Why no I formation?

MizCane

Senior
Joined
Dec 6, 2012
Messages
4,502
I guess it’s evident our interior run blocking is bad but how about trying to run from the I? I’ve been wanting this from the first game on.

Homer needs to get the ball and get up field ASAP. These RO aren’t working all that well lately. No fullback doesn’t help but we gotta figure something out.

I’m hoping we were completely overlooking this team with VT/ND coming up.

We really missed an opportunity after stopping their first possession and then starting at the 50. If we score a TD there I think this would have been a much different ballgame. Oh well, I think Richt figured we should be able to line up and just win and that wasn’t as easy as we thought bc our O line didn’t come to play.

The focus should be 100 this week. VT is the biggest game of the year by far. Looking for the division title and a real test to what we had as a team.
 
Advertisement

SC-Cane

Sophomore
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
1,139
Every team that has the ball on us has done it without a FB damn near everytime or I formation you don’t need one to run the ball it’s just an excuse we’re using
 

gogeta4

All-ACC
Joined
Nov 8, 2011
Messages
21,815
pretty much...I keep seeing we have NO fullback...i mean you just need aa body im sure the u of m has a body that can run and block ..one of the backers ..parrott...we literally have only ran i maybe 4 times this year...with an og there ...and it looked so sloppy doing so..
 

Torocane

Senior
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
8,103
One thing you don't see much now a days is the fullback in the passing game.
Well you don't see fullbacks period but I remember if you had a fullback with good hands it being really effective.
 

TheMatador

All-ACC
Joined
Jan 30, 2012
Messages
13,863
pretty much...I keep seeing we have NO fullback...i mean you just need aa body im sure the u of m has a body that can run and block ..one of the backers ..parrott...we literally have only ran i maybe 4 times this year...with an og there ...and it looked so sloppy doing so..

When we ran from a T formation (Rosier under center) handoff to Homer was screwed up and ball was put on the ground. We probably don't practice it enough. I and split backfield was our staple in '80's. Game has changed so much.
 
Advertisement

JMG

Sophomore
Joined
Sep 23, 2016
Messages
2,829
Why the fvck does the I formation require a full back...


Stop making the full back excuse.
 
Advertisement

JaxonCane

Recruit
Premium
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
166
In my opinion
No "I" formation or FB because most "D" coordeinators would tell you that it is probably one of the easiest formations to defend. Not better for power run game because you add defenders to the box, so you have to be physically better, if you are physcially better why the need of a FB in the first place. But if you take that FB type kid and make him a "H" back then he becomes much more multiple in the offensive attack. He can pull like a guard, trap, set an edge, or get our on routes like a TE. We have guys that can do that - and a lot of offensive coordinators are taking advantage of the multiple H back sets. some teams that use H backs a lot - Texas (Tom Herman), Ohio State, VT (Fuentes), Memphis, etc, etc.
So the thought is that a H back over a FB gives you the ability to be much more multiple in the pass game and still give you the advantage of the extra blocker in the box that can be pre or post snapped positioned to out number the defenders.
 

TheRichtShow

Sophomore
Premium
Joined
Oct 27, 2017
Messages
3,841
How about Trayon at Full Back?

How about some split back sets?

I am sick of the RPO

And there we have it. A poster who is sick of winning.

Oklahoma, Penn St, OSU, Clemson, etc all run the spread with no I. Yet it's just a problem for us. Get fucked
 
Top