Our New Offense

R

romegajacket

Helluva Engineer
Joined
May 14, 2003
Messages
2,102
1) Will the type offense that CPJ is installing matter much to GT players ability to receive interest from the NFL recruiters?

2) Are there any NFL teams using this type offense?
 
1) our A backs might get drafted as WRs, and our O Line and B backs should have an easy NFL transition. Doubtful our QBs will have a shot at playing QB in the NFL.

2) No NFL teams use any sort of option, for financial reasons. They have way too much money invested at the QB spot to run an O that puts the QB at risk.
 
IMO, the QB going to the NFL will rest on his ability to throw. There has been a trend developing in the NFL for mobile QB's. NFL teams don't feature option attacks because the QB's would get killed.
 
PJ_RULZ said:
IMO, the QB going to the NFL will rest on his ability to throw. There has been a trend developing in the NFL for mobile QB's. NFL teams don't feature option attacks because the QB's would get killed.
Click to expand...

Literally.

Our new offense will still translate well to the NFL because of the character and verve required to run it properly. The NFL is not so superficial that they don't appreciate good football, good football coaches and good football programs. Stats are important. Just like wins and losses.

Our new offense is going to be great.
 
NFL teams don't feature the option because defensive front 7's are too fast for it to be effective. I remember a few years ago the Cowboys tried running the option some when they had Quincy. Even with all that blow up his nose, defenses were too quick up front and he was having trouble getting to the edge. He was having to make the pitch behind the line. It essentially became a toss play.
 
NFL teams don't feature the option because defensive front 7's are too fast for it to be effective.
Click to expand...
Run correctly, a spread option could work in the NFL. The QB doesn't have to be fast, he just has to take a defender out of the play. The problem, though, is that QBs make so much money you can't financially justify putting them at risk.

The only way a PJ style offense could work in the NFL with salary like it is, is if they totally reworked their salary structure for their team. You get a highly paid B back, two mid to lowly paid skat backs for A backs, throw a lot of money in your O line at guys who specialize in run blocking, and go on-the-cheap with your WRs. You get a cadre of 4 cheap QBs who all ran option in college (Woody Danzler types) and you platoon them so they don't get hurt. Then you take all the salary you saved by going cheap on QBs and WRs and throw it at your defense, and win games on D.

It could work, but no NFL team is set up to make it work, and retooling an NFL roster from a salary perspective to make it work is muuuch more difficult than just trying to recruit the right guys in college. It'd take a 3 or 4 year commitment to the concept from the owners before you could have it fully implemented, staff wise, and with the turnover rate of NFL coaches and players you just don't have the time.

Could it work? Sure, if you could get all the pieces in place, but getting all the pieces in place is just too hard with the salary structure and the "what have you done for me lately" attitude. So no, we'll never see it.
 
beej67 said:
The only way a PJ style offense could work in the NFL with salary like it is, is if they totally reworked their salary structure for their team. You get a highly paid B back, two mid to lowly paid skat backs for A backs, throw a lot of money in your O line at guys who specialize in run blocking, and go on-the-cheap with your WRs. You get a cadre of 4 cheap QBs who all ran option in college (Woody Danzler types) and you platoon them so they don't get hurt. Then you take all the salary you saved by going cheap on QBs and WRs and throw it at your defense, and win games on D.
Click to expand...

Couldn't disagree with you more about getting the right players. You've essentially outlined the Vikings. All they need to fit your mold perfectly is a skat back and athletic backup QB. Both of those are not hard to come by and are very inexpensive.

If an owner was willing to give a TO coach a few years to get his system it might work, but I have my doubts. If you go the other direction and look at passing style offense, Spurrier was given a long contract and allowed to bring in his style of players. It didn't work out too well for him.
 
M-train Wreck said:
If an owner was willing to give a TO coach a few years to get his system it might work, but I have my doubts. If you go the other direction and look at passing style offense, Spurrier was given a long contract and allowed to bring in his style of players. It didn't work out too well for him.
Click to expand...


Michael Lewis in his NY Times article about Mike Leach claims that college coaches have generally been unsuccessful in the NFL because the NFL tends to hire famous college coaches from major powers. Those coaches win largely because they have more talent than most of their opponents. In the NFL the talent levels are much more equal and very small margins in coaching show through.

Winning at "old money" schools in rich talent beds like Florida and LSU is not a very good indicator of future success, b/c those teams had better talent than most teams they played across the board.

The coaches who win in the NFL won consistently at smaller college programs. Walsh at Stanford, Ross at GT, Johnson at Okie State and Miami when they were first emerging as a major power. The big exception off the top of my head is Switzer -- but both Switzer and Johnson played for Frank Broyles and coached under him early in their careers, so they are in a very real sense both direct descendants of the Dodd heritage.
 
You've essentially outlined the Vikings.
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought about it that way, but I suppose you might be right. I thought their D wasn't so hot though. (?)
 
My opinion on NFL marketibility position-by-position.

QB: We are yet to see what PJ's version of the offense at Tech looks like. He has said Tim Tebow would be the ideal guy to run his offense. Tebow clearly has an NFL future. If we can recruit or develop this type of talent, we might see a QB make it to the pros. Depends on who we can recruit. Maybe slightly less likely.

B-back: The NFL likes big, hard-running backs with moves who can catch the ball. Sounds just like PJ's prototypical B-back. Not many chances for the b-back to showcase pass protection skills. I think this is a wash vs a pro-style offense.

A-back: A-backs with decent size could make good recievers or third-down backs in the NFL. If they are a kick returner, so much the better. Ability to block in space is hard to learn and could be valuable on ST's. Probably a wash from say, Reshaun Grant in Gailey's offense.

WR: Probably just depends on the talent. If we have a fast, shifty WR with size who excels on reverses and is a big play reciever, then why not? The NFL LOVES WRs who are excellent blockers as well, and PJ's usually are. Probably less likely, but depends on the athlete.

OL: PJ has a few OL in the pros. The pros have marvelled at these guys abilities to block in space, and how disciplined, and well-trained they are. On the other hand, they don't get to showcase a lot of pure drop back pass protection skills. A lot of PJ's throwing is play-action.

That said, pass protection is very learnable provided you have the right kind of athlete. The pros take a very developmental approach with OL. As long as our guys have appropriate size, I'd say it's a wash because all of our OL should be fast & have good footwork. Nebraska put a lot of OL in the league in a mostly run offense.

Just my opinion, but it will be interesting to see how it works out.
 
beej67 said:
I hadn't thought about it that way, but I suppose you might be right. I thought their D wasn't so hot though. (?)
Click to expand...

They did pretty well for my fantasy team last year. 11th in scoring D and 1st in Rushing D. Plus they just acquired Jared Allen this offseason.
 
"The big exception off the top of my head is Switzer -- but both Switzer and Johnson played for Frank Broyles and coached under him early in their careers, so they are in a very real sense both direct descendants of the Dodd heritage."

Unless Switzer had a stint in the NFL other than the Cowboys, he was not very successful. The pre-salary cap Cowboys had a sizable talent advantage over most teams he faced and Switzer had much less success than Johnson.
 
floridajacket said:
"The big exception off the top of my head is Switzer -- but both Switzer and Johnson played for Frank Broyles and coached under him early in their careers, so they are in a very real sense both direct descendants of the Dodd heritage."

Unless Switzer had a stint in the NFL other than the Cowboys, he was not very successful. The pre-salary cap Cowboys had a sizable talent advantage over most teams he faced and Switzer had much less success than Johnson.
Click to expand...

Switzer did piggy back off of Johnson's success, but he also did win a Super Bowl. I don't really think that makes him unsuccessful, but I think your point is correct.

Johnson, and Ross all came in right before the beginning of the salary cap era, and were able to establish talented teams before the cap really became what we see it today.
 
M-train Wreck said:
NFL teams don't feature the option because defensive front 7's are too fast for it to be effective. I remember a few years ago the Cowboys tried running the option some when they had Quincy. Even with all that blow up his nose, defenses were too quick up front and he was having trouble getting to the edge. He was having to make the pitch behind the line. It essentially became a toss play.
Click to expand...

I know the idea that an option QB could not succeed in the NFL is generally accepted, but I don't believe that these untested presumptions can be assumed to be "fact."

For quite some time the generally accepted "fact" was that a running QB in general could not be successful in the NFL. The reasons given were the same you list. Defenses in the NFL are too fast; they'll get killed. Yet, now teams are spending top picks on "mobile" QBs whose primary value is as a runner. Vince Young and Mike Vick fall in this category. The jury is still out on whether they can have long term success, but you can't argue with the short term success they have had running around those fast NFL defenses.

If (big IF there) a QB can be successful in the NFL whose primary value was as a runner, then why couldn't that QB be more successful running the option?

Quincy Carter is not a good test case to disprove the idea. And if the point is the expense of the QB and putting them at risk, then teams are already doing that by relying on running capability of QBs like Vince Young so much.
 
It is all a moot point because no NFL GM will EVER have the balls to hire an option based offensive coach to the League.

FWIW, I think any run/pass balanced offensive (scheme where the defense has to be weary of run or pass on first down) can work at any level with the right coaching and personnel. Therefore I think CPJ's 3-O could work if there is a good balance of passing mixed in.
 
floridajacket said:
"The big exception off the top of my head is Switzer -- but both Switzer and Johnson played for Frank Broyles and coached under him early in their careers, so they are in a very real sense both direct descendants of the Dodd heritage."

Unless Switzer had a stint in the NFL other than the Cowboys, he was not very successful. The pre-salary cap Cowboys had a sizable talent advantage over most teams he faced and Switzer had much less success than Johnson.
Click to expand...

Thanks FLJacket, very good points. That makes it pretty consistent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top