X's and O's thread

[IcSyU]

I wonder if it's time to change our entire offense philosophy. Recruit offensive linemen and tight ends who are built for run blocking and get a O line coach that knows how to coach run blocking. Don't offensive linemen like to run block more than pass block since they can be more aggressive? Get a quarterback that is a good game manager but can still throw accurate short passes. Go to a 2 back set and have a running back like Woody as well as a fast back.

If we can keep our defenses performing as they have, a ball control grind out the clock offense may be our best chance of success. Considering we will usually have 2 or 3 windy and/or cold conference home games a ball control offense may be our best chance of success. At least it would make opposing defenses have to prepare for a different offense instead of the offense that every other Big Twelve team runs except with less talented slower players.

Winning games 14 to 10 beats losing 42 to 35.

Kansas State and Oklahoma know nothing about this spread business. Not to mention the fact that preparing for us would be like preparing for slower, less physical versions of them.

And how often does Iowa State have to worry about only giving up 10 points in a conference game. Once a year? Max?

 

[Luth4Cy]

Does anybody know why Jantz won't take shots into single coverage? It seems like the solution isn't to never run the zone read, but instead to take some shots when teams do put 8 guys in the box. Remember, changing the whole philosophy isn't most likely the answer, the zone read that we run is the same play ran by Arizona, Oregon, K-State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, the list can go on and on.

 

[wartknight]

I wonder if it's time to change our entire offense philosophy. Recruit offensive linemen and tight ends who are built for run blocking and get a O line coach that knows how to coach run blocking. Don't offensive linemen like to run block more than pass block since they can be more aggressive? Get a quarterback that is a good game manager but can still throw accurate short passes. Go to a 2 back set and have a running back like Woody as well as a fast back.

If we can keep our defenses performing as they have, a ball control grind out the clock offense may be our best chance of success. Considering we will usually have 2 or 3 windy and/or cold conference home games a ball control offense may be our best chance of success. At least it would make opposing defenses have to prepare for a different offense instead of the offense that every other Big Twelve team runs except with less talented slower players.

Winning games 14 to 10 beats losing 42 to 35.

I have thought about this before and don't really know what to think. A pro-style offense puts a lot of pressure on every position to "pull his own weight" for lack of a better term. The threat of a QB run puts a lot more pressure on a D. In a Pro-style, 2 back O, you need to be better offensively at about 7-8 positions than the Defense. In a spread, getting athletes in space, you can get by with finding 1 or 2 mismatches. Unfortunately at ISU, I think in the long run we have a lot better chance at the latter than the former.

 

[BigLame]

I have thought about this before and don't really know what to think. A pro-style offense puts a lot of pressure on every position to "pull his own weight" for lack of a better term. The threat of a QB run puts a lot more pressure on a D. In a Pro-style, 2 back O, you need to be better offensively at about 7-8 positions than the Defense. In a spread, getting athletes in space, you can get by with finding 1 or 2 mismatches. Unfortunately at ISU, I think in the long run we have a lot better chance at the latter than the former.

It does not need to be 'pro-style'. Kansas State does not run pro-style, but they do not run a true-spread, do they? To me, it looks like their blocking scheme is to get a hat-on-a-hat and get downhill at the first opportunity. Maybe some spread-type plays are run w/Klein & their RB (forgetting his name), but a lot of time it looks more basic to me than spread/zone schemes.

Likely, I am completely wrong & KSU is predominantly running zone blocking/spread schemes. They are just executing it correctly so it looks foreign to me.

 

[Luth4Cy]

I wonder if it's time to change our entire offense philosophy. Recruit offensive linemen and tight ends who are built for run blocking and get a O line coach that knows how to coach run blocking. Don't offensive linemen like to run block more than pass block since they can be more aggressive? Get a quarterback that is a good game manager but can still throw accurate short passes. Go to a 2 back set and have a running back like Woody as well as a fast back.

If we can keep our defenses performing as they have, a ball control grind out the clock offense may be our best chance of success. Considering we will usually have 2 or 3 windy and/or cold conference home games a ball control offense may be our best chance of success. At least it would make opposing defenses have to prepare for a different offense instead of the offense that every other Big Twelve team runs except with less talented slower players.

Winning games 14 to 10 beats losing 42 to 35.

I really wouldn't mess too much with the offensive philosophy. We have recruited players for this system. Teams that aren't the world beaters in BCS conferences that are currently successful have stuck with their philosophies, Texas Tech, Okie State, Northwestern, even Iowa. Others have changed offensive coordinators and offensive systems commonly and struggled, Minnesota under Brewster.

 

[Luth4Cy]

It does not need to be 'pro-style'. Kansas State does not run pro-style, but they do not run a true-spread, do they? To me, it looks like their blocking scheme is to get a hat-on-a-hat and get downhill at the first opportunity. Maybe some spread-type plays are run w/Klein & their RB (forgetting his name), but a lot of time it looks more basic to me than spread/zone schemes.

Likely, I am completely wrong & KSU is predominantly running zone blocking/spread schemes. They are just executing it correctly so it looks foreign to me.

I'm not sure what their blocking schemes are, but it's still primarily a run heavy and option offense, seems to be very similar to Nebraska's offense. Switching to that right now might not be the best idea, considering our quarterback would still struggle with the option.

 

[wartknight]

It does not need to be 'pro-style'. Kansas State does not run pro-style, but they do not run a true-spread, do they? To me, it looks like their blocking scheme is to get a hat-on-a-hat and get downhill at the first opportunity. Maybe some spread-type plays are run w/Klein & their RB (forgetting his name), but a lot of time it looks more basic to me than spread/zone schemes.

Likely, I am completely wrong & KSU is predominantly running zone blocking/spread schemes. They are just executing it correctly so it looks foreign to me.

I haven't watched a lot of them yet this year, but if they are the same as before, they do plenty of read plays, but also have a nice variety of what I would call "pro style" plays where the RB is more of a fullback and Klein is the TB.

 

[Doc]

Does anybody know why Jantz won't take shots into single coverage? It seems like the solution isn't to never run the zone read, but instead to take some shots when teams do put 8 guys in the box. Remember, changing the whole philosophy isn't most likely the answer, the zone read that we run is the same play ran by Arizona, Oregon, K-State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, the list can go on and on.

I'd guess it's a matter of mistake-avoidance. We took a couple shots, and completed one to J. West that was called back for the ineligible downfield penalty.

 

[cyclone83]

I'm not sure what their blocking schemes are, but it's still primarily a run heavy and option offense, seems to be very similar to Nebraska's offense. Switching to that right now might not be the best idea, considering our quarterback would still struggle with the option.

We can't switch offensive philosophy this year, this would be a 3 to 4 year transition with new position coaches, recruiting etc. K State seems to have success with the if you can't beat em do something well that the others aren't doing.

 

[BigLame]

I haven't watched a lot of them yet this year, but if they are the same as before, they do plenty of read plays, but also have a nice variety of what I would call "pro style" plays where the RB is more of a fullback and Klein is the TB.

That is when Klein is truly the Wildcat and they get an extra blocker in that play. Their bootlegs are so effective, too, and it seems to me we do not get Steele out on to many (if any) of those type of plays.

 

[wartknight]

Does anyone have a clip of the ineligible man downfield play? I never saw it live and the stadium replay was from and endzone. I'm curious if the whole line got a run play called, or if it was just 1 guy screwing up. That was a freakin huge play.

 

[Luth4Cy]

Question for the coaches. Steele clearly isn't great with the zone read. Could the solution to that simply be running more pistol plays? Because that would allow us to keep the same playbook, while simply using more traditional running plays opposed to using the zone read.

 

[hawkfan2679]

Question for the coaches. Steele clearly isn't great with the zone read. Could the solution to that simply be running more pistol plays? Because that would allow us to keep the same playbook, while simply using more traditional running plays opposed to using the zone read.

The read stuff, and the option stuff in general, is based on the ability to read certain defenders instead of blocking them. You could still run the zone stuff, both inside and outside, but I don't know that you could have the same playbook. You could do some same-side reads (think Paul Johnson's offense at GT), but personally if I was going to do that type of option, I would prefer it under center. It hits so much quicker...

As was mentioned above, however, it would give a better opportunity for bootleg type plays, where you set up a play one way and get the flow moving, then pull it out and boot the QB around. The disadvantage is that from the pistol, unless you align your RB REALLY deep, the play fake occurs really early and the flow doesn't get as much of a chance to get moving, thus tends to be a little less effective (given an equal amount of selling/faking by the offense).

At least that's my take on it...when Nevada had the right tools, however, they certainly didn't have any problems running option out of the pistol. So it boils down to whatever you can coach effectively and what system best fits what your players can do. Sometimes it's not the X's and the O's, but the Jimmy's and the Joe's...

/Captain Obvious

 

[Luth4Cy]

The read stuff, and the option stuff in general, is based on the ability to read certain defenders instead of blocking them. You could still run the zone stuff, both inside and outside, but I don't know that you could have the same playbook. You could do some same-side reads (think Paul Johnson's offense at GT), but personally if I was going to do that type of option, I would prefer it under center. It hits so much quicker...

As was mentioned above, however, it would give a better opportunity for bootleg type plays, where you set up a play one way and get the flow moving, then pull it out and boot the QB around. The disadvantage is that from the pistol, unless you align your RB REALLY deep, the play fake occurs really early and the flow doesn't get as much of a chance to get moving, thus tends to be a little less effective (given an equal amount of selling/faking by the offense).

At least that's my take on it...when Nevada had the right tools, however, they certainly didn't have any problems running option out of the pistol. So it boils down to whatever you can coach effectively and what system best fits what your players can do. Sometimes it's not the X's and the O's, but the Jimmy's and the Joe's...

/Captain Obvious

How often is a read run out of the pistol though? I know I've seen it done, but I always thought the pistol created more of a basic, non-option running game, especially considering it was invented to apply the power running game to the spread.

 

[wartknight]

How often is a read run out of the pistol though? I know I've seen it done, but I always thought the pistol created more of a basic, non-option running game, especially considering it was invented to apply the power running game to the spread.

Can definitely run read game from pistol, but it limits the plays to inside zone. Takes away outside zone (read) and frontside read possibilities

 

[hawkfan2679]

How often is a read run out of the pistol though? I know I've seen it done, but I always thought the pistol created more of a basic, non-option running game, especially considering it was invented to apply the power running game to the spread.

You can't read it in the traditional shotgun sense, reading a BSDE because the QB would require eyes in the back of his head for that. You can read the playside defensive end and create a double option, or with a second back utilize a triple option, which is what Nevada does.

Visually...

....................E.....N....T...E..S
.....X..............T..G..C..G..T..Y

............................Q

............................T

In this example, out of the poorly drawn )) pistol, let's say we're going to run an option left. The fella bolded/underlined/italicized is going to be the read. At the snap the QB is going turn his hips to the sideline (perpendicular to the LOS) and ride the tailback going through the G/T hole on the left side. This is basically a dive read in an under center offense. It that end crashes, he's going to pull it out and replace the DE. The LT arc-releases to the second level LB. Kaepernick (sp?) used heavy doses of this play when they went 13-1 (or thereabouts) a couple years ago, including a win over Boise St.

But your point is true as well. It does allow the benefits of the shotgun while also maintaining the possibility of a downhill, power running game.

 

[Luth4Cy]

Can definitely run read game from pistol, but it limits the plays to inside zone. Takes away outside zone (read) and frontside read possibilities

Thanks for explaining that. I've never played organized football so I'm far from an expert on strategy.

 

[Cyclophile1]

Well, I'm thinking that if we assume that we aren't abandoning the Zone Read (or Inverted Veer) setup, we should start including using the Z-back in motion a lot more to give us an extra man to account for. We have tried some of this with only modest success using West and a few times with Bundrage. West hasn't been nearly as good taking the handoff/pitch as he is receiving the ball in space curiously. Anyway, Meyer used this with great success at Utah and I would have liked to see a little more of that. It's something we need to consider using Nealy with I think. It's pretty well documented and viewed that Jantz struggles mightily to make the correct read at this point, so I'm wondering if any variation will actually help.

When the D is flooding a zone or bringing the extra defender like Tech was, we need to be able to take advantage of that with the middle passing game, and taking advantage of the man coverage. Easier said than done when 1) OL can't sustain blocks and the WRs can't get open. I looked at the game again and Tech was just better prepared and had better athletes. They obviously executed well. What's frustrating is that it was quite clear that they knew what we were trying to do a great deal of the time and we didn't try to do much different to combat it. They clearly were ready for what we were going to do and beat us when we didn't adjust.

The lone exception was the first series of the second half where we were doing that shotgun crossbuck action sometimes with a TE and sometimes with a Z in motion. That worked and we pretty much abandoned it because we were chasing points and needed more passing. Yet, in those situations we went back to Inverted Veer several times for minimal or no gain outcomes. I'm puzzled by the playcalling, I really am. I just hope things get better, but I'm worried because that was an offense that confidence out there.

 

[wartknight]

I'm not sure why ISU can't get that frontside read (same as the inverted veer that some are referring to) to work. Other than the long TD run vs OSU last year because of the DE crashing and Barnett handing it off, I can't think of many times that it has been very productive. I don't know if it is indecisiveness on the QB's part, lack of movement by the OL, or a numbers issue that is making it not work. Nebraska runs a ton of it, and the bad part is you know its coming and they can still do it fine.

 

[Cyclophile1]

I'm not sure why ISU can't get that frontside read (same as the inverted veer that some are referring to) to work. Other than the long TD run vs OSU last year because of the DE crashing and Barnett handing it off, I can't think of many times that it has been very productive. I don't know if it is indecisiveness on the QB's part, lack of movement by the OL, or a numbers issue that is making it not work. Nebraska runs a ton of it, and the bad part is you know its coming and they can still do it fine.

In the Tech game at least, they were cheating in with the safety/nickel and just flooding the playside with the extra guy. That extra man goes hard after the RB and it's very hard to make that work, particularly with a QB that appears to be flipping a coin in his head on the give/keep rather than really reading the END. You need to be able to play action out of that and make them pay with a crossing route or deep-in, heck even floating the TE out 10 yards into the vacated space just past the LBs. We have deficiencies clearly, so I don't know what these guys can run effectively against Big12 competition. It is frustrating to watch, clearly.