Wow Dino | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Wow Dino

There’s two competing philosophies here:

1) Going fast helps keep the opposing defense off balance and limits substitutions, but it also limits the play calling as you have to minimize the playbook and leaves the defense susceptible to getting worn out if the offense doesn’t move the ball

My take: good against similar talent teams, disastrous against superior teams

2: Run the ball and shorten the game. This helps keep the play book larger since you have time to call plays and make adjustments, it helps to run down the clock and can give your defense a rest. The issues are that it is very hard to switch into high gear and play from behind, it leaves your RBs and linemen susceptible to injury and a shootout could be disastrous.

My take: Good against teams of superior talent if the goal is to keep it close but difficult to win. Good against teams of similar talent since your defense stays rested. Bad all around in shootouts.
I like this assessment. And I am very okay with a run oriented, deliberate offense if the O can control the LOS, and if it leads to wins.

I also like the idea of throwing a hurry up possession at teams as a change-up. Don’t let opposing defenses get comfortable for the whole game. Once or twice a game, stress their ability to substitute and call defensive signals.
 
not sure why playing fast does anything to the play book? why would it? you still have to call in the play and they made it clear early on they changed the signals to make them much easier and shorter.. do we think calling a running play or calling a reverse require a ton more time to get in from the bench?
 
I know why the style was created, but it’s proven to be a short term gimmick that can be easily countered by adjustments. Running fast worked early on because it caught people off guard, but once you learned that teams only run a variation of the same 5-10 plays, it gets very easy to adjust your superior defense to counter a majority of those plays. That’s why 2019 was a mess.
Any scheme can be countered. Its all about how well you execute the plays. 2019 we just weren't good enough. It wasn't because of tempo. My only beef with tempo is that it puts a lot of strain on the defense. A lot of teams use 3 different types of tempo's for that reason.
 
Going fast started as a strategy by teams with limited talent to punch above their weight class. I think it's more accurately stated that going fast is VOLATILE against superior teams. Sometimes it gives you a puncher's chance. Sometimes it puts you in a hole.
Yup tempo and spread offenses were meant to better your chances against superior teams.
 
Any scheme can be countered. Its all about how well you execute the plays. 2019 we just weren't good enough. It wasn't because of tempo. My only beef with tempo is that it puts a lot of strain on the defense. A lot of teams use 3 different types of tempo's for that reason.

That's what I don't understand -- why some are preoccupied with only playing one tempo. Game circumstances should be considered, as well.

Even when we had Dungey, we played slower when we were ahead in the second half.

I think we'll see them play faster next year, when Shrader is fully comfortable with the offense. But if it ain't broke, don't break it.
 
That's what I don't understand -- why some are preoccupied with only playing one tempo. Game circumstances should be considered, as well.

Even when we had Dungey, we played slower when we were ahead in the second half.

I think we'll see them play faster next year, when Shrader is fully comfortable with the offense. But if it ain't broke, don't break it.
Right, I rather have them decide tempo based on how the game is going and the situation. Going in they might think fast tempo will give them an advantage against certain opponents.
 
I like this assessment. And I am very okay with a run oriented, deliberate offense if the O can control the LOS, and if it leads to wins.

I also like the idea of throwing a hurry up possession at teams as a change-up. Don’t let opposing defenses get comfortable for the whole game. Once or twice a game, stress their ability to substitute and call defensive signals.

Exactly! Similar to when JB quickly switches to M2M for a possession or two. Oh wait... ;):)
 
My quibble is that I wouldn't say going fast is disastrous against superior teams. Going fast started as a strategy by teams with limited talent to punch above their weight class. I think it's more accurately stated that going fast is VOLATILE against superior teams. Sometimes it gives you a puncher's chance. Sometimes it puts you in a hole.

We keep seeing these posts looking at the numbers and the conclusion people come to is our record should be better than it is. But it's not. One explanation could be that playing a style that keeps us close magnifies Dino's weaknesses - pressure decision making. Dino's head scratchers don't matter as much when we can build a decent lead or when we're getting blown out. Being in close games also means you have a low margin for error and can't make many mistakes. Looking at our punting and kicking alone... we're a bit prone to mistakes in that area this season.

I absolutely think given that we're leveraging a generational talent for our program in Tucker and turning the offensive reins over from whatever it was supposed to be with DeVito to what it's evolving into with Shrader, that what we're doing now is right for this season. I'm not convinced it's how we should be playing long term though and I hope we get back to playing faster at least in spots next season.

Also... it is a bit of a problem that it seems like it takes a really long time getting plays into Shrader. We need to clean that up even if it doesn't change anything about our pace.
I don't think it is a style that works at all against superior teams. You do not want to try to make more possessions against a superior opponent. You want to limit the possessions as there is a larger likelihood that you come out on top. More possessions for each team causes a larger likelihood of a regression to the mean which you don't want.

I think the offense exists and can be effective for teams that couldn't maybe recruit the same as the big boys and have maybe less talent but could maybe recruit smaller athletic OL and play more receivers, who are all in great shape and playing a quick paced game with spreading the ball all over. If you have an advantage in the conditioning department, then playing the Orange is the new Fast style type of offense would be a benefit. It is also better used in a passing game to me as I feel like in the trenches pass rushing is much harder on the Defense than it is on the OL play after play. It was also more effective when teams were not used to it. I still like the offense as a change of pace to throw at teams to change things up and give them something else to think about if it makes sense for your team.

But I think it has absolutely no place right now with our current personnel and playbook. First, while we are good we are not superior to other teams. If we were, increasing the total number of possessions for each team would be to our advantage. We have a running QB and a one man do it all RB that run the show. We are not spreading the ball around and having each of our WR's take one play hear and there, then the RB some other plays. These two guys are our entire offense. We need to keep them as fresh as possible through out the game to make our offense more productive per play. We don't want them dead at the end of the game. Also we don't have fast mobile OL right now, we have maulers which is actually pretty nice right now. I doubt that there conditioning is excellent compared to the Defense. And if our OL is tired it will lead to more false starts and holding penalties puting us in a hole which our offense would have a hard time digging out of.

I think we have a solid defense and an effective ball control offense and that is why we are now playing old school.
 
There’s two competing philosophies here:

1) Going fast helps keep the opposing defense off balance and limits substitutions, but it also limits the play calling as you have to minimize the playbook and leaves the defense susceptible to getting worn out if the offense doesn’t move the ball

My take: good against similar talent teams, disastrous against superior teams

2: Run the ball and shorten the game. This helps keep the play book larger since you have time to call plays and make adjustments, it helps to run down the clock and can give your defense a rest. The issues are that it is very hard to switch into high gear and play from behind, it leaves your RBs and linemen susceptible to injury and a shootout could be disastrous.

My take: Good against teams of superior talent if the goal is to keep it close but difficult to win. Good against teams of similar talent since your defense stays rested. Bad all around in shootouts.
sutomcat incoming with the Cease and Desist
 
I mean that's cool and all but I'm hoping next year with what we have returning that we get back to playing faster.
I like running the heck out of the ball and controlling the clock , keeping the ball away from elite offenses is fine by me and while yea it’s not as exciting if it gets us a W fine by me . I do think the speed spread briles offense has been some what figured out
 
There’s two competing philosophies here:

1) Going fast helps keep the opposing defense off balance and limits substitutions, but it also limits the play calling as you have to minimize the playbook and leaves the defense susceptible to getting worn out if the offense doesn’t move the ball

My take: good against similar talent teams, disastrous against superior teams

2: Run the ball and shorten the game. This helps keep the play book larger since you have time to call plays and make adjustments, it helps to run down the clock and can give your defense a rest. The issues are that it is very hard to switch into high gear and play from behind, it leaves your RBs and linemen susceptible to injury and a shootout could be disastrous.

My take: Good against teams of superior talent if the goal is to keep it close but difficult to win. Good against teams of similar talent since your defense stays rested. Bad all around in shootouts.
It if you have the ability to twist the dial in either direction is the key .. we can do that we are in business
 
Yup tempo and spread offenses were meant to better your chances against superior teams.
I don't get how this makes sense. Its not just as simple as saying it is an advantage against a more talented team. I don't think its an advantage to play it against a superior team in this style. The reason has to be because these non superior teams were built differently without the ability to sign the massive talented recruits. So they recruit the elite more agile linemen and play the game at a faster pace.
 
It if you have the ability to twist the dial in either direction is the key .. we can do that we are in business
the better the oline is the more you can control how this works.. We have a functional Oline so we can run more and the QB runs some.. The less the oline functions the more you need to the QB to add that threat to move the ball.. If the oline took another step up the QB would just be a threat you had to honor not a main cog in the offense. But if we had a better passing game with the way we can run now we would have something.
 
I don't get how this makes sense. Its not just as simple as saying it is an advantage against a more talented team. I don't think its an advantage to play it against a superior team in this style. The reason has to be because these non superior teams were built differently without the ability to sign the massive talented recruits. So they recruit the elite more agile linemen and play the game at a faster pace.
It's pretty straightforward thinking.

If their 11 are better than your 11 when everyone is set and prepared for the play, it's to your advantage to get set and prepared before they can.
 
It's pretty straightforward thinking.

If their 11 are better than your 11 when everyone is set and prepared for the play, it's to your advantage to get set and prepared before they can.
Well yes obviously, but the talent of the other team has nothing to do with it is what i am saying. In general you wouldn't want more possessions for both teams but less against a more talented team. It does seem the slight rule changes and also teams familiarity with it now make it a bit less effective than it was in the past though. But I'm not against fast pace in general at all. I'm just saying you have to build your team with the right personnel and condition them for it as well. It just so happens I'm not sure we have the right personnel to run it right now.
 
I don't think it is a style that works at all against superior teams. You do not want to try to make more possessions against a superior opponent. You want to limit the possessions as there is a larger likelihood that you come out on top. More possessions for each team causes a larger likelihood of a regression to the mean which you don't want.

I think the offense exists and can be effective for teams that couldn't maybe recruit the same as the big boys and have maybe less talent but could maybe recruit smaller athletic OL and play more receivers, who are all in great shape and playing a quick paced game with spreading the ball all over. If you have an advantage in the conditioning department, then playing the Orange is the new Fast style type of offense would be a benefit. It is also better used in a passing game to me as I feel like in the trenches pass rushing is much harder on the Defense than it is on the OL play after play. It was also more effective when teams were not used to it. I still like the offense as a change of pace to throw at teams to change things up and give them something else to think about if it makes sense for your team.

But I think it has absolutely no place right now with our current personnel and playbook. First, while we are good we are not superior to other teams. If we were, increasing the total number of possessions for each team would be to our advantage. We have a running QB and a one man do it all RB that run the show. We are not spreading the ball around and having each of our WR's take one play hear and there, then the RB some other plays. These two guys are our entire offense. We need to keep them as fresh as possible through out the game to make our offense more productive per play. We don't want them dead at the end of the game. Also we don't have fast mobile OL right now, we have maulers which is actually pretty nice right now. I doubt that there conditioning is excellent compared to the Defense. And if our OL is tired it will lead to more false starts and holding penalties puting us in a hole which our offense would have a hard time digging out of.

I think we have a solid defense and an effective ball control offense and that is why we are now playing old school.
I disagree with almost everything in your first paragraph, and just to reaffirm, I think we're doing the right thing for this season.

I'm not convinced we'll get away with doing it next season. Heck, if we falter and miss a bowl, that could be an argument that it wasn't the right call this season.
 
Well yes obviously, but the talent of the other team has nothing to do with it is what i am saying. In general you wouldn't want more possessions for both teams but less against a more talented team. It does seem the slight rule changes and also teams familiarity with it now make it a bit less effective than it was in the past though. But I'm not against fast pace in general at all. I'm just saying you have to build your team with the right personnel and condition them for it as well. It just so happens I'm not sure we have the right personnel to run it right now.
I mean what you're advocating for is what has given us decades of rock fights in college hoops. Heck go back far enough and you'll find the reason why the shot clock was invented.

You're looking at number of possessions as the metric that matters. It's a factor, but the metric that matters is points.
 
I don't get how this makes sense. Its not just as simple as saying it is an advantage against a more talented team. I don't think its an advantage to play it against a superior team in this style. The reason has to be because these non superior teams were built differently without the ability to sign the massive talented recruits. So they recruit the elite more agile linemen and play the game at a faster pace.
Are you talking tempo or spread systems? In regards to spread. When it blew up it was giving teams favorable chances to beat teams with better D line play and etc.. Its not full proof but that was one of the reasons why it got popular. Teams were losing to inferior teams that ran spread. Zone blocking is the biggest factor honestly. It allows teams to run the ball effectively against bigger stronger front 7s.. Im always going to remember West Virginia beating Georgia in 2006. West Virginia destroying a good clemson team in 2011. There's many more examples of this through the years. Just a couple games that popped in my head.
 
Last edited:
I like running the heck out of the ball and controlling the clock , keeping the ball away from elite offenses is fine by me and while yea it’s not as exciting if it gets us a W fine by me . I do think the speed spread briles offense has been some what figured out
I don't care if we take naps between the plays as long as we win. Fast is fun. Winning is funner.
 
I mean what you're advocating for is what has given us decades of rock fights in college hoops. Heck go back far enough and you'll find the reason why the shot clock was invented.

You're looking at number of possessions as the metric that matters. It's a factor, but the metric that matters is points.
This has nothing to do with hoops and the shot clock. Doesn't relate in any way. Not sure how you can disagree with my first paragraph at all. Its simple. We all know points are what matter. But getting more possessions doesn't give just your team a chance for more points. It gives the other teams more opportunities to get points as well. If the other team is 10% better than you, the more chances you give each team and then add them up at the end, the more likely they are going to go in favor of the opponent. That is just math. Yes it is just one factor. Now If you have an efficient offense and can be more effective each possession running at a higher pace then yes it should be done. We just don't have that.
 
Last edited:
Are you talking tempo or spread systems? In regards to spread. When it blew up it was giving teams favorable chances to beat teams with better D line play and etc.. Its not full proof but that was one of the reasons why it got popular. Teams were losing to inferior teams that ran spread. Zone blocking is the biggest factor honestly. It allows teams to run the ball effectively against bigger stronger front 7s.. Im always going to remember West Virginia beating Georgia in 2006. West Virginia destroying a good clemson team in 2011. There's many more examples of this through the years. Just a couple games that popped in my head.
Agreed that those are examples of things that can help teams against more talented teams. I'm specifically addressing tempo but I feel like spread schemes and tempo usually go somewhat hand in hand. Dino's original offense would use a lot of those elements. I'm just saying tempo in and of itself, creating more possessions for both teams is an element that actually is worse for the less talented team. Other positive advantages of being more effective have to be present to overcome that part. But it is an added advantage against less talented teams which should help you beat lesser teams by an even larger margin.
 
Agreed that those are examples of things that can help teams against more talented teams. I'm specifically addressing tempo but I feel like spread schemes and tempo usually go somewhat hand in hand. Dino's original offense would use a lot of those elements. I'm just saying tempo in and of itself, creating more possessions for both teams is an element that actually is worse for the less talented team. Other positive advantages of being more effective have to be present to overcome that part. But it is an added advantage against less talented teams which should help you beat lesser teams by an even larger margin.
I will say 85% of college football run spread. Dino's scheme is tied to tempo and that makes it more unique. Spread scheme and tempo is two different things. In terms of more possessions throughout the duration of a game, yes it can potentially hurt you more when you are less talented. but when you are less talented you are going to lose most of the time against more superior teams anyways. You can pull upsets as well if you can slow it down and grind it out, limit a team's possessions but that's a tall task too. I've seen teams get blown out that way as well.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,603
Messages
4,714,888
Members
5,909
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
253
Guests online
2,227
Total visitors
2,480


Top Bottom