New Plays on Offense

Submitted by joeyb on

I know the leading blocker argument has been kind of beaten to death lately, but I wanted to point out that on the drive that ended in the 101 yard pick6 was almost entirely I-form. I need to watch the game again, but I think that it may have been all all running until that one pass, if not all I-form runs.

The real point that I wanted to make with the post is that in the first 3 games of the season, we seemed to be getting a new wrinkle/formation/package in offense every game. And then it stopped. Completely. Did any one else notice this? We have been running the exact same plays on almost every down. I feel like RR was trying to do the Remember the Titans thing where they run 5 plays, but hasn't been able to get them to run it perfectly.

I guess this could be blamed on "lack of execution" but when are we ever going to be able to execute the same 5 plays if the opponent sells out to stop these plays every time? All I am saying is that we need to add some more plays to the play book. Try that quick pitch to odoms that opened up the RR era again. Try that play that we used in last year's Illinois game where Arrington had the option to keep or throw and he threw for the TD. Mix in I-form with shotgun spread and try a bootleg pass every once in a while.

What really made me realize our lack of diversity in our play calling was when I was watching the Memphis v. Louisville game. I started watching it to see how English was doing, but I was intrigued by the Memphis offense (the early game version). Three plays stick in my mind. The first was when they were in shotgun with a fullback. They brought the receiver in motion and did an option play. It looked like the QB was going to pitch it to the fullback but he did the backside pitch to the receiver. The QB and FB both layed down blocks and  they got some good yardage on the play. The second was when the QB lined up under center on the 1 yard line with a TB in the backfield. The QB fakes a TO call which loosens up the defense and they snap it to the TB who runs for a TD. The third was the handoff which was then passed back to the QB for another TD.

The first play was something that seemed exactly like something RR would run. The other two were trick plays, but those types of plays lead to points, confidence, and momentum. All three would be extremely useful in the latter half of our season.

I am not a fair-weather fan and I wear my M hat every day, but I still want to see my team win. I have said all season long that I expect 6-6 so that if/when we go over that I would be pleasantly surprised. Well, we need 4 more wins for that to happen and I think 5 of our last 6 are winnable if our offense can execute. I don't think that will happen unless we mix it up a bit. I am not talking about ditching the spread for the rest of the season for the sake of our bowl, but it seems stubborn and counter-productive to ONLY use an offensive pattern that is blowing up in our faces. My biggest gripe with Lloyd Carr was that he seemed to mold players around a system instead of the system around his players and now RR is doing the same thing.

lhglrkwg

October 12th, 2008 at 2:58 AM ^

did anyone else notice that the 100 yd pick was the exact same play that we used to get the third td against illinois? (fake run, pass to fullback) except moundros was covered and threet crapped his pants

joeyb

October 12th, 2008 at 3:17 AM ^

I did not notice that, but that is exactly what I am talking about. Why are we running a play twice in the exact same position that we were in before? Because it worked? Do they not think that Toledo watched the film of the game and prepared for that in practice for these situations?

PattyMax64

October 12th, 2008 at 3:14 AM ^

The problem with molding the system to our players is that our players are pro-style players, meaning that Rich Rod would have to run a offense that is different from his own.  That may yield slightly better results this year, but next year and beyond it would hurt us.  To be honest, every one of these losses hurts me, but I can come to grips with this if it leads to future success.  I think that if even if we miss a bowl it won't be a catastrophe.  Think about it, all streaks must come to an end sometime, and that dates to the Schembechler era.  Maybe this is the last wawy we will be disconnected from Bo.  We can start a new streak with Rich at our helm.

I have to say, Bo was a great coach, but its time to let go.  We can't hold on to history forever.  Lets put the past in the past and move on, with or without the streak. 

joeyb

October 12th, 2008 at 3:26 AM ^

I understand, but my point is not that we need to be running I-form so that we can go to a bowl. My point is that we aren't moving the ball because we are using the same plays over and over and over. Mixing in a new play or new formation every once in a while wouldn't hurt and could possibly help the spread plays by keeping the defense more honest.

The only reason that I bring up I-form is because it is a specific example of where another type of play has worked. I list the option pitch and the first play of the season as other such possibilities/examples of what might help the normal plays become more effective.

shorts

October 12th, 2008 at 4:32 AM ^

At this point, I think we have to keep the playbook limited. Like you said in the original post, if they can't run the staple plays of the RR offense correctly, what's the point of trying to branch out and run variations of those? I think that's actually the reason we're seeing the same plays run repeatedly -- the coaching staff wants us to do it until we get it right, even if mistakes are made along the way.

I'd love to see some other stuff mixed in, but you can only throw a certain amount of the playbook at these young guys and still expect them to digest it. Until our offensive personnel are all on the same page, which obviously isn't the case right now, I don't think trying to teach them MORE plays is going to benefit anyone.

 

NJWolverine

October 12th, 2008 at 11:08 AM ^

because he doesn't have a running QB.  His entire system revolves around a running QB.  The option doesn't work if Threet is never going to run, or if he does, the Defense still cheats on the RB because Threet is too slow.  What you're seeing now is essentially a run left play, since Threet is ineffective as a runner no matter what.  Running left on first down is a tune we've all heard before and it hasn't stopped because there is no running QB.  The problem with running McGuffie is that he goes down way too easily.  There has to be a gaping hold for McGuffie to be effective (and he is elusive when he gets to the second level).  But our O-Line is mediocre at best, so most of the time the hole isn't there, the Defense is sitting on the first down play, and McGuffie goes down instantensouly for a loss.  It's just not smart to use McGuffie.  I'm sorry, but Minor is a far better fit given the realities of the O-Line.  They're afraid to air out the ball for fear that Threet will make too many mistakes, so the first down play becomes predictable (where have we heard that before).  I mean, there really isn't any way he can implement his system this year anyways.  He doesn't' have a running QB.  That's why the argument about sticking with the system simply doesn't hold.  Without a running QB, there is no system to uphold.  The McGuffie to the left play bears no resemblence to what a spread really does anyways, so you might as well go with something that'll work better, running Minor in the I-Form.  The screens and quick outs that are part of the spread can stay, but the experiment with the running game has got to end.  Unless he does something bold like have Brown/Feagin/Smith play QB.  Because other than that, this offense will continue to be a mess.  He just needs to come to grips with reality here, or replace the QB and go with an unknown. 

NJWolverine

October 12th, 2008 at 12:11 PM ^

Shaun King prolonged his NFL career precisely becuase of his scrambling ability.  Just becuase he had an arm didn't mean he couldn't run.  It's the threat of the run.  Threet doesn't threathen you in any way becuase he's a Ryan Mallet clone.  He's just not fast in any way. 

cbuswolverine

October 12th, 2008 at 12:20 PM ^

"Shaun King prlonged his NFL career because of his scrambling ability"

No, he did not.  Shaun King played 6 games in 1999, 16 in 2000, and played in a grand total of twelve games over four seasons after that, of which he started three.  He carried the ball 22 times for 63 yards in those twelve games.

 

 

Anonymous Coward (not verified)

October 12th, 2008 at 2:17 PM ^

RR in the process of trying to convince Mallet to stay continuely said that he could make the spread work for whoever was at QB.  Well it does not seem like it has been adapted too much for Threet.  Something has to give a little mix in the I-form move the ball a little and just mix it up.  Stop giving to McGuffie on 1st down for a loss of a yard.