Wishbone Attack?!?!

[RayCock]

A "Newbie" here, And have not seen a thread on it. But wouldn't it be great with the stable if running backs we have that we came out for a game and run the wishbone? I think it would bemindblowing and we could pull it off! What do you guys think?

[ReCOCKulous]

In before the rants. But I think it would be a good set for us occasionally. Double tight end, wish bone could set up so many iso plays and give us multiple different passing angles.

[Nureye]

Someone started this thread a few weeks ago and got slated.

[bigdog2003]

The wishbone may look like a simple offense to run, but it isn't. The amount of time it would take to practice it wouldn't be worth the benefits.

[YouCanNeverTell]

We currently barely have enough running backs to do a single back set.

[The Yancey]

Originally Posted by bigdog2003

The wishbone may look like a simple offense to run, but it isn't. The amount of time it would take to practice it wouldn't be worth the benefits.

This.

[MWard]

Originally Posted by RayCock

A "Newbie" here, And have not seen a thread on it. But wouldn't it be great with the stable if running backs we have that we came out for a game and run the wishbone? I think it would bemindblowing and we could pull it off! What do you guys think?

At this point in time it would not be advisable.

OL is too young all over, we just lost 2 RB's for the first 2+ games, it IS complex and we don't have time to teach it to them effectively, and we have Spurrier calling plays (good luck getting him to do that.)

We could throw in a couple formations like the wishbone, but we won't devote more than a fistful of plays during the season and they will all be situational IF we even use them.

[Goofyboy]

No. Wishbone offenses counted on 2 or more lost fumbles per game because of the ball handling required. The limited payoff and risk to the quarterback aren't worth messing with and today's defensive ends are not as easy to "option" as in yesteryear - too fast and athletic. Using a two-back set, wildcat, and hammer formations as a changeup fits better with our big offensive linemen and blocking schemes.

[Yearofthegamecock]

Yeah, I dont know about the wish bone. Its a little outdated. If you have a qb and receivers that can move the ball, why sit them out and lose that dimension for any number of plays.


Posted from Cockytalk.com App for Android

[99 steamer Hit X]

"The wishbone is not dead, the coaches who ran it are" Barry Switzer

[GarnetBlack&Blue]

Originally Posted by 99 steamer Hit X

"The wishbone is not dead, the coaches who ran it are" Barry Switzer

they weren't coaching against modern SEC defenses... 6'5" 260 Lbs. guys who run 4.4 shuttles and 4.6 40's simply didn't exist...

[bigdog2003]

Its not like you can just "run the wishbone" and have it work. Lets say a team decided to add the wishbone to their offense. They are basically adding a 2nd offense because you have to run more than a few plays. College coaches are so good at finding any tendencies that they would have the few plays figured out after seen a game worth of film.

So they add this 2nd offense, now they have to split time practicing 2 offenses. Not to mention, they have to decide what kind of wishbone to run. Is it going to be the power running based wishbone with little to no option, or the option based wishbone. They are nothing a like.

If you decide to run the power based wishbone, you have to teach new blocking schemes, new running paths for the rb's, new footwork for the qb, you have to have HB's that can block and don't mind doing it, and you need an offensive line that can get you 3.5 yards a carry against EVERY team.

If you decide to run the option based wishbone, you have to teach new option blocking schemes (they are different than our current option blocking schemes from the gun), teach the qb's how to read the defense, have a backup qb that is as good at running the option (lets face it, a wishbone/flexbone option qb in the SEC wouldn't last long getting hit by those de's over and over every game), have to teach the wr's how to do new blocking techniques, and have a fb the defense has to respect.

The time it would take to do these things successfully would be tremendous. You cant just pick and choose different formations or offenses and piece them together and expect to be successful. Players get confused, coaches start questioning everything, and nobody is sure of the teams identity on offense.

Just trying to weigh in from a coaching stand point on what it would require to do this.

[johnmcclane]

only if andrew pinnock comes back

[bigdog2003]

Originally Posted by GarnetBlack&Blue

they weren't coaching against modern SEC defenses... 6'5" 260 Lbs. guys who run 4.4 shuttles and 4.6 40's simply didn't exist...

True, but a lot of times the option makes these fast players play slower because they are unsure of whats going on. We have seen it before when we have played option teams.

Now, I don't think a pure under center option team would have success in the long run in the SEC just because teams would have weekly film on them running the option against other SEC teams. That would allow coaches to gameplan a lot easier.

[YouCanNeverTell]

Urban ran a bone variation at Florida pretty well. We could have been hell running it with Pinnock as a B back. Honestly though if we hadn't had any injuries and really wanted to change our offense completely Lattimore or Wilds would fill a b back spot nicely. They aren't quite the bruiser Andrew Pinnock was but they are still good between the talk runners. GT was at their best with Dwyer runnin the B. I always liked watching tech run it because they always manage to get one big talented receiver one their team. The QB gets to toss a lot of balls up and let his receivers make plays. It still blows my mind how they got Stephen Hill. I mean I think Calvin Johnson was already there when they changed coaches and switched to the option. I think Stephen Hill actually signed up to play for Paul Johnson.

[99 steamer Hit X]

Originally Posted by bigdog2003

True, but a lot of times the option makes these fast players play slower because they are unsure of whats going on. We have seen it before when we have played option teams.

Now, I don't think a pure under center option team would have success in the long run in the SEC just because teams would have weekly film on them running the option against other SEC teams. That would allow coaches to gameplan a lot easier.

100 percent agree..a team like Kentucky may be better off running the wishbone bc the big thing that nobody is talking about is time of possession and when y have lesser athletes than your opponent u slow the game down and keep the other teams offense off the field. Hell Paul Johnson has a solid track record running it and if u can run run run and catch the D sleeping u can hit them deep...

[ReCOCKulous]

Originally Posted by bigdog2003

The wishbone may look like a simple offense to run, but it isn't. The amount of time it would take to practice it wouldn't be worth the benefits.

This statement is false. Most high school players in the state of SC have run a basic wishbone set before. Installing the offense is simple. I would not want it as our primary offense but it would be good to have it if we need it. The wishbone has always been easy to pick up on because the blocking assignments are relatively simple. It forces superstar defensive players that are used to going for the ball to sit back and play assignment defense. This is why big teams struggle with teams like navy who run the option. Even in iso's and counters, the wishbone forces impatient players to sit back and let a play develop to a certain extent before they can attack. Plus, it is easy for smaller or less athletic linemen to block in this set. It just adds another wrinkle and we would always have it if we need it. This offense takes minimal time to install. I know that because we ran it when I played and new guys picked it up easily. Plus with Elliott, spurrier, and Mangus I'm sure they could put their own devilish spin on it.

[ReCOCKulous]

Originally Posted by YouCanNeverTell

We currently barely have enough running backs to do a single back set.

From what I've seen this statement does not appear to be accurate either. Miles is a typical power I running back and those type of players can normally execute wishbone attacks with very little teaching. Miles can (and before anyone says anything he is big and strong enough) to play fullback and he can rotate in at halfback. Plus qua will be a good fullback. Marcus can handle the iso and counter plays because his vision is great. Wilds (when recovered) can also sub fullback (if he blocks better than last year) and he would be good on hb dives, powers, and iso's. Little josh blue (spelling) would be good to have in a scat back role as would mike Davis. With these backs (plus when Carson comes back) we could rotate them to no end.

[ReCOCKulous]

Originally Posted by Goofyboy

No. Wishbone offenses counted on 2 or more lost fumbles per game because of the ball handling required. The limited payoff and risk to the quarterback aren't worth messing with and today's defensive ends are not as easy to "option" as in yesteryear - too fast and athletic. Using a two-back set, wildcat, and hammer formations as a changeup fits better with our big offensive linemen and blocking schemes.

If you're running powers, iso's, dives, sweeps, and running backs into the flats there are no extra hand offs nor are there extra hitches involved. I would not recommend running the option or triple option from this set. Use it more like a jumbo set and devise mismatches based on where the defensive playmakers line up. I've said it before, the wishbone requires defenses to play assignment football and in this "look at what I can do" day and age, most of the time when a defensive player tries to sniff out a play and breaks assignment, he is normally the one embarrassed. And we may have some big o linemen but that does not mean they are super athletes. No offense, I like Cody and mike a lot both on a personal note and as players, but neither one of them is going to be pancaking anyone. Mike M looks like Bambi on the field and Cody lets his height put his weight off center. You take a lot of this out with the blocking schemes of the wishbone. There are multiple combo blocks to get them help against stud d linemen.

[PageUSC]

No. The wishbone is an offense not just some gimmick like the wildcat u can just put it. It takes a lot of time and practice. We run the spread, 2 totally different concepts. And we only have 3 healthy RBs right now.