2009 tOSU Offense Discussion

[MaliBuckeye]

if executed properly, every play would score a TD. :p

Well, not the "victory formation" or the "clock" play.

Unless you're Dan Marino-

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aHq1P7gccY"]YouTube - Dan Marino's Fake Spike Against the Jets[/ame]
​

 

[osugrad21]

if executed properly, every play would score a TD. :p

Negative. There is the polar opposite perfect defensive call as well that should result in a 'no gain' at the least.

 

[matcar]

Negative. There is the polar opposite perfect defensive call as well that should result in a 'no gain' at the least.

True, except that by my definition, that means the proper play wasn't called. If the proper play is called/audibled, then every play goes for a TD (sans the clock kill, Victory, etc). Personally, I think we should start calling the perfect play and playing with perfect execution. We could prolly put 250 on the board :)

 

[Sportsbuck28]

I really want to see us attack the middle of the field more often in the passing game. This is something that could really utilize our TE's in the passing games, as well as the rest of the receivers in our line up. For the most part, from what I can see, is we either make TP make a long throw on a deep out, 9, or flag or we try to hit a curl to the short side of the field, and also try and roll and have the WR's run outs at different depths. Attacking the middle of the field with drags, slants, option routes, posts, etc. is something that is absolutely necessary and something that championship teams need to be able to do.

 

[BrutusBobcat]

True, except that by my definition, that means the proper play wasn't called. If the proper play is called/audibled, then every play goes for a TD (sans the clock kill, Victory, etc). Personally, I think we should start calling the perfect play and playing with perfect execution. We could prolly put 250 on the board :)

Actually, no. If you look at how a play is diagrammed, there isn't going to be a blocker for every defender, and as long as a safety isn't out of position, gets beat, makes a bad tackle, etc. then in virtually any defensive scheme, the safety can and should make a play to prevent a long touchdown so long as the play happens in front of him. When ordinary plays go for TDs, it's because someone (or many someones) on the defense made a mistake, took a bad angle or missed the tackle. In very rare circumstances, you have an athlete on offense who is so spectacular that he makes the play by himself. See Wells, Beanie and Ginn, Ted for reference. I have never understood the logic behind claiming that a perfectly executed play always goes for a TD. It most certainly does not. That's why the so-called "prevent" defense exists. The purpose is to put extra men deep where they won't be blocked and can react to a play that is kept in front of them to prevent an easy touchdown.

Now, if the argument is that a perfectly executed play always gives you a chance at scoring if the defense fails to execute their scheme and assignments, then I'll agree with that. You can score on just about any play if the defense allows it.

 

[unionfutura]

I really want to see us attack the middle of the field more often in the passing game. This is something that could really utilize our TE's in the passing games, as well as the rest of the receivers in our line up. For the most part, from what I can see, is we either make TP make a long throw on a deep out, 9, or flag or we try to hit a curl to the short side of the field, and also try and roll and have the WR's run outs at different depths. Attacking the middle of the field with drags, slants, option routes, posts, etc. is something that is absolutely necessary and something that championship teams need to be able to do.

In JT's world he won't attack the middle of field regularly with a QB who he doesn't trust yet. You think 4 turnovers are bad, once again if TP's first read is not available, he'll hesitate and most likely throw late. Throwing late down the middle is something that even Brent Musburger would advise against.

Unless the play is intial designed to come to the middle he won't attack it.

 

[bukIpower]

Negative. There is the polar opposite perfect defensive call as well that should result in a 'no gain' at the least.

The big question is what happens when both offense/defense have the perfect play called? OHHH SNAP.

 

[unionfutura]

The big question is what happens when both offense/defense have the perfect play called? OHHH SNAP.

I'm pretty sure that's the plot line of the movie 2012.

 

[muffler dragon]

In JT's world he won't attack the middle of field regularly with a QB who he doesn't trust yet. You think 4 turnovers are bad, once again if TP's first read is not available, he'll hesitate and most likely throw late. Throwing late down the middle is something that even Brent Musburger would advise against.

Unless the play is intial designed to come to the middle he won't attack it.

Forgive my ignorance, but would a quick slant be considered middle or outside?

 

[unionfutura]

Forgive my ignorance, but would a quick slant be considered middle or outside?

depends, usually it originates outside the hash and works its way to the middle, the original formation should open the middle of the field for the ballcarrier. The Qb should throw the ball just inside the hash depending on where the slant occurs, from there it's up to the ball carrier to make a play.

If it's a inside slant to the slot or TE, then it's considered middle.

 

[CalvinistBuck]

In JT's world he won't attack the middle of field regularly with a QB who he doesn't trust yet. You think 4 turnovers are bad, once again if TP's first read is not available, he'll hesitate and most likely throw late. Throwing late down the middle is something that even Brent Musburger would advise against.

Unless the play is intial designed to come to the middle he won't attack it.

Again, I agree with unionfutura. He is offering what I, too, presume to be the reason why TP is not attacking the middle. It's frustrating because it ("attack the middle of the field more often in the passing game") seems like an obvious response to the defensive scheme the Bucks are seeing. I confess that I watch the games and wonder why TP doesn't abandon the intended target and find the hot receiver on a quick pass. However, I think it's safe to assume that TP and his relatively inexperienced receivers aren't ready for certain things and defenses are planning accordingly.

 

[unionfutura]

Again, I agree with unionfutura. He is offering what I, too, presume to be the reason why TP is not attacking the middle. It's frustrating because it ("attack the middle of the field more often in the passing game") seems like an obvious response to the defensive scheme the Bucks are seeing. I confess that I watch the games and wonder why TP doesn't abandon the intended target and find the hot receiver on a quick pass. However, I think it's safe to assume that TP and his relatively inexperienced receivers aren't ready for certain things and defenses are planning accordingly.

I talked to the coaches earlier this week, about what I felt was how teams are totally disregarding the TE in our offense, (which of course everyone on this board knows) I said for a struggling QB to have a safety outlet, is a safe, low risk play, against a team like the Minnesota or Purdue can produce 8 or 9 yards or against a Penn State or a USC can produce 3 or 4 yards; rather than something negative. I was told they do not want TP to even think he has that option, because he always tend to throw late over the middle. If his receivers are not where TP expects them, he'll hesitate just like pretty much every young QB, and wait until the receivers run his route, starring at them the entire time.

JT would rather play chess, then put his defense in a bad spot. We all know that.

 

[cbrian815]

It doesn`t seem like the staff has a lot of options right now with TP. I suppose we will see a shift back to the running game and the I formation.....our bread and butter. I hope it works. Go Bucks

 

[Oneshot]

I talked to the coaches earlier this week, about what I felt was how teams are totally disregarding the TE in our offense, (which of course everyone on this board knows) I said for a struggling QB to have a safety outlet, is a safe, low risk play, against a team like the Minnesota or Purdue can produce 8 or 9 yards or against a Penn State or a USC can produce 3 or 4 yards; rather than something negative. I was told they do not want TP to even think he has that option, because he always tend to throw late over the middle. If his receivers are not where TP expects them, he'll hesitate just like pretty much every young QB, and wait until the receivers run his route, starring at them the entire time.

JT would rather play chess, then put his defense in a bad spot. We all know that.

Well this is not great in terms of trusting TP as a quarterback.

 

[Sportsbuck28]

I talked to the coaches earlier this week, about what I felt was how teams are totally disregarding the TE in our offense, (which of course everyone on this board knows) I said for a struggling QB to have a safety outlet, is a safe, low risk play, against a team like the Minnesota or Purdue can produce 8 or 9 yards or against a Penn State or a USC can produce 3 or 4 yards; rather than something negative. I was told they do not want TP to even think he has that option, because he always tend to throw late over the middle. If his receivers are not where TP expects them, he'll hesitate just like pretty much every young QB, and wait until the receivers run his route, starring at them the entire time.

JT would rather play chess, then put his defense in a bad spot. We all know that.

Pretty counter-productive in terms of QB development, wouldn't you think? Then again, if we could establish some semblance of a vertical passing game I suppose the underneath routes would open up more.

Union, what power does TP have at the line? Is he allowed any freedom like flipping the play or even something as simple as checking down to a hot read on a blitz?