Triple Option

The Champ said:
Auburn didn't run any TO.

Offenses are completely different
Click to expand...
This. CBS announcers kept saying triple option :furious:
one play there was trips to the left with the running back to the right of marshall and marshall kept it and ran right for a touch down. Gary then said Marshall is running the Triple option to perfection...:rotfl:
 
JoeCakeEater said:
We see a lot of nickel....

NO
Click to expand...

Not like they played. Syracuse played a similar defense against us. I could tell from how they lined up that we were going to gash them.

VT and Bud Foster would have done a great job of defending against Auburn. Hell, UGAg practically copies VT's plan against us every year.
 
The bottom line on awbern--they have better players than us and better coaching
hmmmmm
 
Don't they run a 3O package where the third option is a forward pass? One example being the game tying TD against bama
 
GTFowler said:
This. CBS announcers kept saying triple option :furious:
one play there was trips to the left with the running back to the right of marshall and marshall kept it and ran right for a touch down. Gary then said Marshall is running the Triple option to perfection...:rotfl:
Click to expand...

Not this. They most definitely incorporate triple option concepts into the offense. With only a small amount of effort you could verify this by reading the volumes of articles on Malzahn's offense via the internet. It may not look exactly like a flexbone triple option run play, but it incorporates a dive back, keeper, and pitch-back element just like GTs triple-O.
 
A lot of fail in this thread imo. If georgie bats down that 4th and 18 prayer, allbarn would've scored 37 pts in 12 drives, or barely over 3 pts per drive. We scored 27 in 9 drives, or 3ppd. We were basically as efficient scoring against Georgie as the offense playing for the mnc.
 
I am aware of Malzahn's offense and have read up on it quite a bit. I am also aware that the play I described was in no way a Triple option play. Yes they run triple option but is their offense really built around the triple option? (ie even when they aren't calling the play the defense still thinks it could be the 3-O.)I would have to say no. It is not built around the triple option. I like our offense but I really do think coach Malzahn's offense is more innovative and with many different concepts to shape around his players and the opponents they face.
 
GT1992 said:
The last few years that seems to be the rule. I was in school in 1990, it hasn't always been the case. Why aren't we winning these games anymore? Why aren't we going for it on 4th and 1 against Miami last year when the defense was gassed? CPJ doesn't trust his offense anymore, but somehow the fanboys still do.
Click to expand...

Using the one time it wasn't the case as basis for comparison isn't very useful. The 1990 team was lucky - it happens sometimes, see: Auburn 2013.

We aren't winning close games because we lack quality depth (and we haven't had it since the 60s), and the teams we're playing against have it. Up to you if you want to blame the Hill, Board of Regents, coaching, AA, etc.
 
a5ehren said:
Using the one time it wasn't the case as basis for comparison isn't very useful. The 1990 team was lucky - it happens sometimes, see: Auburn 2013.

We aren't winning close games because we lack quality depth (and we haven't had it since the 60s), and the teams we're playing against have it. Up to you if you want to blame the Hill, Board of Regents, coaching, AA, etc.
Click to expand...

Good post a5ehren, but just like Auburn did yesterday, we in '90, pretty much put to rest the luck angle in Orlando. Nebraska had EIGHT future NFLers on D.
 
a5ehren said:
We aren't winning close games because we lack quality depth (and we haven't had it since the 60s), and the teams we're playing against have it. Up to you if you want to blame the Hill, Board of Regents, coaching, AA, etc.
Click to expand...
This. Auburn trots out 9 guys for their DL. Us----not so much.
 
a5ehren said:
Using the one time it wasn't the case as basis for comparison isn't very useful. The 1990 team was lucky - it happens sometimes, see: Auburn 2013.

We aren't winning close games because we lack quality depth (and we haven't had it since the 60s), and the teams we're playing against have it. Up to you if you want to blame the Hill, Board of Regents, coaching, AA, etc.
Click to expand...

We won those games in the late 90's when O'Leary was coach too. We've had decent depth some years, but if that is the biggest problem then that's on the coaching staff's assessment of talent. My point is that the Hill, BOR, or limited majors isn't the reason we are 5-5 against FBS teams. None of those factors have changed negatively since 2009. Roof showed this year that the defense wasn't a talent problem, it was a coaching problem.
 
GT1992 said:
That's part of what I was trying to get at in the Duke thread. We're recruiting in the 40's and getting results in the 40's. The triple option is not gaining us an advantage and is hurting us in recruiting.

When Mover said he wouldn't have come to Tech to play the TO as we do, it speaks volumes about how it hasn't been the equallizer that we expected. It worked pretty well for a couple of years with the previous coach's players, but since then, it doesn't seem to work consistently against better teams, most of which have seen it enough now and can scheme against it.

Maybe a better offensive line coach can fix it, but I have my doubts that the system is best for us without adapting to what we have.
Click to expand...

A player of John Davis' caliber comes to Tech maybe every 10 years or so; öööö that Calculus course, when will we add an aroma therapy major....or

When will we ever learn, we can either lower our academic standards to accept better players that otherwise would never be accepted to most high schools on a merit basis or we can accept who we are; the best öööö football team in the nation based upon SAT scores.

Go Jackets!
 
optionqb said:
Not this. They most definitely incorporate triple option concepts into the offense. With only a small amount of effort you could verify this by reading the volumes of articles on Malzahn's offense via the internet. It may not look exactly like a flexbone triple option run play, but it incorporates a dive back, keeper, and pitch-back element just like GTs triple-O.
Click to expand...

Malzahn has done a lot of different things in his career. But they ran 0 plays with a pitch option last night.

They basically ran two plays 60% of the time, power and counter. Then they ran 10 zone reads, a couple jets and 10 pass plays.

They ran no triple.
 
GTFowler said:
This. CBS announcers kept saying triple option :furious:
one play there was trips to the left with the running back to the right of marshall and marshall kept it and ran right for a touch down. Gary then said Marshall is running the Triple option to perfection...:rotfl:
Click to expand...

Yea Danielson didn't have a clue. He just kept repeating the same things over and over.
 
71YellowJacket said:
A player of John Davis' caliber comes to Tech maybe every 10 years or so; öööö that Calculus course, when will we add an aroma therapy major....or

When will we ever learn, we can either lower our academic standards to accept better players that otherwise would never be accepted to most high schools on a merit basis or we can accept who we are; the best öööö football team in the nation based upon SAT scores.

Go Jackets!
Click to expand...

We have 3 or 4 NFL defensive linemen right now on top of two of the best receivers. Last year, we didn't place anyone on a squad. We're doing something wrong and it isn't calculus.
 
There is also a pass option, they scored a TD on it. The QB rolls and if the corner comes up for the run he throws it. This follows a read option to the back.

Our option pretty much tells the defense which 1/2 of the field to defend in the first second of the play. We run some counter looks but they don't develop fast enough or go wide enough to escape the pursuit.

http://www.aufamily.com/forums/topic/135481-spotlight-on-auburns-triple-read-option/
 
Last edited:
The Champ said:
Malzahn has done a lot of different things in his career. But they ran 0 plays with a pitch option last night.

They basically ran two plays 60% of the time, power and counter. Then they ran 10 zone reads, a couple jets and 10 pass plays.

They ran no triple.
Click to expand...

Maybe they did...maybe they didn't. I know that they fumbled, what, 3 times trying to run the read option? That may be a reason that they didn't run the triple. But they've ran it enough this season to know that it's a part of their offense. They even have a play-action pass off of the triple option play fake. Power runs and counters form the basis of the offense and that gets used even more when you play a team that's having a difficult time manning up. Missouri was touted as having the best pass rushers in the SEC, but they could not stand 4Qs of pounding from that offense. I understand that Auburn is good, but there's no excuse for giving up the kind of yards and points that Missouri's defense did. I'll just say this, it's difficult to have that successful of a run offense out of the spread without incorporating triple option plays of some kind into the offense. You can tone down the TO plays if you are physically better than your opponent, but when you are not, it helps to be able to read a couple of their best defenders instead of having to block them.
 
The Champ said:
Yea Danielson didn't have a clue. He just kept repeating the same things over and over.
Click to expand...

What? Someone in the media repeating something that isn't accurate ad nauseam? The hell you preach!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top