Some good info from Rahme

[kingottoiii]

Here

The added rushing yards and lack of sacks is pretty impressive. Says a lot about our OL.

 

[Chip]

Everyone has their own definition of turning the corner. But in my mind, it happened when we started rushing the ball the way we did. Call it Pugh, call it Trudo, call it RBs, entire team effort, more focus, doesn't matter who gets the most credit. Minnesota showed a blueprint that our passing game could be stopped if there was no running game. Once we were running the ball, we were unstoppable.

 

[kingottoiii]

Everyone has their own definition of turning the corner. But in my mind, it happened when we started rushing the ball the way we did. Call it Pugh, call it Trudo, call it RBs, entire team effort, more focus, doesn't matter who gets the most credit. Minnesota showed a blueprint that our passing game could be stopped if there was no running game. Once we were running the ball, we were unstoppable.

Yep. IMO it started with UConn when we started going under center more, using more two TE sets, and calling running plays that fit Smith's style. If you remember before then you could count on one hand the amount of times we went under center. Even in short yardage situations.

 

[Chip]

Yep. IMO it started with UConn when we started going under center more, using more two TE sets, and calling running plays that fit Smith's style. If you remember before then you could count on one hand the amount of times we went under center. Even in short yardage situations.

I think it was only for tank. I remember after the Northwestern game, leaving the Dome and thinking that absolutely has to be the first time I attended an SU Dome game where every single snap for both teams was in the shotgun.

One thing that also evolved as we ran the ball better is that we started running it better from shotgun too later in the season. Was a joy to watch. Highly unlikely that next year's QB will be as efficient passing as Nassib was, on 3rd down especially. But highly likely that next year's QB will be a better threat to run on the spread option. Offense should still be effective, the system is completely in place now.

 

[billsin01]

I think it was only for tank. I remember after the Northwestern game, leaving the Dome and thinking that absolutely has to be the first time I attended an SU Dome game where every single snap for both teams was in the shotgun.

One thing that also evolved as we ran the ball better is that we started running it better from shotgun too later in the season. Was a joy to watch. Highly unlikely that next year's QB will be as efficient passing as Nassib was, on 3rd down especially. But highly likely that next year's QB will be a better threat to run on the spread option. Offense should still be effective, the system is completely in place now.

Yeah, the sustainability -- that notion that we actually have a solid foundation and something to build on as we get more talent, even if we don't hit 8 or 9 wins next year -- is the biggest storyline of the season, IMO. We can win with our offensive and defensive systems and coordinators. Now we just need to continue to upgrade the talent level and smooth out the play (fewer penalties, limit mental errors, etc).

 

[Chip]

Yeah, the sustainability -- that notion that we actually have a solid foundation and something to build on as we get more talent, even if we don't hit 8 or 9 wins next year -- is the biggest storyline of the season, IMO. We can win with our offensive and defensive systems and coordinators. Now we just need to continue to upgrade the talent level and smooth out the play (fewer penalties, limit mental errors, etc).

This is going to be a bizarre out of left field analogy. We basically made a very important switch to finalize the system a mere 2 weeks before the season began. When I read that article, I immediately thought of 1998, the week before the Michigan game, how storms ravaged the area and the team basically had no time to prepare. And then played its best game of the season. Left 100,000 people speechless as no one had ever come into their house and beat them up like that before.

Maybe football coaches (other than Nick Saban) don't need to obsess about how much time they need to prepare things. Give them less time, and they're less likely to overthink it. And therefore, get it right.

 

[Millhouse]

This is going to be a bizarre out of left field analogy. We basically made a very important switch to finalize the system a mere 2 weeks before the season began. When I read that article, I immediately thought of 1998, the week before the Michigan game, how storms ravaged the area and the team basically had no time to prepare. And then played its best game of the season. Left 100,000 people speechless as no one had ever come into their house and beat them up like that before.

Maybe football coaches (other than Nick Saban) don't need to obsess about how much time they need to prepare things. Give them less time, and they're less likely to overthink it. And therefore, get it right.

they remind me of the Bills in 89, the Bickering Bills year. very disappointing regular season, ended up in a 2 minute shootout playoff game that they lost. the next year the coaches realize that game was a happy accident, why don't we just do that all the time

sounds to me like that's what they saw in practice. even though marrone talked about being uptempo early on, i doubt he would've waited so long to do it with the same core of qb and wr. i don't think his original preferences before he coached a game factored in. i think they just accidentally stumbled into it the way the bills did. it's a credit to them that they're able to scrap their best laid plans the way that marchibroda and levy did.

 

[GoSU96]

This is going to be a bizarre out of left field analogy. We basically made a very important switch to finalize the system a mere 2 weeks before the season began. When I read that article, I immediately thought of 1998, the week before the Michigan game, how storms ravaged the area and the team basically had no time to prepare. And then played its best game of the season. Left 100,000 people speechless as no one had ever come into their house and beat them up like that before.

Maybe football coaches (other than Nick Saban) don't need to obsess about how much time they need to prepare things. Give them less time, and they're less likely to overthink it. And therefore, get it right.

It wasn't a new offense so much as a change of approach within the schemes they had. My guess is that they were going to go with a more varied formations, run a bunch of different plays, sub personnel groups in and out approach.

Same playbook, but focused on a limited set of plays. Instead of plays based on formations it was play calls based on defensive personnel and then audibles based on defensive alignment.

 

[GoSU96]

I think it was only for tank. I remember after the Northwestern game, leaving the Dome and thinking that absolutely has to be the first time I attended an SU Dome game where every single snap for both teams was in the shotgun.

One thing that also evolved as we ran the ball better is that we started running it better from shotgun too later in the season. Was a joy to watch. Highly unlikely that next year's QB will be as efficient passing as Nassib was, on 3rd down especially. But highly likely that next year's QB will be a better threat to run on the spread option. Offense should still be effective, the system is completely in place now.

Beyond the addition of Pugh, I don't think the run game would have been nearly as effective if the heavy pass section of the season hadn't happened first.

 

[Millhouse]

Beyond the addition of Pugh, I don't think the run game would have been nearly as effective if the heavy pass section of the season hadn't happened first.

can you elaborate on that? i buy that pass can set up the run in a game but over months i'm more skeptical

 

[GoSU96]

can you elaborate on that? i buy that pass can set up the run in a game but over months i'm more skeptical

For years opponents have been playing 8,9.10 in the box against SU. Coming out as pass heavy early in the year, and being able to generate a ton of yards, if not points, made opponents adjust and game plan differently. Not only were they passing more, but the routes weren't all 5 yd slants and drags.

That macro change must have helped in establishing the run game as the year went on.

 

[Crusty]

The key for us was balance. Passing 40 times a game can be fun to watch but it is much better if we keep it under 30 with a strong ground game. Next year will clearly be different but I think the run/pass balance will be there. A true dual-threat QB should somewhat offset Nassib's experiene. Hard to have more ups and downs than we had this year. Should be fun.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

My guess is that they were going to go with a more varied formations, run a bunch of different plays, sub personnel groups in and out approach.

Same playbook, but focused on a limited set of plays. Instead of plays based on formations it was play calls based on defensive personnel and then audibles based on defensive alignment.

To me, add all that up and you get a new offense. I'm not hung up on pages being taken out of or added to the playbook. The philosophy looked different. The results were different. The choices made were different.

So, yeah, to me and some others, that = new offense.

 

[Crusty]

Saw lots of zone read and not much I formation. There seemed to be a lot of dorky plays run out of the zone read so I imaging a lot of experimenting was going on.

 

[upperdeck]

the key is how much nassib was seeing and reading verse how much was play calling by the coaches. if we checked out of plays at the line into plays that worked or he was able to find the 2nd -3rd rcvr that is where the new QB will struggle.. its probably a good question for the staff though i dont know if they would reveal the real answer.

we ran a bunch of quick pass plays they all couldnt have been to option one

 

[OrangePA]

This is going to be a bizarre out of left field analogy. We basically made a very important switch to finalize the system a mere 2 weeks before the season began. When I read that article, I immediately thought of 1998, the week before the Michigan game, how storms ravaged the area and the team basically had no time to prepare. And then played its best game of the season. Left 100,000 people speechless as no one had ever come into their house and beat them up like that before.

Maybe football coaches (other than Nick Saban) don't need to obsess about how much time they need to prepare things. Give them less time, and they're less likely to overthink it. And therefore, get it right.

I find the idea that we changed up the offense two weeks before the season hard to believe.

I believe that it was made clear in the spring that SU would be running a K-State offense in 2012.

And that is what I think we basically ran, though our QB was not the running threat that the K-State QBs typically are.

 

[Shenexon]

The whole team showed great poise in the second half of the season, especially in the last several games. After the troubled start to the season, I'm proud of how they made adjustments and executed. This season could have ended badly and the team figured out how to win. I'm pretty happy about that.

 

[Chip]

I find the idea that we changed up the offense two weeks before the season hard to believe.

I believe that it was made clear in the spring that SU would be running a K-State offense in 2012.

And that is what I think we basically ran, though our QB was not the running threat that the K-State QBs typically are.

Like Go said, I don't think we ripped up the playbook and started a new one.

But the up tempo/no huddle style, formations to be used, which led to a change in the personnel that would see the most time. There was a definite change two weeks before. And not one that was easily entered into. Of course, I'm just going by what Rahme and Hackett said, I have to assume it was a risky change, not a fluff piece.

We had run some spread option plays in 2011, they were definitely in the playbook and installed. I'm sure the routes all the WRs run were there too. But the identity of the offense finally started taking shape. Maybe identity is a subjective word that people only use when the offense is performing well. It just seems like there's a framework now that the coaches believe in. Was hard to say that in years past.

 

[Millhouse]

For years opponents have been playing 8,9.10 in the box against SU. Coming out as pass heavy early in the year, and being able to generate a ton of yards, if not points, made opponents adjust and game plan differently. Not only were they passing more, but the routes weren't all 5 yd slants and drags.

That macro change must have helped in establishing the run game as the year went on.

maybe. right now, the offense is so much better now that they're running, i'd probably still take my chances on SU beating me in the air if I were an opposing coach.

i wish we weren't behind all the time at the beginning of the year so we could know for sure

 

[billsin01]

It wasn't a new offense so much as a change of approach within the schemes they had. My guess is that they were going to go with a more varied formations, run a bunch of different plays, sub personnel groups in and out approach.

Same playbook, but focused on a limited set of plays. Instead of plays based on formations it was play calls based on defensive personnel and then audibles based on defensive alignment.

So your stance is that a more defined, limited playbook at a completely different pace with a different play calling-philosophy and different audibles was the same offense? And that's of course ignoring that we never really ran that read-option to any degree before and seemed to be much more aggressive when passing the ball, still obviously using a lot of the quick slants but sprinkling in a far heavier dose of intermediate and deep passes. And Nassib as a runner, while not a particularly exciting part of the offense, was a noteworthy change. A guy who ran for a total of 26 yards in 3 years with a high-water mark of 39 yards in 2011, ran for 130 yards this season. Not huge, but enough to make defenses think.

I think anyone arguing that this is the same offense needs to get over the notion that it's somehow a criticism of DM and Hackett and cone to grips with the reality that they deserve credit for critically evaluating what they were doing and making necessary changes.

 

[billsin01]

But the identity of the offense finally started taking shape. Maybe identity is a subjective word that people only use when the offense is performing well. It just seems like there's a framework now that the coaches believe in. Was hard to say that in years past.

I don't see identity as a cliche, or, if it is one, at least one that's got some truth to it. I think most offenses "can" be successful. There are some truly innovative offenses from time to time and there are some offenses that have tremendous talent. But I think a huge part of what you're trying to do is get kids to buy into what you're doing and accentuate your strengths. That's your identity. Now some of that has to do with a guy like Nassib taking the reigns and having an incredible year but I think this team figured out it could play fast and throw and move the ball and the run game came along as well and it meshed. What is their identity? To me, the shift to an aggressive mindset (more plays, no huddle, deeper pass routes) was huge.