- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: "Gimmick" Offenses
Posted on 6/23/11 at 11:56 am to FootballNostradamus
Posted on 6/23/11 at 11:56 am to FootballNostradamus
quote:
You’re playing your tackle head up over the guard? Fine I’ll just veer it, stretch my dive out and read off the end. You’re tackle is already out of the play.
Ok...you want to veer it? Sure...
yeah the DT get's blocked down, now the DE is the read...He's crashing down because his assignment is the QB, so the QB is going to keep it, where you've got an OLB that has to know that his read has now switched from the pitch man to the QB and your corner moves from a containment role to being responsible for the pitch man.
now my MLB has avoid the block of the playside OT and skate over and plug the cutback lane.
The key in this scenario is the OLB shucking the block of the Tight End.
I can go all day brother.
1
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:00 pm to TXGunslinger10
quote:
And 7th ward, for your theory, that guard is not going to get to the 2nd level before the QB makes that read. it hinges on ENGAGING the Guard.
Maybe i miss understood. Are you gonna play a 2 tech on both sides? In that case, it seems like the C could get the back on playside, backside G scoop the DT and try to get second level and try to get your tackle to scoop the DT.
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:01 pm to TXGunslinger10
quote:
Ok...you want to veer it? Sure...
yeah the DT get's blocked down, now the DE is the read...He's crashing down because his assignment is the QB, so the QB is going to keep it, where you've got an OLB that has to know that his read has now switched from the pitch man to the QB and your corner moves from a containment role to being responsible for the pitch man.
now my MLB has avoid the block of the playside OT and skate over and plug the cutback lane.
The key in this scenario is the OLB shucking the block of the Tight End.
I can go all day brother.
Love this kinda stuff
! You better have a helluva a DE to crash down before my back is through the hole. But if he does then yea my QB is around the edge. You also better hope my TE sucks because if he gets any depth on your OLB then my QB is vertical and the game is over. I think one of my favorite twists if you’re obviously crashing your DE to dictate a pull read is to X with my TE and wideout. Nothing like getting a good earhole crackback on an unsuspecting OLB and having my TE on a little corner!
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:04 pm to Prominentwon
quote:
If you're running these gimmick plays/sets and they don't work, where do you go from there? Do you switch it back up to a straight-line, power football offense? Something that Oregon is just not built for?
When they slow down the tempo - generally with a lead in the second half, it appears to me they run a wider variety of plays, take advantage of substitutions and use a finesse/misdirection type offense with their dual threat QB. So, I suspect this is their plan B. It is not all that different from what Florida has been running. Their OLinemen tend to run lean and rangy - their 300+ lb guys all run 6'5" to 6'7".
Probably not guys behind whom you can "pound the rock".
This post was edited on 6/23/11 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:07 pm to bisonduck
quote:
I watched Urban Meyer take his spread gimmicky offense to the SEC and win. Sorry, but I do know what it's like. You see, we get to watch the two marquee games in the SEC every saturday on the west coast.
Urban Meyer did not have success offensively in the SEC until he adjusted his offense to become more of a power rushing attack. He won with defense his first year, then he added a FB into his scheme and with Tebow, implemented a power attack to pick up tough yards.
This post was edited on 6/23/11 at 12:08 pm
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:08 pm to 7thWardTiger
quote:
Maybe i miss understood. Are you gonna play a 2 tech on both sides? In that case, it seems like the C could get the back on playside, backside G scoop the DT and try to get second level and try to get your tackle to scoop the DT.
Assuming both DT's were in 2's, the C could get the backer, and the backside G could scoop the DT, but I don't see how the tackle could scoop the DT on such a quick hitting play.
U think the timing would be off a little? I'm curious. How do you see it going?
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:12 pm to Chimlim
quote:
Urban Meyer did not have success offensively in the SEC until he adjusted his offense to become more of a power rushing attack. He won with defense his first year, then he added a FB into his scheme and with Tebow, implemented a power attack to pick up tough yards
Oregon has many packages people! Paulson blocked out of the backfield at 242 pounds. Remember, Blount is a 1000 rush in the NFL. CK can run power.
I susupect that you will see Lyerla this year as the H back guy in the backfield.
This post was edited on 6/23/11 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:16 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
You better have a helluva a DE to crash down before my back is through the hole. But if he does then yea my QB is around the edge. You also better hope my TE sucks because if he gets any depth on your OLB then my QB is vertical and the game is over. I think one of my favorite twists if you’re obviously crashing your DE to dictate a pull read is to X with my TE and wideout. Nothing like getting a good earhole crackback on an unsuspecting OLB and having my TE on a little corner!
I agree...but on the premise that your initial plan was to stretch the play into a veer, then the DE crashing would not be a problem because he's unblocked on a veer play. But for the sake of having a little fun, let's say your QB pulls it and gets up the seam, my only alternate line of defense if my OLB can't shake the block from your TE is for me to fly up my safety for support...even then you've probably already gained 4 or 5 yards...or God Forbid you run a veer pass...that's the catch 22...I don't want to commit my safety too much.
Id say to hell with the corner if you're X-ing...Crack on the OLB and Get your TE up on the Safety...then you could run for days.
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:18 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Love this kinda stuff
Me too...Here's to you Nostradamus and 7th Ward.
This is the kind of stuff that makes the offseason a little more bearable.
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:19 pm to TXGunslinger10
"Oregon has recruited extrememly well at the position the last two years. We are talking 6'5" to 6'7" and arriving on campus at 285. Our new guys are already bigger than some of the upperclasmen. Once CK stacks a couple of these classes on top of each other, watch out. Of course, that is if nothing major comes of the lyles deal."
I picked up a woman once who looked as beautiful as a dream. And so we started to have some fun, and had a few drinks. She held my hand and after a while she lead me home.
That was where I first learn that she was really a beautiful pick pocket, and thief. Looks are very misleading a lot of time. What you are seeing is not what you want. But instead, what you get. What we want and what we can have is very rare in love and sports. Especially football. So please running off the size and numbers about your Oregon football team players does very little to empress the LSU & SEC college football fans. We know better.
I picked up a woman once who looked as beautiful as a dream. And so we started to have some fun, and had a few drinks. She held my hand and after a while she lead me home.
That was where I first learn that she was really a beautiful pick pocket, and thief. Looks are very misleading a lot of time. What you are seeing is not what you want. But instead, what you get. What we want and what we can have is very rare in love and sports. Especially football. So please running off the size and numbers about your Oregon football team players does very little to empress the LSU & SEC college football fans. We know better.
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:31 pm to GoldRing
quote:
I picked up a woman once who looked as beautiful as a dream. And so we started to have some fun, and had a few drinks. She held my hand and after a while she lead me home.
That was where I first learn that she was really a beautiful pick pocket, and thief. Looks are very misleading a lot of time. What you are seeing is not what you want. But instead, what you get. What we want and what we can have is very rare in love and sports. Especially football. So please running off the size and numbers about your Oregon football team players does very little to empress the LSU & SEC college football fans. We know better.
Sorry about your misfortune, dude. However, I am not comparing our olinemen to yours, buddy, or any oline in the SEC for that matter. I am comparing our new ones to our old ones. So, no need to get defensive. It's a fact that our recruting is up. I also believe that our ineptitude on offense against Auburn was due our offensive line. SO, you can see why I think you hijacked the point of my post and then turned it into a fricking SEC rant.
This post was edited on 6/23/11 at 12:35 pm
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:38 pm to bisonduck
November means Duck hunting in the bayou. That was your Quote,bud. I never hijacked jack. And I love Defense.
You have no point. Everyone want to do better.
Lets play a football game.
You have no point. Everyone want to do better.
Lets play a football game.
This post was edited on 6/23/11 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:42 pm to GoldRing
No, you made it into a an SEC rant - we got bigger dicks - thread. I am just saying that Oregon's offense, dubbed a "gimmick" in this thread, was only stifled by Auburn because of a talent differential on the lines. Oregon is now getting better talent and we'll see if the 30 some odd carries for 75 yards occurs in the future. I am saying it is a talent thing not a scheme problem. Also, our guys on the oline last year were smaller. That is why I listed the new guys coming in as being bigger and hopefully better.
Also, posting my quote and going on a tangent doesn't mean you didn't miss the point of my post.
Also, posting my quote and going on a tangent doesn't mean you didn't miss the point of my post.
This post was edited on 6/23/11 at 12:46 pm
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:51 pm to bisonduck
That was your Quote. I frankly do not care what you meant.I do not know you. And do not want to. I do not care about you at all bud. But that what you said.
This post was edited on 6/23/11 at 12:55 pm
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:53 pm to GoldRing
Well there you have it. You don't want to get to know me 
. You care so little about it, that you decided to write a worthless piece of shite post that had nothing to do about it and to chest pump SEC superiority. I KNOW the SEC is better. There you have it again. Now let's get back to the point of the thread.
Gimmiky offenses: Auburn '11 and they won the SEC.
. You care so little about it, that you decided to write a worthless piece of shite post that had nothing to do about it and to chest pump SEC superiority. I KNOW the SEC is better. There you have it again. Now let's get back to the point of the thread. Gimmiky offenses: Auburn '11 and they won the SEC.
This post was edited on 6/23/11 at 12:57 pm
Posted on 6/23/11 at 12:59 pm to BigEdLSU
quote:
Another thing to consider, their rush d stats are inflated because most teams abandoned the run and had to play catchup. Cam ate alot of clock last year.
True, but in the BCS title game, Oregon was never out of it. They weren't playing catchup. They just couldn't run the ball v. Auburn.
I like our chances.
Posted on 6/23/11 at 1:01 pm to mtntiger
quote:
, but in the BCS title game, Oregon was never out of it. They weren't playing catchup. They just couldn't run the ball v. Auburn.
I like our chances.
I would like your chances as well. Oregon's offense won't put up a lot of points in this game. Breaking in a center and a guard will be tough to overcome. However, I do think that Oregon will manage more yards on the ground than against Auburn.
Posted on 6/23/11 at 1:27 pm to TXGunslinger10
quote:
Assuming both DT's were in 2's, the C could get the backer, and the backside G could scoop the DT, but I don't see how the tackle could scoop the DT on such a quick hitting play.
U think the timing would be off a little? I'm curious. How do you see it going?
Why are yal worrying about backside DL in the veer? We standard cut every backside DL without questions.
Posted on 6/23/11 at 2:15 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Why are yal worrying about backside DL in the veer? We standard cut every backside DL without questions.
Hey, We're cutting the backside on the veer no doubt. I think 7th Ward's point was back when we were talking about the base triple option. Which I still think you would cut the backside there too.
Posted on 6/23/11 at 2:36 pm to TXGunslinger10
quote:
Hey, We're cutting the backside on the veer no doubt. I think 7th Ward's point was back when we were talking about the base triple option. Which I still think you would cut the backside there too.
O gotcha.
Yea I was a little confused about all the scoop talk. Even in the standard triple option I still think you cut backside. I don’t see any way a tackle could scoop to a 2-tec on a triple option dive. The only way that could happen is if you combo blocked it, and that’s too slow for the guard to get up to a backer on such a quick hitting play like the dive. Most importantly, though, I don’t even think you need to do it. Like you mentioned, I would absolutely just cut the backside tackle unless the tackle is some sort of freak of nature. I’d have a serious talk with my QB and FB if our dive is routinely getting stuffed by a backside tackle.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News