Started By
Message
re: How would you feel about a change in offensive philosophy?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:28 am to TheCheshireHog
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:28 am to TheCheshireHog
quote:
Sounds more like it will be Missouri's version of a TE than a true TE.
Are you seriously telling me you wouldn't take Coffman and Rucker if you had the chance?
1
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:31 am to UAFanFromNOLA
quote:
I think a little more I formation would be great for our offense.
I disagree, when you have a true passer like AJ, you do yourself a diservice by not letting him sling the ball around as much as possible.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:33 am to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Ricky Seals-Jones (who is now 6'7)
damn sounds like a matchup nightmare. Y'all aren't keeping him at WR?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:36 am to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Are you seriously telling me you wouldn't take Coffman and Rucker if you had the chance
That's not what I meant at all. Missouri's "TEs" don't line up on the line and put their hand in the dirt like a traditional TE in the past but have basically been bigger WR's. DGB plays in the TE spot at Mizzou. If RSJ is a TE in A&M's offense then I'm assuming its essentially the same line of thinking as Mizzou.
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 11:38 am
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:47 am to TheCheshireHog
quote:
If RSJ is a TE in A&M's offense then I'm assuming its essentially the same line of thinking as Mizzou.
RSJ will rotate between TE and WR until he's done growing.
Hicks is 6'4 250 and has rotated between H-Back and a traditional tight end
Clear is 6'6 270 (and losing weight). He is more of a traditional tight end
Sumlin has made it clear during interviews that he will line up the receivers and tight ends anywhere that he can see a matchup problem. An example is having Mike Evans in the slot.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:49 am to CGSC Lobotomy
Thanks for the explanation. I thought Hicks weighed less than 250. 
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:50 am to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Aggies, would you be upset with a switch to power football?
We already have the league's leading rusher. What would power football do other than detract from our ability to pass?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:52 am to TheCheshireHog
quote:
I thought Hicks weighed less than 250.
Fine: 248. Nothing but skin and bones.
In all seriousness, what I like about going 3 Wide, 1 TE instead of 4 wide all the time is that it provides flexibility. You can easily switch to an I by moving the TE into an H-back/FB position. You can switch a WR for a TE and go into a BIG 1-back formation. You can even put a RSJ at TE and go 4-wide if need be.
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 11:55 am
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:53 am to CGSC Lobotomy
No, I meant more like 230ish. Obviously I was wrong. 
Posted on 4/9/13 at 11:57 am to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
If we were to change up a little I wouldn't mind seeing a more I-form based running game.
I think Bama was headed that direction before Fowler got hurt. We saw a decent amount of it in the Michigan game.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:09 pm to gideon
quote:Even in the NFL, I formation is being used. There is nothing wrong with having a primarily running formation that is used in obvious running situations.
I disagree, when you have a true passer like AJ, you do yourself a diservice by not letting him sling the ball around as much as possible.
quote:I agree. I think if Fowler comes back strong, we may see some of that next year.
I think Bama was headed that direction before Fowler got hurt. We saw a decent amount of it in the Michigan game.
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 12:10 pm
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:13 pm to UAFanFromNOLA
We'll get more and more conservative as our talent on defense increases. I like our offense because it's just a roided up version of what texas high schools are running anyway.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:20 pm to Wrenchruh
quote:
I think Bama was headed that direction before Fowler got hurt. We saw a decent amount of it in the Michigan game.
Yep, and I loved it. If Fowler can return at or close to 100%, I think Nuss will take advantage of Fowler again.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:37 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
I want to be doing what the rest of the SEC is not doing. Right now when the focus is power football, spread it out. If the SEC goes all Big 12 and moves towards a spread, pound the rock.
The idea is to make it so that your competition only gets one week to learn a completely different type of offense for just your game. That situation can cause better teams to lose games.
The idea is to make it so that your competition only gets one week to learn a completely different type of offense for just your game. That situation can cause better teams to lose games.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:57 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:Or a better idea is to "execute" your own offensive scheme and force the opponent to stop it. Example: Alabama does nothing flashy on offense, and most every team knows exactly what to expect. They know what's coming in advance. But, because they execute at a high level, and limit stupid, drive stopping penalties, they are very consistant and they are a tough team to stop.
I want to be doing what the rest of the SEC is not doing. Right now when the focus is power football, spread it out. If the SEC goes all Big 12 and moves towards a spread, pound the rock.
The idea is to make it so that your competition only gets one week to learn a completely different type of offense for just your game. That situation can cause better teams to lose games.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:59 pm to RT1941
quote:
Or a better idea is to "execute" your own offensive scheme and force the opponent to stop it.
I think his point was not all teams have the talent to do that.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 1:41 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
I want to be doing what the rest of the SEC is not doing. Right now when the focus is power football, spread it out. If the SEC goes all Big 12 and moves towards a spread, pound the rock.
Bama, lsu, and Georgia are the only teams in the conference that have had a consistent power scheme on offense the past 5 years. So if you want to be doing the opposite of everyone else, you're doing it wrong. More teams run spread in the SEC than power
Posted on 4/9/13 at 1:57 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Bama, lsu, and Georgia are the only teams in the conference that have had a consistent power scheme on offense the past 5 years. So if you want to be doing the opposite of everyone else, you're doing it wrong. More teams run spread in the SEC than power
Spread does not mean air raid. Alabama's single back offense is more of a "spread" than Ole Miss lining up with two backs. "Spread" is really misused on here.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 2:14 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Spread does not mean air raid
You don't say
Posted on 4/9/13 at 3:11 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
I love having an I-form, power running style of offense. One big problem for LSU is not being more creative in playcalling and formation variation. Mixing in some Ace with I-form would keep the opposing defense from seeing the same looks. Also passing more out of the I and running more out of the Ace would help to keep the defense off balance.
I love a two-back power running game. If there can be more creativity in exploiting matchups and keeping the defense off balance then that would be the only change.
To answer your question: Philosophically no, execution yes.
I love a two-back power running game. If there can be more creativity in exploiting matchups and keeping the defense off balance then that would be the only change.
To answer your question: Philosophically no, execution yes.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News