mean it could not have been an effective system once the players were fully acclimated to it... which takes longer with some systems than others. Also, UT didn't have ideal players for the system but the former O staff was on the way to signing them.

For example, UF avg'd less than 30 ppg in Meyer's first year there... and he had better players than UT had last year.

Fulmer said they players did not grasp the concepts, Clawsen said the same thing! It was crap! Flip Flopping O-Lineman is not the right answer. Do you remember the game against Georgia were they said they new where we were going to run by the way we were lined up? That is a BS system. Talent is there but if the system does not fit, it will fail real bad!
Click to expand...
OK... what ever you say...:whistling:

Same guy took a bad Richmond program, turned them around, and put them in the FCS championship game... but his system doesn't work 'cause you say so.
Our QB's have talent we need a system that fits their talent!
Click to expand...
Don't disagree with that... but I think they could have played in the system had their supporting cast been better. If the OL can't hold blocks for more than 2 seconds... You can't make that system work... or Kiffin's.
I mean two years ago our O-Line we had a good rushing season and then all of a sudden we had a pathetic rushing season?
Click to expand...
Ummm, what? UT was74th nationally and 9th in the SEC that year. They won because of the quick passing game.
And did we not return all the starters from that year on the O-Line?
Click to expand...

Yes a bunch of guys who couldn't run block or give the QB 3 seconds.
 
#89
#89
sjt18 said:
Because the system worked everywhere else it was tried... including the NFL. Just because it didn't "click" in one year, doesn't mean it could not have been an effective system once the players were fully acclimated to it... which takes longer with some systems than others. Also, UT didn't have ideal players for the system but the former O staff was on the way to signing them.

For example, UF avg'd less than 30 ppg in Meyer's first year there... and he had better players than UT had last year.

OK... what ever you say...:whistling:

Same guy took a bad Richmond program, turned them around, and put them in the FCS championship game... but his system doesn't work 'cause you say so. Don't disagree with that... but I think they could have played in the system had their supporting cast been better. If the OL can't hold blocks for more than 2 seconds... You can't make that system work... or Kiffin's.
Ummm, what? UT was74th nationally and 9th in the SEC that year. They won because of the quick passing game.

Yes a bunch of guys who couldn't run block or give the QB 3 seconds.
Click to expand...

See my last post. That was not the 'true' Clawfense . Phil hamstrung Clawson...it was only elements of his O . The Clawfense sucked at Richmond year 1 , moderate success year 2 and 3 and worked year 4 . I agree execution was the issue , but due to the offenses complex nature and the fact the CPF would not give DC freedom to run HIS offense ...it would have taken 10 years to find itself .
 
#90
#90
sjt18 said:
Ummmm.... nope. A run game is when you can run when you need to. UT couldn't... and especially not against credible defenses.
Click to expand...

Very few teams can run outta mixed protection with 8 guys in the box . I think the run game failure was direct result of the passing game failure . 6 - 7 guys in the box they would run just fine . But they did not get that because teams dared them to pass. When the changed to max protect against Vandy and KY and abandoned the pass and went with the zone read option ...they ran just fine because they compensated for the extra guys in the box.
 
#91
#91
sjt18 said:
Because the system worked everywhere else it was tried... including the NFL. Just because it didn't "click" in one year, doesn't mean it could not have been an effective system once the players were fully acclimated to it... which takes longer with some systems than others. Also, UT didn't have ideal players for the system but the former O staff was on the way to signing them.

For example, UF avg'd less than 30 ppg in Meyer's first year there... and he had better players than UT had last year.

OK... what ever you say...:whistling:

Same guy took a bad Richmond program, turned them around, and put them in the FCS championship game... but his system doesn't work 'cause you say so. Don't disagree with that... but I think they could have played in the system had their supporting cast been better. If the OL can't hold blocks for more than 2 seconds... You can't make that system work... or Kiffin's.
Ummm, what? UT was74th nationally and 9th in the SEC that year. They won because of the quick passing game.

Yes a bunch of guys who couldn't run block or give the QB 3 seconds.
Click to expand...

Um 2007 Arian Foster had almost 1200 yards, last year he had 570. With the exact same offensive Line! That would tell me that it was the SYSTEM!
I dont care if we were 9th in the SEC, 1200 yards for a back is good to me!

Serious question: In Kiffin's Offense with a Pro Style Offense, Aren't the O-Line zone blocking?

And Clawsen's Offense Line blocking was based highly on tyring to get a mismatch by flip flopping O-Lineman?

I think Clawsen's Offense was way to complex for him to put in effect in 1 year. That is his fault! He should have done some things that incorporated what we were already doing and slowly work his complex offense into the program. When you dont have the Talent to run what you want you have to try and coach to what talent you have! That is were he failed. Instead of working with Crompton and the O-Line he kept trying to get them to understand something they did not understand.
When Fulmer was let go, do you remember the interview that he said he wished he would have hired the other OC that he interviewed because his system was closer to what Tennessee was already doing.
So the point of my argument was I think the O-Line will get back to doing what they are comfortable doing and we will be just fine next year.:peace2:
 
#92
#92
Our offense will be fine. Actually, if you look at USC's offense, it is pretty simple. Everyone that is bashing Clawson will see an awesome offense in 2 years at BG (I think that is where he went). Just because our guys couldnt pick up the offense doesnt mean that it isnt good.
With that being said, I believe that we have a lot better athletes to work with this next year as well.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top