Started By
Message
How would you feel about a change in offensive philosophy?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:14 am
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:14 am
I really like what bama has going right now on offense. A heavy zone blocking power running game with spread and play action principles in the passing game. It keeps the defense honest. We consistently have one of the most balanced attacks in the country under Saban.
If we were to change up a little I wouldn't mind seeing a more I-form based running game. More running behind a fullback and less running from shotgun. That's a change I wouldn't be pissed about.
Aggies, would you be upset with a switch to power football? Lsu, would you be upset with a switch to the spread?
Everyone chime in. Philosophies change from time to time. I know a lot of auburn fans were excited about the "power game" returning but that was a miserable experience ( for them)
What would you be ok with switching to? What's a
philosophy in your eyes?
If we were to change up a little I wouldn't mind seeing a more I-form based running game. More running behind a fullback and less running from shotgun. That's a change I wouldn't be pissed about.
Aggies, would you be upset with a switch to power football? Lsu, would you be upset with a switch to the spread?
Everyone chime in. Philosophies change from time to time. I know a lot of auburn fans were excited about the "power game" returning but that was a miserable experience ( for them)
What would you be ok with switching to? What's a
philosophy in your eyes?
12
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:19 am to Riseupfromtherubble
Chizik agrees with going to a power running game from the I-formation and away from a multi formation power running game.
How did that work out for us?
How did that work out for us?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:21 am to Riseupfromtherubble
Im stoked about our change. Bobby Petrino's offense is still my favorite and was so long before he came to Arkansas but I have become enamored over the recent years with what Stanford and Wisconsin have been doing. I love power football and their use of multiple different TE's.
Paul Chryst was actually one of my top choices for head coach because I wanted the Wisconsin philosophy but never thought we had a shot at Bielema. I think their philosophy is going to mesh very well with Chaney's vertical passing game.
Paul Chryst was actually one of my top choices for head coach because I wanted the Wisconsin philosophy but never thought we had a shot at Bielema. I think their philosophy is going to mesh very well with Chaney's vertical passing game.
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 10:22 am
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:21 am to allin2010
I'd be ok with a philosophy change but I must say I do enjoy how UGA runs the ball and the fact they run a pro-style offense. I'm not sure how'd I feel if an offense like Chip Kelly or Hal Mumme or Gus Malzahn came in and changed things up.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:22 am to Riseupfromtherubble
as long as it works I don't care what offensive philosophy it is.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:22 am to allin2010
I'm really looking forward to seeing what Butch can do in the SEC. We've got the O-line to compete, if nothing else.
Per media reports the offense is similiar to Kelly's at Oregon. Up-tempo, No Huddle, with a heavy dose of running. More than a 60/40 split in favor of the ground game.
I think this board, and even a lot of Vol fans have been under the impression that Jones' system mirrors Brian Kelly's at Notre Dame. Complete fallacy.
Per media reports the offense is similiar to Kelly's at Oregon. Up-tempo, No Huddle, with a heavy dose of running. More than a 60/40 split in favor of the ground game.
I think this board, and even a lot of Vol fans have been under the impression that Jones' system mirrors Brian Kelly's at Notre Dame. Complete fallacy.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:23 am to allin2010
quote:
Chizik agrees with going to a power running game from the I-formation and away from a multi formation power running game. How did that work out for us?
It probably would have worked out fine once you had a QB.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:23 am to Riseupfromtherubble
Not a drastic change. I wouldn't mind some more Petrino-style passing, but I love what Nussmeier is doing
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:23 am to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Lsu, would you be upset with a switch to the spread?
Livid.
ETA: What I would like to see is more use of the TE in both the running and passing aspects. We use a fullback, but I like the idea of using an H Back in motion to fill the same responsibilities.
Other small things like that, but power pro style needs to stay at LSU.
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 10:26 am
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:24 am to adammwilson
quote:
I'd be ok with a philosophy change but I must say I do enjoy how UGA runs the ball and the fact they run a pro-style offense. I'm not sure how'd I feel if an offense like Chip Kelly or Hal Mumme or Gus Malzahn came in and changed things up.
I love Richt's offense. The most attractive and truest pro-style (traditional pro/spread hybrid) in the league.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:26 am to adammwilson
I like UGA's offense. True modern pro-style. Blends the I-formation power running game, play-action, and a good bit of shotgun looks.
I also think it's a recruiting asset for us. UGA can sell it to QBs, WRs, and TEs who are looking to hone their skills in a refined pro-style scheme, as opposed to a spread system. The power running game is very appealing to most every-down RB prospects.
I also think it's a recruiting asset for us. UGA can sell it to QBs, WRs, and TEs who are looking to hone their skills in a refined pro-style scheme, as opposed to a spread system. The power running game is very appealing to most every-down RB prospects.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:33 am to Crowknowsbest
I am ready for the change in offense...
The last few years, LSU was able to get by with just bludgeoning inferior opponents, but the lack of inventiveness showed up against equal opponents like Georgia, Alabama, and Clemson.
the offense will be much better...I expect LSU to be in the upcoming 4-team playoff every year
The last few years, LSU was able to get by with just bludgeoning inferior opponents, but the lack of inventiveness showed up against equal opponents like Georgia, Alabama, and Clemson.
the offense will be much better...I expect LSU to be in the upcoming 4-team playoff every year
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:35 am to Crompdaddy8
quote:
as long as it works I don't care what offensive philosophy it is.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:37 am to Riseupfromtherubble
If you look at our current spring depth chart, there IS a change in offensive philosophy.
We went from a primarily 4-wide set to a 3-wide, 1 TE, 1 back set.
We went from a primarily 4-wide set to a 3-wide, 1 TE, 1 back set.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:37 am to Riseupfromtherubble
I think a little more I formation would be great for our offense. I don't recall us doing that all that often even 3rd and short. Also with OJ Howard coming in, I would like to see us utilize our TE more often and have Aaron Hernandez type players.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:37 am to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
1 TE
who is the one TE?
and what you are describing is a change in base personnel no a change in offensive philosophy.
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 10:38 am
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:39 am to ProjectP2294
quote:
What I would like to see is more use of the TE in both the running and passing aspects. We use a fullback, but I like the idea of using an H Back in motion to fill the same responsibilities.
This is what in most excited about in regards to our new offense. Two to three TE's on the field at a time while motioning them presnap to gain leverage. That's a matchup nightmare.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:39 am to adammwilson
quote:
who is the one TE?
Either Nehemiah Hicks (Nemo), Cameron Clear, or Ricky Seals-Jones (who is now 6'7)
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:40 am to Riseupfromtherubble
LSU needs to stick with a power running game, it's what this offense is built around.
But I honestly think just having a legit deep threat would do wonders for this offense. It was not risky at all for defenses to stack the box against us. If LSU can find a way to make defenses pay for stacking the box, this offense can be dangerous.
But I honestly think just having a legit deep threat would do wonders for this offense. It was not risky at all for defenses to stack the box against us. If LSU can find a way to make defenses pay for stacking the box, this offense can be dangerous.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 10:41 am to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Either Nehemiah Hicks (Nemo), Cameron Clear, or Ricky Seals-Jones (who is now 6'7)
Sounds more like it will be Missouri's version of a TE than a true TE.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News