Football Home Game
Sat, August 31, 2024
Sat, August 31, 2024
Basketball Home Game
Fri, November 1, 2024
Fri, November 1, 2024
I'm all for ditching the spread
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
I'm all for ditching the spread
at least for the rest of the year.
Think about it. It requires a playmaker at QB and we're looking at Harrison and a true Freshman. Our O-line has not blocked well on the traditional spread plays including the read option and all the cutesy wide out stuff. We've already had to resort to max protect. The TE has had to become a tackle or FB in order for the Aggies to get yards
Why not go back to a proset, 2 backs to provide a lead guy. That opens up the TE to run some routes in max protect by leaving the FB in. It opens up more carries for Hunt, and more wheel mismatch routes for Hill. Its much more simple for the new QB. Finally, and most importantly it reduces the temptation of McGivens to throw in all the little I drew this up on a napkin cute stuff.
Its not like we're able to run 3-4 man patterns anyway and most of that can be done from the Pro-Set. I just don't think our O-line and QBs are geared to run an effective spread. Even Garrettson would be much more effective.
Do this and challenge this O-line to hit someone in the nose and tell Mcgivens he has to make sure a RB gets the ball 60% of the play calls.
Think about it. It requires a playmaker at QB and we're looking at Harrison and a true Freshman. Our O-line has not blocked well on the traditional spread plays including the read option and all the cutesy wide out stuff. We've already had to resort to max protect. The TE has had to become a tackle or FB in order for the Aggies to get yards
Why not go back to a proset, 2 backs to provide a lead guy. That opens up the TE to run some routes in max protect by leaving the FB in. It opens up more carries for Hunt, and more wheel mismatch routes for Hill. Its much more simple for the new QB. Finally, and most importantly it reduces the temptation of McGivens to throw in all the little I drew this up on a napkin cute stuff.
Its not like we're able to run 3-4 man patterns anyway and most of that can be done from the Pro-Set. I just don't think our O-line and QBs are geared to run an effective spread. Even Garrettson would be much more effective.
Do this and challenge this O-line to hit someone in the nose and tell Mcgivens he has to make sure a RB gets the ball 60% of the play calls.
-
- Posts: 561
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:03 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 8 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
I agreehickaggie wrote:at least for the rest of the year.
Think about it. It requires a playmaker at QB and we're looking at Harrison and a true Freshman. Our O-line has not blocked well on the traditional spread plays including the read option and all the cutesy wide out stuff. We've already had to resort to max protect. The TE has had to become a tackle or FB in order for the Aggies to get yards
Why not go back to a proset, 2 backs to provide a lead guy. That opens up the TE to run some routes in max protect by leaving the FB in. It opens up more carries for Hunt, and more wheel mismatch routes for Hill. Its much more simple for the new QB. Finally, and most importantly it reduces the temptation of McGivens to throw in all the little I drew this up on a napkin cute stuff.
Its not like we're able to run 3-4 man patterns anyway and most of that can be done from the Pro-Set. I just don't think our O-line and QBs are geared to run an effective spread. Even Garrettson would be much more effective.
Do this and challenge this O-line to hit someone in the nose and tell Mcgivens he has to make sure a RB gets the ball 60% of the play calls.
I would run a veer/ single wing variation. We should have Myers at QB with Hunt,Sharp, Robinson, Vigil, Hill, and Hall rotating. JoJo is too small to carry the ball out out of the back field so I say no to him being back their. Then bomb the other team when they put too many in the box.
-
- Posts: 1728
- Joined: November 11th, 2010, 10:45 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 8 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
“The system is phenomenal,” he said. “The execution is lacking.”
- 3rdGenAggie
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Kickoff
- Posts: 12395
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:53 pm
- Location: The City of the Salty Lake
- Has thanked: 4040 times
- Been thanked: 2365 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
I agree. I think it was OKAggie or maybe Sneelock that said that he thinks as a smaller school we should go with what isn't the most popular in order to help get the best recruits most suited to our system. I've thought about it, and am starting to agree. I wouldn't mind seeing us go with a little more pro-style stuff. Max protect with a fair bit of play action thrown in. Especially this year, like you said. It seems like that's what has worked best.
"I have no idea what I'm doing, but I know I'm doing it really, really well." -Andy Dwyer
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
Thats such a cop out in this case anyway. Yes if we executed the spread perfectly the Aggies would score nearly every down. Since they have proven they can't execute it why the hell do they keep doing it. You know the saying about the definition of stupid...aggieaggie wrote:“The system is phenomenal,” he said. “The execution is lacking.”
The other part to that is consistency. When you get a 59 yard untouched run ride that baby the rest of the game. Its usually indicative of an opponent's weakness which in fact was CSU's weakness. I'm not sure but Hunt's big run looked like the same play.
- QuackAttackAggie
- Pick'em Champ - '12, '22 Bowl; '15, '17 Weekly; '18 BB Predict the Score; '22 Kickoff
- Posts: 18231
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:08 pm
- Location: Sonora, MX
- Has thanked: 310 times
- Been thanked: 2958 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
that's a quote from bronco. he basically was saying he designed the perfect defense, but his players were too stupid or too slow to carry it out.hickaggie wrote:Thats such a cop out in this case anyway. Yes if we executed the spread perfectly the Aggies would score nearly every down. Since they have proven they can't execute it why the hell do they keep doing it. You know the saying about the definition of stupid...aggieaggie wrote:“The system is phenomenal,” he said. “The execution is lacking.”
The other part to that is consistency. When you get a 59 yard untouched run ride that baby the rest of the game. Its usually indicative of an opponent's weakness which in fact was CSU's weakness. I'm not sure but Hunt's big run looked like the same play.
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
Football's all about adjustment. The Aggies should be simplifying things and asking their O-line to step it up. To answer your question, yeah, lets not run the plays that on average have caused the Aggies so many third and longs.DCS wrote:Yeah all those plays we've practiced all year, let's not run those anymore.
- hipsterdoofus21
- Mr. Buttface
- Posts: 18158
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:39 pm
- Has thanked: 3236 times
- Been thanked: 3195 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
Could Court be considered a fullback option? Seems like a good lead blocker.
-
- Posts: 3680
- Joined: July 11th, 2011, 9:59 pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 177 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
You don't just "ditch" an entire (and major) component of your offense mid-season and expect a happy outcome. It doesn't work that way.
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
Mmmmmm . . . did somebody say Single Wing?
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
- jackmormon
- RIP
- Posts: 10564
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:53 pm
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
If you take out the three longest runs against the CSU, we had something like five yards rushing for the game.hickaggie wrote:Thats such a cop out in this case anyway. Yes if we executed the spread perfectly the Aggies would score nearly every down. Since they have proven they can't execute it why the hell do they keep doing it. You know the saying about the definition of stupid...aggieaggie wrote:“The system is phenomenal,” he said. “The execution is lacking.”
The other part to that is consistency. When you get a 59 yard untouched run ride that baby the rest of the game. Its usually indicative of an opponent's weakness which in fact was CSU's weakness. I'm not sure but Hunt's big run looked like the same play.
- hipsterdoofus21
- Mr. Buttface
- Posts: 18158
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:39 pm
- Has thanked: 3236 times
- Been thanked: 3195 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
Coach Dunn!USU78 wrote:Mmmmmm . . . did somebody say Single Wing?
[youtube][/youtube]
- ViAggie
- Posts: 24807
- Joined: June 16th, 2011, 6:49 pm
- Location: Temecula, California
- Has thanked: 6112 times
- Been thanked: 2560 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
man... talk about slow white kids
Maybe it's just the speed of the film?
Maybe it's just the speed of the film?
Just another day in the (Aggie) Brotherhood
-
- Posts: 1774
- Joined: November 18th, 2010, 8:08 am
- Has thanked: 37 times
- Been thanked: 353 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
When has the oline showed that they can line up and knock people off the ball? This team has playmakers at wideout and a back that is dangerous in the open filed. I don't think lining up and trying to win with a power game is the answer.
I actually think Wells is right it comes down to execution.
I actually think Wells is right it comes down to execution.
- hipsterdoofus21
- Mr. Buttface
- Posts: 18158
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:39 pm
- Has thanked: 3236 times
- Been thanked: 3195 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
I'm waiting to hear Quack's analysis before I answer.ViAggie wrote:man... talk about slow white kids
Maybe it's just the speed of the film?
- bigbluebaby
- Posts: 1548
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 2:11 pm
- Location: Logan, Idaho Falls, Rock Springs,
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 34 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
USU78 wrote:Mmmmmm . . . did somebody say Single Wing?
[youtube][/youtube]
That video is awesome..
Most of those boys could tackle..
Football hasn't changed that much.
"So your saying I got a chance ??!!"
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
In a lot of ways it was exactly what the Aggies did last year to go 6-1. They went a lot of double tight and some 2 back and some motion to create lead blockers simplified the passing scheme and rode the O-line and Joey D. They also slowed things down, went back to the huddle, and under center.Smokin Joe wrote:You don't just "ditch" an entire (and major) component of your offense mid-season and expect a happy outcome. It doesn't work that way.
Your not creating something new as we ran a ton of pro under Bubbles and it is an element of what the Aggies have been doing and aside from a true 2 back involved most of the concepts they used against BYU.
When I say ditch the spread, I'm talking moving a back in and not running read option, the 3 stack sets exc. The Aggies have already moved in that direction. You can still run shotgun or go under center depending on the QB's comfort with either and if you want to go pistol out of the pro occasionally it really just requires a back in motion.
The Aggies are multiple formation anyway and ditching the one back 3-4 Wide out look and adding a guy to the backfield or going more double tight isn't remaking anything. Its Just getting rid of what's not going to work with the QB and O-line situation and focusing on what's been effective and/or needs to be much more effective.
Maybe what I meant to say is regardless of the formation or name, cut the crap and get back to basics.
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
That is just awesome. Was that at Logan or BE. The field was an absolute mudhole. Love those kind of games.bigbluebaby wrote:USU78 wrote:Mmmmmm . . . did somebody say Single Wing?
[youtube][/youtube]
That video is awesome..
Most of those boys could tackle..
Football hasn't changed that much.
-
- Posts: 3680
- Joined: July 11th, 2011, 9:59 pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 177 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
^^^^^ +1000DCS wrote:Yeah all those plays we've practiced all year, let's not run those anymore.
Thank God some of you guys are not football coaches. You wouldn't last one game. I read some of this stuff and think I am on Boogerboard.
-
- Posts: 3680
- Joined: July 11th, 2011, 9:59 pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 177 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
hickaggie wrote:That is just awesome. Was that at Logan or BE. The field was an absolute mudhole. Love those kind of games.bigbluebaby wrote:USU78 wrote:Mmmmmm . . . did somebody say Single Wing?
[youtube][/youtube]
That video is awesome..
Most of those boys could tackle..
Football hasn't changed that much.
Love the snow.
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
So you excited for another steady diet of fumbled fly sweeps, DTs blowing up the read, plenty of bubbles to Natson. Two yard slants on third and 9, Nick Vigil sweeps to the short side. I'm no coach but I've played a fair number of positions on various teams and I see an offense that to me is not working. Of course its execution. The spread is a fine system when run by Keeton and a good 0-line. Our guys don't execute these plays very well and there seems to be no theme, rhyme, or reason.Smokin Joe wrote:^^^^^ +1000DCS wrote:Yeah all those plays we've practiced all year, let's not run those anymore.
Thank God some of you guys are not football coaches. You wouldn't last one game. I read some of this stuff and think I am on Boogerboard.
All of the things I pointed out we're already doing to a large extent and they've worked but there is no follow up or consistency. Maybe the coaches who have seen thousands of hours of film just would love to go smash mouth but just don't believe in the O-line. I know obviously nothing we say on here will influence things and of course they shouldn't but I hope the Aggies at least try to get back to what started the winning streak last year. On today's team that would seem to be a healthy sustained dose of Hill, Hunt, and Vigil.
Think of it this way. If you are UNLV with a porous run D your D-Coordinator is going to be esctatic with a 65-35 pass run ration and 10 attempts inside the tackles.
-
- Posts: 3073
- Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
- Has thanked: 398 times
- Been thanked: 753 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
Hick, it appears the game was played at old Romney Stadium. 1967 was the last year for games in the old Romney and the turf showed lots of wear and abuse. The brief shots of the south end zone show an elevated bowl end which would confirm Romney and eliminate either Box Elder or Logan High football fields.
- DCS
- Posts: 990
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 2:56 pm
- Location: Salt Lake
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
I think it's pretty obvious that the play calling will change somewhat. I expect to see more runs and a few more plays from under center. I don't expect the type of offense that is run will change much at all. The offense is built around the skill set of the players USU has. The WRs on this team are the playmakers. The coaches seem to be trying to find as many ways to get them the ball as possible. The fly sweep has been effective sometimes and not effective others. Just because it was fumbled on a play or that a defense makes a good play doesn't mean it's thrown out of the playbook. The coaches and the QB need to see when the play will be effective against the defense and use it then.hickaggie wrote:So you excited for another steady diet of fumbled fly sweeps, DTs blowing up the read, plenty of bubbles to Natson. Two yard slants on third and 9, Nick Vigil sweeps to the short side. I'm no coach but I've played a fair number of positions on various teams and I see an offense that to me is not working. Of course its execution. The spread is a fine system when run by Keeton and a good 0-line. Our guys don't execute these plays very well and there seems to be no theme, rhyme, or reason.Smokin Joe wrote:^^^^^ +1000DCS wrote:Yeah all those plays we've practiced all year, let's not run those anymore.
Thank God some of you guys are not football coaches. You wouldn't last one game. I read some of this stuff and think I am on Boogerboard.
All of the things I pointed out we're already doing to a large extent and they've worked but there is no follow up or consistency. Maybe the coaches who have seen thousands of hours of film just would love to go smash mouth but just don't believe in the O-line. I know obviously nothing we say on here will influence things and of course they shouldn't but I hope the Aggies at least try to get back to what started the winning streak last year. On today's team that would seem to be a healthy sustained dose of Hill, Hunt, and Vigil.
Think of it this way. If you are UNLV with a porous run D your D-Coordinator is going to be esctatic with a 65-35 pass run ration and 10 attempts inside the tackles.
The coaches use the spread to try and get the defense to cover the entire field. Just because the backup QB won't be as good at getting the ball to the outside, doesn't mean you change that philosophy. All of the players know the current playbook, to switch the main portion of the offense IMO would create more problems for the offense. It's not what was practiced all year.
I agree with your point that you would like to see the offense play more of a run first offense, but this year the running game has been mostly stagnant. That doesn't mean the team needs to stop running the ball up the middle, but it does seem like the coaches are trying to come up with ways to get an advantage for the playmakers. With the QB change, maybe the team needs to shift into a more pistol oriented spread. Those plays seem to be more within the tackles, but still with the option for the spread attack for the WRs to keep their space.
I disagree entirely that the team should be going to a two tight end set as the main offense. If that gave the team the best option on offense, it would have already been implemented more. The TEs are good to great receivers, but not as effective as blockers. To me it would seem like you would try to use your team strengths and not force them into a formation because the QB has changed.
-
- SJSU Ultimate Loser Award Winner - Given to someone that should probably give up but won't.
- Posts: 23460
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
- Location: Where the sagebrush grows!
- Has thanked: 1417 times
- Been thanked: 3213 times
- jackmormon
- RIP
- Posts: 10564
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:53 pm
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 3 times
- JSHarvey
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: April 2nd, 2013, 12:45 pm
- Location: Sandy, UT
- Has thanked: 3529 times
- Been thanked: 352 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
Just do what worked against BYU - as much as the QB situation allows. My guess is Coach Wells will do this.
"The purpose of education is not to validate ignorance but to overcome it." Lawrence Krauss
"Thinking is the hardest work there is, that's why so few people do it!" Henry Ford
"Thinking is the hardest work there is, that's why so few people do it!" Henry Ford
-
- Posts: 817
- Joined: January 1st, 2014, 11:30 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 42 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
Guys forgive me but perhaps I have been watching the wrong team or am in need of lasik eye surgery...but I was unaware that we had any tight ends this year.
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
The latter: 16mm game film developed in slow motion for analytical purposes. These kids were quick from 1-10 yards, not so fast for 40 yards.ViAggie wrote:man... talk about slow white kids
Maybe it's just the speed of the film?
These were 2 of the best HS teams in the state, and the Logan QB, Craig Smith, was a HS all-American and went toe-to-toe with Tony Adams for the USU starting job, until Tony's sheer brilliance made the decision that landed Craig in the defensive backfield.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15398
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7167 times
- Been thanked: 2086 times
Re: I'm all for ditching the spread
That's exactly right, NBA.NavyBlueAggie wrote:Hick, it appears the game was played at old Romney Stadium. 1967 was the last year for games in the old Romney and the turf showed lots of wear and abuse. The brief shots of the south end zone show an elevated bowl end which would confirm Romney and eliminate either Box Elder or Logan High football fields.
Loan and BE ended the regular season tied, though Logan had won the first game: Logan's QB ran and passed 'em silly. It was an astonishing turnaround in the days before tiebreakers and you always settled things on the field.
I was at that game. Best defensive performance I ever saw (I missed Merlin's game in the snow against Idaho).
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.