MOAR X/Os! Let's talk run game...

No. At least it wouldn't for me.

In the redzone, and more specifically on the goaline the threat of the pass is reduced. Most defenses are just going to try to outnumber you in the box. There really is no way to get a hat on a hat on all necessary defenders in the scenario. Zone would actually be even more effective there IMO. But of course I'm talking about inside zone.

I did work with one coach who swore on the outside zone in that scenario. His reasoning was you're gonna be outnumbered up the middle, your best bet is to try to get the edge. And if you can get the defense moving horizontally your chances of a crease opening up increases. I guess I can see his reasoning, I don't agree though. I'd stick to straight inside zone there.

I agree with the coach you worked with. I ran that as a tail for 5 years in university in the redzone, it's a dream

Yea I see his logic because if you get those guys 'chasing' a crease is likely to open up somewhere and then you have a 2-for-1 option so to speak as far as running frontside or having something open up backside. Where I disagree is using it as a base, especially against a really fast penetrating type defense. But I guess in that scenario you have the possibility of the boot as a counter.

What set did you run the outside zone out of?

I'm in Canada so we played 12 man ball the sets we used were, 1 back 5wr or 2 back 4wr.
We mainly ran it out of a qb sneak or stretch play on the qb call, so the qb called either a qb sneak or stretch at the LOS. Used in any shortage situations, the read was how wide or tight and end played, if he played a 6tech or narrower run stretch to his side if they were wide and had 7 or less in the box or less he called qb sneak.

Interesting.

I've long been a fan of Canada because of the 3-down rules. I think it gives a broad view of how to attack a defense efficiently.

But back to the zone, we mostly ran it out of a single back set with a TE/Wing on the backside. Our second most popular set was with 2-backs in shotgun formation and the weak back would be out backside seal guy. That might seem odd especially for the outside zone because most coaches want to seal off the playside end but our philosophy was to seal the backside end. It created a huge cutback lane if the frontside was overplayed.

Now I like to see Trips there with maybe a TE opposite of trips to seal. What do you think about that? Advantages/disadvantages?
 
Advertisement
That's the benefit of teaching a zone blocking scheme, it's all about stay on your tracks and block your zone, as opposed to moving objects in a man-to-man scheme.

That inverted veer that you're talking about is that the same one Gus Malzahn has been using with his QB over at Auburn, here's the link to it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtDXpRfIKws

Check out the 2 minute mark for the best view, tight view, and if that's what you're talking about.
If it is, man I don't know if we got the QBs for this type of beating, outside of Gray Crow, unless there gonna bring him situationally, which according to Duke doesn't work out that bad.

I have access to all22.com. I'm. OBSESSED with Auburn. Watched their entire season at least twice over.

I have the same concerns. Not sure who they'll use to run it. Maybe Duke, maybe Rozier, maybe Yearby? Maybe Olsen can do it a couple times per game.

Apparently they weren't running it with the the QB too much, though. They had the running backs running the power, so they weren't reading it. I assume they're just going to set up the sweep with a healthy dose of power.

Watch their game against Alabama this year. Their jet game is a thing of beauty.
 
So more of a "fake jet sweep-power" a few times followed by an actual jet sweep to keep the edge guys honest?
 
I'm sure you're right - I just can't bring myself to watch highlights from Forced *** University...
 
That's the benefit of teaching a zone blocking scheme, it's all about stay on your tracks and block your zone, as opposed to moving objects in a man-to-man scheme.

That inverted veer that you're talking about is that the same one Gus Malzahn has been using with his QB over at Auburn, here's the link to it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtDXpRfIKws

Check out the 2 minute mark for the best view, tight view, and if that's what you're talking about.
If it is, man I don't know if we got the QBs for this type of beating, outside of Gray Crow, unless there gonna bring him situationally, which according to Duke doesn't work out that bad.

I have access to all22.com. I'm. OBSESSED with Auburn. Watched their entire season at least twice over.

I have the same concerns. Not sure who they'll use to run it. Maybe Duke, maybe Rozier, maybe Yearby? Maybe Olsen can do it a couple times per game.

Apparently they weren't running it with the the QB too much, though. They had the running backs running the power, so they weren't reading it. I assume they're just going to set up the sweep with a healthy dose of power.

Watch their game against Alabama this year. Their jet game is a thing of beauty.

My question would be: how does it fit in with whatever else we're doing?

Also, I think Yearby is a good candidate down the line.
 
Here's a kinda long video on the Jet Sweep Power Read (no TE):


[video=youtube;3ejMvCwSik0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ejMvCwSik0[/video]
 
My question would be: how does it fit in with whatever else we're doing?

Also, I think Yearby is a good candidate down the line.

Good question. Working on finding a video to describe what I'm talking about.
 
Advertisement
All of those concepts are really nice and I love to see them in any offense, but you have to have a plan for what you're going to do with it.

Like Pease at UF, we did everything but were good at nothing. We ran jumbo sets, ran counters, sweeps, zone, pistol, 5 WR, 4 WR, etc. and the result was really no identity. Seems like we just picked a bunch of formations and plays we liked and just ran them with no idea of what we were setting up or what our plan was gonna be. I don't watch y'alls offense enough to know but hopefully Coley doesn't fall into that trap as well.
 
I would like to see more unbalanced line formations. Especially in the run game, we use to run that to perfection and always would confuse the other teams defense.
 
All of those concepts are really nice and I love to see them in any offense, but you have to have a plan for what you're going to do with it.

Like Pease at UF, we did everything but were good at nothing. We ran jumbo sets, ran counters, sweeps, zone, pistol, 5 WR, 4 WR, etc. and the result was really no identity. Seems like we just picked a bunch of formations and plays we liked and just ran them with no idea of what we were setting up or what our plan was gonna be. I don't watch y'alls offense enough to know but hopefully Coley doesn't fall into that trap as well.

Exactly why I asked my question above. A grab bag ends up sucking more often than not. A lot of people like to cite Auburn's creativity, but Malzahn will literally run the same play on you over and over. I love his concepts and, actually, can't wait to see what he does with a passing QB later on, but they have a clear identity.
 
We dont have an identity on offense....Are we a power run team or a 4 Wide spread team??






**** if I know
 
Here's a kinda long video on the Jet Sweep Power Read (no TE):


[video=youtube;3ejMvCwSik0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ejMvCwSik0[/video]

This guy is the head coach and calls the offense and defense. I've never seen anyone do that before. Really cool guy to talk to.
 
All of those concepts are really nice and I love to see them in any offense, but you have to have a plan for what you're going to do with it.

Like Pease at UF, we did everything but were good at nothing. We ran jumbo sets, ran counters, sweeps, zone, pistol, 5 WR, 4 WR, etc. and the result was really no identity. Seems like we just picked a bunch of formations and plays we liked and just ran them with no idea of what we were setting up or what our plan was gonna be. I don't watch y'alls offense enough to know but hopefully Coley doesn't fall into that trap as well.

Exactly why I asked my question above. A grab bag ends up sucking more often than not. A lot of people like to cite Auburn's creativity, but Malzahn will literally run the same play on you over and over. I love his concepts and, actually, can't wait to see what he does with a passing QB later on, but they have a clear identity.

Found it. Starting at 4:15, you'll see three plays in a row with the backfield action that I'm talking about. The first is a waggle, the next two are jet/power plays.

Depending on what you classify #35 as (I see him as a H-TE, not a FB) they're in either 11 or 20 personnel. In relation to us. We can do this out of 11 or even 12 (I don't see us doing that in 20 with Tucker as the H [do we even use 20?]). It's been mentioned that Coach Coley likes pistol. Auburn does it in an offset pistol look. We can do the same or from a traditional pistol look. Same thing.

In 11 personnel we can bring Stacey from the slot -- like in play 1 -- or even from a wide flanker alignment -- like in plays 2 and 3.

In 12 personnel we can do the same as in plays 2 and 3, only the slot would be a flexed TE.

Like I said earlier, all we need to teach is the backfield timing and footwork. Every team knows power blocking schemes, here they use a power-G look. At that point, it's up to Coach Coley to make it fit in our gameplan. We have no idea what we're going to look like this year. They made it pretty clear that they weren't showing anything during the "spring game."

[video=youtube;tK8Vv-_Cgz0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tK8Vv-_Cgz0&feature=youtu.be[/video]

By play 3, Saban started blitzing the corners, lol. That's a common strategy used to stop that play. It was made popular by Belichick when the Dolphins were shoving the wildcat down everyone's throat.

TCU uses a check that is tagged to any call -- blitz or base -- called "cheat." If they see any jet motion, the jet side corner comes on a contain blitz, while the back side corner run to the opposite deep 3rd. They even apply it to cover 0 blitzes. Sounds nuts, but it seems to work.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
All of those concepts are really nice and I love to see them in any offense, but you have to have a plan for what you're going to do with it.

Like Pease at UF, we did everything but were good at nothing. We ran jumbo sets, ran counters, sweeps, zone, pistol, 5 WR, 4 WR, etc. and the result was really no identity. Seems like we just picked a bunch of formations and plays we liked and just ran them with no idea of what we were setting up or what our plan was gonna be. I don't watch y'alls offense enough to know but hopefully Coley doesn't fall into that trap as well.

Exactly why I asked my question above. A grab bag ends up sucking more often than not. A lot of people like to cite Auburn's creativity, but Malzahn will literally run the same play on you over and over. I love his concepts and, actually, can't wait to see what he does with a passing QB later on, but they have a clear identity.

Found it. Starting at 4:15, you'll see three plays in a row with the backfield action that I'm talking about. The first is a waggle, the next two are jet/power plays.

Depending on what you classify #35 as (I see him as a H-TE, not a FB) they're in either 11 or 20 personnel. In relation to us. We can do this out of 11 or even 12 (I don't see us doing that in 20 with Tucker as the H [do we even use 20?]). It's been mentioned that Coach Coley likes pistol. Auburn does it in an offset pistol look. We can do the same or from a traditional pistol look. Same thing.

In 11 personnel we can bring Stacey from the slot -- like in play 1 -- or even from a wide flanker alignment -- like in plays 2 and 3.

In 12 personnel we can do the same as in plays 2 and 3, only the slot would be a flexed TE.

Like I said earlier, all we need to teach is the backfield timing and footwork. Every team knows power blocking schemes, here they use a power-G look. At that point, it's up to Coach Coley to make it fit in our gameplan. We have no idea what we're going to look like this year. They made it pretty clear that they weren't showing anything during the "spring game."

[video=youtube;tK8Vv-_Cgz0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tK8Vv-_Cgz0&feature=youtu.be[/video]

By play 3, Saban started blitzing the corners, lol. That's a common strategy used to stop that play. It was made popular by Belichick when the Dolphins were shoving the wildcat down everyone's throat.

TCU uses a check that is tagged to any call -- blitz or base -- called "cheat." If they see any jet motion, the jet side corner comes on a contain blitz, while the back side corner run to the opposite deep 3rd. They even apply it to cover 0 blitzes. Sounds nuts, but it seems to work.

I like the play and it's still zone concept. As you mentioned earlier and several others did as well, I don't see how that finds it rhyme in our offensive philosophy and that's earlier based on what we saw last year. Even for a change of pace look, it seems a little odd or forced if its ever called. We haven't been a zone-read team, so if we ever see this we better see a healthy does of zone read before he pulls this plays out of the hat. Its 3rd quarter type of plays.
I'm a big fan of sticking with your philosophy and living and dying by it. He's in his 2nd year as a coach of this team and evaluating his players and that's usually when you see a coordinator get a handle on who he has and how he thinks they should be utilized, so maybe that's what he think his team strength is and Fisch wasn't on point with his evaluation of personelle.
 
I like the play and it's still zone concept. As you mentioned earlier and several others did as well, I don't see how that finds it rhyme in our offensive philosophy and that's earlier based on what we saw last year. Even for a change of pace look, it seems a little odd or forced if its ever called. We haven't been a zone-read team, so if we ever see this we better see a healthy does of zone read before he pulls this plays out of the hat. Its 3rd quarter type of plays.
I'm a big fan of sticking with your philosophy and living and dying by it. He's in his 2nd year as a coach of this team and evaluating his players and that's usually when you see a coordinator get a handle on who he has and how he thinks they should be utilized, so maybe that's what he think his team strength is and Fisch wasn't on point with his evaluation of personelle.

I agree with pretty much everything you mentioned. I think it's smart to stick with your philosophy, no matter what; and it does seem out of place with what we know up to this point. I would say that this series of plays doesn't necessarily need a zone-read concept coupled with it. It would be great, but it's not necessary.

They don't even read this play; it's predetermined who's getting the ball. Maybe all you need need is a healthy power game and/or a healthy two back inside zone game. Who doesn't spill their ends these days? Apparently Coach Coley made a lot of changes to his playbook when he arrived here. I know for sure that he converted a lot of his terminology to what Fisch was using. Maybe he's going back to what he's comfortable with. I'm anxious to see what we look like.
 
Back
Top