Question---Since most all football teams ran the single wing initially, is the I formation a gimmick offense?
It's the pace not the scheme. We could do the same thing with our offense. LSU did it to us with their pro style offense. It has absolutely nothing to do with the style of offense. All that is happening is the pace of the offense basically only gives the defense time to line up for the next play. This eliminates the defense from reading the pre snap formation, making substitutions, making adjustments to their alignments and other personnel on the field. Turning the play into a sandlot football type situation. Defensive players are in a position of having to "free style" defending the play because they've had no time to change alignments, personnel or overall positioning.Texas went to an SEC style offense after McCoy and haven't been the same sense. Tebow followed Leak for a NC. Baylor plugged in the next QB and he only broke RGIIIs season yardage record. Oregon has run several QBs and they just keep on winning. Texas Tech had about four QBs that put up huge numbers and won ball games. It only ended when Craig James ran the coach off.
My point in using LSU as the example is that they didn't have that type qb and ACCOMPLISHED THE SAME THING aTm did (other than the win). They (being LSU) drastically picked up the pace and it caused the same problems for us. We couldn't substitute, make pre snap adjustments etc. They did this with not having the style quarterback you're referring to. So what's really causing the problem?Buzzard, you're leaving out that the QB is a threat instead of a handoff machine.
Baylor rushed for 306 yards in the bowl to UCLAs 33. That's a gimmick most anyone will take. The reality is that Alabama will need to adjust to a smaller, faster defense against Aggie and Ole Miss. No big deal.
LSU is one of the few teams that can match up physically with Alabama. Take that talent level and add a QB that is a run threat and you have an incredible offense. A QB who is a threat as an athlete is the key.My point in using LSU as the example is that they didn't have that type qb and ACCOMPLISHED THE SAME THING aTm did (other than the win). They (being LSU) drastically picked up the pace and it caused the same problems for us. We couldn't substitute, make pre snap adjustments etc. They did this with not having the style quarterback you're referring to. So what's really causing the problem?
I'd express general agreement. Mainly though I think people interpret their own connotation to gimmick. I personally think the wishbone was a gimmick, I think the wildcat was a gimmick. Both have a lot of success. But, that sort of thing has a lifespan.Second, if we use the word "unconventional" instead if "gimmick" can we spend less time on the debate over syntax and more on the merits of the offense?
I'd express general agreement. Mainly though I think people interpret their own connotation to gimmick. I personally think the wishbone was a gimmick, I think the wildcat was a gimmick. Both have a lot of success. But, that sort of thing has a lifespan.
As to what is and isn't a gimmick, something isn't a gimmick if it stands the test of time. If, once the novelty has worn off, and once teams have adjusted to it, it still works well then it's not a gimmick. We'll see in the next few years since this sort of offense is rising in popularity. If it isn't a gimmick, more and more teams will use it and they all will have great success. If it is a gimmick, as more teams use it, more teams will get used to it and it will fail at an increasing rate.
Once again though, this is not to disparage Texas A&M, but I was at the game. They caught Alabama off guard, and that's what this defense tries to do. You can only catch people off guard so many times doing the same thing...
Absolutely! That's in any offense. But now we're getting away from it being the scheme and more toward athletic superiority. My point (so it won't get lost) in this entire thread is that I do not believe the spread offense in and of itself is that dominant. I think the tempo is what keeps defenses from adjusting and makes a living on defensive players having to resort to sandlot play due to the lack of time to make presnap adjustments or substitutions. Then you throw in a superior athlete and you've got a monster to handle.LSU is one of the few teams that can match up physically with Alabama. Take that talent level and add a QB that is a run threat and you have an incredible offense. A QB who is a threat as an athlete is the key.
as we've seen time and time again, stats (offensive or defensive) put up against big 12 or pac 12 teams, especially in bowl games, don't mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things.Baylor rushed for 306 yards in the bowl to UCLAs 33. That's a gimmick most anyone will take. The reality is that Alabama will need to adjust to a smaller, faster defense against Aggie and Ole Miss. No big deal.
What did you think of the Aggie stats in Tuscaloosa? What did you think about the vast improvement at Ole Miss with a different offense? With less than a full year in the new offense, TAMU and Ole Miss were greatly improved.as we've seen time and time again, stats (offensive or defensive) put up against big 12 or pac 12 teams, especially in bowl games, don't mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things.
Once again, they are running an offense that their opponents are ill prepared for. They can and will adjust over time. Gimmicks work! That's the point, people want to argue over my use of the term but a gimmick works or else it wouldn't be a gimmick!What did you think of the Aggie stats in Tuscaloosa? What did you think about the vast improvement at Ole Miss with a different offense? With less than a full year in the new offense, TAMU and Ole Miss were greatly improved.
i dont worry at all about either of those teams, they did improve, but ole miss had no where to go but up.What did you think of the Aggie stats in Tuscaloosa? What did you think about the vast improvement at Ole Miss with a different offense? With less than a full year in the new offense, TAMU and Ole Miss were greatly improved.
What is your overall line of thinking regarding offenses like aTm's, Oregon's & Ole Miss'? Do you think that these style offenses are superior to the style defenses of an Alabama, LSU, Florida etc.? And that ultimately it is the SEC defenses that are the ones going to be forced to change, not these type offenses? Curious to read your thoughts.What did you think of the Aggie stats in Tuscaloosa? What did you think about the vast improvement at Ole Miss with a different offense? With less than a full year in the new offense, TAMU and Ole Miss were greatly improved.
No one is taking anything away from the win. Anybody can beat anybody on a given Saturday. It's what you do over the course of the marathon that counts. You beat us, great, congrats. But you lost two other games. Doesn't matter why, you lost more games than we did. See you in College Station next season.What was gimmicky about A&M's defense?
The first interception was brilliant coaching: Show a Cover 2 safety look, switch to Robber coverage, INT.
Yeldon's fumble wasn't a mistake: hard hit by A&M defender right on the ball, the way it is supposed to be.
The final INT was scouting and having players ready to go: the DB never hesitated, read the attempted (illegal) pick play, avoided the WR pick, and made the INT.
What about putting our walk-on DL Spencer Nealy on Barrett Jones and frustrating the Outland Trophy winner all night.
If A&M's offense against Alabama was a "gimmick," the Defense wasn't. Unless you call "Bend but don't Break" and "stiffening up at the right time"
gimmicks.
It wasn't just A&M's offense against Alabama. If you want to beat Nick Saban's team, it takes a complete effort.
I believe the subject was about gimmicky offenses. Yes in a sense aTm's defense did save the day - barely after giving up a 3 TD lead (created by a hot QB and spread offense, 'gimmicky' or not) and enough big plays for Bama to almost pull the game out. But they made enough plays to hang on and over the course of the season were certainly a credible defense. But I'm not really interested in a recounting of the various reasons from the aTm perspective why they beat us that day. There's probably a large number of threads for that over on the aTm boards.What was gimmicky about A&M's defense?
The first interception was brilliant coaching: Show a Cover 2 safety look, switch to Robber coverage, INT.
Yeldon's fumble wasn't a mistake: hard hit by A&M defender right on the ball, the way it is supposed to be.
The final INT was scouting and having players ready to go: the DB never hesitated, read the attempted (illegal) pick play, avoided the WR pick, and made the INT.
What about putting our walk-on DL Spencer Nealy on Barrett Jones and frustrating the Outland Trophy winner all night.
If A&M's offense against Alabama was a "gimmick," the Defense wasn't. Unless you call "Bend but don't Break" and "stiffening up at the right time"
gimmicks.
It wasn't just A&M's offense against Alabama. If you want to beat Nick Saban's team, it takes a complete effort.