Revisionist History

[AE 87]

IMO, the problem with our offense is not the offensive line. We line up in the same formation for almost every play. CPJ sends in a play and it looks like we run it as called almost all the time.

More and more I see good defensive teams stunting to disrupt our option flow. They don't telegraph what they are doing.

We are becoming very predictable.

And true, we don't have a problem against teams without solid defenses, but we have lost a lot of games over the past two years because our offense has not been able to move the ball and eat the clock to put the ballgame away - VA Tech, Miami, Clemson, UGA, etc.

And, I will admit that not having a stud QB like Josh to get the two or three yards when we need them has been a big part of the problem with running ball control offense.

But, if you don't have that guy, you need to go to something that doesn't need him.

What scheme do you want to go to which will be more successful against a top 15 defense without star play-makers? Only FSU, Georgie and SCar scored as many against Clemson as we did this year. We scored over 30 against everyone except VPI, BYU and Pitt (two top 5, top 10 D's and our 8th straight FBS game). Last year we scored 30 or more against everybody except VPI, BYU, Georgie, FSU, and USC (and MTSU).

Do you really believe that you can change the offensive scheme to something else that will be more successful against top 25 teams without special play-makers? Over the last 3 years, after most of the 2007 class was gone, we've still averaged a top 25 offense and the #17 offense for the three years combined.

Here are the offenses better than us over the last 3 yrs:
Bay, A&M, Bama, Ore, Wisc, Georgie, OKSt, LSU, Miami, Stanf, Clem, ND, OK, FSU, tOSU, Mich.

Which of them is bringing in talent comparable to ours to show that their scheme is better than ours? (I think Baylor is the only one)

 

[AE 87]

Oh, and Baylor's done it with RGIII and now Brice Petty projected to be the top QB in the country next year.

 

[johncu]

What scheme do you want to go to which will be more successful against a top 15 defense without star play-makers? Only FSU, Georgie and SCar scored as many against Clemson as we did this year. We scored over 30 against everyone except VPI, BYU and Pitt (two top 5, top 10 D's and our 8th straight FBS game). Last year we scored 30 or more against everybody except VPI, BYU, Georgie, FSU, and USC (and MTSU).

Do you really believe that you can change the offensive scheme to something else that will be more successful against top 25 teams without special play-makers? Over the last 3 years, after most of the 2007 class was gone, we've still averaged a top 25 offense and the #17 offense for the three years combined.

Here are the offenses better than us over the last 3 yrs:
Bay, A&M, Bama, Ore, Wisc, Georgie, OKSt, LSU, Miami, Stanf, Clem, ND, OK, FSU, tOSU, Mich.

Which of them is bringing in talent comparable to ours to show that their scheme is better than ours? (I think Baylor is the only one)

How did you determine that those teams have "better" offenses? Scoring average? If so, that's not quite accurate. Teams like Clemson, Baylor, and many others play so fast that they will score a lot of points because of their pace. Your list has us 17th offensively, but I'd be surprised if we weren't higher on an efficiency-adjusted list.

 

[QuadF]

Who?

VT 2012, miami 2010-11, uga 11 are the ones that come to mind. I'd have to go back and check stats to make sure my memory isn't biased though.

 

[AE 87]

How did you determine that those teams have "better" offenses? Scoring average? If so, that's not quite accurate. Teams like Clemson, Baylor, and many others play so fast that they will score a lot of points because of their pace. Your list has us 17th offensively, but I'd be surprised if we weren't higher on an efficiency-adjusted list.

I totaled footballoutsiders' offensive F/+ for the last three years. That stat is opponent-adjusted and throws out plays/scores during garbage time. It is a combination of their FEI (primarily drive efficiency) and S&P+ (primarily play efficiency). I then sorted on the total.

For the season this year Baylor is scoring at a rate of 3.48 ppd (all opponents, not counting ends of half or safeties) while GT and Aubie are scoring 3.01 ppd (about what each did against georgie). Clemson is scoring 2.77 ppd.

Again like scoring offense, these ppd numbers are not adjusted by opponent, though unlike scoring offense, they only count scrimmage TDs (7 each) and FGs (3 each). We are 18th for 2013. We were 14th in 2011, 23rd in 2012.

 

[AE 87]

VT 2012, miami 2010-11, uga 11 are the ones that come to mind. I'd have to go back and check stats to make sure my memory isn't biased though.

VPI was #18 D in 2012, #17 in yd/play. Georgie was #5 in total D in 2011, #7 in ypp. Miami was #20 in ypp D in 10.

I think Miami is the best example of what you're talking about, but I'm not sure that there aren't other factors involved.

 

[QuadF]

VPI was #18 D in 2012, #17 in yd/play. Georgie was #5 in total D in 2011, #7 in ypp. Miami was #20 in ypp D in 10.

I think Miami is the best example of what you're talking about, but I'm not sure that there aren't other factors involved.

That's a fair point. Those games in particular I remember us being creamed at the line of scrimmage. There are a few others where similar results happened (byu last year) but I think they actually had a good defense last year.

Where did you grab the rankings? I did a quick google search, but perhaps i used the wrong terms...

 

[AE 87]

That's a fair point. Those games in particular I remember us being creamed at the line of scrimmage. There are a few others where similar results happened (byu last year) but I think they actually had a good defense last year.

Where did you grab the rankings? I did a quick google search, but perhaps i used the wrong terms...

I use cfbstats.com for a quick and handy look at the traditional stats. They also have some situational stats which is nice for looking a bit behind the numbers.

 

[1NYJacket]

There is nothing wrong with an option offense. What I find disappointing is our insistence on sticking with just one type of offensive set. Why can't we mix it up more?

Why can't we put in packages that take advantage of our best skill set? Can you imagine how effective we could be if we were able to move the ball with other formations and get the defense reacting to flow and then hit them with an option play? When we are running the B back into the jaws of an all American defensive lineman backed up by a NFL caliber linebacker over and over again hoping that something is going to change it is frustrating.

But, I guess I will have to be happy with my way or no way from CPJ.

I guess, Bobby Dodd spoiled me with his willingness to use every formation being run in his time. And, he ruined me by adding new wrinkles to them. But, then again, I guess that’s why his name is on the stadium.

But, I do know that defensive coaches hated to have to prepare for him because they never knew what was coming.

Dodd even told one of his teams just before kickoff with Auburn that Auburn was probably 3 touchdowns better than his team based upon an analysis of player personnel.
But, he also told them that his game plan had taken that into account and all that was necessary was to go out and execute.

Final result Auburn lost.

So, you see it is possible to win games against teams stacked with stars but you need to be able to develop a plan to attack them at their weakest point. And that is what a really good coach can do.

His QB's and his players were taught to recognize what the defense was going to do and communicate among themselves so plays and even formations could be changed at the LOS. The only reason he never scored 100 points in a game is because he didn't want to.
He never wanted to embarrass an opposing coach.

CPJ is OK but he could be a lot better.

 

[johncu]

There is nothing wrong with an option offense. What I find disappointing is our insistence on sticking with just one type of offensive set. Why can't we mix it up more?

Why can't we put in packages that take advantage of our best skill set? Can you imagine how effective we could be if we were able to move the ball with other formations and get the defense reacting to flow and then hit them with an option play? When we are running the B back into the jaws of an all American defensive lineman backed up by a NFL caliber linebacker over and over again hoping that something is going to change it is frustrating.

But, I guess I will have to be happy with my way or no way from CPJ.

I guess, Bobby Dodd spoiled me with his willingness to use every formation being run in his time. And, he ruined me by adding new wrinkles to them. But, then again, I guess that’s why his name is on the stadium.

But, I do know that defensive coaches hated to have to prepare for him because they never knew what was coming.

Dodd even told one of his teams just before kickoff with Auburn that Auburn was probably 3 touchdowns better than his team based upon an analysis of player personnel.
But, he also told them that his game plan had taken that into account and all that was necessary was to go out and execute.

Final result Auburn lost.

So, you see it is possible to win games against teams stacked with stars but you need to be able to develop a plan to attack them at their weakest point. And that is what a really good coach can do.

His QB's and his players were taught to recognize what the defense was going to do and communicate among themselves so plays and even formations could be changed at the LOS. The only reason he never scored 100 points in a game is because he didn't want to.
He never wanted to embarrass an opposing coach.

CPJ is OK but he could be a lot better.

I think part of the problem with that is that we need to practice our offense a lot to run it effectively. I do agree that we need to pass better, but we don't necessarily need to switch to shotgun 4-wide to do that. The plays are there with our current formations - we just have to have the right players to run them, and the right coaches to teach the players.

 

[beej67]

1NYJacket, we did exactly what you're talking about. We did it this year. It watered down our base stuff so much that we weren't particularly good at anything.

Towards the second half of the year, we stripped a lot of our base stuff out, and focused on less base stuff and a more limited set of the shotgun stuff, and it worked.

"Revisionist History" is claiming CPJ is stubborn when he's actually done almost exactly all the things that fans over the last 6 years have wanted him to do. Even after saying he wasn't going to do them.

 

[lonestarjacket]

1NYJacket, we did exactly what you're talking about. We did it this year. It watered down our base stuff so much that we weren't particularly good at anything.

Towards the second half of the year, we stripped a lot of our base stuff out, and focused on less base stuff and a more limited set of the shotgun stuff, and it worked.

"Revisionist History" is claiming CPJ is stubborn when he's actually done almost exactly all the things that fans over the last 6 years have wanted him to do. Even after saying he wasn't going to do them.

I think that was mostly trying to adjust to a QB who was not particularly adept at the base stuff. The adjustments themselves didn't water down our base stuff or cause us not to be good at it. Rather, we attempted adjustments BECAUSE we were not particularly good at it.

Toward the second half of the year, we simply executed better.

CPJ is stubborn in that he is married to his particular system more than any coach at any level to any system. That is not in itself a bad thing. He knows it better and depends on being able to out-adjust any DC coming up with a counter.

The downfall of that approach and theory is when the players can't execute what he has in mind. When players can't read and react with speed then it becomes a guessing game with the opposing coach. When players can read and react with speed it becomes a juggernaut.

My only real complaint with CPJ is we were supposed to be further along by now in having players who can execute who were also familiar enough with the whole system to execute. My hope is we are just a little off schedule in that respect.

 

[1NYJacket]

With all due respect, I don't think we exactly what I was talking about. CPJ still called all the plays from the sideline. And, with the exception of lining up in the pistol or three back formation we did exactly what we had been doing since he got here.

How many read option plays from the spread did you see?

Did you see any sprint out pass plays with the B back or a pulling guard leading to block the defensive end?

Did you see any power plays with the B back lined up in the traditional full back position with a tailback deep?

Did you see us line up in any formations that would facilitate a bubble screen?

Maybe I missed them

 

[GTCrew4b]

With all due respect, I don't think we exactly what I was talking about. CPJ still called all the plays from the sideline. And, with the exception of lining up in the pistol or three back formation we did exactly what we had been doing since he got here.

How many read option plays from the spread did you see?

Did you see any sprint out pass plays with the B back or a pulling guard leading to block the defensive end?

Did you see any power plays with the B back lined up in the traditional full back position with a tailback deep?

Did you see us line up in any formations that would facilitate a bubble screen?

Maybe I missed them

I think it's just a matter of opinion. CPJ is of the mindset that its better to give as few tells as possible prior to the snap. You seem to like to line up the team in a way that would perhaps put them in the best position for the designed play, but good film study could yield tendencies in that respect I think both schools of thought have merit

I also think that DC's and defenses hate preparing for us too like they did when we had Dodd. You have to remember that film capabilities and the like are much better now than they were under Dodd. Being a jack of all trades but expert of none isn't that helpful.

 

[daBuzz]

I think it's just a matter of opinion. CPJ is of the mindset that its better to give as few tells as possible prior to the snap. You seem to like to line up the team in a way that would perhaps put them in the best position for the designed play, but good film study could yield tendencies in that respect I think both schools of thought have merit

I also think that DC's and defenses hate preparing for us too like they did when we had Dodd. You have to remember that film capabilities and the like are much better now than they were under Dodd. Being a jack of all trades but expert of none isn't that helpful.

We have tendencies that they exploit too. Just as an example, I went back and rewatched the Georgia game the other day. At one point, they stopped Godhigh for a short gain on a rocket toss and the announcer pointed out, "Notice how Georgia watches and, everytime they see Godhigh come in motion, they crash the play side safety up to stop the toss."

Theoretically, the play to call in that situation would be to throw it deep to the zone vacated by the safety, which we did early in the game. For some reason, we stopped throwing the ball as much in the second half...maybe we were trying to protect a lead instead of trying to be as aggressive and score more points.

 

[1NYJacket]

50 years ago, it was possible to change the play or even the formation at the LOS and communicate how to attack the defense and execute.

It can also be done today.

Watch Auburn when they play FSU.

 

[GTJackets530]

"Notice how Georgia watches and, everytime they see Godhigh come in motion, they crash the play side safety up to stop the toss."

Yep. I noticed the same thing, especially on the 3rd down toss to Godhigh in 2OT that went for a loss. I probably have watched that play 20 times. Right when Godhigh went in motion, the cornerback he was heading towards completely sold out against the run. He moved a few steps over until he wasn't even lined up near Summers and was able to run in unblocked before Summers could get near him to try and set a block. The linebacker and end on that side also crashed that way and basically came in unblocked as well, leading to Godhigh being triple team tackled the instant he caught the ball.

If that was a pass play off the motion, Vad could have lobbed the ball to the corner of the end zone for a wide open TD to Summers. Or hit the other A-back on a little curl route in the spot vacated by the LB. I agree with your comment that we seemed to get too conservative, and it seems at the end of the game UGA knew we were going to either win or lose on the ground. Not a great spot to be in when the other team is that much faster than you as well.

 

[GTCrew4b]

Yes but my point is they had to guess right because we run all our plays out of the same formation. They guessed we were running rocket toss. Prior to that it had been getting a few yards in the last drive. Probably due to our success passing. They gambled and won. I still think there could've been flags on the last play and the third down play prior to the missed FG.

I don't agree that we got conservative in the second half. Did we try to run more to shorten the game? Absolutely. But we only had 4 possessions and could've scored a TD on 2 of them if an obvious PI is called. On our last possession why would we want to give UGA the ball with time to score in regulation? The drive was clearly poised to get us in position to kick the GW FG as time expired. Unfortunately we just couldn't. Get 10 more yards.

This is also part of the problem with being unable to call triple because that's a play where even if you guess right, you can still be wrong, and its especially effective when it can be called for success bc then you can really set the def up to guess wrong.

 

[QuadF]

With all due respect, I don't think we exactly what I was talking about. CPJ still called all the plays from the sideline. And, with the exception of lining up in the pistol or three back formation we did exactly what we had been doing since he got here.

How many read option plays from the spread did you see?

Did you see any sprint out pass plays with the B back or a pulling guard leading to block the defensive end?

Did you see any power plays with the B back lined up in the traditional full back position with a tailback deep?

Did you see us line up in any formations that would facilitate a bubble screen?

Maybe I missed them

I'm not sure that it's accurate to say that it's the same play-calling for 6 years because he did or didn't call a set of plays that you wish he would've. I've noticed that the play-calling has changed a bit with each qb. I'm curious about what you've seen that's so consistent, as I don't quite agree.

In regards to specifics, we didn't really run any traditional spread. I think we ran some single option plays out of pistol, but I don't remember the typical read-option off of the top of my head.

sprint-out/roll-out pass plays are executed pretty often, but the bback is usually in charge of the OLB, iirc. We ran this several times against VT. I think we ran more of the roll-out passes with nesbitt.

haven't seen any hand-offs with the bback blocking. I do wish we had more of this, but then again, CPJ would prefer to pull a guard at the snap instead of lining up in a power run formation for the same reason that we run flexbone instead of iform.

I think i saw one bubble screen this year. I remember being rather surprised by it. CPJ mentioned on one of the call in's that the aback toss takes the place of the typical bubble screen (although someone more knowledgeable can probably explain the reasons better than i can.)

 

[GTLiebs]

I think that was mostly trying to adjust to a QB who was not particularly adept at the base stuff. The adjustments themselves didn't water down our base stuff or cause us not to be good at it. Rather, we attempted adjustments BECAUSE we were not particularly good at it.


My only real complaint with CPJ is we were supposed to be further along by now in having players who can execute who were also familiar enough with the whole system to execute. My hope is we are just a little off schedule in that respect.

I guess I have a little of a hard time believing that. I don't think I ever hear coaches going away from their base offense set just because their QB isn't good at it yet. This isn't accounting for a weak arm or poor mobility or some other talent-related issue. Maybe some players can guess on instinct better than others but option proficiency is all in the head, it can be taught.

In another thing, why should any particular amount of time matter in this? It's not like there is a steady accumulation of execution ability or something once a coach is hired, at least not in college where there is a constant rotation of players in and out. There is nothing that says that just because this year ended and next year began that our execution or talent or w/e is suppose to get better. Getting better each time is what everyone wants to see, but it isn't always feasible. Only place I would say that has been in the system long enough to disappoint on the execution is the O-line in my opinion.