Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 12345678912 ... LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 181
  1. #14
    BamaNation Hall of Fame GrayTide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Greenbow, Alabama
    Posts
    8,962

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    I tend to agree with sip that the spread is an offense that has morphed from the old split T, the wishbone, veer etc. The difference is that it relies more on passing and trying to get matchups in the open field. As has been said on here many times; it is the offense of choice in a tremendous amount of high schools nationwide so the athletes being recruited for the most part already have experience running this type of offense. It would be interesting to see how the percentage of snaps from under center to the direct snap to the QB since CNS arrived in 2007 until Monday night.
    "My momma always said you got to put the past behind you before you can move on." Forrest Gump

    "The past is never dead. It's not even past." William Faulkner

  2. Advertisement
  3. #15
    BamaNation All-American 2003TIDE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    ATL
    Posts
    3,197
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    Quote Originally Posted by jagvocate View Post
    Really old timers would laugh about your substitutions talk. Willy-nilly subbing in on every play would be a gimmick to them ... They would tell you to put your best 11 on the field and leave em there to play. If you left the game, you left it ... No coming back in next play.
    Good point. It's funny how gimmick is tossed around. When your whole offense is based around a philosophy, I don't see it as being a gimmick. That's just your offense. Uptempo, spread, pistol, pro-set are all the same. Now if you ran the wishbone 3-5 times a game, that IMO would be a gimmick.

    So when Alabama goes uptempo, is that gimmick?

  4. #16
    BamaNation Second Team Bama Czar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Woodstock, GA
    Posts
    157

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    [[ I'm not disparaging Texas A&M or Oregon for using a gimmick. But, I've watched it live. I know what it is. When your offense is built around not letting the other defense make substitutions, which is something that football has come to expect, it's relying on a quirk in the rules. ]]

    This point alone is the reason I would call it a gimmick as opposed to the wishbone. At least the wishbones, GA Tech's, & GA Southern's of the world would huddle and don't really care if the defense makes substitutions or not. I couldn't care less what style of offense you run, but I hate the constant "hurry-up" approach. That is a completely a gimmick. It's so "video game-ish" when it's a staple of your offense, & the success of your offense hinges on such gimmicks........

  5. #17
    BamaNation Hall of Fame TideFan in AU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Almost close enough to the pasture to smell it!
    Posts
    5,606
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com
    Quote Originally Posted by jagvocate View Post
    Gimmick?

    You can't understand the mindset because you are on the mountaintop looking down, not trying to find a path upwards ...

    A&M is still recruiting to stock the cupboards, but we don't have 5*s all over like y'all do. Texas HS aren't producing 230 lb bruising SEC RBs by the bushel basket. So why try to beat you on your terms? Why try to "out-Alabama" the Crimson Tide? But TX HS do produce QBs, WRs, and agile OL all over the place. So what you call a gimmick is playing to inherent strengths. Playing fast in space neutralizes those 300 lb monster DL and 250 lb LBs you have. And I promise you this: when Jake Matthews (RT) and Ced Ogbuehi (RG) are leading Johnny Manziel through the hole on a designed QB Counter Trey, there is nothing gimmicky about it. Two 300 lb pulling linemen and an elusive back. Old time football wearing modern clothes.

    It is also called strategy and good ones accentuate one's own positives and turns an opponent's positives into weaknesses.

    And as far as being a "gimmick" ... There once was another style of football, also with origins on the TX HS fields, that took CFB by storm, and gave Coach Bryant a few important victories.
    People called it a gimmick and said it was ruining football. It spread the field and stressed defenses in new, uncomfortable ways.

    It was the wishbone.
    Your post
    kinda proves the point doesn't it? The wishbone is gone because it is a gimmick offense. We won 3 NC's with it, and it's a great part of our history, but there's a reason we don't run it anymore. Offenses gets figured out more quickly now than they used to be, especially in the SEC. A whole lot of your success this year was responsible by a phenomenal player that turned busted plays into big plays. It is a lot like AU's success in 2010 and UF's success with Tebow. The beauty of the offense Saban runs is that it reloadable without requiring once in a generation players to sustain success. 3 NC's in 4 years and 61 victories in 5 years proves that. As good as the players we've had in the last 5 years have been, not a single one will ever even be mentioned as one of the "greatest ever" as Cam, Tebow were and possibly Manziel will be. With that being said, I don't blame TAMU or other schools for running the offense they are running, and you can't argue that it is successful. The notion that it is unstoppable or the "future of CFB" is wrong though. That's what the media would have you believe and the hype up HUNH teams like no one has a chance to beat them. That's what the OP and others have a problem with.

  6. #18
    BamaNation All-American
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    2,077
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    Besides the two losses for A&M it kills me that media just totally disregard the Ole Miss game. I actually saw Brando and A&M fans saying A&M should have beaten LSU and would've been in the national title. This makes the logical leap of assuming A&M would have beaten UGA. I responded with A&M should have lost to Ole Miss (and honestly that was much more a screw up than the A&M LSU loss). An A&M fan was like we beat you in Ttown or did you forget.

    To sum it up it's like the worst example of selective memory/revisionist history I can remember. Also I think the A&M fans have gotten wayyy too large of a head and I hope they get brought back down to Earth next year.

    Bottom line is Bama is king and everything they say about these teams can't change that.

  7. #19
    BamaNation All-SEC
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,992

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    Quote Originally Posted by KrAzY3 View Post
    The wishbone was a gimmick, and while I won't criticize its use, it did have repercussions. Alabama for instance used to produce Super Bowl quarterbacks on a regular basis. Starr, Namath, Stabler... there has not been one first round draft pick at QB, or one QB from Alabama playing in a Super Bowl (or even starting full time) since the wishbone era. Yes, it worked, but eventually Alabama had to stop using the gimmick.

    I'm not disparaging Texas A&M or Oregon for using a gimmick. But, I've watched it live. I know what it is. When your offense is built around not letting the other defense make substitutions, which is something that football has come to expect, it's relying on a quirk in the rules. Take the game against Alabama. Had Alabama been given the regular amount of time to make substitutions, I can assure you that A&M's offense has little success. The reason it worked was because Alabama doesn't practice this sort of thing every week, and doesn't recruit for this sort of thing.

    Believe you me, if Texas A&M played an Alabama team that recruited and practiced for their offense, it would have been a blood bath. A&M played a similar offense and gave up 57, which makes my point. A&M doesn't even practice or recruit to play their own offense. Once again, good for A&M. If you think I hate them, you haven't bothered to read my posts. The point is, we can't give them too much credit. They're using a gimmick, and sooner or later that gimmick won't work.

    The real problem as I see it is that once Alabama starts recruiting and practicing to handle this gimmick, they'll be less prepared for fundamentally sound football. So, they might be able to beat A&M or Oregon handily, but an LSU or the like might prove to be their undoing.

    Anyway, my original point was the simple fact that a lot of people don't understand how easy it is to stop A&M and Oregon. You just have to prepare for it and the thing is most college teams are not prepared for it.
    if it was truly that easy to stop...we wouldn't be having this discussion, and it woundlt be uwed as frequently as it is. IMO...

  8. #20
    BamaNation Hall of Fame JBama_in_PCOLA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Andalusia, Alabama via Pensacola, Florida United States
    Posts
    20,385
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com

    Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    The "hurry-up" offenses ate figured out. This will go the way of the spread. CNS and CKS got it!
    ROLL TIDE!

  9. #21
    BamaNation All-American KrAzY3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,460
    My Mood
    Paranoid on TideFans.com
    Thread Starter

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    Quote Originally Posted by bamafaninOhiO View Post
    if it was truly that easy to stop...we wouldn't be having this discussion, and it woundlt be uwed as frequently as it is. IMO...
    Oregon was held to 14 points. Texas A&M was held to 17 and 19 points. Easy might have been the wrong way to explain it, but let me put it like this. If Alabama went out every week and practiced to handle these sort of offenses, they would decimate them. Alabama can't afford to do that though, they practice for the style of football they play and their opponents play regularly. They don't have the luxury of overlooking a LSU, or Virginia Tech simply because A&M is on their schedule. Their regular preparations prepare them for most games, their preparations for A&M are specific to A&M and that is the advantage that A&M derives.

    We can't erase what we witnessed though. Both A&M and Oregon's offense were brought to a grinding halt. If the opponent is prepared, their defense falters. The advantage is in creating an offense that the defense is not prepared for, and that advantage will diminish over time. My post and my point was not to disparage A&M and Oregon, but to say that Notre Dame and Alabama deserve more credit than they are getting. Sound fundamental football got those two teams in the championship game, and those two teams are the ones that belonged.

    Quote Originally Posted by RollTide1224 View Post
    Besides the two losses for A&M it kills me that media just totally disregard the Ole Miss game.
    This is an interesting point considering Ole Miss has more familiarity with the type of offense that A&M runs. They give up 27.6 points on average, and the A&M score was 30-27. They made one of the top offenses look average because they were better prepared for it.

    Having said that, I like Johnny, I wanted A&M in the SEC. More of my angst is felt towards Oregon because despite not winning anything I always seem them treated like something special. I don't blame either team for doing what they do, I just wish more people would understand what's actually going on.
    Last edited by KrAzY3; January 9th, 2013 at 08:48 AM.

  10. #22
    BamaNation Hall of Fame
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Arab, AL
    Posts
    8,454
    My Mood
    Inspired on TideFans.com

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    Despite the fact that I am sure it gave CNS and CKS migraines, they had A&M's offense contained after that first quarter.

    That game, that loss, was on our offense more than the defense. If we don't turn the ball over 3 times, we win. If we don't flounder about on 3rd down, we win. We were beat up and tired going into that game, especially on defense, but the defense still did enough.

    That game was also a testament to A&M's conditioning. They had not had a single off week all year. Their offense routinely puts their defense on the field because of quick drives. Yet their defense completely flummoxed our offense in that game. And despite Oklahoma being able to run about 50 plays in the first half against A&M, their defense still shut down OU in the second half.

    Anyway, I understand that the media seems to have shifted to this narrative that someone else should have been in the game other than Notre Dame because we beat them so badly. They hyped Notre Dame up, and when we demolished them, they just cast them away. Let that be a lesson in the media's lack of intelligence. They haven't had it in a long time. You've got a select few in this country who can think logically. But by and large, the American sports media cannot process information rationally.

  11. #23
    BamaNation Hall of Fame DiamondDust's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    15,158

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    Quote Originally Posted by TideEngineer08 View Post
    But by and large, the American sports media cannot process information rationally.
    Neither can the American sports public.
    “We have 45 men suited up. They're all supposed to be ready to play.”

    -Bill Belichick

  12. #24
    BamaNation First Team Rolltide_PA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    897
    My Mood
    Talkative on TideFans.com

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    Quote Originally Posted by KrAzY3 View Post
    Anyway, my original point was the simple fact that a lot of people don't understand how easy it is to stop A&M and Oregon. You just have to prepare for it and the thing is most college teams are not prepared for it.
    ridiculous statement. We're the most prepared football team in America and aTm lumped 20 on us...in the FIRST quarter. Yes we adjusted but they still put up 29 which is more than double our season average. If it was so easy to stop Sumlin wouldn't be the coach at aTm.

    As far as Oregon only one team held them under 35 all season, in 2011 scored at least 27 in every game and in both 2009 and 2010 only twice were held under 37, 2009 only twice held under 31. So you're saying it is EASY to stop an offense that for the past 5 years have failed to score at least 27 points only 7 times (roughly 1.5 out of 13-14 games/year)? I'll take the facts and stats over opinion in this case. There's some really good coaches out there and none have consistently figured out a way to stop Oregon or Sumlin's offenses.

    just because you play in a faster tempo than Alabama doesn't make you a "gimmick". I'd venture to guess Oregon has a higher % of running plays than we do and runs in between the tackles more times/game than the Tide. If they ever had a qb that could manage a game like AJ they'd have a nice crystal trophy

    aTm's "gimmick" offense brought them 11 wins in Sumlin's first season along with a Heisman trophy...not to mention they came into Ttown and put up 29 which is the most we've allowed in BDS since 2007

  13. #25
    BamaNation Third Team
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    26
    My Mood
    Mellow on TideFans.com

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    I don't really think A&M's offense was gimmicky, but I do think their qb had an exceptional game. It reminded me of South Carolina in 2010 when Garcia played that same type of extraordinary game, hitting ridiculously tight passes all day. A&M had this type of success and along with the qb's uncanny ability to move around, they caught our team at the right time for them to be successful. Hats off to them, what else can you say and remain credible? There are no excuses for the poor execution by our offense on a questionable offensive gameplan, imo. That A&M game, if it did nothing else, exposed our team to the reality of having to define an identity (running the ball) or risk being beaten again.
    The quicker paced offense of A&M also exposed something that CNS himself has been outspoken about:
    His ability to have time to sub in defensive players aka personnel groups for the desired defensive 'play'.

    The interesting part in all of this is, now that CNS has spoken in favor of having time between plays to substitute players, does the rest of the college football world use this to capitalize on one of the few perceived weaknesses we have? Notice I said 'perceived', because it isn't really a weakness, it's a time issue. If we have time to get things set on defense, we do fine. Without that time between plays, our defense can be more vulnerable as would most defensive schemes.

    Does the paradigm shift on offense further towards the spread and, more importantly, up-tempo offenses to try to neutralize dominant defensive teams?

    When Coach Saban asked the nation a few months ago (paraphrasing) "Is this what you want football to become?" regarding no-huddle offenses and him not having time to sub defensive players, the answers still linger in the minds looking ahead to football's immediate future.

    Is it fair to not allow defenses to adjust to down and distance situations?
    He's asking the college football world to make decisions about the game itself, sportscasters and broadcasters, writers, heads of organizations and the like, does everybody want "NFL light" or do we hold onto more traditional style of play by legislating time between plays in college?


    It's a great discussion, and I'll be following any tidbits I hear on any rules changes this off-season regarding no-huddle schemes in college. I doubt there will be any changes, officially, and hurry-up teams will continue to have some success with the blitzkrieg style. It neutralizes strong defenses at times.

    History is in the making, and our coach is at the forefront of the issues in general.
    It is a wonderful time to be an Alabama fan and to have the kind of coach we currently have.
    Roll Tide! everybody, and if anyone hears anything regarding the issue that's obviously important to our coach and our favorite game, keep us all posted.

    rtr

  14. #26
    BamaNation Second Team
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    86

    Re: Gimmick offenses (Oregon, Texas A&M, etc...)

    Football is always evolving, always progressing. Everyone is looking for an edge to help them.

    I read an interesting article about the spread offense with a QB who can throw well and run well (like Manziel, but there are others). The author's point was this: these dual weapon QBs have moved the audible forward in time, to include during the play.

    The old audible was come to the line, QB reads the defense, and changes the play as necessary, snap the ball, go.

    With the mobile QB and blocking (important skill here) WRs, it is come to the line, change the play if necessary, snap the ball, drop back, read the defense again, and change the play again (from a pass to a run), with the WRs and linemen adjusting responsibilities on the fly.

    A real-time audible if you will, during the play.
    Last edited by jagvocate; January 9th, 2013 at 09:18 AM.

Bookmarks

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
  •  
'Gear UP! Get your University of Alabama Crimson Tide National Championship & Football Dynasty Gear!