Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke, Class of 20Something
BJWilliams wrote:I dont either. I think we could run an offense similar to Oregon, though. We showed when we go uptempo good things can happen. We have a guy in Masha who I think is fully capable of running a more fast paced offense with much more misdirection in the backfield, and when defenses come up to stop the run, make the throws that can stretch the field (as long as the receivers catch them of course)Put the crack pipe down and slowly back away......
GillsHill2013 wrote:Are we spread or are we a power team? Quarterback going to run or be pro style. Misdirection or downhill. In some ways we try to do all these. We need to decide what we are, recruit for that type of offense, and begin to develop playersto fit a scheme. I think liberty would do well with a read option scheme.We have no identity on offensive philosophy and that is entirely on the coaches, beginning at the top.
BJWilliams wrote:Im saying go for an uptempo faster paced offense. To be able to do that though, you need an athletic quarterback who can put the ball in the hands of the playmakers in space, but can pull the ball down and run off the zone read, which is the foundational play in a lot of those Oregon style offenses. you need a running back who can get the tough yards, but is capable of busting off a big run when he gets the ball off that initial read. you need receivers who, when the QB gets you the ball in space, SECURE the ball, with your hands (as obvious as that sounds, we have guys who STILL seem to struggle with that basic concept) and and then can make defenders miss and get big chunks of yards, and athletic linemen who can handle getting up and down the field and won't need oxygen tanks after a couple drivesAre you serious?
bluejacket wrote:As I said...BJWilliams wrote:Im saying go for an uptempo faster paced offense. To be able to do that though, you need an athletic quarterback who can put the ball in the hands of the playmakers in space, but can pull the ball down and run off the zone read, which is the foundational play in a lot of those Oregon style offenses. you need a running back who can get the tough yards, but is capable of busting off a big run when he gets the ball off that initial read. you need receivers who, when the QB gets you the ball in space, SECURE the ball, with your hands (as obvious as that sounds, we have guys who STILL seem to struggle with that basic concept) and and then can make defenders miss and get big chunks of yards, and athletic linemen who can handle getting up and down the field and won't need oxygen tanks after a couple drivesAre you serious?
Purple Haize wrote:BJWilliams wrote:I dont either. I think we could run an offense similar to Oregon, though. We showed when we go uptempo good things can happen. We have a guy in Masha who I think is fully capable of running a more fast paced offense with much more misdirection in the backfield, and when defenses come up to stop the run, make the throws that can stretch the field (as long as the receivers catch them of course)Put the crack pipe down and slowly back away......
jimflamesfan wrote:You know what play made me the most upset? When the game was tied at 3 & LU was about at the 40 of the Sycamores...we had been running the ball and being really conservative until this point...so I thought to myself...well...at least if we're conservative and run it three times we'll be able to kick a long FG. At that point...we tried the WR sreen...to make it even better we threw it backwards so it' was a lateral...that way when the receiver droped it we lost 10 yards, and were out of fg range (besides almost giving the other team the ball.)That sequence epitomized the offense today. An awful play call, poor throw from Woodrum, and a drop by Henderson all in rapid succession. 1st and five and we run a lateral screen.
SuperJon wrote:We changed the game plan? I thought we continued to force the run and throw horrible screens.We didn't change the game plan at all. We played poorly and ran into a team with a pulse....
Purple Haize wrote:I don't know offensive schemes in football but I do know it isn't the Wishbone and certainly not what Oregon runs. What I do know is that it is currently not that important. Yes, it would be great to have an offensive or defensive 'Identity' but how many teams really do?We have an identity on defense (its a lot more than simply repeating "bend don't break" throughout every TV and radio broadcast) and our conservative 4-3 defense got exposed. Spread us out, pass short, and you will kill our defense in the red zone. The linebackers can't cover in space, most of the secondary can't tackle, and the defensive line play is erratic. A lot of defensive coaches made comparisons between Mike Perish and Taylor Heinicke. That game completely exposed the weaknesses of that identity and was the key to yesterday's game. So why didn't we learn and make the necessary corrections? If ODU doesn't repeatedly turn the ball over in the red zone, the score is the same as it was yesterday.
Purple Haize wrote:What is more important is our players executing things they should. Specifically, catching the football. Play 'What If.....' On some of those drops and the times in the game they occured. The cumulative effect was to change the game plan on the fly, which leads to hesitation on the QB which leads to stagnate offense.This goes back to the player/coach responsibility debate. They both are to blame. Ultimately I blame the coaches more since it is their responsibility to teach the players to become football players by constantly improving the fundamentals (tackling, catching, passing, etc.), formulate and execute gameplans that win games, and put the team in the best position to succeed based on the team's individual and collective talent.
I do think we are very stale offensively, but it's hard to be creative when your players can't catch a pass.