Depth Chart Projecting: Offense
by Peter Bean on May 1, 2008 10:40 AM CDT
in Texas Longhorns Football
Email
PrintIt's May 1st, meaning we've spent four months without Texas football and have four more until it returns. Halfway home, boys and girls.
Same as last year, we'll take couple cracks at projecting the depth chart, once now before summer and again at the beginning of August when fall workouts begin. Let's pray it's a quiet, trouble-free summer and we're not talking about attrition to grades and jail.
Les Roster
QBs (3) - Colt McCoy (JR), John Chiles (SO), Sherrod Harris (SO)
RBs (8) - Chris Ogbonnaya (SR), Vondrell McGee (SO), Foswhitt Whittaker (RS-FR), Tre' Newton (FR), Jeremy Hills (FR), Cody Johnson (FR), Antwan Cobb (SO), Luke Tiemann (SR)
WRs (11) - Dan Buckner (FR), Brandon Collins (SO), Quan Cosby (SR), Brock Fitzhenry (FR), DJ Grant (FR), DeSean Hales (FR), Antoine Hicks (FR), James Kirkendoll (SO), Jordan Shipley (SR), Montre Webber (SO), Malcolm Williams (R-FR)
TEs (4) - Blaine Irby (SO), Peter Ullman (SR), Ian Harris (RS-FR), Josh Marshall (SO)
OTs (6) - Tray Allen (SO), Aundre McGaskey (SO), Adam Ulatoski (JR), Kyle Hix (SO), Mark Buchanan (FR), Luke Poehlmann (FR)
OGs (6) - Cedric Dockery (SR), Charlie Tanner (JR), Michael Huey (SO), Britt Mitchell (SO), Steve Moore (SO), David Snow (FR)
Cs (3) - Buck Burnette (SO), Chris Hall (SR), Greg Smith (SO)
May Projection, Offense
Four months out, we lack a lot of the requisite information to make an opening day prediction, but this would be my guess as to where we stand heading into the summer. A few thoughts:
* I don't think this is necessarily our best top-to-bottom offensive depth chart, nor one I expect to see at the close of the season. This projection gives greater deference to veterans than I expect the season will uphold. Sophomores Tray Allen, Michael Huey , Buck Burnette, and Aundre McGaskey will all challenge for starting jobs, if not by September 1, then by December. Sophomore Kyle Hix had a terrific season of his own last year, so he won't be unseated easily. Ulatoski, Tanner, Hall, and Dockery will all need to remain healthy and perform consistently to avoid being passed by this young crop of O-Line talent.
* While the situation at wide receiver isn't hurting for depth, it certainly is in clarity. I honestly have no idea how this will play out and, at this point, think the only thing we know for sure is that a healthy Jordan Shipley and Quan Cosby will start. Beyond that, it's a mad scramble for position.
* Tight end depth? None. What the hell do we do if Irby gets hurt? (Edit: Brain fart overlooking Harris and Marshall. Regardless, the depth is an issue if Irby goes down, considering Ullman's limitations as a pass catcher and the inexperience of Harris and Marshall.)
* We've discussed John Chiles v. Sherrod Harris already, the resolution of which could shake things up a bit. Assuming Chiles sticks with QB as he intends, one of the young wide receivers needs to step up as a playmaker this season.
Thoughts?
20 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Tight End
Behind Irby and Ullman we have Josh Marshall (6-4, 240, R-So) and Ian Harris (6-4, 250, R-Fr). I don’t know much about either, but I believe Marshall is a converted WR.
'Til Gabriel blows his horn...
What about Marshall?
I heard everyone was going nuts about him in practice. But that just means he’s probably not panning out, and will see play time as a 12th year senior, and we will hate him for it.
--Horn Brain--
Haven't seen him
All I know is we have Irby, with limited experience, and Ullman, with limited abilities. And two kids who’ve never played live college football.
I’d love for Marshall to emerge as a quality option. I’d feel infinitely better about the position.
--PB--
It is either him or Mal Williams.
One has size the other has speed/athleticism. The offense needs speed, so Williams would be my choice.
Cats and dogs sleeping together.
I'm with EOB
Williams is my (now not so) secret crush I have high hopes for. Would love to see him break out.
--PB--
new offense on the way (believe it!)
I think the “mess” at receiver is by design. With all due respect to those who have undying faith in Greg Davis’ incompetence, I think we are about to see unveiled a “new” offense we might call the “zone read spread” that will put three or four wide receivers on the field, including Cosby, Shipley, Williams, and Collins (and Chiles occasionally) as the top 4. The TE position will be de-emphasized, and be used mainly for power blocking or a change of pace
Why do I think this? Ten Reasons
1. The spring game was excruciatingly boring. I know Mack Brown knows he can’t run basic plays and win. I think he wanted to see how tough his RB’s were (affirmative) and whether Chiles would devolve into poor technique when pressured for real (again, affirmative).
2. What else can you do when you have 11 WR’s and 4 TE’s (maybe) and seem to have recruited an enormous number of receivers (at least 5 in the Buckner – Grant class alone)? The best offensive players on the team right now are at wide receiver, especially if you include Chiles as an occasional member of that group.
3. The comment from spring practice that Major was teaching the running backs to read defenses. That is something you do if you are running out of the spread and need the back to have options on any given play, such as pass protect against certain defenses or run a ppattern against others, or expect the ball against yet others.
4. It’s not that far of a reach, given the zone blocking used in the zone read, which is to go pass out of the same backfield formation.
5. Fozzy Whittaker will be an awesome weapon in a spread offense, and even Vondrell McGee has a style that lends itself to making little cuts inside or outside the tackle out of a spread.
6. Mack Brown has repeatedly expressed his love and respect of the spread offense. He also seems to be able to recruit excellent wide receivers in addition to excellent secondary players. If Horn wide receivers are superior to other teams that run the spread, why can’t Texas run it better.
7. The offensive line now has a little experience to go with young talent. I expect the starters to be, from left to right, Tray Allen, Michael Huey, Chris Hall, Cedric Dockery, Adam Ulatoski. Kyle Hix will back up at tackle Buck Burnette comes in at center with Hall shifting to guard if either Huey or Dockery get hurt. With confidence in this group, we don’t need a receiving TE.
8. Both Finley and Charles left for the NFL because they could see this coming. In a new “zone read spread,” Finley would have been blocking or off the field on most plays and might actually have been beaten out by Irby. Charles succeeded mainly in I formation runs such as traps and counters that are not easy to run out of the spread.
9. Colt McCoy, with protection and “clever” running ability, would be a deadly accurate passer in the spread.
10. There was almost no discussion about WHAT offense was being run in spring practice. There was no discussion, as happened last August, about whether to be a power running team or spread team. There was no mention of trying things, experimenting with things, etc., as in the past. In the chess game of college football, silence means either change or the status quo, and I can’t see status quo out of this group.
by burnt in ny on May 2, 2008 7:07 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
So in other words...
you think they’re shifting to an offense similar to that run by Mizzou. Or one that is built around a QB with the skill set of someone like, say, Garrett Gilbert.
'Til Gabriel blows his horn...
Could be...
I’m not convinced Gilbert is a good enough runner to be a threat to run in the zone read. But he may be a better passer (quicker release and stronger arm), which might induce a further shift to a spread more like Tech’s or something else altogether in 2010
Gilbert
You’re not the first person I’ve run across that sees Gilbert as “less than mobile.” And as you live in NY I wouldn’t expect you to have seen much if any of Gilbert. I also have not seen much of him, but from what I have seen he’s much more mobile than I expected. I keep thinking of him as Chase Daniel. Pass-first, but can hurt you running and is also effective throwing on the run. If you get a chance, try and find some video of Chase Daniel and Mizzou. I think their offense is similar to what you’re describing, and you’ll see that while Daniel is no VY (and who is?) he’s mobile enough to get it done in a spread zone offense.
And just as a side note I enjoy your break down and personal insight. As you said below right now in May the most fun thing to do is guess and dream.
'Til Gabriel blows his horn...
Change
A change is coming..A change is good.
wow. just......wow.
Where to start:
think we are about to see unveiled a "new" offense we might call the "zone read spread" that will put three or four wide receivers on the field, including Cosby, Shipley, Williams, and Collins (and Chiles occasionally) as the top 4. [/quote]The zone read is an integral part of any spread offense being run today. If texas was switching to a pure spread offense, it wouldn’t be a “zone read spread”, it would simply be a spread offense. You may think I’m nitpicking semantcis, but I think in an era of spread option offenses (Missouri) and spread single wing schemes (Florida, Utah, UNLV), such distinctions are important.
comment from spring practice that Major was teaching the running backs to read defenses. That is something you do if you are running out of the spread and need the back to have options on any given play, such as pass protect against certain defenses or run a ppattern against others, or expect the ball against yet others.[/quote]In texas’ current offensive scheme, the RB is responsible for the Will LB on passing plays. If he blitzes, they stay in and protect; if he goes into coverage, they go out in a pattern. Applewhite teaching them how to read defenses would be totally consistent with preparing for the same offense they have been running ever since Davis arrived in Austin.
succeeded mainly in I formation runs such as traps and counters that are not easy to run out of the spread. [/quote]Don’t mean to be mean, but DID YOU WATCH A FREAKING GAME LAST SEASON?! The end of the Nebraska game ring a bell? Oklahoma State? Charles EXCELLED at running the zone read. He was rarely used in the I, if at all.
was almost no discussion about WHAT offense was being run in spring practice. There was no discussion, as happened last August, about whether to be a power running team or spread team. There was no mention of trying things, experimenting with things, etc., as in the past[/quote]All of which means absolutely nothing. Just b/c they aren’t throwing the wishbone out on the field during spring practice doesn’t mean they’re overhauling the offensive scheme.
This seems like just so much wishful thinking on your part.
Worth a response
I’ve enjoyed Beergut’s comments and really appreciate his knowledge of formations and the history of the game. I appreciate disagreements and I don’t like to get into pissing matches over something as fun as watching football, but I feel like some comments are worth a response.
First off, it’s May, and what else do football addicts have to do but wishful thinking. From the sports network pundits down to the occasional fan, what are any of us doing besides reading the tea leaves and using our imaginations.
Did I watch the freaking games? I did watch several games (hard to watch them all being based in central New York and thus Penn State land (forget Syracuse)), and more importantly, I did look at video and study what the offensive linemen were doing on most of the big plays in the biggest games. My mistake in describing Jamaal Charles running was Jamaal Charles had big runs out of the zone read 3 times against Nebraska, but 2 of his long toughdown runs in that game, and all of the big runs in the Oklahoma State game,and the big runs against TCU, Central Florida and Arizona State in the Holiday bowl were all counters or traps. While these were run out of the spread, they are fundamentally I-formation type plays that try to time the arrival of offensive linemen at the point of attack with the arrival of the running back. I know you know all this Beergut, but there may be some BON members that don’t, so I wanted to be clear on what I meant.
The teaching of RB’s to read defenses by Major Applewhite comes straight out of interviews with the RB’s on the MB-TF website. If the players say it is something new, then why doubt them?
Formations. I think you have a point in terms of the technical descriptions of the formations, but I was trying to keep that down to a minimum for the non-techno blog reader (even I get bored when I’m paying too much attention to X’s and O’s). When I refer to a “zone read spread” what I mean is an offense with the backfield alignment of the zone read but 1 TE andf 3 WR or no TE and 4 WR in which the “option” on the play for the QB is to give the ball to the RB, keep and run, or backpedal and pass. The option to pass is inherent in the play, not a separate call. This is not the Florida single wing or the Tech spread. It may be very similar to the Missouri spread option – I haven’t seen Missouri play. The idea is to put pressure on both the outside LB and DE: for the LB to commit to the RB or drop and try to cut off the slant pass to the slot receiver and the DE to commit to the QB or RB (as the current version of the zone read apparently does). If the LB drops and the DE commits to the RB, then the QB runs. If the LB commits to the RB and the DE to the QB, then the slant or WR screen should be open and McCoy can just throw to a spot even if he is rushed. If the LB drops and the DE commits to the QB, and Fozzy Whittaker gets the ball, look out. It just gives more simultaneous but simple options to Colt and should allow more speed on the field without fundamentally changing the offense.
The lack of comment about the offense with the press I agree is a weak point (which is why I put it tenth on the list), but Mack likes to agonize in front of the press quite often, and his lack of agony this spring was quite distinct in my view.
If I’m wrong (and I probably am) what’s your explanation for having 11 WR’s on the roster and only 2 TE’s with any real talent (Irby and Marshall)? They sure aren’t going to be running 2 TE power sets very often.
Your quote blocks are a pain to read
Are you doing your own coding for that? Please give the quote button a try when you do another quote. My eyes will be thankful.
It's a Horns' world. Even Aggies play hoops with a burnt orange ball.
Is it football season YET?
re: 10 reasons on offense
You make some brilliant points in your 10-point analysis. It’s truly scary to think of Chiles having to run the offense with his lack of skill in the passing area; Harris would be the safer option for backup QB. On No. 8, I disagree: I believe both players left early for the NFL for financial reasons, notably Jermichael Finley. It’s his bad fortune to have the body and skill to be a terrific TE - but the position is not one colleges or the NFL build around. As to No. 1, all spring games are boring. That’s understandable with this year’s spring game, due to the huge number of freshmen and sophomore in the mix to start or play a lot. The coaches were looking for and working on developing basic skills, not putting in intricate plays (that, of course, could be scouted). But as to going to the Spread as a basic offense, no way. Teams that live out of the Spread cannot run the ball in the fourth quarter, cannot punch it in on short-yardage and goal-line plays (that was a major UT failing in 2006). Most of all, Mack Brown is not going to deviate from a run-pass balance, which is what the Spread does. Rushing the ball is as basic to the game as tackling and blocking.
reply
these were run out of the spread, they are fundamentally I-formation type plays that try to time the arrival of offensive linemen at the point of attack with the arrival of the running back. [/quote]
Actually, the trap and counter are staple plays in just about any series offense, but started with the single wing and fullhouse T. To say they are ‘fundamentally I-formation type plays’ is intellectually dishonest.
When Rich Rodriguez invented the Dart series, he included the dart option (aka zone read), the dart trap (basic inside trap), the outside zone (think sweep), and the counter. texas runs all of these plays not b/c they are running the I-formation, but b/c they run parts of the Dart series as their base runnning game.
As for your description of a “zone read spread”, you seem to be defining what you believe (hope?) the offensive scheme will be by the formation. The problem with that theory is that texas uses 10 personnel frequently, and 11 personnel the majority of the time. So, you’re going to see 4 wide frequently, but 1 TE, 3 WRs the majority of the time.
Y’all do not have the personnel to run the Missouri spread option; you need a QB who is a true running threat on the option, and while McCoy has shown some mobility, he isn’t mobile enough to run the option. Chiles is mobile enough to run the option, but not a polished enough passer to execute the spread passing game.
As for your idea of what the “zone spread” would do to put pressure on the OLB and DE, texas’ current offensive scheme already does this.
It seems to me that the offense you desire is already in place, they’re just not running it the way you want them to (that’s a playcalling issue).
phillip payne
I know he’s not a potential starter, but is he still around? I didn’t see him on any of these lists for WR.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Burnt Orange Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
