Power running
by owenh on Feb 24, 2009 9:28 PM CST
33 comments
So the speculation of late seems to center around some supposed shift in running philosophy. Orangebloods and several of ya'll have recently alluded to ideas of Cody Johnson as being the starter and having Colt take the snap from under center and have a fullback...etc.
From what I'm hearing this is going to be something they toy with in the spring in hopes of using it situationally throughout the season.
The first thing that comes to mind to me is..."not gonna happen". This seems to have "q package" written all over it.
Who sees real results coming out from this spring.
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
0 recs |
33 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Doesn't matter
The O-line will still be blocking the farthest man from them on every play. Good luck running through a wall of tubby guys trying really hard to block 260 lb DLs with just one pectoral.
by Horn Brain on Feb 24, 2009 10:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think it will be something similar to how OU ran the ball last season
In the no huddle they would line up in the Strong I and I formation and run the ball, then the next play they could be 4 wide and in shotgun.
Blazz
by blazzinken on Feb 24, 2009 11:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Unknown statistic
Cody Johnson had 13 rushing Touchdowns last year as a freshman. I say give him a chance and let Fozzy play back up.
by colt12 on Feb 24, 2009 11:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Weren't most of those in the red zone?
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see him get a chance outside of red zone situations, too.
by TXinDC on Feb 25, 2009 1:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The offense worked last year...
I see no reason why GD will change anything….. at all……
by the1austin on Feb 24, 2009 11:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
At all???
How much sense does it make that the Texas Longhorns CANT run the football….i’ll answer for you: NO SENSE. I’ll all about us using our stable full of horses to their strengths.
Throw Ya Horns, Mayne
by texasboi01 on Feb 24, 2009 11:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Boi, obviously I wish we ran the ball better....
But with GD nothing will change…. especially when it was working the year before. Never buy into the spring talk that GD is implementing some new system or package that will fix the main weakness of the offense from the past season.
by the1austin on Feb 25, 2009 12:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually things do change
GD doesn’t always bring the dramatic change we want or need, but the schemes change over time. Witness the adaptation to VY, the refining for Colt (although it took a while).
The running game is the weak sister. The culprit has been both blocking scheme and a certain lack of quick opening north-south plays.
With a host of RBs – whether we think they’re all class 1A racehorses – I suspect that they will streamline the blocking while they have the time and a relatively new OL (with backups) and will go with more two-back under-center options. This will make for more multiple formations and multi-player packages. This stays with the theme of getting more players on the field.
I don’t think any silly Q-package bullshit will happen; this is more foundational work.
This would not be changing the whole offense adapted to Colt but refining the running game. I see it as a natural, something they need (and have needed) to do. It might diminish some of the shorter passing game and set up more play action, but all-in-all would give more flexibility to the offense. The Horns must run effectively against Tech and OU in the first half of the season. Tech can’t defend it and you need the balance against OU’s defense (against any good defense; we were predictable as could be).
So, I see no dramatic change here. I think they saw the quick hitting run game of OU and how well it set up that offense. They want that capability. But we’re not going to return to a power-running game ala Benson per se.
Let’s be even more graphic about this need:
Texas ran the ball 508 times for 2,177 yards, 4.2 ypc, 33 TDs – that’s 53.2% of the plays.
Texas passed 447 times, hit 343 for 4008 yards, 36 TDs – that’s 46.8% of the plays.
The balance is toward run. Passing gained twice as much yardage though.
What needs to be shored up?
What are they working on?
I don’t think there’s much mystery here.
by whills on Feb 25, 2009 11:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Stats are too simple
1. Some of those running carries are sacks or non-designed scrambles on passing plays. That should at least skew back to a 50-50 distribution.
2. A portion of those runs also came in garbage time games when the run-pass ratio is naturally skewed towards run.
Texas was definitely a pass-oriented team last year, stats be damned. But your points are definitely accurate.
by jc25 on Feb 25, 2009 12:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
True, they were pass oriented. Didn't say they weren't.
The point is they are relatively balanced nonetheless. So is OU. Most of the time, though, the Horns were much more effective as a pass-first team…especially so in the no-huddle, two-minute drill style that nailed tOSU, OU and nearly got Tech.
The Horns passing hit a record level of effectiveness. The running…not so much.
It wouldn’t bother me if they ran less as long as they were more effective. The basic offense would still be intact. Wouldn’t bother me either if they did have power running formations to catch light weight nickel and dime coverages on the field, aside from goal line and garbage time usages.
Eventually, if things break right, we’re gonna have to play Alabama, Florida, USC or LSU when it really counts. That’s why I think they need to get the running game into better territory. They need it for offense and they need to be able to practice against it on defense.
by whills on Feb 25, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
O-line
I think the spring will be used to see if the offensive line can rush block and create lanes. If it doesn’t look doable or potentially so, the coaches will scrap it. I think the coaches are serious, but if the OL doesn’t have the aptitude for it by the end of spring training, I don’t think they have much hope for further development during non-supervised summer. Of secondary concern is finding a leading FB. The OL and FB will determine if Texas has a consistent, move the chains running game. In terms of the running game and considering the variety of talent we have at RB, the running back’s primary contribution is vision (hit the hole hard, follow the blockers, or cutback) and what happens after 5 yards. We could punish the DL and LB’s with Whaley and CJ or could have Fozzy running in space.
The pride and winning tradition of The University of Texas will not be entrusted to the weak or the timid.
Hook'em
by longhorns1 on Feb 25, 2009 12:26 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I don't see how you force
a square peg (a power or varied running game) into the round hole that is the Zone Read. The two are incompatible. They call for different formations AND different personnel.
Combine that with the OL starters being selected based on pass-blocking skills and you have a pass-first, run-sometimes-because-everybody-says-we should mentaility. This mindset covers not only the players but the coaches, the play-calling and who gets to be on the field.
You can run AND pass — you just can’t do both out of the Zone Read. (Well, you can against Rice and Iowa State, but not against legit Big 12 defenses.)
by edsp on Feb 25, 2009 10:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
O-line
Colt’s much maligned sophomore season was to a large degree due to the offensive lines ineptitude. Combined with the loss of the only proven RB threat in Jamaal Charles, you can see why the emphasis would be pass blocking and keeping McCoy upright. Give it a chance and see what they can develop over the spring and summer. The other consideration is that the coaches would probably like to lean on opponents in Q4 with a power running game and run time off the clock. As for being “multiple” on offense with the same personnel, they could go with a 2 TE set and switch up with Barrett Matthews shifting to FB as a lead blocker in a no huddle, hurry up offense. Also consider that personnel on the O-line is often rotated to keep them fresh. In the process of rotating personnel, they could make adjustments with personnel that are more adept at run blocking. It also handicaps Texas to not be able to run the ball, particularly against teams like TT where you’re trying to reduce their number of possessions.
Talking about lead blockers, any thoughts on who takes over Roy Miller’s spot in jumbo package? Sergio Kindle who played some RB in high school or Lamaar Houston who’s got more mass and quick feet?
One last thought: 53:47 running vs passing percentage…what’s the percentage if we throw out Q4 running the clock out running plays? what’s the percentage if we limit it to plays that gain at least 1 yard? The statistics are a bit skewed.
The pride and winning tradition of The University of Texas will not be entrusted to the weak or the timid.
Hook'em
by longhorns1 on Mar 1, 2009 12:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It starts to get absurb
Do you also think we should throw out 3rd and longs? Fake punts? Games where we were trailing in the 4th and needed to throw?
The stat is what it is, and its pretty balanced, moreso then I bet you thought even before considering throwing things out.
Your first point is the important one, if we can keep Colt up, its obvious we can win. I, like everyone else, would like to see a more productive running game, but the important thing is to win. If Colt can light it up like he did last year, I have no problem forsaking the run to put up points. I dont think we lost any games last year solely on our tendency to pass first, do you?
by BoddickerIsClutch on Mar 2, 2009 10:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And we'll continue to hear it
Until he’s gone….he’s good sometimes, but we will see remarkable results if we had an aggressive OC. Texas has the success it has and still wastes a lot of talent because our weapons arent allowed to get loose.
Throw Ya Horns, Mayne
by texasboi01 on Feb 25, 2009 12:26 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think we'll see some change
He’s changed before. Not anything drastic this time, just some variation in offensive formation and blocking schemes. Maybe a smaller percentage of plays run from the shotgun single back formation. Our bread & butter won’t change, we just need to show some diversity and the ability to be effective with it. There’s too much expectation for next year to just simply trot out last year’s offense. Mack wants next year, and getting it requires some things to change. We need to be more effective running the ball, and Mack knows it. I think Fozzy being healthy will be key, but maybe Johnson gets involved more. I’d bet we’re still running back by committee.
by hungry on Feb 25, 2009 1:35 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Colt has established himself as a great spread QB who prospers in the Shotgun...
No way do we throw him in the I-formation when we hung 45 on OU and have so many great receiving threats coming back.
by the1austin on Feb 25, 2009 10:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Should we not have adapted in the Fiesta Bowl?
The type of offensive variety that worked so well in the 3rd quarter of that game demonstrates our need to be effective in other areas on offense. We can’t line up against top-20 defenses, tell them from the beginning we can’t run and we don’t throw deep, and expect to win. What we did last year will work against most opponents, but we need to be more versatile against better defenses.
by hungry on Feb 25, 2009 3:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying a better ground game won't help us....
I’m saying that GD won’t change what worked last year so long as Colt and Ship are back. GD has spent 4 years fine tuning his offense to best suit Colt. Recall his first season when we ran WR screens every other passing play. From that, as Colt has progressed, we now have a very successful spread passing attack that operates at its peak out of the Shotgun. I do not see GD going back to an I-Formation/Mixed spread offense with Colt playing the way he is. The offense we are all describing here sounds an awful lot like what we had in the Simms/Cedric era where we would go I-Formation and use a fullback and then go to a 3 or 4 WR set on obvious passing downs. Maybe that would work great now, it might, but I am saying no way does GD change it up after the success we had last year. He will expand on the passing game, but I do not see an immediate solution to the problems in the ground game developing next season.
by the1austin on Feb 26, 2009 1:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It'll actually make it through the spring and work out for us a little
Time for the annual pledge to scheme something different that gives momentary hope but doesn’t work because Davis isn’t capable of making it work.
Lucy with the football.
by utexex on Feb 25, 2009 2:54 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
12-1
I wouldn’t make too many changes. I would just make enough changes to confuse other teams. Texas went 12-1 against one the toughest schedules in the country.
by Longhorns84 on Feb 25, 2009 9:16 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
but that doesn’t mean we abandon the running game, or be happy with it’s current state…
by Displaced Longhorn on Feb 25, 2009 9:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
Do you really expect Colt McCoy to set the NCAA completion % again?
He’s a helluva gunslinger and I’m not going to argue that, but regardless of his abilities I don’t think anyone should expect him and two receivers to carry the entire team again.
Something’s gotta give, and I’ll hold out a sliver of optimism that a change in scheme is it.
by TXinDC on Feb 25, 2009 9:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
well..
I’m not saying to do the exact same thing. I would just add a few more creases to the play book, and go under center a few times a game. I don’t think Texas should try and be a great running team next year when they have had so much success passing. I just think they need to use the running game to throw teams off balance. When Texas does run, they need to be effective.
by Longhorns84 on Feb 26, 2009 8:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone knows.....
……Mack has a deep-seated desire to run first, regardless of the success we have in the passing game. With that said, we’re not going to defeat the winner of Florida/USC/OhioState without a solid running game.
Cody Johnson should have been the starting RB last season. Spilled blood and all that junk……
--- All roads to the Big-XII Championship lead through OU/RRS. It's not just another game! We're all about championships here. ---
by HornChamps on Feb 25, 2009 10:34 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Greg Davis does turn into the football equivalent of Rick Santorum when faced with the big game, but one thing he has shown he’s more willing to do than in past years is adapt the scheme to the players. They did a good job transitioning from the Cedric Benson rushing attack to a pass-happy offense that took advantage of McCoy’s talents and reduced the dependence on the weak rushing attack. I think once the personnel they like are in place to run the ball they’ll put a little more emphasis into setting up the run. I just hope Whaley’s the guy.
by burntorangehorn on Feb 25, 2009 7:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
almost certainly
what the coaches are talking about is shifting into and out of power formations during a drive while in the no huddle. The key as posted up top is whether the linemen (and I’m pointing at ALL of them, but 2 or 3 times at Kyle Hix (RT) and David Snow (who likely will take over RG) can handle the mental transition. You can run power formations with zone blocking techniques, so that’s not the issue. The issue is whether they can shift their timing from the longer wait for the back to hit the hole out of the spread, vs. a shorter wait out of the I.
The other piece that has to come together is finding 1 or 2 TE’s who can shift into and out of power formations on successive plays without having to substitute.
That’s two big if’s, but if it works it will create incredible game-changing momentum for the Horns at crucial stretches in critical games, much as it did in the Fiesta Bowl.
by burnt in ny on Feb 25, 2009 9:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think you're onto something.
That’s what I’ve been thinking, a fluidity of offense that can shift and take advantage of lighter defenses who typically defend the no-huddle. Faster hitting plays keep the pressure on the defensive line not to penetrate and for the defense to stay tighter; pass plays then take advantage and spread them out; thus, completing the mission of most spread offenses to force the defense to defend the whole field all at once and to be constantly guessing right up to the snap. Scary stuff.
by whills on Feb 26, 2009 1:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
