Quality of SEC offensive execution

[USCNowAndForever]

Watching some past SEC games, it is interesting to me how often SEC teams fail to execute offensive plays correctly.

Examples:

2009 SEC Championship game

-Mark Ingram runs the ball to the right down on the goal line with Terrence Cody lead blocking. Cody barely makes the block and flies into the endzone and almost falls flat on his face.

-Tebow has Hernandez wide open behind the defense in the upper right corner of the endzone, and yet Tebow tries to throw more of a bullet pass and it is intercepted by Javier Arenas.

2012 USC-LSU game

-I have covered this one several times on here before, but USC's TEs fail to execute the Mesh play correctly.

2012 USC-UF game

-I have also covered this one several times on here before. USC's two right receivers run into each other while trying to run a Seam/In route combination.

2012 SEC Championship game

-UGA's running back fails to pass protect correctly, which leads to a Bama linebacker tipping Aaron Murray's pass.

These are just a few examples.

No one is perfect, but considering how well the SEC is known for football, not to mention the quality of coaching, how is this sort of stuff so commonplace in the SEC? Perhaps SEC teams tend to be so good at defense that there is no incentive for them to be better at offense?

Keep in mind that these sort of errors are usually not because of something the defense did, but rather they are execution errors where the offense beat themselves, especially with USC's TEs and WRs not running plays correctly.

[brat]

I don't find it odd, at all.

Consider how many plays an average or good team may execute during a game. We'll just throw out a number...55.

Now, you have to have 11 people to not only execute their job on each play in a well operated, cohesive fashion. Even then, to make it near perfect, you hope that not only do they, individually, do what they are expected to do, but that the defensive layer either doesn't defeat someone by physical strength, speed, or a combination. Additionally, you also have to throw out the possibility of one or more defensive players "sniff out" the play ahead of time by anticipation of what is about to be run and disrupting the offensive timing, making the play appear to be poorly run. You have to also consider a play that is run well with the exception of one or more player deciding to freelancing it, such as a RB deciding to reverse his field on a play before waiting to see how his intended blocking was going to do, or a QB taking off on a run instead of letting a pass play fully develop.

Since the SEC is known for its defenses, for the most part, and most teams have their best athletes on that side of the ball, makes one think that the good "D" offsets an average or good "O" more times than not. The old saying that "defense wins championships" is just as strong as the baseball bedrock of "good pitching beats good hitting".

[b381l]

22 players flying around......easy to understand how not every play is run exactly according to plan.

[Flameout12]

Avg. play is what? 3-5 secs? 3-5 secs to make split second decisions and try to make one's body do what their brains are thinking as fast as they can.

Go look at how many mistakes NFL players make...not an easy game to perfect.

[USCNowAndForever]

Originally Posted by Flameout12

Avg. play is what? 3-5 secs? 3-5 secs to make split second decisions and try to make one's body do what their brains are thinking as fast as they can.

Go look at how many mistakes NFL players make...not an easy game to perfect.

You make a great point, and that is exactly why offenses should be simple, not complicated. If you only have a limited amount of time to process what is going on, muscle memory plays a very important role. How do you increase muscle memory/familiarity with a movement task or series of movement tasks? With more properly executed practice and game reps.

Do you really need 20 different ways to attack Cover 3?

Would it not be more efficient to have 2-3 concepts that can attack any coverage that the defense presents, and allows the players to adjust accordingly? E.g. if I see man coverage, I keep running, but if I see zone coverage, I find the weak spots between zones and settle in them.

Go look at NFL playbooks and see how complicated they are. Even with the amount of time they have, it is a wonder that they are able to get lined up properly (which is a challenge sometimes), let alone run offensive plays considering how big the playbooks are. And I am not talking about the reference playbooks that have virtually any play a coach could plan on running, I am talking about the playbooks that the offensive staff decides to use for a given season.

[USCNowAndForever]

Originally Posted by brat

I don't find it odd, at all.

Consider how many plays an average or good team may execute during a game. We'll just throw out a number...55.

Now, you have to have 11 people to not only execute their job on each play in a well operated, cohesive fashion. Even then, to make it near perfect, you hope that not only do they, individually, do what they are expected to do, but that the defensive layer either doesn't defeat someone by physical strength, speed, or a combination. Additionally, you also have to throw out the possibility of one or more defensive players "sniff out" the play ahead of time by anticipation of what is about to be run and disrupting the offensive timing, making the play appear to be poorly run. You have to also consider a play that is run well with the exception of one or more player deciding to freelancing it, such as a RB deciding to reverse his field on a play before waiting to see how his intended blocking was going to do, or a QB taking off on a run instead of letting a pass play fully develop.

Since the SEC is known for its defenses, for the most part, and most teams have their best athletes on that side of the ball, makes one think that the good "D" offsets an average or good "O" more times than not. The old saying that "defense wins championships" is just as strong as the baseball bedrock of "good pitching beats good hitting".

First, let me say your reply was one of the more well-thought out responses on here. I appreciate your reply.

Based off of what you wrote, it looks like you have coached football at some, or at least have a good understanding of football.

Concerning the part in bold, those are all valid points, but most, if not all, of the plays I mentioned were cases of the offense beating themselves, not cases of the defense outplaying the offense.

The point about freelancing is a good one, but if you have any experience coaching, you will know that it is the responsibility of the coaches to make sure each player understands their job, and is able to do their job.

If players continue to freelance, either they still don't understand their job or they are intentionally going against what they have been taught. If it's the former, the coaches are not doing their jobs as teachers. If it is the latter, the players should be disciplined accordingly.

When you have complicated playbooks, and try to incorporate many different concepts into your offense, you reduce the amount of teaching time per play, and the amount of practice reps per play.

For example, look at some offensive play diagrams from a UF spring clinic:

http://fastandfuriousfootball.com/wp...a%20Clinic.pdf

Of course, that is not all of UF's playbook at the time. And just that is a lot to learn for players. Also, considering the amount of time D1A coaches have to work with players during the year, how are they going to properly execute all those plays from the link above, let alone the rest of UF's playbook?

http://brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2...all-to-be.html

"Basically all they do is run an increasing amount of IZ tied to key screens and two or threee man games on the flanks. When they want to get down the field they run Verticals, Sail, and Y-Cross. What makes them go though is speed and efficiency. Not only does LaTech play fast but they do so with very few mistakes. An offense that does not make mistakes is a difficult one to stop."

http://brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2...fficiency.html

"With the exception of the offensive line, his personnel has changed every year. The constant variables has required him to quickly assess what his players are capable of doing (even if there isn't a logical constraint within the package). Like Alex Gibbs, Tony (and Mazzone) would've come to an awakening of removing plays that resulted in negative yardage or inconsistent production. The following are the basic questions that would push an offense into a cycle of perpetual momentum against an opponent.

1. If this is what we're going to become on offense, what don’t we need to keep?
2. What works? What has the highest efficiency? minimize negative yardage plays
3. Should always be about getting more numbers at the point of attack (this could be double wing, wing-t, or spread) in an isolated area (outside the hash / on the hash / between the tackles).
4. How fast can you run key screen? This HAS to a one of the easiest plays to execute and doesn’t require you to block anyone
5. Focus on plays that require the least amount of processing. Front option / MOF read can be toyed with by defensive movement. Deciphering the defense will only slow your offense down.
6. The more efficient the concept the faster you can play without adjusting. You'll see Tony not running much across the middle of the field, which would require a quarterback to get a clear understanding of what he is seeing (to throw Dig/Post/Shallow where a Rat would be). This is why he’s running power, key, rodeo/lasso – it’s against very limited looks (1/3 of the field) and can work against whatever the defense could be in.
7. The more efficient at converting downs translates to more scoring opportunities
8. Gaining positive yards puts you in manageable situations to sustain drives. You miss every shot you don’t take – the more volleys you can make the greater the odds you can score.
9. The more scores (and the threat of rapid scoring), the more one-dimensional your opponent will become.
10. The faster you play, the less a defense can adjust / change
11. The more static a defensive look, the more efficient your concepts become
12. Protection – what do you need? If you aren’t getting blitzes, you will only get 5 man pressures. If you get 6 man pressures it can be an immediate hot throw. This means you don’t need to involve an inconsistent back in protection….everything is 5 man protection now
13. If you only work in 5 man protection, then there are no adjustments needed from empty to 3-back, increasing the versatility of the offense through simplicity."

Is it better to run many plays poorly, or few plays excellently?

[cockybusiness2]

Hind sight is 20/20

[cockypanther]

Dumb thread?

You can say that about any football conference, offense and defense.

[gamecock88]

Did you watch any other plays other than those few? SEC O vs SEC D, mistakes are bound to happen. Very few offenses look sharp vs SEC defenses. The only one that comes to mind would be Oregon and they still struggled at times vs Auburn and a not so great D, relative to the others you've listed.

[CockLurker]

Hall of what? thread.

[USCNowAndForever]

Originally Posted by gamecock88

Did you watch any other plays other than those few? SEC O vs SEC D, mistakes are bound to happen. Very few offenses look sharp vs SEC defenses. The only one that comes to mind would be Oregon and they still struggled at times vs Auburn and a not so great D, relative to the others you've listed.

Yes, I did watch other plays.

Concerning what you said about SEC O vs SEC D, here is what I wrote in the OP: "Keep in mind that these sort of errors are usually not because of something the defense did, but rather they are execution errors where the offense beat themselves, especially with USC's TEs and WRs not running plays correctly. "

I am not talking about plays where the offense was defeated because of something the defense did. I am talking about plays where the offense defeated themselves. Hernandez was wide open behind the defense, and yet Tebow throws a bullet pass instead of lofting it over the defenders. Do you think he would have done that if he had more practice with that play rather than trying to so many different formations, plays, and adjustments?

In the Oregon-Auburn game, Chip Kelly had put in some new formations and plays, and Darren Thomas struggled to run them properly. Would he have made that many mistakes if they had just stuck with their base offense? Why suddenly change up your offense and go away from what got you to the national championship game in the first place?

Oregon makes many offensive mistakes themselves. Just like SEC teams, they try to do too much on offense. Less practice and game reps per concept usually equals mediocre execution.

If it is possible to get better, why not try to get better? Why just sit there and say "Well, our defense and field goal kicker does a good job of bailing us out, so we don't really need a good offense."

Or in the case of Oregon, why just sit there and say "They score plenty of points as it is." Every year under Chip Kelly they choked in at least one game. What if their offense was better?

[GamecockSuperFan]

Originally Posted by USCNowAndForever

Yes, I did watch other plays.

Hernandez was wide open behind the defense, and yet Tebow throws a bullet pass instead of lofting it over the defenders. Do you think he would have done that if he had more practice with that play rather than trying to so many different formations, plays, and adjustments?

I don't think it matters how many times he would've practiced that play. When your in a game, its instinctive. He just threw the ball and didn't throw it the way he wanted to. It happens..

I mean shoot he practiced his throwing mechanics forever and ever and he still throws the same way? So I don't really get your logic there.. practicing that play in practice more wasn't going to prevent him from throwing a bullet over a lob. That's just how he threw it under those circumstances. You can't be perfect all the time.

Urbans Meyers offense at Florida wasn't made up of a ton of different formations, plays, and adjustments in the first place. It was a spread to run offense that was pretty basic at it's core. It was successful because of execution and because they had guys like Tebow and harvin running the show. The more you talk about football, the less it sounds like you really know what your talking about. More like an NCAA videogame armchair quarterback... just sayin.

[USCNowAndForever]

Originally Posted by GamecockSuperFan

I don't think it matters how many times he would've practiced that play. When your in a game, its instinctive. He just threw the ball and didn't throw it the way he wanted to. It happens..

It is instinctive, which is exactly why it is so crucial to make sure players get enough practice with each play in the offense.

It wasn't just a case of not putting enough spin on the ball, or overthrowing it somewhat, he threw the complete opposite throw of what was needed for that situation. He threw the pass straight to the defense.

Originally Posted by GamecockSuperFan

I mean shoot he practiced his throwing mechanics forever and ever and he still throws the same way? So I don't really get your logic there.. practicing that play in practice more wasn't going to prevent him from throwing a bullet over a lob. That's just how he threw it under those circumstances. You can't be perfect all the time.

That was really not a mechanics issue, but rather it was throwing the wrong type of pass. Tebow is more than capable of throwing good passes.

It is true that you cannot be perfect all the time, but when you are playing SEC defenses, the margin for error is so small that you really cannot afford to mess up on more than just a few plays. Watch a selection of SEC games over the past 5 seasons. First, watch the play overall to figure out which play it is (e.g. Power, Counter Trey, etc), then go through and watch each player. There are constant execution errors. What it really looks like is offensive coordinators are just installing needlessly complicated offenses, and saying "Just do the best you can, if one or two people don't get the playcall, or don't execute properly, we will still bust a good play from time to time".

Let me emphasize one more time, because most people in this thread have either missed it or ignored it: I am not talking about plays where the offense was defeated because of something the defense did. I am talking about plays where the offense makes an execution error almost entirely, or entirely, independent of anything that the defense does.

Originally Posted by GamecockSuperFan

Urbans Meyers offense at Florida wasn't made up of a ton of different formations, plays, and adjustments in the first place. It was a spread to run offense that was pretty basic at it's core. It was successful because of execution and because they had guys like Tebow and harvin running the show.

http://fastandfuriousfootball.com/wp...a%20Clinic.pdf

Of course, that would not have been all of UF's playbook at the time. Just that is a lot to learn for players. Considering the amount of time D1A coaches have to work with players during the year, how are they going to properly execute all those plays from the link above, let alone the rest of UF's playbook?

Also, their terminology is not efficient.

Instead of having formation names with tags added onto them (e.g. Gun Doubles, Gun Trey, etc), why not just give each formation a one word name?

For example, all of your formations could be animals (e.g. Tiger, Dolphin, etc).

[Cocks and Canes]

This post doesn't even merit a response because when you look through the OP's history he is at best a miserable fan who thinks he can do a much better job than our coaches and at worst a tater. Just one example:

http://www.cockytalk.com/showthread....54#post3565354

But I'll respond anyway.

09 SEC Championship:

-Terrance Cody was a nose tackle, it's not really surprising that he missed a block against the team that won the national title that year

-Tebow threw a bad pass? Holy shit, that's something I've never seen before.

2012 USC-LSU:

Our TEs were by far our most effective players that game, I guess you don't remember Justice's long catch and Adams' late catch over the middle that set up our final TD.

2012 USC-UF:

Our entire offense didn't show up to this game

2012 SEC Championship:

Last play of the game, hurrying to the line, and a backup running back misses a blocking assignment? That entire sequence was a cluster**** because UGA panicked, not because of any deficiency among SEC offenses.


I get the feeling this thread was created by someone who is jealous of the SEC's success and buys into the myth that the only reason SEC defense are good is because the offenses are bad, despite SEC teams routinely dominating teams from other conferences on both sides of the ball.

[OldPat]

Originally Posted by Cocks and Canes

This post doesn't even merit a response because when you look through the OP's history he is at best a miserable fan who thinks he can do a much better job than our coaches and at worst a tater. Just one example:

http://www.cockytalk.com/showthread....54#post3565354

But I'll respond anyway.

09 SEC Championship:

-Terrance Cody was a nose tackle, it's not really surprising that he missed a block against the team that won the national title that year

-Tebow threw a bad pass? Holy shit, that's something I've never seen before.

2012 USC-LSU:

Our TEs were by far our most effective players that game, I guess you don't remember Justice's long catch and Adams' late catch over the middle that set up our final TD.

2012 USC-UF:

Our entire offense didn't show up to this game

2012 SEC Championship:

Last play of the game, hurrying to the line, and a backup running back misses a blocking assignment? That entire sequence was a cluster**** because UGA panicked, not because of any deficiency among SEC offenses.


I get the feeling this thread was created by someone who is jealous of the SEC's success and buys into the myth that the only reason SEC defense are good is because the offenses are bad, despite SEC teams routinely dominating teams from other conferences on both sides of the ball.

May I summarize your thoughts? The OP's bird don't fly.

[USCNowAndForever]

Originally Posted by Cocks and Canes

This post doesn't even merit a response because when you look through the OP's history he is at best a miserable fan who thinks he can do a much better job than our coaches and at worst a tater. Just one example:

http://www.cockytalk.com/showthread....54#post3565354

But I'll respond anyway.

09 SEC Championship:

-Terrance Cody was a nose tackle, it's not really surprising that he missed a block against the team that won the national title that year

-Tebow threw a bad pass? Holy shit, that's something I've never seen before.

2012 USC-LSU:

Our TEs were by far our most effective players that game, I guess you don't remember Justice's long catch and Adams' late catch over the middle that set up our final TD.

2012 USC-UF:

Our entire offense didn't show up to this game

2012 SEC Championship:

Last play of the game, hurrying to the line, and a backup running back misses a blocking assignment? That entire sequence was a cluster**** because UGA panicked, not because of any deficiency among SEC offenses.


I get the feeling this thread was created by someone who is jealous of the SEC's success and buys into the myth that the only reason SEC defense are good is because the offenses are bad, despite SEC teams routinely dominating teams from other conferences on both sides of the ball.

Concerning what you said about Terrence Cody, I will go back to my point about the level of coaching. What you said is true, which is exactly why he never should have been in on that play. Why risk injuring one of your most important defensive players on offense when you are only going to use him for a few plays, and if you are not even sure if he can block properly? How many reps did he get with that play? I am guessing probably not that many considering that his primary job was on defense. You can't just pull a guy over from defense, give him a few reps at a new position, and expect him to play excellently at that new position on a consistent basis.

It's not just that he threw a bad pass, he threw the complete opposite type of pass from what he needed to throw in that situation. Hernandez was wide open behind the defense, and yet Tebow throws the pass straight to the defense instead of lofting it over them. Considering how complicated Florida's offense was under Urban Meyer, and extensive their running game was, how many reps do you think he had with that pass play? Probably not many.

USC's TEs made great plays against LSU. So what? Wes Welker made great plays in 2007. Randy Moss made great plays in 2007. Tom Brady made great plays in 2007. But at the end of the season, their offense collapsed against the Giants. It has also collapsed almost every season since then in the post-season.

Concerning what you said about the 2012 USC-UF game, that does not really help your case. I pointed out the receivers colliding on the Seam/In route combination because that is the error play for that game that stood out to me. I think the main reason it stood out to me is because it is an example of routes not being ran properly, which because of players not having enough reps with each play. That ultimately falls back on the coaches. As I pointed out in another post in this thread, Louisiana Tech has greatly simplified their offense and it has worked well for them. It was against WAC defenses, but the point is that their level of offensive performance was high. They generally did not beat themselves on offense, unlike USC under Spurrier.

I am not suggesting that we hire Tony Franklin, but rather suggesting that there is a better way than the way Spurrier has used thus far.

Concerning what you said about the 2012 SEC Championship game, that also does not help your case. Pressure situations like the end of the 2012 SEC Championship game are exactly why it is so important for players to know how to do their jobs correctly, and have the reps doing their job correctly. If UGA had practiced that sort of situation, do you think they would have panicked? If they did practice it, did they get enough reps?

I am a USC fan, and an SEC fan. I think it is awesome that the SEC keeps on winning one national title after another, as well as generally dominating outside the conference. I don't think SEC defenses are great because the offenses are bad, it's just that the offenses could be so much better if they did not defeat themselves so often. If they have a great offense, do their jobs correctly, and the defense still outplays them, that's just football. But when you beat yourself because you have players who don't understand their assignments, players who start freelancing, and players who don't have enough experience running plays because your offense is too multiple and complicated, maybe you need to look at simplifying the playbook.

[qcgamecock]

Originally Posted by USCNowAndForever

Concerning what you said about Terrence Cody, I will go back to my point about the level of coaching. What you said is true, which is exactly why he never should have been in on that play. Why risk injuring one of your most important defensive players on offense when you are only going to use him for a few plays, and if you are not even sure if he can block properly? How many reps did he get with that play? I am guessing probably not that many considering that his primary job was on defense. You can't just pull a guy over from defense, give him a few reps at a new position, and expect him to play excellently at that new position on a consistent basis.

It's not just that he threw a bad pass, he threw the complete opposite type of pass from what he needed to throw in that situation. Hernandez was wide open behind the defense, and yet Tebow throws the pass straight to the defense instead of lofting it over them. Considering how complicated Florida's offense was under Urban Meyer, and extensive their running game was, how many reps do you think he had with that pass play? Probably not many.

USC's TEs made great plays against LSU. So what? Wes Welker made great plays in 2007. Randy Moss made great plays in 2007. Tom Brady made great plays in 2007. But at the end of the season, their offense collapsed against the Giants. It has also collapsed almost every season since then in the post-season.

Concerning what you said about the 2012 USC-UF game, that does not really help your case. I pointed out the receivers colliding on the Seam/In route combination because that is the error play for that game that stood out to me. I think the main reason it stood out to me is because it is an example of routes not being ran properly, which because of players not having enough reps with each play. That ultimately falls back on the coaches. As I pointed out in another post in this thread, Louisiana Tech has greatly simplified their offense and it has worked well for them. It was against WAC defenses, but the point is that their level of offensive performance was high. They generally did not beat themselves on offense, unlike USC under Spurrier.

I am not suggesting that we hire Tony Franklin, but rather suggesting that there is a better way than the way Spurrier has used thus far.

Concerning what you said about the 2012 SEC Championship game, that also does not help your case. Pressure situations like the end of the 2012 SEC Championship game are exactly why it is so important for players to know how to do their jobs correctly, and have the reps doing their job correctly. If UGA had practiced that sort of situation, do you think they would have panicked? If they did practice it, did they get enough reps?

I am a USC fan, and an SEC fan. I think it is awesome that the SEC keeps on winning one national title after another, as well as generally dominating outside the conference. I don't think SEC defenses are great because the offenses are bad, it's just that the offenses could be so much better if they did not defeat themselves so often. If they have a great offense, do their jobs correctly, and the defense still outplays them, that's just football. But when you beat yourself because you have players who don't understand their assignments, players who start freelancing, and players who don't have enough experience running plays because your offense is too multiple and complicated, maybe you need to look at simplifying the playbook.

LMAO, your card should be revoked for saying "They generally did not beat themselves on offense, unlike USC under Spurrier."!
Yeah, it is the over complicated playbook causing all these humans to make mistakes. I have been the QB in a Triple option system, very simple for everyone but complicated for the OL at times. We could execute the play perfectly but react to a defensive player differently and make a mistake even though we ran the same play over and over and over and over with different outcomes due to the defense, you know the other 11 guys on the field who are there to disrupt your execution.
I was also the QB for a pro set offense and very complicated play book compared to the triple option. Within this playbook were several read routes that on 95% of times I read the same as the WR but there was that 5%. On max protect plays the RB was not assigned anyone to block but to assist on the first man through, many times on film it would appear he had no clue what he was doing because he had to make a snap decision on who to block within a split second if more than one man got through. We executed most plays pretty well at the snap, but one man gets beat and now we are making quick decisions, an OL getting meat off the ball is not poor execution but the snap decisions made to keep the play going lead to mistakes that could look like poor execution since pro set offenses have many plays that require time unlike the triple option.
I have been upset a few times over execution to get back to the line and get a played called but the examples you use are players making decisions not execution, there is a reason great coaches have great players.

[USCNowAndForever]

Originally Posted by qcgamecock

LMAO, your card should be revoked for saying "They generally did not beat themselves on offense, unlike USC under Spurrier."!
Yeah, it is the over complicated playbook causing all these humans to make mistakes. I have been the QB in a Triple option system, very simple for everyone but complicated for the OL at times. We could execute the play perfectly but react to a defensive player differently and make a mistake even though we ran the same play over and over and over and over with different outcomes due to the defense, you know the other 11 guys on the field who are there to disrupt your execution.
I was also the QB for a pro set offense and very complicated play book compared to the triple option. Within this playbook were several read routes that on 95% of times I read the same as the WR but there was that 5%. On max protect plays the RB was not assigned anyone to block but to assist on the first man through, many times on film it would appear he had no clue what he was doing because he had to make a snap decision on who to block within a split second if more than one man got through. We executed most plays pretty well at the snap, but one man gets beat and now we are making quick decisions, an OL getting meat off the ball is not poor execution but the snap decisions made to keep the play going lead to mistakes that could look like poor execution since pro set offenses have many plays that require time unlike the triple option.
I have been upset a few times over execution to get back to the line and get a played called but the examples you use are players making decisions not execution, there is a reason great coaches have great players.

All of what you said is true, but the plays that I listed were examples of players messing up on their own without the defense doing anything.

The Mesh play against LSU? The TEs ran into each other...If they had practiced that play enough, that should not have happened that far into the season. Then not only that, one of the TEs kept running a crossing route despite the fact that LSU was in zone coverage. When you run the Mesh play and the defense is in zone coverage, you are supposed to settle in the first "window" between defenders after meshing with the other player running a crossing route.

Tebow's pass? Hernandez had the defense beat, and Tebow threw the ball straight to the defense. It was not anything that the defense did. UF had Bama beat on that play, and at that point in the game, a touchdown and PAT would have made it a 12 point game.

The receivers running to each other while running the In/Seam route combination? They ran into each other. If they had practiced that route combination enough, that should have not happened that late into the season.

Terrence Cody missing the block? He absolutely missed the block. It was not because of anything Will Hill did. Cody had no business even being on offense in the first place. Even if you are going to use him offense, he had better make it worth the risk of injury. That was a simple execution error. Usually execution errors come from insufficient understanding of assignments and/or an insufficient amount of reps with assignments.

The running back missing the block? You make a good point about the pro set offense, but that was not the case with UGA's running back. He started to make the block on the LB, but then failed to carry out the assignment correctly.

http://coachhoover.blogspot.com/2012...onship-rb.html

"Fundamentals of RB Pass Protection

1. Scan the Defense.
Check. The RB scanned the defense and knew who to block.

2. Step with Inside Foot First.
Check.The RB stepped first with his inside foot to get inside leverage and to get his body turned correctly.

3. Close Space Quickly.
Big mistake here. Both the RB and the LB started off 5 yards from the LOS (line of scrimmage), so theoretically they should meet halfway—at or near the LOS. Instead of expanding the pocket to give room for the QB to throw, the pocket is condensed.

4. Punch.
Even with the mistake of the RB not closing the space quickly, he can still do his job and block his man if he punches him at all. Instead, the defender takes off at the 11-yard line and continues in the air relatively unimpeded and tips the ball at the 13-yard line.

5. Expand the Pocket.
After the punch, the RB should continue to force the defender outside to expand the pocket. The RB "opens up the gate" and lets the pass rusher get upfield vertically instead of widening him. On a drop-back pass that takes longer to develop, the RB would need to keep his feet working to widen the rusher and expand the pocket."

You mention the triple option offense, which is a different animal. None of the plays I mentioned involved triple option offenses, or even triple option plays. There is definitely going to be some errors because you are having to read the reactions of defenders much more often, not to mention the fact that the QB may have to make up to 3 different decisions in rapid succession on a given play.

That said, triple option offenses tend to be known for excellent fundamentals because they focus on running a limited number of concepts well. If a coach is doing their job, then players should understand what their job is and have the practice reps necessary to execute the play almost automatically during a game. There should be no freelancing going on. If you have an assignment, stick to it, how can it get any more simple than that? If they start freelancing, either you are not teaching effectively, or they are ignoring you and playing how they want to play. If it's the former, you need to do a better job teaching. If it's the latter, bench them until they get the message.

I agree with what you said about the pro-style offense, which is one of the reasons I am not a fan of it.

I don't know if you saw in one of my other posts in this thread, but Louisiana Tech does not even involve their running back in pass protection. They run only 5 man pass protection. This increases the amount of reps that their offensive line gets with 5 man pass protection, allows the offense to be more versatile, and increases the amount of reps a running back gets with passing concepts.

From the blog Cripes! Get back to fundamentals...


We reviewed how Tech distilled their blocking of identifying multiple defensive fronts to a simple 6-man protection, packaged to an odd or even front. Fast forward two years, and gone is Roger and Louie (determining back help in protection), O-Line coach, Petey Perot, has sold-out to simplicity and has removed the back from the call (just free-release the back every down). Recognize this?



Protection is split to a 3-man zone and 2-man most-dangerous-man side. The quarterback makes the call (Rickey / Linda), so he will know where he has the least help (where the quarterback read becomes part of the protection). This is very similar to what Mike Leach was using at Texas Tech and exactly how Noel Mazzone protects in his system (though he will use a back to pick up the hot).

Source:

http://brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2...fficiency.html

As for offensive linemen getting beat off the ball, when it comes to pass protection, Louisiana Tech, as well as other teams, use what is known as Vertical Set Pass Protection (VSPP). Depending on the drop of the QB, the linemen either backpedal between 2-4 steps. What this does is force defenders to chase the offensive linemen in order to get around them and get to the QB. With traditional pass protection, if a defender beats an offensive lineman, he has a straight shot to the QB and plenty of time to get to the QB before he gets rid of the ball. With VSPP, the offensive linemen are able to buy more time for the QB by moving the potential escape point (the point at which a defender is able to get around an offensive lineman) later into the play.

Several other advantages of VSPP:

1. It allows the offensive linemen to see any stunts that are occurring in front of them and adjust accordingly rather getting beat right after the snap.

2. It gives the offensive lineman the advantage because instead of the defender attacking them with a low center of gravity, the defender is upright by the time they get to the offensive lineman.

Getting back to the line and calling plays have definitely been a problem just about every season Spurrier has been at Carolina.

Louisiana Tech generally did not have those problems under Sonny Dykes/Tony Franklin. Oregon generally did not have those problems under Chip Kelly. Texas Tech generally did not have those problems under Mike Leach.

Louisiana Tech and Texas Tech do not have the offensive talent of SEC teams. Since 2005, Oregon's recruiting classes have never ranked higher than 9th nationally.

I am sure you will bring up the fact that all of those teams played against defenses that are inferior to SEC defenses. I agree. But that is not what is being argued here. Getting back to the line and calling plays are not really affected by what the defense does. That responsibility falls on the offensive coaching staff and the offensive players.

Originally Posted by qcgamecock

the examples you use are players making decisions not execution, there is a reason great coaches have great players.

Tebow made a great decision (throw to wide open Hernandez), but he made a bad throw. The two USC TEs running into each other was not players making decisions, it was players running their routes incorrectly, which is execution. The one TE continuing to run a crossing route despite LSU being in zone coverage was decision making, but then that is on the coaches to make sure the player knows how to recognize zone coverage and adjust. If they can't run it correctly, it should be thrown out of the playbook for that season. The UGA running back failed to block the LB correctly. That was an execution error. The two USC receivers running into each other while running the In/Seam route combination was an execution error.

[Flameout12]

Originally Posted by USCNowAndForever

All of what you said is true, but the plays that I listed were examples of players messing up on their own without the defense doing anything.

The Mesh play against LSU? The TEs ran into each other...If they had practiced that play enough, that should not have happened that far into the season. Then not only that, one of the TEs kept running a crossing route despite the fact that LSU was in zone coverage. When you run the Mesh play and the defense is in zone coverage, you are supposed to settle in the first "window" between defenders after meshing with the other player running a crossing route.

Tebow's pass? Hernandez had the defense beat, and Tebow threw the ball straight to the defense. It was not anything that the defense did. UF had Bama beat on that play, and at that point in the game, a touchdown and PAT would have made it a 12 point game.

The receivers running to each other while running the In/Seam route combination? They ran into each other. If they had practiced that route combination enough, that should have not happened that late into the season.

Terrence Cody missing the block? He absolutely missed the block. It was not because of anything Will Hill did. Cody had no business even being on offense in the first place. Even if you are going to use him offense, he had better make it worth the risk of injury. That was a simple execution error. Usually execution errors come from insufficient understanding of assignments and/or an insufficient amount of reps with assignments.

The running back missing the block? You make a good point about the pro set offense, but that was not the case with UGA's running back. He started to make the block on the LB, but then failed to carry out the assignment correctly.

http://coachhoover.blogspot.com/2012...onship-rb.html

"Fundamentals of RB Pass Protection

1. Scan the Defense.
Check. The RB scanned the defense and knew who to block.

2. Step with Inside Foot First.
Check.The RB stepped first with his inside foot to get inside leverage and to get his body turned correctly.

3. Close Space Quickly.
Big mistake here. Both the RB and the LB started off 5 yards from the LOS (line of scrimmage), so theoretically they should meet halfway—at or near the LOS. Instead of expanding the pocket to give room for the QB to throw, the pocket is condensed.

4. Punch.
Even with the mistake of the RB not closing the space quickly, he can still do his job and block his man if he punches him at all. Instead, the defender takes off at the 11-yard line and continues in the air relatively unimpeded and tips the ball at the 13-yard line.

5. Expand the Pocket.
After the punch, the RB should continue to force the defender outside to expand the pocket. The RB "opens up the gate" and lets the pass rusher get upfield vertically instead of widening him. On a drop-back pass that takes longer to develop, the RB would need to keep his feet working to widen the rusher and expand the pocket."

You mention the triple option offense, which is a different animal. None of the plays I mentioned involved triple option offenses, or even triple option plays. There is definitely going to be some errors because you are having to read the reactions of defenders much more often, not to mention the fact that the QB may have to make up to 3 different decisions in rapid succession on a given play.

That said, triple option offenses tend to be known for excellent fundamentals because they focus on running a limited number of concepts well. Also, supposedly some of it is due to the fact that many collegiate triple option offenses are ran by service academies, and thus they are more disciplined, but I don't know if I buy into that. If a coach is doing their job, then players should understand what their job is and have the practice reps necessary to execute the play almost automatically during a game. There should be no free-lancing going on. If you have an assignment, stick to it, how can it get any more simple than that? If they start free-lancing, either you are not teaching effectively, or they are ignoring you and playing how they want to play. If it's the former, you need to do a better job teaching. If it's the latter, bench them until they get the message.

I agree with what you said about the pro-style offense, which is one of the reasons I am not a fan of it.

I don't know if you saw in one of my other posts in this thread, but Louisiana Tech does not even involve their running back in pass protection. They run only 5 man pass protection. This increases the amount of reps that their offense line gets with 5 man pass protection, allows the offense to be more versatile, and increases the amount of reps a running back gets with passing concepts.



We reviewed how Tech distilled their blocking of identifying multiple defensive fronts to a simple 6-man protection, packaged to an odd or even front. Fast forward two years, and gone is Roger and Louie (determining back help in protection), O-Line coach, Petey Perot, has sold-out to simplicity and has removed the back from the call (just free-release the back every down). Recognize this?



Protection is split to a 3-man zone and 2-man most-dangerous-man side. The quarterback makes the call (Rickey / Linda), so he will know where he has the least help (where the quarterback read becomes part of the protection). This is very similar to what Mike Leach was using at Texas Tech and exactly how Noel Mazzone protects in his system (though he will use a back to pick up the hot).

Source:

http://brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2...fficiency.html

As for offensive linemen getting beat off the ball, when it comes to pass protection, Louisiana Tech, as well as other teams, use what is known as Vertical Set Pass Protection (VSPP). Depending on the drop of the QB, the linemen either backpedal between 2-4 steps. What this does is force defenders to chase the offensive linemen in order to get around them and get to the QB. With traditional pass protection, if a defender beats an offensive lineman, he has a straight shot to the QB and plenty of time to get to the QB before he gets rid of the ball. With VSPP, the offensive linemen are able to buy more time for the QB by moving the potential escape point (the point at which a defender is able to get around an offensive lineman) later into the play.

Several other advantages of VSPP:

1. It allows the offensive linemen to see any stunts that are occurring in front of them and adjust accordingly rather getting beat right after the snap.

2. It gives the offensive lineman the advantage because instead of the defender attacking them with a low center of gravity, the defender is upright by the time they get to the offensive lineman.

Getting back to the line and calling plays have definitely been a problem just about every season Spurrier has been at Carolina.

Louisiana Tech generally did not have those problems under Sonny Dykes/Tony Franklin. Oregon generally did not have those problems under Chip Kelly. Texas Tech generally did not have those problems under Mike Leach.

Louisiana Tech and Texas Tech do not have the offensive talent of SEC teams. Since 2005, Oregon's recruiting classes have never ranked higher than 9th nationally.

I am sure you will bring up the fact that all of those teams played against defenses that are inferior to SEC defenses. I agree. But that is not what is being argued here. Getting back to the line and calling plays are not really affected by what the defense does. That responsibility falls on the offensive coaching staff and the offensive players.



Tebow made a great decision (throw to wide open Hernandez), but he made a bad throw. The two USC TEs running into each other was not players making decisions, it was players running their routes incorrectly, which is execution. The one TE continuing to run a crossing route despite LSU being in zone coverage was decision making, but then that is on the coaches to make sure the player knows how to recognize zone coverage and adjust. If they can't run it correctly, it should be thrown out of the playbook for that season. The UGA running back failed to block the LB correctly. That was an execution error. The two USC receivers running into each other while running the In/Seam route combination was an execution error.

We're so impressed...clearly you're a yet-to-be-discovered coaching legend of unheard of proportions.

[qcgamecock]

So the TE's running into each other has nothing to do with the defense but then you say one ran a route meant for man to man not the zone? Sounds like one player making a mistake in a pressure situation. It is not how good you are when you execute but how good you are when you are bad, no matter how good you are you will be bad because there are 11 humans on the field every play.

In one sentence it is execution in another it is one of 11 people on the field making a mistake, he did not block him correctly, that is not execution that is one of 11 players not blocking their assignment correctly.

So everyone executed the play correctly but Tebow made a bad split second decision, nothing to do with execution and more to do with him reading the coverage wrong.

calling plays are not really affected by what the defense does. WHAT?
I would have already revoked your card but this statement solidifies it!

La Tech was 9-3 and they play a crappy schedule but you think they execute better than a Spurrier coached GAMECOCK squad. Talk to me after Mr. Dykes has a season in the pac 10 with cal, your execution example had 35 more penalties than the HBC!

While playing in both of the aforementioned offenses we made mistakes in execution but they were hardly ever the problem, it was a decision made after the error that caused us hardship. This is the same reason when we execute properly it was a decision made based on the defense disrupting that play that caused hardship, trying to force a throw, trying to make something out of nothing...being human.
I bet you could find as many great plays with broke down execution from the same personnel, the play is a starter blueprint, but we all know the 50% blueprint will have plenty of changes, the 100% blueprint will have more and the finished product will represent the 100% blueprints very closely but we will have to provide asbuilt drawings because even the greatest plans or plays are only as good as the personnel put together to complete them!
To blame a coach for the Tebow throw is just insane, to blame him for TE's running into each other is pretty crazy since they both have eyes to see each other as well as read the defense and to take away the credit of a great play from the LB that did not get to the QB but got his fingertips on the ball is a huge assumption on your part.

Last but not least, if the auburn coach took your advice and benched Cam Newton for free lancing then we would have won that game and coulda woulda shoulda....While running both offenses I had to make split second decisions and reads on the defense when I got to the line as well as after the snap. Do you not think you have to make split decisions in the pro set offense, read the defense, read the coverage, read the safeties and LB's once the ball is snapped.......