|
Post by spreadattack on Nov 26, 2007 18:28:14 GMT -6
I like Mizzou's O. Only saw them a couple other times. Lots of gadgets and fun quads stuff. I imagine some on this board run stuff pretty similar to what they do.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 13, 2007 22:13:21 GMT -6
This is a very good article. I'm always amazed at the House that Mumme built - Leach (HC TTech), Hatcher (HC Valdosta and, GVSt right?), Morris (HC Ky, Baylor, now?), and Franklin (now OC at Auburn, and of course, the Tony Franklin of, well, Tony Franklin fame). Literally they had five offensive coaches (Mumme QBs, Franklin RBs, Hatcher TEs/QBs, Leach WRs, and Morris OL) and within 10 years each has been or is a HC, except for Franklin who just landed one of the most plum jobs.
Especially since at the time all five (including Mumme) were unknown D-II coach types. Franklin was a HS coach. Anyway, thanks again.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 4, 2008 8:15:46 GMT -6
Whether intentionally or not, the kid at the end of the game made a good play by getting tackled at the one. I couldn't tell if he was really going for it though, but then the announcers started saying how he should have REACHED THE BALL OUT to score. I mean, let's recap: KU up 3, only about 40-50 seconds remaining, VT no timeouts, and the guy had just gotten a first down. VT's offense wasn't looking pretty, but their only prayer of winning would have been a frantic 40-50 seconds of throwing the ball downfield, which they could only do if KU scored. VT did have some big athletic receivers, they just didn't have the schemes/QB to get them the ball on anything other than jump balls.
Or imagine if the kid had "reached the ball out" and had it knocked away and out of the back of the end zone? First down VT at the 20, down only 3. Anyway, moot point anyway but those announcers blew me away with saying the kid should have tried to reach the ball out to score. Like I said, I couldn't tell if he just got tackled or knew he didn't need to score (maybe he saw Brian Westbrook a few weeks back), but the announcers totally blew it.
And anyway, I didn't get to see every minute but KU played well. VT had some horses on O and D, and they make you play their brand of football. KU rose to the challenge, blocked the FG, made a lot of plays on D, and did enough on O to win without making big mistakes. I could be wrong but if I was HS coach looking to maybe go spread I'd have to think that's a staff I want to visit, since their offense has had such success with an undersized, young QB, and they are able to handle much of the playcalls from the sidelines.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 24, 2006 9:49:04 GMT -6
Can anyone provide any insight into his no-back philosophy that someone on here mentioned? Thanks
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 2, 2007 13:40:14 GMT -6
I've seen Stoops outcoached in every major bowl game since the National Championship game against FSU, and that's only because that FSU team (Mark Richt had just left) did one of the worst coaching jobs in the history of ever. I remember being on the West Coast after USC shelacked OU by about 50 in the BCS game and Bill Walsh wrote an article for the L.A. Times detailing all the ways USC outcoached OU, from Norm Chow (who he gave enormous props to) to Pete Carroll's D to even OU had the wrong cleats for the field. Let's also not forget LSU outcoaching THE GREATEST TEAM EVER according to the USA Today. (I still remember the Jet sweep for a TD LSU ran against an OU inside dog blitz that was a thing of beauty.)
It's amazing to me that OU has gotten more and more mediocre while getting better and better athletes. OU was so lucky too, do you remember them wasting their last timeout of the 2nd half with about 5 minutes to go?
Zabransky needs to send the coaching staff (and backup QB!) thank you cards for redeeming him from permanent exile in GOAT-land.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 25, 2006 12:27:27 GMT -6
Colt actually spent a couple days in jail... not sure how you serve time for "assault" after being charged with sexual assault, but that's neither here nor there. People don't talk about it but Gary Barnett ran one of the worst run programs for a few years. Did anyone see the recent article about the female kicker they had? Unsure of how true the allegations are, but she said she endured abuse, sexual assault, etc. They asked Barnett and his quote was "We all know she was a terrible kicker...she couldn't kick at all." Classy.
Regarding Hawaii, people forget that the lesser programs tend to really have to stretch to get talent. Lots of castoffs and sordid background. You have the guys no one else wanted to recruit, and then the guys everyone recruited but had too many grade/character issues.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jul 11, 2006 8:35:44 GMT -6
Biggest con is what you expect out of Y in the running game. Many good teams leave their receivers on opposite sides. The Colts leave X and Z on opposite sides and just change Y/H. The Airraid guys just use Y.
The problem comes if Y is your tight end position and you can't have your formation strength to both sides. If you run power, some counters, maybe even zones this could be an issue. The Airraid guys are obviously not concerned about this, since they don't use Y in the run game and their runs are deceptions, quick dives and traps, or draws.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 19, 2007 18:17:55 GMT -6
I was at the mall the other day and I saw a person run into my truck. by the it got down the parking lot they had backed up and sped off. so much for christmas cheer there. is it me or are people just ruder this time of year. It seems chirstmas shopping has become like katrina, every peron for themselves. then I hear the other day on ebay a guy got 9100 dollars for guitar hereos part seven billion. $9100 dollars would have boughen a lot of toys for poor children. And we thought discussing the coaching changes at D-1 schools was off topic.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Nov 28, 2006 19:57:53 GMT -6
Depends what is being discussed, and who is speaking. I find most speakers, even informative ones, have not planned their talks all that well, so this makes things a bit difficult. For most Xs and Os discussions I think it's best to write down as much of what they say and draw out diagrams because these tend to throw the most information at you in the quickest period of time. My initial notes usually look like a mess but then I will try to recopy and clean them up within 24 hours, hopefully before I've forgotten what the notes mean.
For more general clinic talks I mostly just try to listen and jot down anything of use or that strikes me (i.e. talks on gameplanning, or motivation, or preparation, or building a team, etc versus some stunt out of a 3-3 stack look). If I'm really gungho about a particular speaker or I know I'll be unfamiliar with something I try to do a little research ahead of time--I find if I know zero about the area a coach is speaking about their clinic talk on some specific thing just passes me by. If it's some kind of zone blocking technique I probably won't understand it if I don't even know how zone blocking works; if it's a zone-blitz I probably won't appreciate it if I don't understand the overall principles of the 4-3 or 3-4 or whatnot that it is being shown from; etc. I don't need to know it beforehand but it's tough to catch the details if you don't know anything about that area. Again this is only when I get a list of general topics and there are some that particularly interest me.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Aug 1, 2006 6:59:07 GMT -6
I'm an "ex"-QB, and my basic philosophy on football is: Winning football is entirely dependand upon your ability to Run the football, while stopping your opponent from running the football. Well, I think this is tied to "competitive football games." If the other team can just run it down your throat then they are going to do that because it's so easy. Now, once your run defense is good enough that they can't just run 3 plays in a row and get 1st down after 1st down, the game gets more interesting.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jul 31, 2006 20:38:20 GMT -6
I agree it's the latter.
As Dan Henning said in his Carolina playbook:
"Football, in any classification is a percentage game. A Quarterback who goes against percentages too often will fail. He'll have to be extremely lucky. No one figures to be that lucky due to so many extenuating circumstances involved in a 22 man game.
The following rules for play calling have been established for the Panthers to reduce the margin for tactical error. Errors in play calling will kill us quicker than mistakes in any other phase of football.
60% run 40% pass
The above percentage between pass and run is the healthy approach to pro football in any tightly played football game. To run more than 60% of the time will result in low scoring unless we are definitely superior. To pass more than 40% could mean costly losses as the result of failure in pass protection with loss of ball possession and field position due to interceptions."
It's not any more complicated than that. Running the ball does all those good things like controlling the ball, etc but you will not average enough per play and hence will not score enough to win. To score points you need to throw the ball, but passing carries with it the risk of sacks, fumbles and interceptions. That's it. To score points you max out your average per play and throw more, but if you throw too much you may turn it over too much to win.
Football is a simple game. The whole bit about total rushing and passing stuff is for tv commentators
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Nov 20, 2006 18:17:14 GMT -6
It might not even be that bad but I recently saw "Pre-business," and it made me laugh since I'd never heard of it before. Pre-med or pre-law, yes. Pre-business? No.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Apr 10, 2007 17:31:23 GMT -6
One thing that bears noting that if you say OL is the most important position, maybe that means that your OC (or HC) should NOT coach OL because they necessarily will be distracted by other duties and positions. During team practice the OC has to focus on the whole offense, and may not be able to always closely watch his OL.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Nov 2, 2005 9:17:33 GMT -6
I totally agree that track is key for these kids. It's important to be realistic with many of these kids. Sure, you'd like them to put in some kind of "all-football" workouts throughout the year, and they should be working speed etc on their own but track will force them to work and run every single day. It is important to keep the lifting up as well.
Also, at least if they are skill guys, I have always said that they can't just do high-jump, etc. It defeats the purpose if your kids are just going out and doing 10 jumps and going home when the point was to make them run, etc. Obviously we encourage them to do the shorter events--it doesn't really help us if our football players are running the two mile...
Brophy, I envy you, I don't think any track coaches I've been around (even some that coached football too!) would appreciate us breaking out in OLine drills during track practice!
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jun 28, 2007 7:47:47 GMT -6
its funny, as an OC, I just got a new RB's coach last week.... Him and I are meeting like crazy to get him caught up and ready for our upcoming minicamp... He is having a hard time learning the system and I am finding out here is the reason why.... Everything in my entire scheme is about keeping things as simple as possible for the OL..... Really I only have two formations, Pro and Twin and the kids know where they adjust on every formation..... We run no huddle and the only thing that the lineman hear is what effects them in the playcall... Our number system is series based and tells the OL what exactly to do.... The thinking is left for the QB mostly and then secondly the skilled kids..... Covering the gap between his old terminology and mine is proving difficult, but he is getting it..... I guess the moral of the story is the last guys you want thinking are the guys up front..... I agree, but it is interesting how without a doubt the position in the NFL who does the best on the Wonderlic intelligence test are the OL. I guess the moral is just it's important to keep it easy for the OL because it can get complicated very quickly if you don't pay special attention to keeping it simple.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jun 18, 2007 9:39:04 GMT -6
All of the above is great planning advice and will help you stay organized throughout your install process. I think you need to decide what your running game staple is going to be. Is it IZ/OZ, is it iso & power, is it the triple option? Make that decision and pick your four best run plays that you will go into each week with and install those first. Those plays will need the most reps. Then decide what other run plays you want and add those a little at a time. Do the same thing with your passing and screen game. I always install the play-action pass right along with the run play. That being said, if I may offer some other advice to help you get the best possible handle of the offense. Make a new offensive playbook. If you are using an older one, re-write it and make it up to date. Find a format for one that you like, or simple re-do the one you already have. nothing teaches you the in's and out's of your offense like putting it all on paper. I recently re-wrote ours and I learned new stuff about my own offense. Make sure your philosophy is written down and the other coaches understand what you are trying to accomplish on offense. My play book is very detailed and I would never give a full copy to any of our kids, it would simply overwhelm them. I feel a good comprehensive play book is more of a "Coaches' Reference Book." We won't run everything in our book each year because we might not have a moblie QB some years, but more of a drop back pocket passer. Other years, we may have a stud athlete at QB and run a bit more option and sprint out. Its not changing our offense or anything, it's simply adapting to your kids and giving them the best chance to win. I think this is good too. If you can't make sense of your own system, it's not a system. And if your playbook is so big that it is too overwhelming to put together, then maybe it is too big. The other thing that is good - and Ted Seay has done this to his Wild Bunch stuff - is after you're done you can go back and take inventory of your offense. How many inside runs, outside runs, 3-step, and 5-step, but then you also ask how many horizontal stretches you have, how many vertical stretches, how many cover 3 beaters, how many cover 2 beaters. How many different run actions you have, blocking schemes. How many powers, traps, zones, etc. You will get some perspective on what you have too much of, not enough enough, etc. This is good self analysis.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jun 18, 2007 7:41:50 GMT -6
Plan backwards. Make a list of what you would like to have in by the first game in order of priority, and print a calendar which lists all of your practice/meeting time before that first game. Work backwards from the first game to the first day of practice to schedule your installation. Err on the side of less and build in days where you are installing nothing new. From your install schedule, then make a practice/meeting schedule for every session describing exactly how each individual position, group and the team will learn and rep each of the skills necessary to perform what was installed that day. Great advice for almost anything. Figure out where you want to be, and then figure out how to get there day by day.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 26, 2007 14:40:59 GMT -6
It makes a difference. How much? Good coaching and discipline can overcome it. Hence Tiller, etc. But of course it's easier to throw the ball in nice weather. Side wind can be a problem, cold can be a problem, a slicked rain can be a problem.
Again, how much? QB hand size is important, as is overall discipline. I mean, even sunny weather can present problems with the QB and/or receivers looking into the sun and cant see the ball. The elements are part of the game. I think "moot" is too strong a word, but evidence shows they can be overcome.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 22, 2008 13:13:03 GMT -6
Yeah, absolutely wild timing. The world is a wild place...
|
|
|
WVU "O"
Nov 3, 2006 11:27:44 GMT -6
Post by spreadattack on Nov 3, 2006 11:27:44 GMT -6
I will say that, from an offensive standpoint, the difference offensively between these two teams is and will continue to be the gun spread's biggest deficiency--they simply cannot recreate what great play action teams do. Brohm had 350 yards on 19 completions. Look at Peyton Manning, who essentially runs a "gun offense" in the Pros. Meyer is trying to work in more play action now at Florida, but it simply is not the same. Is this hurting WVU? Not really, but it will always inhibit any true gun-spread team. All offenses are trade-offs but to me, this has always been a tough one.
|
|
|
WVU "O"
Nov 3, 2006 11:24:04 GMT -6
Post by spreadattack on Nov 3, 2006 11:24:04 GMT -6
White runs as well as a runningback and throws as well as a backup quarterback Coach - I have to disagree...if anything, White showed that he CAN throw well last night...kid completed 65% of his passes for 200+ yards in an offense that was built to run the ball...you EXPECT Brohm to throw for 300+...that's what they do at L-ville. But White? Sure, you expect the big game running the ball, but I'll bet that NO ONE thought the kid could throw as well as he did last night against one of the best teams in NCAA D-IA. Well, he made a few throws I was impressed with--I think he threw a deep comeback off a sprint out late in the game that was on the money, etc. But the run game was rocking and rolling, so it doesn't totally surprise me. I think you'd agree he clearly is not an NFL caliber passer--at least not now. This is not a knock against him--they are a dominant offense and it exhibits my "balance" principle as I discuss on my site--their run game is so good and their pass game is well designed. But they are only a top team when they are running for around ~300 yards. The fact is they are amazingly able to do this against almost everyone. But let's not confuse that with his raw, in a vacuum, passing ability. I'm just saying that Brohm is so on the far end of good quarterbacks that it instantly and immediately makes your pass game so dangerous that you can use players who can specialize in run plays so well. This is why there are few "hybrids" in the NFL--it is so hard to get to NFL caliber level of quarterbacking, and there just aren't many guys who can throw/read that well and also run. If it happens, they will win a lot of games. WVU's run game and Pat White is so good it's killing people. Make no mistake WVU is running the ball right now like no one has since the Nebraska championship teams.
|
|
|
WVU "O"
Nov 3, 2006 10:16:11 GMT -6
Post by spreadattack on Nov 3, 2006 10:16:11 GMT -6
I'll take Brohm because of comparative advantage--White runs as well as a runningback and throws as well as a backup quarterback--I feel like I can do more letting Brohm throw like an NFL QB and letting runners as good as White handle the running duties. That said if Brohm had the footwork of even an Alex Smith or someone it'd be incredible. But while you want guys who can do a lot of things well, I personally feel in the end you win more games who are exceptional at what they do do.
That said White is a player, he's only a sophomore, and WVU is going to be tough to beat as long as he is there.
The thing I like also is that both offenses used their players so well. Louisville's offense is so well-crafted and Brohm so well suited to what they do, and WVU is so dangerous with Slaton and White (and the FB!) in the backfield faking and reading.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Nov 1, 2006 9:24:24 GMT -6
My two cents: At bare, the shoot relies on a few principles:
(1) a moving quarterback (or rolling) can be more effective than a stationary one;
(2) formations should be simple, not give away what play is to come, balanced, and when they are not balanced motion should be used to expose the defense's weaknesses, and
(3) receivers should be given flexibility to adjust their routes based on coverages--the packages are just an attempt to systematize and make sure that all 4 receivers not only find their best individual route, but each adjust to make the best pass play against the defense.
The modern pro-spread or college style-gun-spread or the Airraid offenses, to me, are really more of "make it what you want" offenses, with no true underlying principles like the shoot. There is nothing wrong with this, as most offenses fall into this category and their advantage is they can adopt and integrate new ideas quickly on the fly. Airman's description is accurate--I'd say from a passing standpoint most spread teams would rather have the QB check at the line or let a single receiver (option routes) adjust on the field, and you'll often see a big difference between good and bad spread teams is in the skill of the playcaller. In the R&S, if its working great, it can make an average playcaller look like a genius (which is not taking away a coach's skill, but is really is just emphasizing the other half of coaching--the weekly prep.).
Versus the wing-t? I'd say they are similar in that both the R&S and the wing-t look to have a cohesive package with some underlying philosophies--the wing-t's being more about an attack centered on faking and misdirection or surprising the defense with overwhelming numbers at the point of attack, or some combination. The wing-t becomes a bit more of a coordinated dance with precise steps, whereas the R&S is fluid and reactionary.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 11, 2008 13:40:55 GMT -6
I agree about visiting Missouri. They do plenty of good stuff from the gun run game (grab that bowl tape!) and they focus on the quick passing game. The first thing you need to do is understanding why you are spreading. This is not just the idea of "speed in space," but that is part of it. Most of the best gun-run teams (Northwestern under Randy Walker, Urban Meyer, etc) have a lot of traditional run game and I concepts in there. To me, the best way to think about the spread is that you are either (a) taking the fullback out and making him another receiver, or (b) splitting the tight end out to loosen the defense and define the reads. Then when you add the shotgun it can transform your QB into another runningback, or at least a running threat. The first thing you can do is just think about your running game (a) from 3-wide I form, and (b) from 3-wide 1-back gun. From the first think about your base midline schemes and etc and how it should define the reads for your QB - you can run the reads to either side and if they need loosening you can throw quicks to those guys. From the 3-wide 1-back gun try to think about your traditional runs (apart from say midline) where your QB becomes the second runner. I.e. the zone read, counters, etc. That's all you're really doing. It's nothing magical. But it can be effective. If you want to learn about the quick passing game read this book: www.amazon.com/Footballs-Quick-Passing-Game-Vol/dp/1585181935
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 22, 2006 17:33:02 GMT -6
Roethlisberger just whipped up on the Broncos. What type of offense did he play in during his time at Miami of Ohio? Just wondering. Pro-style one back. 3 WRs, and 1 TE, 2 TEs with H-back motions, etc. They were a very good play action passing team when he was there, ran the ball better than you'd expect too.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 22, 2006 10:42:09 GMT -6
I've heard lots of good stuff about the kid. Obviously he's a competitor. M. Vick never lead the NCAA in passing efficiency, though sitting this kid for a season like Carson Palmer/McNair is probably a good move. If nothing else, one of the other problems with throwing a kid out in the NFL before he is ready is he takes a lot of shots, particularly someone as good of a scrambler as Young is. Don't want to get the body used up while the mental part is still coming along.
Bottom line is this guy is a one man show and there is absolutely no reason he can't be an excellent NFL QB. I mean he can't carry an NFL team like he can a college one, but who can? (Look at Vick, Favre, etc).
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Mar 24, 2008 21:15:12 GMT -6
cool site
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 1, 2006 10:06:08 GMT -6
I think visiting a school/college/staff of some kind that runs what you want to run and watching practice is the best thing you can do, along with everything else mentioned. The question of "why switch" is a broad one...
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Oct 22, 2007 10:26:51 GMT -6
I like this from veer against certain defenses. A 4-4 team can be vulnerable here because, very importantly, you are spreading out the pitch read.
This is my favorite thing about using a slot with the veer. That said, you might be able to achieve this with simple twins. But widening the pitch read can be very good for a young QB (especially against teams that crash them).
Depends how the D will adjust to your formation though. But that's the number one reason for doing this.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jul 5, 2006 15:12:22 GMT -6
I don't really want to get involved in this thread too much, but just basically I think once a year, possibly in the spring, coaches should give a short talk about "playing football at the next level" and briefly highlight of course D-1, but make sure to point out the very low numbers there and that most D-1 players are recruited very very early and not only are standouts but also have certain physical tools. Not much you can do about it one way or another. Then highlight the other avenues, D-II, III, Ivy Leagues (who don't give scholarships but will let in bright but not spectacular kids who play sports), etc and then offer to talk further with anyone interested. I think this is important since lots of kids have big hopes and dreams but don't really know anything.
One thing that could be improved is the whole tape thing but I'm not really sure what to say. Coaches seem to be expected to make a tape for every single kid on the roster which is just not feasible or fair. I've had kids get some of the tapes and make their own but not that many. Also, kids should remember that Colleges are trying to evaluate them, and a highlight tape is not always the way to go. I remember talking with Terry Bowden back a number of years ago and he mentioned taking a kid who only threw 90 passes in each of his junior and senior years, but he made a tape with every single one of the 90 passes, not just the highlights. Now, if you throw some terrible interception maybe that really shouldn't make it on the tape, but you get what I mean.
Kinda off topic, sorry. Distracted day.
|
|