TrueGSU.com

Follow GSUFANS.com on
     
Page 19 of 45 FirstFirst ... 1718192021 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 446

Thread: Option Offense

  1. #181

    Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by half-n-half View Post
    I THINK I'm right and you are biased. It’s okay that you love the option and think it’s the only thing that could work here. You are wrong but you are going to think that way until the day you die and that’s okay. Hell I love the option too and hope we find a way to make it work but there are several other offense including what LSU does that would work here and we could recruit for (I really hope we never run what UGA is running...I don’t even want UGA running it). But nothing I can say to make you see otherwise.

    Anybody who says that we can only recruit for the option is saying that Ga State and App are both better places to be than Ga Southern. That may be what you think but it’s not what I think.
    "Fixed it for you"

    You are not right. I know you believe you are, you always do. (But who doesn't believe their own opinion is right?)
    You aren't even right about what I said. I didn't say that nothing else will work here or that we can't do what App State is doing as good as them.
    In fact I said that we could. We could win like them here (and get beat on Thursday nights by an option team ).

    Note: You DID say ANY offense, which includes what UGA is doing - so maybe you can admit a mistake with the "ANY offense" insert?

    I didn't say we couldn't do what LSU is doing. I'm saying that LSU is going to be able to do that A LOT better than us.

    And don't even try to put words in my mouth with your nonsense about anyone disagreeing with you must think GAST and APP are better places to be than Southern.

    I'm simply saying that we can be much better than APP STATE (and have been) when we do what we do correctly (instead of trying to do what they do), including a gun based option - not just the flex.

    I am saying that if we run LSU's offense, we can win. But we will be a lot weaker version of what they do.

    By contrast, we could be the BEST option team in the country, which would give us a fighting chance when we face the LSU's of the world (like Army/Oklahoma last year) AND dominate our conference at the same time. I don't want to be as good as App ---- I want to be BETTER. The option gives us that (the FLEX amplifies it!).
    Jumping back and forth between schemes and coaches is killing us. The last thing we need to do is now back peddle and say.. "Let's do that! See, See... LSU just beat BAMA... we should change!"

  2. #182

    Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by half-n-half View Post
    I’m right and you are biased. It’s okay that you love the option and think it’s the only thing that could work here. You are wrong but you are going to think that way until the day you die and that’s okay. Hell I love the option too and hope we find a way to make it work but there are several other offense including what LSU does that would work here and we could recruit for (I really hope we never run what UGA is running...I don’t even want UGA running it). But nothing I can say to make you see otherwise.
    This is the biggest disconnect every time this debate comes up.

    Someone says “The flex would continue to work well consistently at GS” and everyone hears “The flex is infallible and is the only way to win here or anywhere”. I don’t think I’ve ever heard even the most ardent flexboner suggest that.
    Sincerely,
    Irwin M. Fletcher

    P.S.: Have a nice day!

  3. Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by eaglewraith View Post
    What App ran under Satterfield was a hair breadth away from being a triple option offense. Hell they actually ran option better than we did in 16/17.

    They also remembered that you have to have an effective and efficient passing game. And their offense actually encouraged a passing game.

    They are literally about to be back in the top 25, and if they win this week could potentially be the first SBC team to be ranked in the CFP rankings, after being the highest AP ranked SBC team. The inertia from all that doesn't just go away, you ride it and it helps you when you do stumble to be able to make it back up. I'm liking what they're doing and what they've built for a lot more than how we're looking right now. I get that we have personnel issues and I've been a big advocate for patience with the OL issues, however we're not scheming around our issues either it seems. And we don't really have an answer right now for when our ground game is shut down....we just don't.

    I love being a heavy run based team....but we've got to get better at passing the ball too. And it needs to be more a part of our offense instead of just a novelty. That's the only way you're going to recruit more skilled QBs and actually hang onto the talent you get at WR. We do a good job of getting WRs here but then they leave after they get 1 pass a season.
    Said about as well as it can be said, especially the last paragraph. Until we make throwing the ball an integral part of the offense what you see is what we're gonna be.

  4. #184

    Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by eaglewraith View Post
    What App ran under Satterfield was a hair breadth away from being a triple option offense. Hell they actually ran option better than we did in 16/17.

    They also remembered that you have to have an effective and efficient passing game. And their offense actually encouraged a passing game.

    They are literally about to be back in the top 25, and if they win this week could potentially be the first SBC team to be ranked in the CFP rankings, after being the highest AP ranked SBC team. The inertia from all that doesn't just go away, you ride it and it helps you when you do stumble to be able to make it back up. I'm liking what they're doing and what they've built for a lot more than how we're looking right now. I get that we have personnel issues and I've been a big advocate for patience with the OL issues, however we're not scheming around our issues either it seems. And we don't really have an answer right now for when our ground game is shut down....we just don't.

    I love being a heavy run based team....but we've got to get better at passing the ball too. And it needs to be more a part of our offense instead of just a novelty. That's the only way you're going to recruit more skilled QBs and actually hang onto the talent you get at WR. We do a good job of getting WRs here but then they leave after they get 1 pass a season.
    I don't think anyone disagrees that we have to make defenses respect our passing game. Can't argue with your thoughts here.

  5. #185

    Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by straightshooter View Post
    I'd take the Fritz offense with 15 or so passes a game thrown in. Still run dependent, but enough passing to open up the run game a bit more.
    That’s what we saw on Saturday, isn’t it?
    Thanks, Rastabot!
    www.247sports.com/porkchops

  6. #186

    Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    This is the biggest disconnect every time this debate comes up.

    Someone says “The flex would continue to work well consistently at GS” and everyone hears “The flex is infallible and is the only way to win here or anywhere”. I don’t think I’ve ever heard even the most ardent flexboner suggest that.
    Exactly.

  7. #187

    Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by eaglewraith View Post
    What App ran under Satterfield was a hair breadth away from being a triple option offense. Hell they actually ran option better than we did in 16/17.

    They also remembered that you have to have an effective and efficient passing game. And their offense actually encouraged a passing game.

    They are literally about to be back in the top 25, and if they win this week could potentially be the first SBC team to be ranked in the CFP rankings, after being the highest AP ranked SBC team. The inertia from all that doesn't just go away, you ride it and it helps you when you do stumble to be able to make it back up. I'm liking what they're doing and what they've built for a lot more than how we're looking right now. I get that we have personnel issues and I've been a big advocate for patience with the OL issues, however we're not scheming around our issues either it seems. And we don't really have an answer right now for when our ground game is shut down....we just don't.

    I love being a heavy run based team....but we've got to get better at passing the ball too. And it needs to be more a part of our offense instead of just a novelty. That's the only way you're going to recruit more skilled QBs and actually hang onto the talent you get at WR. We do a good job of getting WRs here but then they leave after they get 1 pass a season.
    We need to do what we did throwing the ball on Saturday about half the time—except for the sacks. The plays we didn’t get sacked were the kind of production we need out of our passing game if we are going to score enough points to win this league.

    We might get by with less production in the passing game if we run for 380+ YPG and 6.5 YPC. However, I’m not sure that’s gonna happen any time soon.
    Thanks, Rastabot!
    www.247sports.com/porkchops

  8. #188

    Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by eaglewraith View Post
    What App ran under Satterfield was a hair breadth away from being a triple option offense. Hell they actually ran option better than we did in 16/17.

    They also remembered that you have to have an effective and efficient passing game. And their offense actually encouraged a passing game.

    They are literally about to be back in the top 25, and if they win this week could potentially be the first SBC team to be ranked in the CFP rankings, after being the highest AP ranked SBC team. The inertia from all that doesn't just go away, you ride it and it helps you when you do stumble to be able to make it back up. I'm liking what they're doing and what they've built for a lot more than how we're looking right now. I get that we have personnel issues and I've been a big advocate for patience with the OL issues, however we're not scheming around our issues either it seems. And we don't really have an answer right now for when our ground game is shut down....we just don't.

    I love being a heavy run based team....but we've got to get better at passing the ball too. And it needs to be more a part of our offense instead of just a novelty. That's the only way you're going to recruit more skilled QBs and actually hang onto the talent you get at WR. We do a good job of getting WRs here but then they leave after they get 1 pass a season.
    What it comes down to is "What kind of QB to you want to recruit?" That IMO is probably the biggest conundrum of any option coach right now trying to compete in DI.

    If you have a guy like Chandler Burks and Jaybo Shaw in order to be "balanced" in the passing game you will pay for it in the option game because you have to hold blocks on the edge a lot longer for them to makes plays on the perimeter unlike with guys like Shai Werts Jerick McKinnon. I've seen more than a few plays that guys like Shai Werts and McKinnon can turn into 5-10 yard gains that are minimal gains with a "standard" dual-threat QB. That means you could be sacrificing athleticism at A-back in exchange for good blocking ability to make it work.

    IMO, we should continue to recruit athletes at QB (i.e. the way we always have) and put the guy in there that can run the option game well and has a decent arm. In my mind, the offensive statistics for 2012 versus 2011 show that that model is superior than recruiting a QB specifically for "passing balance". IMO 2015 also showed you can still score points with a limited passing game so long as you have a good OL (and I consider it realistic we can have a line that talented every season). You need a guy that can at least complete some of the passes to one-on-one matchups downfield but you don't need a guy that can watch 4 receivers and anticipate which one is going to come open.

    And for the guys that would say "you can recruit A-backs that are athletic and can block and you can recruit guys that are athletic as Werts that can throw". Doesn't work like that.
    Last edited by BillyBob; 12th November 2019 at 10:34 AM.
    "Follow the trendlines, not the headlines." -Steven Pinker (?)

    Regarding football Scheduling.

  9. Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by BillyBob View Post
    What it comes down to is "What kind of QB to you want to recruit?" That IMO is probably the biggest conundrum of any option coach right now trying to compete in DI.

    If you have a guy like Chandler Burks and Jaybo Shaw in order to be "balanced" in the passing game you will pay for it in the option game because you have to hold blocks on the edge a lot longer for them to makes plays on the perimeter unlike with guys like Shai Werts Jerick McKinnon. I've seen more than a few plays that guys like Shai Werts and McKinnon can turn into 5-10 yard gains that are minimal gains with a "standard" dual-threat QB. That means you could be sacrificing athleticism at A-back in exchange for good blocking ability to make it work.

    IMO, we should continue to recruit athletes at QB (i.e. the way we always have) and put the guy in there that can run the option game well and has a decent arm. In my mind, the offensive statistics for 2012 versus 2011 show that that model is superior than recruiting a QB specifically for "passing balance". IMO 2015 also showed you can still score points with a limited passing game so long as you have a good OL (and I consider it realistic we can have a line that talented every season). You need a guy that can at least complete some of the passes to one-on-one matchups downfield but you don't need a guy that can watch 4 receivers and anticipate which one is going to come open.

    And for the guys that would say "you can recruit A-backs that are athletic and can block and you can recruit guys that are athletic as Werts that can throw". Doesn't work like that.
    I know that the coaches were excited and thought they had what they wanted at QB with the kid from Louisville, who was a big strong kid that could run and throw. He was not a Shai Werts type guy, but was the type guy they wanted to build the offense around. They thought he was gonna be really special. Maybe I've missed it, but there doesn't appear to be anyone on our recruiting radar like him. Correct me if that's wrong. We need to keep up the faith though because when we get that one "GUY" it will change everything.

  10. #190

    Default Re: Option Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by pete4256 View Post
    We need to do what we did throwing the ball on Saturday about half the time—except for the sacks. The plays we didn’t get sacked were the kind of production we need out of our passing game if we are going to score enough points to win this league.

    We might get by with less production in the passing game if we run for 380+ YPG and 6.5 YPC. However, I’m not sure that’s gonna happen any time soon.
    The passing will help make that 300 ypg rushing total happen. Sacks were disturbing to say the least. OL has to shore that up and QB has to get rid of the ball quicker. WR have to run crisp routes, make cuts and get separation - ball has to be thrown on time though. Easier said than done, but that's the process.....

Similar Threads

  1. Triple Option Offense represented
    By gatadotcom in forum The Flight Line
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 2nd December 2014, 03:45 PM
  2. Time for a more evolved version of the option offense
    By EAGLEClassOf13 in forum The Flight Line
    Replies: 213
    Last Post: 18th January 2014, 07:25 PM
  3. Great Read On Option Offense
    By NWGaEagle in forum The Flight Line
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 15th September 2011, 08:54 PM
  4. Jamere Valentine on practice and the option offense
    By gsuradio in forum The Flight Line
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 26th March 2010, 06:10 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •