Playbook timing
I just got done reading Brian's most recent breakdown of a possible 4-3 defense, and thought about players learning the new playbook, and wanting to have it as soon as possible. My question is this then, with the coaching transition and staff hire occuring just weeks ago (in the midst of last minute recruiting), when and how does the staff develop the playbook for both offense and defense and distribute them to the players.
Obviously the coaches want to do this as quickly as possible, but Mattison's most recent playbook is for the NFL, and I'm sure he wants to be on the same page as Hoke, who I'm guessing has a pretty big opinion on the matter. I'm guessing offense is a little easier, since they are transitioning from another college team, with the exception of having some talent that might not fit the system perfectly.
Anyways, anyone who is familiar with when players usually get playbooks, and maybe any inside info on our current situation would be much appriciated. Even educated guesses from coaches that I know frequent the board.
February 16th, 2011 at 5:11 PM ^
I may have them now. Some defensive players have tweeted about watching the ravens on film so the coaches are at least teaching them the basics of the defensive playbook
February 16th, 2011 at 5:13 PM ^
I can't edit from phone. The players may have them, I mean
February 16th, 2011 at 5:21 PM ^
Thanks for the info. That seems like good news that they are watching film of the Ravens for basic understanding. I have just heard that NFL defenses are a significant level more intricate than the college game, so I wass't sure how long it would take to modify a playbook for college and get agreement from the rest of the coaching staff. Although, from what people have been saying, the 4-3 is what most players have played in the past, so this may be more of a refresher to their 4-3 base knowledge.
This spring game should be a great game. I can't wait.
February 16th, 2011 at 5:28 PM ^
I think that it is something of a misconception that NFL defenses are more intricate. It is certainly true that NFL defenses are more diverse - teams run multiple fronts, multiple alignments, and then have far mare variations on those fronts and alignments. If this is what you mean by intricate,then yes, you are correct.
But, the base defenses - 3-4, 4-3 over, 4-3 under - are pretty much the same at any level. On many plays, where the team just shows the bae formation, watching an NFL team play our of a base 4-3 should be no different than watching a college team. Similarly, a corner blitz looks the same at all levels. So, I would guess that if the players are watching film of the Ravens, it is of their base defenses, and what the assignments of the various players will be in that base defense.
February 16th, 2011 at 5:36 PM ^
The new terminology will be the most important thing for the players to pick up. This goes for offense and defense. Playbooks become somewhat unnecessary once you understand the terminology of the play called.
February 16th, 2011 at 5:40 PM ^
This type of educated info is why I love MgoBlog
February 16th, 2011 at 6:48 PM ^
While you are right about the base alignments being similar, make no mistake that NFL defenses have 100x more variations or adjustments to make when the offense lines up.
In the NFL, you have your Woodsons and Polamolus so you have to tailor your gameplan around the best athletes in the world. In college, its more about making sure your scheme is sound as to not confuse or leave a player in a spot that is unrealistic for a college player.
February 16th, 2011 at 9:07 PM ^
What he states is correct. A cover 2 is still a cover 2 and so on and so forth but the biggest difference is how the defense disguises it. As you say someone like Polamolu may be at the line of scrimmage when the ball is snapped but at that moment he may sprint back to his deep safety position to assume his zone in the cover 2. The concept is still a cover 2 but the QB reads blitz. So the NFL defense is more based around not tipping your hand to the QB.
February 16th, 2011 at 5:43 PM ^
was hoping this was a post about the Blackberry Playbook.
http://us.blackberry.com/playbook-tablet/
I need an MGoGeek fix.
February 16th, 2011 at 6:51 PM ^
No matter how many yards Denard ends up getting on the ground, this offense is going to look significantly different compared to last few years and will mostly likely be the more difficult playbook to implement, as is usual for any team.
It's not like our current defensive players have had any continuity in the first place. I doubt they've had specific schematic concepts pounded vigorously into their heads for so long that they can't adjust yet again.
The difference between a college defense and a pro defense (schematically speaking) is vastly overshadowed by the difference between RR's playbook and SDSU's 2010 playbook.
February 16th, 2011 at 8:51 PM ^
Greg Mattison has stacks of playbooks. If there is on thing coaches don't like to do is throw things away. He has all of his old stuff from his days at Michigan all the way up through his last year in the NFL. Add in Hoke's old playbooks and you have some pretty hefty resources. These guys will watch film of our guys and see what they can do and disign a scheme around them and where they want the program to head. It doesn't take as long to do this as one might think with the technology that is out there, a group of college coaches should be able to toss a base defense together in a couple of days once they have decided on a scheme. After that though they may want to work with the players during the spring to decide what other fronts they can run. Offense is pretty much the same process once you know what direction you are going.
I also find it interesting that they are watching film on the Ravens and makes me wonder what they will be running for a scheme. There base is a 3-4, but their Raven package is very similar to what Brian has on the front page as the 4-3 under, except the weakside end is Suggs and he plays in both a two and three point stance. I also know that they ran it a lot against power running team.