Video and MANBALL

Submitted by Ziff72 on

For those of you posting in the never ending Spring Battle of MANBALL vs Evil I would like to point out 1 little tiny thing.

Has anybody actually looked at SDS offense last year?

Go on Youtube and check out their highlights or look at the video in Magnus's post. 

http://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/

Magnus points out that 1/3 of the plays are run from the Power G series that almost every team in the country runs(yes even Mich ran it last year as well), but what he doesn't point out is that SDS ran about half their sets from a spread look.   They run some zone blocking.  They ran some ace sets that we ran a lot when we Tate was under center in 09.  They did this with a qb that's running ability looked a little Sheridan esque(shifty but wasn't going anywhere).  This should not be that big of a transition.

The bottom line is they don't look that much different than we did last year, they just ran more out of a 3WR look in the I formation than we did.  It's not a stretch for them to install the exact same offense at Michigan and just call more Shotgun sets and let Denard run a little. 

So before you post again just watch the videos.  It should alleviate most of your concerns.   Just don't get down because none of their plays worked against TCU.  They were really good........oh wait for an offense to be good it has to score a bunch of points against defenses that are better than them.   Scratch that we're doomed.

 

AnthonyThomas

March 25th, 2011 at 1:53 PM ^

There have been multiple threads and diaries devoted to breaking down SDSU's style and they've been occurring since January. I'm pretty sure you're the only one keeping the manball debate alive as of now.

justingoblue

March 25th, 2011 at 1:54 PM ^

Some good discussion about SDSU's offense here.

Borges does a good job mixing things up, IMO. The complaint hasn't been that he never does, the concern is that we have no idea what the ratio of "MANBALL" to "gimmick" is going to be.

King Douche Ornery

March 25th, 2011 at 2:04 PM ^

Not another Brian Cookism that the witty guys here are going to burn into the ground.

PLEASE Brian copyright your cute little aphorisms and charge EVERY time they are used.

ken725

March 25th, 2011 at 2:05 PM ^

I don't want to copy and paste premium info, but it has been stated on other sites that Denard is really happy with the new offense.  That should be enough for us to accept it and look forward to the spring game.

trussll12

March 25th, 2011 at 4:38 PM ^

Let's see -- his QB rating last year was higher than Henne's ever was in his four years.  Denard's completion percentage -- ditto.  Denard's passing yards were more than Henne's sophomore, junior, or senior campaigns.  What more does he need to do to prove he's a real QB?  Be taller?  More lumbering?       

Oh, and on the side he happened to have more rushing yards than Hart ever had in a season.

So many people blinded by the defense and special teams issues (and the RR hatred) will never appreciate what happened last year.   

justingoblue

March 25th, 2011 at 5:54 PM ^

But he's a system QB.

Obviously this is not what I believe, but you better believe that mouth breathing haters don't think Denard is as good of an athlete as he is because he played in the read-option (based) offense.

Also, if Henne had played in Denard's offense his completion percentage would likely be higher than Denard's. Denard is a fantastic athlete but the completion percentages are definitely a product of the system (yes I realize I almost called myself a mouth-breathing hater, have mercy).

ken725

March 25th, 2011 at 6:14 PM ^

I think trussll12 missed the point.  We all know that Denard was a great quarterback for us. 

What Denard wants to prove to the nation is that he is an actually quarterback, not just a product of RR's offense.  Maybe he wants to prove that he is more than an athlete and maybe he wants to be named all-conference as a QB. 

He may not have anything to prove to us,  but he obviously feels that he has the need to prove himself to others.  I think that drive for recognition will further develop him into a better player.

trussll12

March 25th, 2011 at 6:47 PM ^

No, I hear you.  But people don't think these things through.  Every QB plays in a system.  Every QB plays on a team.  A simple way to think about it (for people who think that all Denard did last year was rely on his athleticism to run for 1700 yards): what did Henne do under Carr's "system" that Denard did not do as a QB?  Completion percentage?  QB rating?  Yards?  Because Henne was a big, slow, tall white guy with a rocket arm people think he threw for significantly more yards than Denard, or had a better completion percentage, or a better QB rating, or what have you.  None of that is true.  (And this isn't a knock on Henne.  I liked him, rooted for him, thought he was a good QB, etc.)  Denard is an "actual" QB.  

(And yes, RR's WRs probably had more YACs, etc., etc.  Sorry, I still think Denard is an actual QB.  I just watched his throw on the penultimate play of the last drive in the ND game last year.  QB.)

 

 

trussll12

March 25th, 2011 at 6:25 PM ^

If completion percentages and yardage were both better with Denard in RR's read option system (versus Henne under Carr's aerial attack), what is that we are attempting to get back to again?  I don't think there is a statistic kept for completed 8 yard passes on 3 and 12, but I have plenty of memories of those.  (The percentage/system argument reminds me of the argument that RR's system led to some wide receivers being wide open -- apparently a possible knock on the accuracy of the QB.  On what planet, other than the one that thinks having a QB run the ball is "communist," etc., is it a bad thing to get wide receivers wide open?)

Anyway, not that any of this matters.  Chait and Brian have made the very good points about how much better we were at running under RR than under Carr last decade.  I wanted to quickly make the point that Denard as a true soph in his first year starting already eclipsed the yardage, percentage, etc. stats of Henne's tenure.  Can you imagine what that offense would have done this year with 10 of 11 starters returning, with some experience under their belt?