Did We Run The Option And ...

We didn't run the option...we didn't really even threaten to run the option. (might have run it once or twice but totally of no consequence).
Looked like 'Buck' was meddling in the offense much more than O'leary ever did. The amazing thing was to realize just how much talent O'leary left here. Even when the 3rd or 4th units were out on the field there was plenty of talent there.

We will win in spite of 'Buck'.
 
Sluggish. Lined up with 1 back & 2 WRs on each tackle. Started the 1 WR in motion toward the back, faked to back off OG & pitched to the WR coming on around. Watkins got 5 yds & Logan 3. Didn't run it using 2 backs where the QB either hands off, keeps or pitches to the trailing back. Should be interesting to see what Hollinga could do on a wide pitch. Ran Hollings exclusively off OT where he veered to outside when things were clogged.
 
We ran the option one time to the left and it appeared Suggs went too deep and it did not work well.

When your toss sweeps get 7+ yards you do not run the option.

You will not see a steady diet of the option until the Clemson game.

Beeware, how many times did O'leary run the option against Syracuse last year? NUFF said.

NOT SINCE HAMILTON left have you seen GT run the option in the 1st game. This was Hollings first game in his LIFE at tailback. This was our QB's first game in 2 yrs.

If you think it was CG's decision not to run the option you are full of it. In fact CG did not go anywhere near O'Brien during the game. That is probably the most freedom O'brien has ever had
 
Originally posted by law_bee:
If you think it was CG's decision not to run the option you are full of it. In fact CG did not go anywhere near O'Brien during the game. That is probably the most freedom O'brien has ever had
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">If you think Buck didn't go anywhere near O'brien during the game, then you either didn't go to the game, or, you are crazy as he!l. I watched it very closely. Gailey had the play card in his hands and on several of the timeouts, when we were about to score, all the conversation and all the instruction came directly from Gailey.

We will win with Buck here or in spite of Buck being here.
 
Originally posted by beeware:
We didn't run the option...we didn't really even threaten to run the option. (might have run it once or twice but totally of no consequence).
Looked like 'Buck' was meddling in the offense much more than O'leary ever did. The amazing thing was to realize just how much talent O'leary left here. Even when the 3rd or 4th units were out on the field there was plenty of talent there.

We will win in spite of 'Buck'.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">When I saw the single back set in short yardage I was having flashbacks to last year. I was sure GOL must have been lurking somewhere scaring BOB to run that formation... If I never see the single back again except in obvious passing situations it will be too soon. And that single back damn well better be pass blocking!!!! Not running the ball up the middle or off tackle...
 
I believe we have yet to see the "total package." Why would BOB/C.G. open up the playbook against a team we could beat as we did? The players settled in, the coaches got their communcations and responsibilities solidified, and future opponents saw very little.

A good game plan IMHO. I would have loved to see it wide open and full-tilt, but we have a whole season ahead.
 
I don't get this Buck stuff. Seems way out of line to me after the first game.

We have an ex NFL head coach and offensive co-ordinator who has been around the block a time or 2. If I am Obrian he is exactly the kind of guy I want to mentor me after a stint with Fridge.

This is also the first game the 2 of them have worked together. I for one would be glad if they were discussing things to find out how each other thinks during the game. Great way for Chan to get confident/comfortable with how Billy OB works.

And finally, for this game the only way Vandy even stays close is if we do stupid stuff on offense and turn the ball over by running high risk plays our NEW QB and NEW TB are not ready for yet. If I were the head coach I would be making sure we kept it simple on offense and just manhandled them.

I really don't get this going after Chan on his first game. You may have wanted Mac as the coach - fine I can understand that - but it didn't happen - time to move on and not look back. We have a coach with a great background and experience to bring to Tech. I for one am going to let him make it or not on the field.
 
I hope we see more of the option, especially with Hollings on the pitch.
 
Me too kirbee! It is always one of the last things to install. With new starting qb and tb they had to work on so many other parts of the base offense. Not that they haven't installed it. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!
wink.gif
As season goes on we'll see it more I think.

Hollings is really quick to the corner. He's got that super extra gear when he makes his cut upfield. We didn't see it out of Clinkscale Sat because he was running between the tackles, but he's got super quickness to the corner as well.

Our offense does so many things. No way they should try to do it all early on. We'll see the option a good bit as the season goes along.
 
You want see any option until Clemson. Gailey and O'Brien are doing the right thing with a new QB, TB, and FB by introducing the offensive package gradually. Additionally, the option package is there to keep teams that play a aggressive style of Defense (FSU, Clemson) honest by making them defend the whole field and by be able to run plys that benefit GT's matchups out of multiple sets. There was no need for the option against Vandy. Power football mixed with play action was all that was required to blow the dores away
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top