An Offensive Philosophy Change

[Millhouse]

with all the packed run pass options out there, being pass first or run first is a bit antiquated. you don't have to decide anything first. you just see where the defense cheats and respond accordingly

however many times a lot of these teams run or pass is decided by the defense. baylor runs a lot because defense would rather die by a million cuts.

i still think mcdonald took an offense that should've had that packaged play element and dumbed it down too much for hunt. wanted to appear superficially like one of those run pass option spread teams when really a lot of it was predetermined (bubble screens) total speculation, no way for me to know

i want an offense in the dome that can air it out if that's the right option based on what the defense gives you. i love spread to run when the defense picks the other poison. i don't want some predetermined run first offense. let every other northeast team be like some big 10 dinosaur.

 

[Finwad32]

with all the packed run pass options out there, being pass first or run first is a bit antiquated. you don't have to decide anything first. you just see where the defense cheats and respond accordingly

however many times a lot of these teams run or pass is decided by the defense. baylor runs a lot because defense would rather die by a million cuts.

i still think mcdonald took an offense that should've had that packaged play element and dumbed it down too much for hunt. wanted to appear superficially like one of those run pass option spread teams when really a lot of it was predetermined (bubble screens) total speculation, no way for me to know

i want an offense in the dome that can air it out if that's the right option based on what the defense gives you. i love spread to run when the defense picks the other poison. i don't want some predetermined run first offense. let every other northeast team be like some big 10 dinosaur.

Bingo. At least, IMO.

 

[Chip]

with all the packed run pass options out there, being pass first or run first is a bit antiquated. you don't have to decide anything first. you just see where the defense cheats and respond accordingly

however many times a lot of these teams run or pass is decided by the defense. baylor runs a lot because defense would rather die by a million cuts.

i still think mcdonald took an offense that should've had that packaged play element and dumbed it down too much for hunt. wanted to appear superficially like one of those run pass option spread teams when really a lot of it was predetermined (bubble screens) total speculation, no way for me to know

i want an offense in the dome that can air it out if that's the right option based on what the defense gives you. i love spread to run when the defense picks the other poison. i don't want some predetermined run first offense. let every other northeast team be like some big 10 dinosaur.

So the big question is... is Lester smart enough, or experienced enough, to be able to see it and teach his QB how to see it?

I don't know that answer, but something I hope we're evaluating.

My hope was that Shafer, as a former QB, and a long time DC, would be the best of both worlds. A guy who gets offense in general, and also knows what kind of offenses give him the most trouble. Maybe he just thought McDonald was the safest choice because he was a good combination of tireless recruiter and tireless worker when it came to studying the offense. But there's a difference between working hard and working smart, so maybe that's what Shafer finally noticed.

 

[TheCusian]

So the big question is... is Lester smart enough, or experienced enough, to be able to see it and teach his QB how to see it?

I don't know that answer, but something I hope we're evaluating.

My hope was that Shafer, as a former QB, and a long time DC, would be the best of both worlds. A guy who gets offense in general, and also knows what kind of offenses give him the most trouble. Maybe he just thought McDonald was the safest choice because he was a good combination of tireless recruiter and tireless worker when it came to studying the offense. But there's a difference between working hard and working smart, so maybe that's what Shafer finally noticed.

Time will tell. But the work Lester has done with AJ is remarkable. Not just based on FSU game - but on AJ's comments after the game and this week - they talk a lot about making correct reads. Nothing predetermined - just the order of your reads. Simplifying and making run/pass reads at the line will get better, I think.

I think Shafer took a good chance on a guy he knew well and that he knew could be a game changing in recruiting in McDonald. He couldn't snag him from Ark unless he gave him the OC tag. I liked both moves - take a chance on a young guy that could pay huge dividends, but cut bait quick if it fails. Lester was always plan B.

 

[Millhouse]

So the big question is... is Lester smart enough, or experienced enough, to be able to see it and teach his QB how to see it?

I don't know that answer, but something I hope we're evaluating.

My hope was that Shafer, as a former QB, and a long time DC, would be the best of both worlds. A guy who gets offense in general, and also knows what kind of offenses give him the most trouble. Maybe he just thought McDonald was the safest choice because he was a good combination of tireless recruiter and tireless worker when it came to studying the offense. But there's a difference between working hard and working smart, so maybe that's what Shafer finally noticed.

On the surface, McDonald was a good gamble. He can recruit and based on all his public statements, he had a general understanding of what the best college offenses are doing. It's just when it came to the nuts and bolts of it, he either wasn't good enough at teaching Hunt (this implicates Lester too) or he was hoping that defenses wouldn't catch on that his offenses were only pretending to have run/pass options

My biggest fears about Shafer aren't that he hired McDonald or pulled the plug. Fine with both calls. I worry that he doesn't know what he wants to do.

 

[Millhouse]

Or maybe...

human centipede offense

 

[SWC75]

When Coach Mac was here we in the pro set. Slowly he shifted over to the freeze-option when DeLeone came on board in '85. Shafer is evolving, too.

I think the big question is the chicken or egg question: do you start out running what you want to be, even if you don't really have the personnel for it hoping that your style of play will recruit the players you need to run it, "(If you build it they will come"), or do you put together an offense that makes sense for the guys you have, win games and use the wins to recruit the guys you want? I think the latter is probably the better plan. We were trying to be like Oregon or Baylor without their talent.

 

[Millhouse]

When Coach Mac was here we in the pro set. Slowly he shifted over to the freeze-option when DeLeone came on board in '85. Shafer is evolving, too.

I think the big question is the chicken or egg question: do you start out running what you want to be, even if you don't really have the personnel for it hoping that your style of play will recruit the players you need to run it, "(If you build it they will come"), or do you put together an offense that makes sense for the guys you have, win games and use the wins to recruit the guys you want? I think the latter is probably the better plan. We were trying to be like Oregon or Baylor without their talent.

baylor stunk forever tailoring their offense to what they had. briles went 8-16 his first two years. maybe they would've been better had thought more about what he had rather than what they wanted to be. i bet baylor fans are happy he didn't.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

baylor stunk forever tailoring their offense to what they had. briles went 8-16 his first two years. maybe they would've been better had thought more about what he had rather than what they wanted to be. i bet baylor fans are happy he didn't.

That's exactly how I look at it. We've seen bad offenses. More bad offenses can be stomached if they're building towards becoming a consistently good offense.

If you keep tailoring your offense to your talent, and your talent isn't special, your offense won't be special. At a certain point you try to run the offense that works best in theory and hope that as you do it better it attracts the talent.

 

[GoSU96]

baylor stunk forever tailoring their offense to what they had. briles went 8-16 his first two years. maybe they would've been better had thought more about what he had rather than what they wanted to be. i bet baylor fans are happy he didn't.

You mean there wasn't a Baylor version of you screaming about how he sucked two years in, had a losing record after three, or pointing out that he was only 25-25 after four years.

 

[Millhouse]

You mean there wasn't a Baylor version of you screaming about how he sucked two years in, had a losing record after three, or pointing out that he was only 25-25 after four years.

going 25 and 25 implementing your system, sticking around, and recruiting is obviously better than short term white knuckling, not recruiting and not sticking around

 

[Pyle]

going 25 and 25 implementing your system, sticking around, and recruiting is obviously better than short term white knuckling, not recruiting and not sticking around

So I don't get it. Mc***it as you say, was recruiting better talent, trying to implement a better system, yet you are one of his harshest criticizers. Are you willing to let somebody implement a system even if it means 2 wins? Doesn't seem to be the case. As I said before, we try, we panic, back to ground and pound.

 

[Pyle]

That's exactly how I look at it. We've seen bad offenses. More bad offenses can be stomached if they're building towards becoming a consistently good offense.

If you keep tailoring your offense to your talent, and your talent isn't special, your offense won't be special. At a certain point you try to run the offense that works best in theory and hope that as you do it better it attracts the talent.

Were you stomaching this offense before Shafer made the move? That's what this boils down to, can we stomach enough ineptitude to put something else in place. Based on the board comments after the UL game, the answer is no.

 

[Millhouse]

So I don't get it. Mc***it as you say, was recruiting better talent, trying to implement a better system, yet you are one of his harshest criticizers. Are you willing to let somebody implement a system even if it means 2 wins? Doesn't seem to be the case. As I said before, we try, we panic, back to ground and pound.

I thought his system sucked. I've made 15000 too many posts over why that is (predetermined bubble screens, inability to count defenders and run the correct run/pass option).

Throw in a few of the most idiotic situational playcalls I've ever seen and you have to pull the plug. if he was just a little less stupid, i could've gone along with letting him learn on the job. but he took it too far

Seeing so many bubble screens thrown into coverage convinced me that he just didn't understand the point of why you want to spread out a defense.

and despite him being a total dope, they still moved the ball! imagine what we could do with someone who can count

we don't need to go back to ground and pound because of one knucklehead. the problem is too many syracuse fans only watch SU - their whole sample of passing teams is pariani spence and mcdonald, three total bozos. "that newfangled girly don't work!"

 

[Millhouse]

Time will tell. But the work Lester has done with AJ is remarkable. Not just based on FSU game - but on AJ's comments after the game and this week - they talk a lot about making correct reads. Nothing predetermined - just the order of your reads. Simplifying and making run/pass reads at the line will get better, I think.

I think Shafer took a good chance on a guy he knew well and that he knew could be a game changing in recruiting in McDonald. He couldn't snag him from Ark unless he gave him the OC tag. I liked both moves - take a chance on a young guy that could pay huge dividends, but cut bait quick if it fails. Lester was always plan B.

lester's work with hunt has gotta be a little worrisome though, right?

 

[Full_Rebar]

Whatever offense will land SU recruits like RGIII, Josh Gordon, Terrance Williams and Kendall Wright is clearly the offense to run.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Were you stomaching this offense before Shafer made the move? That's what this boils down to, can we stomach enough ineptitude to put something else in place. Based on the board comments after the UL game, the answer is no.

I actually was OK with letting it play out.

 

[Pyle]

I actually was OK with letting it play out.

Fair answer, thanks.

 

[TheCusian]

lester's work with hunt has gotta be a little worrisome though, right?

Not if you concede:

1. Hunt played well enough last year to be presumed the starter this year (he regressed)
2. They thought he'd get better (he didn't)
3. AJ, Wilson, & Kimble were all too raw to supplant Hunt (given 1 and 2, why take the chance?)
4. He gave them the best chance to win while the other guys develop (best way)

So, that's the plan going in. What if Hunt is so flawed as a passer and McDonald is so equally flawed as a play caller - that Lester could only do so much? What if thats the little pea under the mattress that became McDonald's demotion?

 

[Pyle]

I thought his system sucked. I've made 15000 too many posts over why that is (predetermined bubble screens, inability to count defenders and run the correct run/pass option).

Throw in a few of the most idiotic situational playcalls I've ever seen and you have to pull the plug. if he was just a little less stupid, i could've gone along with letting him learn on the job. but he took it too far

Seeing so many bubble screens thrown into coverage convinced me that he just didn't understand the point of why you want to spread out a defense.

and despite him being a total dope, they still moved the ball! imagine what we could do with someone who can count

we don't need to go back to ground and pound because of one knucklehead. the problem is too many syracuse fans only watch SU - their whole sample of passing teams is pariani spence and mcdonald, three total bozos. "that newfangled girly don't work!"

I'm not trying to defend ground and pound, that being said...it hasn't just been one knucklehead, there's been quite a few the past 10 years. Also I do realize it works, I see the other teams making it work. Problem is either we don't get the right recruits to run it (Tim Lane in a WCO still makes me cringe) or we panic and pull the plug too quick which might be the case here. Guys like Long, Ishmael, Philips are the kind of guys to put something like that in place. Unfortunately it looks like it's back to Deleone v2. Like I said before I don't know the answers or pretend to. I've seen us try to change offensive philosophy with disastrous results and I've seen us put the Dome to sleep with ball control ground and pound. The latter has a ceiling of about 8 wins, the prior needs time to develop without the casual fans burning the Dome down. That is a bigger task than it may seem. Grob and his offenses ruined this fanbase. There is no patience, everyone's afraid of Pariani v2 instead of Deleone v2. Personally I just want to win. This **** is so much easier on Xbox...I-form weak double slants...Power 0 left, Power 0 play action...TD. lol

 

[O-pulse]

there have been a number of offensive schemes discussed in this thread; however, whatever on is decided upon in the future it better be one where the OC is not just familiar with it; it must be that he knows it in and out.
Weekly adjustments must be made for ech week depending upon the opponent and to keep the defense guessing. GMcD was familiar with the type of offense he wanted to run; however it appeared that he did not know it enough to adjust where adjustments are needed.
Lester did a much better job vs FSU in adjusting the offense to fit FSU and in a way that he felt comfortable with.

 

[Millhouse]

What if Hunt is so flawed as a passer and McDonald is so equally flawed as a play caller - that Lester could only do so much? What if thats the little pea under the mattress that became McDonald's demotion?

i hope that's the case too

 

[SWC75]

baylor stunk forever tailoring their offense to what they had. briles went 8-16 his first two years. maybe they would've been better had thought more about what he had rather than what they wanted to be. i bet baylor fans are happy he didn't.

I'm sure you can find examples of both approaches working. You site Baylor. I site Syracuse in the Coach Mac. Early P era. Running the freeze option, we managed to recriut McPherson, Graves and McNabb, Moore, Carpenter, Hill, Harrison and Spotswood, even though we were running the ball most of the time. Why did they come here? We were winning! We could have run a pretty good spread with those guys if that's the way they wanted to go.

 

[Millhouse]

I'm sure you can find examples of both approaches working. You site Baylor. I site Syracuse in the Coach Mac. Early P era. Running the freeze option, we managed to recriut McPherson, Graves and McNabb, Moore, Carpenter, Hill, Harrison and Spotswood, even though we were running the ball most of the time. Why did they come here? We were winning! We could have run a pretty good spread with those guys if that's the way they wanted to go.

were they running that offense because of recruits they inherited or did they run it because that's what they wanted to do?

 

[SWC75]

were they running that offense because of recruits they inherited or did they run it because that's what they wanted to do?

Coach inherited in 1981. DeLeone came on board in 1985 and they installed the freeze option at that point. They already had Donnie Mac, who came here when we were running the pro set. DeLeone may have gone to the freeze option because we had him and knew he could run it.