I'm an aTm aggie: Our up tempo no huddle throw it around offense...

SEC_Aggie

New Member
Apr 27, 2012
3
0
0
I graduated from texas a&m and I'm very excited we are in the SEC. So I just watched our spring game and I'm interested to see from experienced SEC fans like yourselves what you think about our plan. Our plan is to try to get into a track meet type games. In the spring game the QB did not line up under center 1 time and did not huddle 1 time. The average time between plays is about 20 seconds. The offense is going to be like Oklahoma State and West Virginia last year. Try to run as many offensive plays as fast as possible to tire out the DL and LB's and keep the defense from substituting and giving presnap looks. The hope is that given only 3 days to prepare it will be difficult to stop. One of my main concerns however is how does our defense get prepared to face the offenses in the SEC when all they have seen in the spring is the hurry up spread.

I think it's worth a try. The alabama defense and LSU defense will be formidable regardless of the offensive scheme they face just curious how you think it will work against the rest of the SEC.
 
First off, welcome!

Secondly, the only way a track meet type offense will work in this league is if you have a starting O-Line that all end up playing in the NFL.

IMHO, you guys need 2 tackles who are legitimate 1st or 2nd rounders to even think about that type of offense. There's a reason no team in this league (sans Arkansas) has really tried this type of offense. I don't think it's a stretch to say that the SEC has the best coaching in all of college football. If none of those guys are willing to try that type of gameplan, it's for good reason.
 
How's your medic-vac units? You'll see no less than four Ds you can't out-quick. In these games your depth will suffer.
 
Sumlin and Kingsbury's air-raid will be very successful, imo, against everyone except Alabama and LSU. With good recruiting, I expect A&M to almost immediately take over the Arkansas spot for #3 in the West. If Lester struggles in Baton Rouge, you can take #2.
 
New coach, new QB, new offense, and about to run off the AD. What do you think will happen?
 
That type of offense can win a lot of games if it's well coached and you have talent at a few key positions. But imo you're selling yourself short by doing it; Texas A&M should be able to lure blue chip talent at every position. You guys are about to be the only school in Texas in the best college football conference in the country. Getting premier line talent shouldn't be a problem. Why would you go gimmicky and try to win a few games you shouldn't?

The track meet offense can win 10 games a year with the right QB and a couple of burners playing WR, it just almost never goes undefeated. The throw it all over the field offenses will allow you to beat some teams that are more talented than you. The problem is that you inevitably have a game where the offense sputters and you get beat by some team you shouldn't have (Oklahoma State *cough, cough*). Spurrier gets a lot of credit for his fun-n-gun offense in the 90's, but he never went undefeated. Let's not kid ourselves, one of the biggest differences between the NFL and CFB is that in CFB you're trying to win every game. It matters.

Then there's always the question of "What do you do on 4th and goal at the 1 when you don't play under center?" You can't just tell the o-line that we're going to be smash mouth on this play...
 
The value of a hurry-up offense - that it gives no time for the defense to catch breath - means that when things go badly, your own defense has no time to catch breath either. This is the biggest reason why any kind of trick, spread, west-coast, hurry-up etc tends not to do well in the SEC, because even if you go 3-and-out, you need your own defense to get a chance to freshen up. That, and SEC defenses are so fast and athletic that hurry-up does not buy you much.

SEC offenses are more about ball control, clock management and field position. You slug out your yards and make the defense pay. For the better team, it all comes together in the fourth quarter.
 
If I were A&M, I'd rather have an offense that was able to legitimately go hurry when they wanted to, but didn't necessarily have it as a base - that way it's a little easier to keep matchups that you think are to your advantage, but not necessarily running hurry up the entire game as a base philosophy of your offense.

I'm a firm believer that the more plays there are in a game the more it benefits the better/more talented team. If you do an honest assessment of the talent at Texas A&M, where would you rank them in the SEC? I don't know too terribly much about them but I can't imagine it would be top 3...

I do think it CAN work in the SEC, but it sure does take a lot of commitment to it. Sumlin may be that guy, or he may not be.
 
I like the offense because everyone is a weapon. It is like the old triple option but going forward. But you are putting a lot of pressure on your defense because they may be on the field a lot.
 
I think the offense will look pretty good , initially , but will slow down a lot as the season progresses . All it takes is 3 to 5 games on film to erase whatever advantage was in the fold in September . Arena ball doesn't win out over the course of a season in this conference and without a future 1st round type QB slinging it around it's pretty much a joke . It is also worth considering that A&M will see plenty of 2nd string DB's in the SEC who are better than the majority of those starting in the ... whatever it's called these days .

As for the defense , if you thought things were bad during the 3rd and 4th quarters last year , it will become an absolute disaster after a few 3 and outs in this league . I like Texas A&M and respect what has been accomplished over the years in football , basketball and baseball , but your football team is simply entering a new world and will have much to learn before becoming a legitimate threat .

Recruiting , no matter what anyone says , will be better in time as there are more high quality prospects in Florida and Georgia alone than there are in Texas . Then , add S. Carolina , Louisiana , etc. , etc. , etc. into the mix and you've doubled your opportunities . Will it take a few years ? Of course it will . Probably as much as a decade before a difference is really seen . A little patience and hope for stability would be wise .
 
There's a reason that SEC Offenses average scoring significantly more points against non-SEC BCS Schools than they do when playing against SEC foes: the SEC defenses are better.

What does this have to do with the style of offense that you run? Well, obviously, it's about your defense. :)

If you want to see some interesting stats, take a look at plays per point, i.e., how many plays it averages a team to score a point, for offenses and defenses but especially in regards to the highest scoring offenses in each conference over the past few years. (Note: when putting together stats for team/conference comparison I typically only include BCS foes.)

In looking at the offenses you'll see something very interesting. First, you'll notice that there is a big disparity between some offenses versus others in this stat even though they average about the same about of points per game. Second, you'll notice that the highest scoring offenses in the Big 12 over the past few years have averaged more points per game compared to the highest scoring SEC offenses over the past few years while the highest scoring SEC offenses have averaged fewer plays per point. What does this mean? It means that the Big 12 offenses scored more points because they had more chances, i.e., more plays and more drives. Most importantly, it means that the best SEC offenses were more efficient than the best Big 12 offenses. The head to head match-ups between upper level SEC and Big 12 teams over the past few years will bear this out.

So, why the disparity? The disparity is a direct result of two things: 1) the style of offense being run and 2) the quality of the defenses faced.

In looking at the defenses you'll also notice something interesting but for a different reason than when looking at the offenses: the disparity you would expect for defenses isn't there, or at least is not as great, as with the offenses. The better defenses, i.e., defenses allowing the fewest points, will usually average forcing around the same number of plays per point. This is usually true even from conference to conference. For example, the better defenses in the Big 12 over the past few years have averaged forcing fewer plays per point than the best SEC defenses but the disparity isn't nearly as great as with the offenses. There is a disparity, though, and that is regarding the average points allowed per game. The better Big 12 defenses allow more points per game than the better SEC defenses. Why? Because, even though they aren't that much less efficient than the better SEC defenses, they average defending more plays per game than the SEC defenses. Why? The disparity in the average number of plays defended per game is, somewhat ironically, almost identical to the reason for the offensive disparity: 1) the style of offense your team plays and 2) the quality of defenses your offense is facing.

The reason for all of this, in a way, boils down to one simple analogy:
Team A has a good offense. Team B has a good defense. Team A will score more points, on average, if they are given 75 plays in a game as opposed to 60.

Case in point:
Last year Arkansas had one of the best offenses in the NCAA. They played the two best defenses in the SEC in Alabama and LSU and two Big 12 defenses in Texas A&M and Kansas State. While LSU and Alabama both had much better defenses than TAMU and KSU there wasn't a huge difference between the plays forced per point against conference foes. This, unsurprisingly, shows up in the box scores for those four games.

Against the Aggies and the Wildcats, Arkansas had 142 offensive plays. They scored 71 points, for a total of 2 plays per point.
Against Alabama and LSU, Arkansas had only 99 offensive plays. They scored 31 points, for a total of 3.2 plays per point.
That's not nearly as big of a difference - in terms of defensive efficiency - as you would expect just looking at the scores, with Arkansas having put up more than twice as many points against their two Big 12 foes than against those two SEC foes.


So, the bottom line is this:
The more plays your defense has to defend the more points they give up. And the unit that most determines the numbers of plays your defense has to defend is not your defense but your offense. The faster the pace you play on offense the more plays your defense has to defend.

In a conference with few to no great defenses then a fast-paced, high-flying offense can succeed more or less week in and week out. In a conference such as the SEC which has 2 or 3 great defenses and another half a dozen good to very good defenses that kind of offense will usually run out of steam in two or three, if not more, games per season.



When you run that kind of offense in the SEC your are literally hanging your defense out to dry. You will have to out-score your opponents more often than not. You can't do that successfully week in and week out when you end up facing offenses like Alabama, Arkansas, and even LSU in conference play. If you guys are going to run that kind of offense then, like Arkansas, you'll need to put up 35-40+ points against the best teams in the conference to win. Arkansas averaged, I think, over 40 points per game last year excepting the Alabama and LSU games. Against Alabama and LSU they only managed to score 14 at most and got blown out in both games. They put up 29 and 42 points against KSU and Texas A&M last year, winning both, in games they were expected to lose by most.


There's a reason most teams play some sort of ball-control offense in the SEC and it's not because they don't have the talent to play offense. It's because both the offenses and the defenses in the SEC are very good and they want to limit the number of plays the opposing offense gets to run. Limit the plays, limit the points. Limit the points and it takes pressure off of your offense to score as much, making games easier to win.

Ask Bobby Petrino and Urban Meyer what happens when you get behind in the SEC while running a hurry-up offense. (Note: Meyer began drasticly slowing down the overall pace of his offense in his second year in the SEC.)

In other conferences a fast-paced, high-flying offense might win you an extra game or two. In the SEC it's more likely to lose you an extra game or two.

Sent from my Asus EEE Pad Transformer using Tapatalk 2
 
My guess, aTm will be facing alot of nickle defenses. The passing windows will be small and the negative consequences for missing those windows will be huge. You passing game will likely be based on lots of short passes hoping for the big run-after-catch breaks. If you do not get the run after catch or you drop/miss a couple of throws the 3rd and longs will kill your starting QB (see Florida last year). You best have a good #2 and #3 QB standing in the wings.
 
It may work against the mid-lower tier, but it's not going to work against LSU and Bama. You can forget it. It (all of them) are basically offenses made to make the most of thin talent and take advantage of matchups. When Malzahn moved to AU, he put the OL on diets, to try to starve them down to what he wanted. When Meyer moved to the SEC, I predicted that he wouldn't last over the long haul. After his initial success, I predicted that, when he had to rely on a non-superman QB, he'd fade. I was attacked. Ahem. When Malzahn moved to AU, I predicted that his success depended on a superman QB. I was attacked. Ahem. So, no, that offense will never take you to the top of the SEC. It may take you to the middle. That's if that's what you want... ;)
 

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads