CPJ still not happy with OL play

The O line looked better in the scrimmage. Justin had more time to throw in passing situations and if he was not in a no contact jersey it would have been better. The refs were pretty lax in letting the defense line up in the neutral zone which makes it tough on the offense. A definite improvement from the week before. Should be even better for the spring game. No doubt that Shamire needs to get in better shape.
 
Hopefully this years offensive line will rise to the occasion like the 2014 team's offensive line did that became dominant by the end of the 2014 season.
 
If Shamire can get his weight down, and stay healthy, he will be the ultimate answer at right guard. Right guard in this offense is the equivalent of the Left Tackle in a pro-style offense (it's what you begin to build the whole o-line around). You [the right guard] are gonna square off against the biggest, baddest run-stopping d-lineman of the opposing team every time. When Devine gets his block fitted correctly on a opposing d-lineman, there aren't many that can hold their ground against him. Of course, his weight loss and maintenance requires discipline and effort, and those are not as easily measured as strength, speed, and agility. I hope he sticks with his new training program and pulls it off.
 
optionqb said:
If Shamire can get his weight down, and stay healthy, he will be the ultimate answer at right guard. Right guard in this offense is the equivalent of the Left Tackle in a pro-style offense. You [the right guard] are gonna square off against the biggest, baddest run-stopping d-lineman of the opposing team every time. When Devine gets his block fitted correctly on a opposing d-lineman, there aren't many that can hold their ground against him. Of course, this all requires discipline and effort and those are not as easily measured as strength, speed, and agility. I hope he sticks with his new training program and pulls it off.
Click to expand...
Honest question... Why is the right guard more important than the left guard? I understand the importance of the left tackle in a drop back passing offense to protect a right-handed QB's blind side. Is there an analogous reason that the right side is more vulnerable in an option offense?
 
gtleviathan said:
Honest question... Why is the right guard more important than the left guard? I understand the importance of the left tackle in a drop back passing offense to protect a right-handed QB's blind side. Is there an analogous reason that the right side is more vulnerable in an option offense?
Click to expand...
If your qb is right handed, the right side probably sees the option more than the left since the right hand is the pitch hand. Would be interested in seeing which side we run the option to the most.
 
DressCheeseSideSeaboard said:
If your qb is right handed, the right side probably sees the option more than the left since the right hand is the pitch hand. Would be interested in seeing which side we run the option to the most.
Click to expand...
I always thought where we ran depended more on "boundary" side vs. "field" side but it makes sense that a right-handed QB would probably prefer going right.
 
I may be totally off on this, but I think it's because the dive goes to the right more than to the left. Even when the option goes to the left, it is usually a counter or some variation with the dive man still going right. Just seems to be what I remember seeing most.
 
gtleviathan said:
Honest question... Why is the right guard more important than the left guard? I understand the importance of the left tackle in a drop back passing offense to protect a right-handed QB's blind side. Is there an analogous reason that the right side is more vulnerable in an option offense?
Click to expand...

Even though the flexbone is a balanced formation, not all linemen are equal in ability. There will still typically be a "strong side" and "weak side" that is determined by quality of linemen rather than whether a tight end is located on the left or right. If you go back to say 2014 and watch GT games, you can see that the majority of runs are called to the right side behind Shaq Mason. Go even further back and they were called predominantly behind Uzzi. One of the best examples is the 2014 Georgia game. In overtime, they ran every play behind the right side (with only one play being an option). The rest were all power plays (Belly G). These power plays involved no post-snap reads...just a straight handoff to the B-back. To be fair, it does not have to be the right guard..it could be the left guard, but it should be ONE of the guards for the following reasons:

You can think of the right guard as the "go to" linemen where you want to run the football when you are relying on a matchup advantage for that play. Of course, doing it too much can be compensated for by the defense, but then that opens up other play-calling possibilities. If your best run blocking o-linemen is at right guard, then that should force your opponent to place their best run stopping d-linemen there. It is just one of the ways that Johnson can dictate where and how the opposing defense has to play him [Johnson]. If you cannot find a right guard that is a dominating player, then you probably don't dominate anywhere along the line and you are forced to rely much more on finesse/deception in your play-calling rather than outright strength (i.e. the necessary strategy of a weaker team). As Johnson has said before you can't out-trick your opponents all the time. You have to be able to line up and beat them SOMEWHERE with relative frequency.

Also, Right handed quarterbacks can also run play-action a little faster to the right (since they do not have to rotate any to set their feet for a throw). It may only buy you a fraction of a second, but that can mean the difference between the qb getting the ball thrown and getting hit with the ball still coming out of his hand. So, rolling your qb to the right more frequently requires pass protection to be more sound on the right, since they are actually required to pass block for a slightly longer duration to provide time for the qb.

Finally, the base play is the triple option. Most defenses have some interior d-lineman whose technique requires him to cover the guards. Most of the time it's some form of a 4-3 alignment. These players MUST be blocked if a crease is to be created for the B-back; ideally, they can be blocked by one o-linemen instead of a combo block with another o-lineman (thus the need for a game-changer at guard). You can option the next d-lineman out (the read key), but the d-lineman inside the read key must be neutralized or your just in for a very long day. This is the task for both guards, but you expect the right guard to do it right with the most frequency. If the right guard can't do it (because the defensive tackle is just too much of a beast), then you may have to run midline option and make the inside lineman the read key). When you do that you are pretty much conceding that your guards need help because they cannot be relied upon to block the defensive tackle with any frequency. On the other hand a right guard who can singlehandedly get movement on the DT and knock him off the ball is gonna make the B-back crease larger and larger, creating an easier read for both the qb read and b-back when he decides to make a cut. You might say, "Why not just run triple to the opposite side?". You can do that, but you typically do not have the matchup advantage at guard on the other side. It may work well form time to time, but it cannot be relied upon to work frequently against equal or better competition. Often it may require combo blocks from the center or tackle and this may impede the center or tackle from getting to the 2nd (or 3rd) level fast enough for a critical downfield block. Sorry to ramble on, but it basically comes down to having strength somewhere along the line. Since the guards take on the best run defenders on the line of scrimmage AND since this offense has a strong inside running component, then hopefully it's now more obvious why you'd want to have an area where a dominant o-lineman could make a big difference.
 
What about switching to a formation that allows for a little more creativity in the OL blocking? We almost never change formations. So, the defense is allowed to tee off when the ball is snapped. If our only way to run the ball is to have a "dominate" blocker on the LOS, we are in a world of hurt.
 
1NYJacket said:
What about switching to a formation that allows for a little more creativity in the OL blocking? We almost never change formations. So, the defense is allowed to tee off when the ball is snapped. If our only way to run the ball is to have a "dominate" blocker on the LOS, we are in a world of hurt.
Click to expand...

I'll admit that I've seen less and less of this during Johnson's tenure at GT. Adding new formations from which to run plays can complicate the blocking rules; this is something that Johnson may feel he needs to do less with better athletes. In theory this would allow athletes to play faster due to increases in decisiveness. This was his criticism of Groh's defensive scheme...people had to think too much during pre- and post-snap periods.

I was watching the offensive series of when Georgia Southern defeated Florida in 2013 (I think). I was amazed at how many formations that ran essentially the same plays out of. It was bewildering. Of course they really did have a more severe talent disparity between them and Florida as the Gators had one of the best statistical defenses in FBS. I'm sure that Johnson has to consider during the beginning of each new season the tradeoff between adding complexity verses diminishing execution. With a young team or a team with lots of injuries (or both), you'll be forced into simplicity against your will.

Even if you switch formations though, you'd still have a "strong side" and "weak side" on the interior line based on personnel. You can perform a lot of formation "hocus pocus" and still have a strategy of calling Belly G many times behind your best guard and tackle (be it left or right side).
 
The last two football seasons have proven two things.

1. Nobody knows jackshit (including coaches and players) about what is going to happen this fall. Now despite over one hundred years of data, countless experts measuring and studying every nuance, enough game film to gift wrap Jupiter, a statistical data base maintained by the same organization over thousands of players and tens of thousands of plays, and a controlled environment watched over by officials and media - THE SCIENCE IS NOT SETTLED. So obviously football is more complicated than the entirety of global weather. Can any of you tell me what the Settled Science Weather is going to be on any given Saturday this fall? Thought not. Much less football then.

2. There is something in this offense that approaches witchcraft. Sometimes, seemingly regardless of the ability or experience of the players, Johnson can harness the forces of football and make them do his bidding on the field. Other times, only weak forces cooperate or maybe they all just refuse. He really has no idea which it will be or how he is able to do it, so her performs the rituals each spring and summer and hopes for the best. When he fails, he fails gloriously and abjectly like he did last year. But when he masters the forces, when he whips them into harness, and turns them loose, they will devour any Power 5 defense. I give us two chances in three that he controls them this year.
 
I've seen several schools of thought on formations.

1. One where you match the formation best suited to what you wanted to do. Shotgun for passing. I formation to run. The drawback is that you tip your hand in playcalling to a degree. Another drawback is you need a lot of time to practice the different techniques for blocking.

2. Run every play out of the same formation so as not to tip your hand. The old oilers run-and-shoot looked this way. Urban Meyers and CPJ run just about everything out of the base formation with very little pre snap motion.
The Packers under Farve won a Superbowl running everything out of the two back, TE set with maybe the TE going in motion to flip the formation to its mirror image.
The drawback is the D rarely gives you any presnap information on what they are doing.

3. The Fridge school which had very few plays (to fit into the college practice time constraints) with dozens of formations. We would line up in I form, then switch to the west coast set, only to run the speed option outside. The theory was to get the D to show who had what responsibilty. The drawback was we ran some plays out of sets that weren't ideal for the play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top