Started By
Message
re: Offense Fix
Posted on 11/17/14 at 12:03 pm to AgBQ00
Posted on 11/17/14 at 12:03 pm to AgBQ00
ok, well, a few things...
1) Pro Style term was coined back in the 70/80s when most teams ran the same offense in the NFL. Today, that isn't really true. Many different offenses are run so the term is somewhat generic. I'm going to assume you are talking 90s Cowboys with 21 personnel as a base
2) Sumlin is pretty head strong. He doesn't much care what other people think and based on my understanding honestly doesn't believe what you stated about needing a kind of offense to develop a defense. In fact he rejects it out of hand (for good or bad). He has a vision and he sells it every day
3) the current roster is not well stocked to run 21 personnel. We have no real fullback or TE. We'll have a hybrid TE in Jordan Davis next year but not a true inline guy (Cam Clear was that guy). We could certainly adapt, but those offenses are rarely great without elite players at those positions.
4) We aren't recruiting to it now so there is no evidence we are moving the offense at all. I think Sumlin will adapt to his personnel. It's his way. But he picks that personnel. If he's able to get a kid like Kaden Smith in 2016, I think we'd see more 11 personnel packages. But I don't think he's going to shoehorn the current roster into a new offense
A lot of Ags have heartburn about this offense and they project a change with no real basis (other than want). Many said we'd never run it when Sumlin was hired. He likes it because
- it's incredible simplicity. It makes it a great college system because you are limited in practice time and there is such roster turnover year to year
- it's easy to recruit to. Things like OL can be fairly interchangeable which is important and allows you to recruit the best (mostly OT). WRs while they look for certain skill sets, are much easier to switch positions to get your best personnel. With 1 TB, 1 FB, 1 TE, 2 WRs, there are so many different kinds of players they aren't very interchangeable on the fly. You are redesigning an offense to do it
There is no magic elixir of an offense. No one way to do things. You can hear Sumlin talk about this. You build a system, recruit to that system, and honestly the good ones make it work. What you don't do is change systems constantly. We've had some rough patches this year, no doubt. But we've also broke in 2 new QBs, quite a few WRs, and our OL had a disappointing year. That's a recipe for disaster in any system.
1) Pro Style term was coined back in the 70/80s when most teams ran the same offense in the NFL. Today, that isn't really true. Many different offenses are run so the term is somewhat generic. I'm going to assume you are talking 90s Cowboys with 21 personnel as a base
2) Sumlin is pretty head strong. He doesn't much care what other people think and based on my understanding honestly doesn't believe what you stated about needing a kind of offense to develop a defense. In fact he rejects it out of hand (for good or bad). He has a vision and he sells it every day
3) the current roster is not well stocked to run 21 personnel. We have no real fullback or TE. We'll have a hybrid TE in Jordan Davis next year but not a true inline guy (Cam Clear was that guy). We could certainly adapt, but those offenses are rarely great without elite players at those positions.
4) We aren't recruiting to it now so there is no evidence we are moving the offense at all. I think Sumlin will adapt to his personnel. It's his way. But he picks that personnel. If he's able to get a kid like Kaden Smith in 2016, I think we'd see more 11 personnel packages. But I don't think he's going to shoehorn the current roster into a new offense
A lot of Ags have heartburn about this offense and they project a change with no real basis (other than want). Many said we'd never run it when Sumlin was hired. He likes it because
- it's incredible simplicity. It makes it a great college system because you are limited in practice time and there is such roster turnover year to year
- it's easy to recruit to. Things like OL can be fairly interchangeable which is important and allows you to recruit the best (mostly OT). WRs while they look for certain skill sets, are much easier to switch positions to get your best personnel. With 1 TB, 1 FB, 1 TE, 2 WRs, there are so many different kinds of players they aren't very interchangeable on the fly. You are redesigning an offense to do it
There is no magic elixir of an offense. No one way to do things. You can hear Sumlin talk about this. You build a system, recruit to that system, and honestly the good ones make it work. What you don't do is change systems constantly. We've had some rough patches this year, no doubt. But we've also broke in 2 new QBs, quite a few WRs, and our OL had a disappointing year. That's a recipe for disaster in any system.
2
Posted on 11/17/14 at 12:12 pm to tmc94
I was thinking more single back single tight end sets zone blocking run scheme than the 90's offense you were describing. Still a simple concept.
Posted on 11/17/14 at 2:01 pm to tmc94
Great post tmc yet again. So many Ags want to shift back towards the old style of defense over offense, but if anything this season shows me we need to go all in on offense.
The kind of talent it would take to have an elite SEC defense would take YEARS to build via recruiting. And that is only if we get access to that kind of defensive recruit for that long of time- if Texas or someone else local gets elite while we are building it will all be flushed down the tubes. We simply don't have the margin of error to ever be a defensive minded team again. Or, let me say, until we win a few modern national titles we don't have the margin of error to be a defensive first team.
Unlike offensive, defense is obivously WAY more about talent than coaching (or otherwise Snyder would have ruined our best player). I don't see an A&M stockpiling that kind of D talent in my lifetime, at least not without a lot of success on the field caused by a great offense.
Meanwhile on offense we have rebuilt the thing TWICE this year alone and we still lead the SEC in many categories. Unlike on D it is easier to mask deficiencies in talent and expect good results without years of coaching. We need to jump up the food chain quickly, and offense is still our ticket. The real question for me this offseason is not if we are going to focus on defense at the expense of offense as that won't happen until Sumlin is gone. The real question is:
At what point does being a good recruiter not make up for being a poor coach?
From the start Sumlin put a priority on good recruiters, and it brought us a great result last February. But now we are at a point where it doesn't matter how good of a recruiter a Snyder is and his crappy coaching hurts more on the recruiting trail.
Or look at WRs- they are terrible. Dropped balls everywhere. I think I could coach them better. But we can't make a change at that position because our best recruiter coaches WRs. I mean, that is a problem. Can't Beaty have some job that doesn't actually coach? Of course the answer is no because any job like that would be a demotion for him and his career. But the Catch 22 created in that position is a microcosm of the recruiter vs coaching issue that is at the core of where we go from here.
The kind of talent it would take to have an elite SEC defense would take YEARS to build via recruiting. And that is only if we get access to that kind of defensive recruit for that long of time- if Texas or someone else local gets elite while we are building it will all be flushed down the tubes. We simply don't have the margin of error to ever be a defensive minded team again. Or, let me say, until we win a few modern national titles we don't have the margin of error to be a defensive first team.
Unlike offensive, defense is obivously WAY more about talent than coaching (or otherwise Snyder would have ruined our best player). I don't see an A&M stockpiling that kind of D talent in my lifetime, at least not without a lot of success on the field caused by a great offense.
Meanwhile on offense we have rebuilt the thing TWICE this year alone and we still lead the SEC in many categories. Unlike on D it is easier to mask deficiencies in talent and expect good results without years of coaching. We need to jump up the food chain quickly, and offense is still our ticket. The real question for me this offseason is not if we are going to focus on defense at the expense of offense as that won't happen until Sumlin is gone. The real question is:
At what point does being a good recruiter not make up for being a poor coach?
From the start Sumlin put a priority on good recruiters, and it brought us a great result last February. But now we are at a point where it doesn't matter how good of a recruiter a Snyder is and his crappy coaching hurts more on the recruiting trail.
Or look at WRs- they are terrible. Dropped balls everywhere. I think I could coach them better. But we can't make a change at that position because our best recruiter coaches WRs. I mean, that is a problem. Can't Beaty have some job that doesn't actually coach? Of course the answer is no because any job like that would be a demotion for him and his career. But the Catch 22 created in that position is a microcosm of the recruiter vs coaching issue that is at the core of where we go from here.
This post was edited on 11/17/14 at 2:07 pm
Page 1 of 1
Latest Texas A&M News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News