Dwyer Faring Well in PJ's Offense

Sweet. Now if they don't fumble, we'll be in outstanding shape.
 
I have been EXTREMELY impressed with how Dwyer has handled this transition. He was probably the one I've been worried about the most, as he would be an excellent tailback in a conventional offense. He has been the guy I've been impressed with most with his willingness and work ethic to adapt. His team comment at the end is awesome and inspiring.
 
What I like about this situation is the sheer flexibility of this offense. Sure, Dwyer may be the designated guy in the backfield, but every once in awhile he could line up at the A-back spot and take an end around or short pass or something.
 
I think I'd rather have Roddy Jones take the end around or the pitch, and we don't do short passes.
 
No dude, seriously, short passes are really freaking dumb in this offense, unless they're fast dumps to the WR because the CB is playing off or playing inside to beat the block to the pitch guy. The reason for short passes in a Chan offense is to keep the defense honest, and the 3O already does that. In this offense, if we threw to a short receiver, we'd be throwing into the D.

Go back and look at YPC in any PJ offense. It's freakin huge. Because the average is kinked upwards because there's no short completions to bring it down - all our short completions are pitches, so they don't count towards the stat line.
 
beej67 said:
No dude, seriously, short passes are really freaking dumb in this offense, unless they're fast dumps to the WR because the CB is playing off or playing inside to beat the block to the pitch guy. The reason for short passes in a Chan offense is to keep the defense honest, and the 3O already does that. In this offense, if we threw to a short receiver, we'd be throwing into the D.

Go back and look at YPC in any PJ offense. It's freakin huge. Because the average is kinked upwards because there's no short completions to bring it down - all our short completions are pitches, so they don't count towards the stat line.
Click to expand...

there are exceptions to your claim, the most common being that if your B back can go through the line and does not get the ball, he can trail the QB behind/in front of the LBs (situation dictating) and offer a short pass option. Tebow did these all the time, might be a case study.

in general, this offensive approach tends to look for larger downfield chunks in the passing game. frequently with a "surprise pass" sensation
 
there are exceptions to your claim, the most common being that if your B back can go through the line and does not get the ball, he can trail the QB behind/in front of the LBs (situation dictating) and offer a short pass option. Tebow did these all the time, might be a case study.
Click to expand...

Well yeah, but that's more of an outlet than a design. When we pass, we'll be looking for more than 10 yards. If we play action the BB and they don't bite, then he's going to hang shallow to force the LBs to stick close to the line. His job isn't to be the receiver as much as it is to be a decoy, who might get the ball if the defense is inept. If Dwyer gets more than 6 catches all season I'd be very surprised.
 
I'm with beej,

The Trip O gives 1-on-1 matches deep down the field. Most of the short stuff is replaced with runs. Yes, we do have short passes in the playbook. But over 3/4 of Nesbitt's throws have been for large chunks.

The beauty of the offense is the ability to get 3-4 yards on almost every play. Why throw a lot of short stuff if you can get the same yards without the risk?
 
The reason for short slants and flares in a west coast offense is to keep the defense near the line of scrimmage at the corners, to open up deeper routes. They're already going to be doing that because of the 3O threat, so we'd just be throwing into the D. If we ever, ever call a flare pass in this offense, I'll be amazed if it works and angry if it doesn't. They're pointless, when the LBs and corners are forced to play short anyway.
 
What if we play a blitzing defense, like our former one? Short passing works well against that, and I expect to see it. Also, I've seen several hitch route completions in watching Navy films.
 
Jacket59 said:
What if we play a blitzing defense, like our former one? Short passing works well against that, and I expect to see it. Also, I've seen several hitch route completions in watching Navy films.
Click to expand...
Would it be wise to blitz against the TO? The blitz is high-risk high-reward anyway, but against the triple option it sounds like suicide. One person misses and the play goes for 6.
 
WaCoJacket said:
The beauty of the offense is the ability to get 3-4 yards on almost every play. Why throw a lot of short stuff if you can get the same yards without the risk?
Click to expand...

WaCo, I love this offense, but to say we will get 3-4 yards on every play without the risk is not completely true -- we risk the ball with every lateral and with the ball being held loosely by the QB. Maybe not the same amount of risk as a short slant, especially with the defense playing up to stop the run, but there is significant risk in the option attack.
 
Ish said:
Would it be wise to blitz against the TO? The blitz is high-risk high-reward anyway, but against the triple option it sounds like suicide. One person misses and the play goes for 6.
Click to expand...

You are right...linebackers and safeties have to play responsibilty football against the 3-O.

However, D-lines will probably shift and stunt a lot to keep blockers off linebackers. That will probably be the hardest thing for O-line and Nesbitt to read.
 
It's all going to go back to the DE read. DEs who are able to fake at the B back long enough to get Nesbitt to keep it, then go after Nesbitt, forcing the pitch, will blow this system up. That's the key to every one of our games from here on out - it's how smart the DE is when we run the Outside Veer.
 
We have Cox and Kelly practicing at A-Back too. Ouch. Line both of them up at A back with Dwyer at B and we could be dealing some serious punishment early in games. How many times is the safety going to want to tackle Cox after the pitch?
 
beej67 said:
It's all going to go back to the DE read. DEs who are able to fake at the B back long enough to get Nesbitt to keep it, then go after Nesbitt, forcing the pitch, will blow this system up. That's the key to every one of our games from here on out - it's how smart the DE is when we run the Outside Veer.
Click to expand...

DT's are optioned also...depends on the play call.
 
BuzzMD said:
WaCo, I love this offense, but to say we will get 3-4 yards on every play without the risk is not completely true -- we risk the ball with every lateral and with the ball being held loosely by the QB. Maybe not the same amount of risk as a short slant, especially with the defense playing up to stop the run, but there is significant risk in the option attack.
Click to expand...

Right you are, Doc. Under Gailey's offense, the QB shoves the ball hard into the RB's gut or he fires it hard to a receiver. That's a lot different from floating it to the RB via lateral. Our guys have to get used to plucking the ball out of the air and protecting it before the big thump that could come very quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top