forums

Trying to understand offensive schemes…

Gocanes1990

Gocanes1990

Sophomore
Joined
Jan 28, 2021
Messages
968
Honest question for better football minds than mine… @Memnon @JayCane20 @LuCane @Cribby and others.

Why can’t we look at UW, Texas, Oregons schemes and apply them to Miami. I’d argue they are physical at the line of scrimmage, good running teams with explosive elements and good TE use. Why can’t we just take those schemes and apply them to our personnel and offense?

Thanks in advance… an aspiring OC
 
Advertisement
SmartSelect_20231111_210951_Video Player.gif
 
mcnaire2004 said:
View attachment 268933
Click to expand...
this gif is perfect dude. we fyzical af on this play and block it perfectly and woulda been a touchdown but for the fact that the safety on FSU sold out cause he was 110% sure what play was coming. same thing happened late in the game against Louisville.

I have realistic expectations - we not ever gonna resemble udub's beautiful offense - but maybe do a play fake off this play a couple of times so the safety won't sell out on it when the blocked comes in motion
 
flips said:
this gif is perfect dude. we fyzical af on this play and block it perfectly and woulda been a touchdown but for the fact that the safety on FSU sold out cause he was 110% sure what play was coming. same thing happened late in the game against Louisville.

I have realistic expectations - we not ever gonna resemble udub's beautiful offense - but maybe do a play fake off this play a couple of times so the safety won't sell out on it when the blocked comes in motion
Click to expand...

Is it? It’s just a really good call. Sometimes the defense wins. It was blocked perfectly, you never account for a backside safety on this design. They sent him and he ran it down from the backside. IMO this really doesn’t explain anything in relation to the OP.

I have a pretty simple answer, though. Penix, Nix, and Ewers are light-years better than an injured Tyler Van Dyke.
 
OrangeBowlMagic said:
Is it? It’s just a really good call. Sometimes the defense wins. It was blocked perfectly, you never account for a backside safety on this design. They sent him and he ran it down from the backside. IMO this really doesn’t explain anything in relation to the OP.

I have a pretty simple answer, though. Penix, Nix, and Ewers are light-years better than an injured Tyler Van Dyke.
Click to expand...

It's always about the QB in college football. Always.
 
Advertisement
Gocanes1990 said:
Honest question for better football minds than mine… @Memnon @JayCane20 @LuCane @Cribby and others.

Why can’t we look at UW, Texas, Oregons schemes and apply them to Miami. I’d argue they are physical at the line of scrimmage, good running teams with explosive elements and good TE use. Why can’t we just take those schemes and apply them to our personnel and offense?

Thanks in advance… an aspiring OC
Click to expand...
I don’t know much, but what I do know is that my issues with how we do things are often less about scheme (though, sometimes, as it relates to how we adjust) and more about how aggressive we are in our approach. It just seems philosophical. It extends beyond offense into situational calls.

Some specificity: to be what we want to be, I think we need to be able to change speeds. I don’t think anyone actually argues against having a physical team. I was deeply against Manny Diaz’s overall approach to tackling in practice, for example. You can’t win big without being physical to some level, but that can’t be the end all, be all, either.

Things aren’t black and white. If we had to choose between ‘physical’ and scoring points from a competitive advantage in some speed matchup, I’d choose the speed matchup.

I think the current issue is being more aggressive and proactive in what we intend and how we attack the field and the games/matchups - both in game planning and in-game. From my outside, know-close-to-nothing point of view, we often appear very stubborn or myopic. Like if things have to be black or white.

Guidry may not be perfect, but for example, I appreciated how he continuously adjusted as things in front of him changed. Can we do that throughout all aspects of the team? I don’t know how much Mario/Mirabal dictate (or not) to Dawson, so all we can do is speculate why we sometimes look so rigid or predictable.

People who are far closer to the program than I tell me different reasons. I wouldn’t speculate about that on an open forum.
 
Alex Del Piero said:
UW, Texas, Oregon. Very different from each others. I think that the Texas offense is not very different from what Mario would like but that’s my opinion and I don’t know ****.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Texas isn't running some kind of new-age air raid stuff out there. They have a great line which results in a great running game and a lot of time for a really smart QB to find his receiver.

O-Line + smart QB = a lot of wins
 
Advertisement
Sark is the best offensive mind in the game and you think we are going to replicate that?

Let me repeat what the issue is though. The quarterback. We haven't had a real qb in 30 years.
 
OrangeBowlMagic said:
Is it? It’s just a really good call. Sometimes the defense wins. It was blocked perfectly, you never account for a backside safety on this design. They sent him and he ran it down from the backside. IMO this really doesn’t explain anything in relation to the OP.

I have a pretty simple answer, though. Penix, Nix, and Ewers are light-years better than an injured Tyler Van Dyke.
Click to expand...
Respectfully I think it answers everything. Run up the middle is what we do on probably 90% of all first downs. It almost always goes nowhere. I thought about making gifs for every 1st down run up the middle but I got bored.

SmartSelect_20231202_135041_Video Editor.gif
 
Advertisement
I thought about this watching **** BAMA at the last week's Iron Bowl.

To win in today's college/NFL at QB, you need one of two types (I'm not saying either is "better", but I believe Type I is is rarer than Type II)

Type I
- Statue drop back passer with cannon arm and laser-like accuracy
- Marino, Brady, Rodgers, Manning, Aikman, etc... yeah that's about it
- OL to protect him

Type II
- Serviceable drop back passer with serviceable arm and accuracy
- Is a legitimate consistent running threat for 5-10+ yards to gash the defense and NOT get broken in half
- OL to protect him

At Jordan Hare last weekend both teams had Type II QBs on the field. Miami has had neither a Type I/II QB in forever to MATCH an OL to protect him. King with this year's OL could have been fun to watch,but we can't have nice things. Maybe Emory turns into Peyton Manning (he's built like him and has his mannerisms) next year.

My point is, it is IMPOSSIBLE to run an fully effective RPO scheme with a INT machine who is basically no threat to run (e.g. TVD). It is also IMPOSSIBLE to run a fully effective RPO scheme with a QB who can't complete basic passes, but can run like a gazelle (e.g. JB).

If Miami had either Milroe or Thorne under center this past year, probably add +2/+3 to the dub-u column because of what just those two bring in term of Type II capability.

Again, I'm not advocating for either Type, but the most glaring deficiency uncovered by upgrading the OL play was, surprising to me, QB play.

IF Miami can replace Cohen and Lee's level of impact* in 2024 and upgrade QB1 play, Ws should follow.

*huge concern
 
Advertisement
Empirical Cane said:
I thought about this watching **** BAMA at the last week's Iron Bowl.

To win in today's college/NFL at QB, you need one of two types (I'm not saying either is "better", but I believe Type I is is rarer than Type II)

Type I
- Statue drop back passer with cannon arm and laser-like accuracy
- Marino, Brady, Rodgers, Manning, Aikman, etc... yeah that's about it
- OL to protect him

Type II
- Serviceable drop back passer with serviceable arm and accuracy
- Is a legitimate consistent running threat for 5-10+ yards to gash the defense and NOT get broken in half
- OL to protect him

At Jordan Hare last weekend both teams had Type II QBs on the field. Miami has had neither a Type I/II QB in forever to MATCH an OL to protect him. King with this year's OL could have been fun to watch,but we can't have nice things. Maybe Emory turns into Peyton Manning (he's built like him and has his mannerisms) next year.

My point is, it is IMPOSSIBLE to run an fully effective RPO scheme with a INT machine who is basically no threat to run (e.g. TVD). It is also IMPOSSIBLE to run a fully effective RPO scheme with a QB who can't complete basic passes, but can run like a gazelle (e.g. JB).

If Miami had either Milroe or Thorne under center this past year, probably add +2/+3 to the dub-u column because of what just those two bring in term of Type II capability.

Again, I'm not advocating for either Type, but the most glaring deficiency uncovered by upgrading the OL play was, surprising to me, QB play.

IF Miami can replace Cohen and Lee's level of impact* in 2024 and upgrade QB1 play, Ws should follow.

*huge concern
Click to expand...
The only thing I thought about watching Bama is how they started the year with a suspect OL and QB and the coaches were able to get the players to get it together. I tried imagining that with orange and green but it didn't compute.
 
Gocanes1990 said:
Honest question for better football minds than mine… @Memnon @JayCane20 @LuCane @Cribby and others.

Why can’t we look at UW, Texas, Oregons schemes and apply them to Miami. I’d argue they are physical at the line of scrimmage, good running teams with explosive elements and good TE use. Why can’t we just take those schemes and apply them to our personnel and offense?

Thanks in advance… an aspiring OC
Click to expand...
Every single OC/Playcaller for the teams on this list are absolutely better tacticians than anyone Miami has on campus.


As someone already alluded, it's not necessarily the scheme. The issue is more so why we call the plays we call, when we call them, and why are we using that specific personnel on that specific play.

Did you peep Sarkisians first 2 drives? It doesn't get much easier for a QB and an Oline. It was a clinic in settling in your QB and feeling the flow of the game. That's not apart of scheme you can teach bro. We could swap playbooks with any of those schools but if we're gonna run on 3rd &6, down 2 scores, with 7 minutes left in the game, were gonna do that no matter what scheme.v

I think your question should be, can we adopt the philosophy and mindset of those coaches
 
Last edited:
mcnaire2004 said:
The only thing I thought about watching Bama is how they started the year with a suspect OL and QB and the coaches were able to get the players to get it together. I tried imagining that with orange and green but it didn't compute.
Click to expand...

I mean, they needed a miracle to beat a terrible Auburn team one week ago.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top