"Modern" Offensive football
After perusing the comments on Brian's latest article, I thought I'd offer up some different analyses on "Modern" offenses, terminology, etc.
Pro-Style. Spread, etc. I think these are dated terms and shouldn't really be used anymore by this board. Look at the Colts and Patriots. They are often in 3+ wide receiver, shotgun sets, yet are pro teams. Andrew Luck at Stanford occasionally ran a Zone Read - and kept it. MSU ran a VERY successful Zone Read at us this year out of their "Pro Style" offense.
With the advent of the internet, modern tape review, 20 hour work days (for coaches, zing!) etc. there aren't a whole lot of "new" concepts in offensive football save the Pistol set - debut a few years ago. The future is Multiple.
The "Wildcat" revolutionized football a few years ago - until defenses remembered that this was 1950's football and how to stop it. Now even the Dolphins rarely run it anymore. Rich ran many of the same plays Michigan ran in the 1940's, just with wide-outs as opposed to tight ends. There are an enormous amount of offensive plays out there, but all of them can be stopped by defenses with enough time to prepare.
Navy's Triple Option is ridiculously old offense, but it still works when executed well.
For a great example of what "modern" offense is, watch the Philly Eagles some time with Michael Vick. They run out of the I. They run a zone read 3 times a game. On 4th and 1 I saw them run QB Iso (denard's main play vs. ND). Those are football tactics from 1900, 1940, and the early 2000s. In preseason this year I saw the Titans run a Navy-style triple option with Vince Young. Last week in the playoffs the Packers many times ran out of a 3 back set.
Modern football is multiple football. I dont want Michigan to be "Zone Read" Only, I form Only, "Spread" or "Pro".
It may be a pipe dream with college kids, but the keys to offense aren't scheme based anymore. As Bo said it's all about Blocking and Tackling. Execution. I hope that Brady has a very open mind when it comes to the playbook, and that our Michigan Team can execute better than everyone else.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:41 PM ^
...is spot on. Stop telling me that Denard can only work in RichRod's offense. You can't convince me when I see Michael Vick tearing up the NFL this year.
Andy Reid is as "West Coast Offense" as they come and look what they did to adjust to their talent. Why does Denard have to run 25-30 times a game? Why does he have to put up another 1500/2000 year? Why can't some of those rushing yards be distributed to, you know, RBs? Why can't DRob be taught to pull the ball down when he's scrambling or on a designed roll out and run with the ball when he may be the best option?
January 13th, 2011 at 3:51 PM ^
As much as "decided schematic advantage" is a bad statement, I do believe that 10 years ago the "spread" formations were an advantage/equalizer to undermatched teams - much like the 3 point shot in Basketball.
But... now everybody knows about the 3 and utilizes the 3 and can compete against it. The Strategery is past. Let's get multiple and own some fools this year
January 13th, 2011 at 3:51 PM ^
To answer your question about why the RB's can't actually be given the rock to run with, it's because they didn't run the ball particularly well this year. Denard was our best running option last year which is partially the reason why he picked up over 1,500 yards on the ground.
January 13th, 2011 at 4:22 PM ^
...running backs and you can't convince me that one or more can't have a breakout year if they're given the ball on a consistent basis. And no, I don't mean that the measuring stick is a 1000 yd rusher. And yes, DRob is our best rusher, but let's let him get his yards when he's got open space in front of him and can shred defenses that are spread all over the field in pass coverage. Better than getting schwacked 15 times a game by DLs and LBs at LOS +/- 5 yds.
If Borges is the guy, I'm looking forward to how he creates a "Great Lakes Coast Offense (TM)" that utilizes DRob like Steve Young or Michael Vick.
January 13th, 2011 at 4:33 PM ^
The first thing I thought of when Hoke was announced was how the Eagles used Mike Vick this year. I'll take 750 yds rushing / 3,000 yds passing from DRob next year. Our offense will move forward next year in the Great Lakes Offense.
BTW love the new TM, but I had to drop the Coast. It was too long for me. That's what she said.
January 13th, 2011 at 5:52 PM ^
Third Coast Offense please, standard Great Lakes Coast nomenclature
January 13th, 2011 at 6:14 PM ^
this must become standard nomenclature for all mgoposters from here forward
January 13th, 2011 at 4:24 PM ^
Instead of using the QB as a defacto 6th or 7th blocker and allowing for the defense to choose whether Denard or whoever the RB in the game at the time was, Rich Rod decided to use the RB as an actual 6th or 7th blocker so that Denard would be the one carrying the ball.
January 13th, 2011 at 5:23 PM ^
That may have contributed to our RBs' high injury toll. Being a lead blocker is pretty grueling - you end up in a lot of nasty collisions. This was a big problem I had with RR's offense. Yes, it could work very well when everyone was healthy, but it resulted in the QB and RBs taking so much more punishment than usual that they frequently were banged up.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:49 PM ^
Amen brotha. We will be the eagles of college football. I like it. Denard will come out of this more NFL ready than he would be with RR. I have no doubt that Hoke will incorporate the scheme to fit Denard. He doesn't seem to be a stubborn crusty old man who wants things just the way he always has done them. ADAPT BABY!
January 13th, 2011 at 3:54 PM ^
Absolutely! If you have a one dimensional scheme, then it can be prepared for. The best bet is to be fundamentally sound and smart enough to switch schemes. It happens in every other sport!!!
January 13th, 2011 at 4:18 PM ^
There is still an advantage to spreading the players on the field. That's why two spread teams played for the NC this year. And it's why the NFL's "two minute offense," with four or five wideouts, still scores at a higher rate per second than any other offense in the NFL.
I believe that most offenses will be hybrids in five years or so. The old I formation will look just ashorribly inefficient then as a full house backfield with one TE and one WR would look as a base formation today.
It's why I still hold out a shred of hope that Brady Hoke can get together with Borges and come up with a hybrid offense that takes full advantage of Denard's skills and helps make Michigan actually be the "leaders and best" at something on the field again besides its fight song.
January 13th, 2011 at 4:51 PM ^
All offensive schemes mentioned above are effective. Predictability is never effective. If you can execute well from mulitple formations/blocking schemes, you will give D-cordinators the trots and a bad rash. If you only do 1 thing well? I can manage a D to stop you.
January 13th, 2011 at 5:13 PM ^
I would hope that the new staff will utilize the Auburn ties to learn more on how to utilize DRob ala Cam Newton. They were able to utilize his gifts while being a little more " smashmouth" which so many seem to adore.
<br>
<br>For a gifted runner it seemed to me that Denard was not often dangerous running when pass plays broke down - maybe not pulling it down soon enough perhaps. I can only guess that he was coached against the tendency to always want to run and over compensated. Hopefully in a system with less focus on him running so much will free him to be more dangerous in this aspect like Troy Smith, Juice, etc vs. Us in the past.
<br>
<br>I think this "Basketball on grass" quote is getting the same distortion that the Harbaugh comments did. If I recall correctly, Hoke's main point was the effect on the defense never getting practice reps against offenses more similar to what they would face in a Big Ten schedule.
<br>
<br>
January 13th, 2011 at 5:26 PM ^
Hoke's point was pretty straightforward IMO - he was saying that teams shouldn't rely exclusively on zone blocking. I'm not sure why this caused a stir, given that most coaches would agree, including RR (we used man blocking on occasion this year).
January 13th, 2011 at 5:40 PM ^
It caused a stir because the author preceded the quote with the words "Disdain" and "Spread Offense". It then got turned into MANBALL and everyone went nuts with it. I've pointed out numerous times that this was misinterpreted and that it likely means we will have a very diverse offense. This is exactly what made Harbaugh's offense so powerful, but that doesn't matter to anyone.
January 13th, 2011 at 8:27 PM ^
...if "people" wouldn't jump to conclusions about such things and create MGoBlog-isms that just... won't... die.
January 13th, 2011 at 5:41 PM ^
It should give you some hope. Best runs are at 20 seconds and 4 minutes. Vick passes/runs out of the spread and I-form and there is even an option pitch and at least one zone read in there. And before Vick Beamer wasn't known as an offensive innovator by a long stretch:
January 13th, 2011 at 5:59 PM ^
I may interpret this wrong, but in the pros, nearly every offense uses every scheme nowadays - because it's the players job to know every system inside and out. The argument some have is that in college and high school, if kids learn the "pro style," they won't know any of the various sets perfectly. For example, they won't be able to recognize from a spread look when they have an advantage on the edge because of the defense's constraints. Or when, from a multi-back look they notice they have an advantage on the weakside. However, because they can run multiple looks, they can more effectively adapt their game strategy for whomever they play. But during a play they have more trouble taking advantage of a defense's weaknesses.
Now a caveat is that every college offense doesn't only run out of one formation - I believe we ran the I on one drive against Penn State in 2009 - but there is a lot more variety from team to team than in the pros, since student athletes cannot dedicate as much time to studying football as pro athletes can.
In the pros, you'll see Peyton Manning notice a defensive constraint and check to a play. The defense then realizes he's taking advantage of their exposed weakness and checks to a different formation. Manning checks to another play, and so on until the snap. In college, the QB will check once or will not, and the D certainly doesn't check to another defense.
My take kind of goes along with what Brian said about Hoke's teams having a lower offensive ceiling, and makes sense when you think of Tresselball and Lloydball - that they rely on defense and uninspired offense. However, it also gives us hope for an easy transition, since Hoke's "pro style" OC should be able to run a sloppier spread offense for Denard's last two seasons.
Again this is the take of someone who played HS football and no further. Please correct any flaws in the logic.
January 14th, 2011 at 8:43 AM ^
"It may be a pipe dream with college kids, but the keys to offense aren't scheme based anymore."
I'm not sure how much of this stuff college kids can be expected to pick up, they're busy enough anyway. But if say, we learn 10 "spread" runs and 10 "I" runs as opposed to 20 "I" runs... I'd feel better about our offense