I wonder if we should set the over/under for the Bama-Miss. St. game at 2.5
I would hate sweating the under for 60 minutes...
Execution vs. Playcalling
- Thread starter tidefanblake
- Start date
I would hate sweating the under for 60 minutes...
I'm going to make this very short.
In 2004, our offense averaged
42.7 points per game until Brodie got injured.
After that point on, our offense averaged 18.5 points per game.
In 2005, our offense averaged
29.6 points per game until Prothro got injured.
After that point on, our offense averaged 16.4 points per game.
Those are the facts. Whether you like you or not, whether you want to admit it or not, injuries did have a major part in our team over the past two years. Coach Shula, of course, never used that as an excuse, but I can. So can most of these fans who still remember what happened in those years.
Here is another way to look at the situation. Our true freshmen LT Andre Smith already looks to be better than our former LT Chris Capps (who is a Junior) in every aspects. And Chris Capps looks to be better than former starting RT Kyle Tatum (Senior). What does that say to you? That our play calling sucks? That we have no imagination on offense?
I don't know if this has been brought up or not and if it has I apologize, but CrimsonDuck brought up why don't we run more misdirection and counter running plays instead of the plays we do run. I'm of the opinion that if we're stuggling to handle the plays that we currently run, there's no way we could handle more misdirection plays. Misdirection and counter plays are more difficult to execute than conventional run plays and that's the root of our current problems is execution. I also think that if you can't succeed on a consistent basis in "straight" run plays, you're more than likely not going to succeed in misdirection run plays as well.
I'm going to make this very short.
In 2004, our offense averaged
42.7 points per game until Brodie got injured.
After that point on, our offense averaged 18.5 points per game.
In 2005, our offense averaged
29.6 points per game until Prothro got injured.
After that point on, our offense averaged 16.4 points per game.
Those are the facts. Whether you like you or not, whether you want to admit it or not, injuries did have a major part in our team over the past two years. Coach Shula, of course, never used that as an excuse, but I can. So can most of these fans who still remember what happened in those years.
Here is another way to look at the situation. Our true freshmen LT Andre Smith already looks to be better than our former LT Chris Capps (who is a Junior) in every aspects. And Chris Capps looks to be better than former starting RT Kyle Tatum (Senior). What does that say to you? That our play calling sucks? That we have no imagination on offense?
Yes. 42.7 points per game in 2004 against Utah State, Ole Miss, and Western Carolina...come on. Yes, it is 42.7 points a game, and it looks gaudy, but when you score 48 against Utah State and 52 against Western Carolina...that has the tendency to skew statistics.
In 2005 we were averaging 29.6 points a game until Prothro got injured. Okay. This is a fact. But if an offense's success hinges on whether one reciever is available or not, it is just not a well designed offense. The fact that the offense totally collapsed when ONE player went down is a great example of what is wrong with the offense. It is an offense that must have everything going for it...senior leadership, superior offensive line play, athletic recievers, and talented runnings backs in order to succeed. If a reciever goes down, your offensive output should not drop 13 points. That is just ridiculous. Prothro is a bonafied playmaker, but when you have DJ Hall, Keith Brown, Ken Darby, and a senior QB...even with the incompetent offensive line...it should still be able to muster more than 3 offensive points against Mississippi State, and be able to muster more than 16 points a game, and 10.6 points a game in SEC play after Prothro was injured.
Yes. I still maintain that this offense maxes out in the mid-20's. And seeing as Bama has a tradition of average offense and stifling defense, I'll bet that most will be content with at least "okay" offensive play as long as our defense remains the foundation of the program...but in 2006 it does take more than defense to win championships...you have to have a little bit of offense as well...I suppose we could go the 2003 Ohio State route and win close game after close game, which is what we've been doing for about a year now, but I think I just love Alabama football too much and want everything about the team to be perfect....I know the days of not having to worry about freakin Vanderbilt are on the horizon...I can see SEC teams fearing coming to BD Stadium, not because of the crowd noise, but because they very well might be handed a royal beatdown...ala Louisville (average score Louisville: 50.1 Opponents: 16.7 (!) during their 13 game home win streak).
What I have seen on the field for 2+ years is an offense that has underachieved (yes, even with the injuries), and a defense that has absolutely maxed out their potential. What I look at is the previous success of the coaches on both sides of the ball. Well, on one hand we have Joe Kines, who has one of the best resume's in college football. And on one hand we have Mike Shula, who has absolutely no prior success and has had no success in 3+ years here. I love Mike Shula...but why does he need to call plays? Pete Carrol WAS USC's defensive coordinator for 4 years until he decided to give up the reigns and focus on the team as a WHOLE. Considering our utter lack of success, and lack of overachieving in any regard on the offensive side of the ball since 2003, it is just my opinion, but it doesn't seem logical to continue down this path when it clearly is not working. I don't mean to be soooo negative, because the situation isn't nearly dire enough to where everyone should be up in arms, but it's just my opinion that this offense that we are running, even with all of the positives that we have seen throughout the course of games over the past couple of years, is just not the answer. If this offense suddenly pumps out points on a consistent basis, I will be the biggest fan of it, and the first to say "I was very very wrong, sorry coach!", but I just cannot see it unless we have 1st rd. NFL talent at more than one position...which isn't likely considering Bama only has 3 1st Rd. offensive picks in the last 20+ years.
When schools like Louisville, West Virginia, Iowa, Purdue, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, Iowa State, and Wake Forest can each reach levels of offensive output Alabama has only seen once or twice in two decades it is very frustrating. I know Alabama plays in the SEC, where defense reigns supreme, but there have definitely been some potent offenses in the SEC the past couple decades. But none of the schools I listed above are anywhere near the same stratosphere as Alabama is tradition-wise in college football. They just are not. Alabama is on another level. I do not know what to attribute the utter lack of offensive success by Bama over the years...a lack of talent? a lack of coaching? traditonally conservative playcalling? who knows?? But when I look at a school like Wake Forest piece together a better 3 year offensive run than Alabama has had since Bear Bryant it's just baffling. Can anyone here name a single Wake Forest player? I can...Chris Barclay...but that's it!
Sorry for the length of the posts here, but I feel very strongly about this offensive situation that we have been going through for a few years...ROLL TIDE!!
Skew the statistics? Not anymore than how you somehow want to throw in the stats from 2003, Mike Shula's first year which he didn't even have a spring practice with the team, into the equation to support your case. I simply showed you how much impact our injury problem had on our offensive woes. Oh, did I mention we also had serious injury problems in 2003? I thought you should know that as well.
And what about all those dropped passes? If you recall, our team led the SEC in dropped passes. Our team led the SEC in sacks allowed. So what are those? Also offensive calling problem? If you can come up with a passing play that would guarantee no dropped pass and no sacks, then feel free to share that. Sure, some of the plays are questionable, but to put the entire blame on the offensive calling and on Shula's shoulder is just plain stupid. You can't just look at the surface of what is showing on the stats, then call the offense "unimaginative". The stats I showed you prove that this offense can, and will, put enough scores on the board. Which brings up to my next point...
I will be honest. I am more than content with offense scoring enough for us to win. The only stat that matters at the end of the game is Win-Loss column, period. You, on the other hand, somehow think that's not the case. You want Bama to air out in every possession and score 50+ points like Louiville or early 90s Florida team. (Yes, you have to throw the ball if you want to score that many points especially in today's rule). But that's not me. I'm happy with a ball controlling, clock eating, field position game. Defense wins the championship. That is a proven and effective strategy.
Again, you are ignoring the fact that we have gone through some tough situations. Numerous coaching changes, serious injury problems, scholarship reductions, medicore recruiting prior to Shula's arrival...etc. But I suppose none of those matters. We should be going all out and score 50+ points every game. Just like how I do in my PS2 NCAA2007.
All I can say is... Watch out, or you might actually get what you wish for
Tell me, how many national championships have Louisville, West Virginia, Iowa, Purdue, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, Iowa State, and Wake Forest won?
No problem. I actually have been enjoying this debate.
I know that, but I don't think running more of these types of plays is the answer to our struggles as others have tried to say it is.
Our struggles hasn't been from playcalling though. Dropped passes and two passes that were barely out of bounds against Hawaii was a big factor in the game being close. That is execution and not playcalling. Against Vandy, two fumbles in the redzone, a missed field goal and a failed fake fg kept that game close. In both games, play calling put us in a very good position to put plenty of points on the board but execution is where we failed. I know that Coach Shula is responsible for getting our players to execute but we do have a new QB whose timing will improve and we have a revamped o-line that is learning new technique. These circumstances lead to execution problems in the short term.
Whoa whoa whoa!!! I think you're misunderstanding the whole reason behind my post. Go back and look at some of my other posts and you'll see that I'm definitely not one of the people claiming that playcalling is the root of our problems so far. I firmly believe that at this point the execution of the called plays is definitely the problem not the other way around. I was just trying to refute others' claims that if we ran more misdirection and counters our run game would suddenly be cured.
Sorry. I should be in bed. My reading comprehension nor my ability to translate my thoughts into words have been the best tonight.
IMHO, I think the Tide is still on track to return to greatness, but all this duscussion about the offense makes me wonder what a Joe Kines defense combined with a Mike Price offense might have looked like if ole Pappy had not gone on his little excursion to the strip club?
I would be afraid to see what a cross between Joe Kines and Mike Price would look like!That would be one ugly man. :biggrin2:
oops... As I said in the post above, my reading comprehension is really lacking tonight.
Last edited:
That's okay, no problem, I just noticed over the weekend that the Coach Price UTEP offense almost outscored Texas Tech in an offensive shootout.
I know it's getting late, because I find myself with unprintable analogies as to how "worn-out" the spread would get...
Oh, the days before the baby. He has already climbed in bed with Momma, hence my still pawing at the computer instead of other things.
Last edited:
let the coaches coach, they are trying to get the team ready for sec action . we've been in control of both games. keep it close,it keeps the players humble,the coaches need something to harp on in practice, they need to learn to handle the pressure of a close game and they are winning and thats good. all is fine. we havent needed to dig into the playbook so why do it unnessisarily.the team may or may not be ready for the sec games but i cant fault thier approch. it wil pay off in the end if our players have the right charicter to :BigA: be winners.
Agreed. The 2003 season gets a bye because of the lack of depth, but I included it because, if by some chance you have game tape of the 2003 season, you'll find that the formations and the playcalling have remained essentially unchanged since that season. People talk about CMS's short amount of time in order to implement the offense...but just watch the USF game. We still run the same plays we run now! We still run the counter to the right. Our "motion" still mostly consisted of the tight end shifting from left end to right end, or vice versa, our run plays consisted of the draw play up the middle out of the I, the counter to the right out of the I, the occasional fullback up the middle, and Shaud up the middle out of the 3 reciever set, (we implemented that counter play where the tight end seals the end and the guard pulls in 2004), we still had a knack for missing the deep ball (Zach Fletcher against Oklahoma?), and occasionally hitting it (Dre Fulgham against Arkansas), we still didn't hit any screen passes (we did hit a couple I recall against Auburn towards the end of the game to make the score closer), we didn't have any rollouts, no moving the pocket, we still ran on the occasional playaction pass out of the I to Tim Castille...I'm just saying...I'm sure the offense has changed...surely it's changed in 4 years! But the formations...the plays...the philosophy of the passing game and the running game were essentially the same.
High percentage passes. Delivering the ball on time. Delivering a catchable ball. These are things that are taught. Some how, under Franchione we managed to have very few dropped balls. Very few of the passes Tyler Watts threw were to WR's that were in traffic. When a reciever does not have a linebacker that has dropped into coverage and a safety creeping up to worry about, and the reciever is OPEN, the way the play was designed for him to be, the liklihood that the ball is dropped decreases significantly. If you can get a WR in a comfort zone, when he knows he doesn't have to worry about getting his head knocked off, the chances that he drops the ball decrease. How many passes caught by Sam Collins, Triandos Luke, Freddie Milons, and co. were acrobatic, difficult catches? Very, very few. The offense was on time 80% of the time. The plays were so well designed...comparing that offense to what we run now is foolish. It's an offense that made everything easy...compared to this offense, which makes everything difficult. We ran the ball out of a host of different formations...and the passing game was efficient and effective. Very few LOW PERCENTAGE PASSES. Very few passes into traffic. A lot of curl routes. A lot of controlled passes. Basically...a superior offensive design. But that's just my opinion.
By scoring points in boatloads, I do not mean to "air it out." There is this perception that what a lot of the people here that want the offense to be overhauled want a pass first shotgun offense. Absolutely NOT. A cute shotgun Texas Tech style offense is not going to work in this conference. The defenses are as strong as they have ever been at the top of the conference...and it's just not going to work. I'm talking about running the ball. I'm talking about drastically changing our running scheme...and...well...the offense entirely. Louisville has averaged 228, 250, and 189 yards rushing the last three years. With no option. It's downhill running. No long developing running plays where a DT can blow up the play. Last year they ran for 200+ yards 5 times and passed for 250+ yards 8 times. I guarantee you if Alabama was a program that had some kind of history of offense you would be apalled at our current state. It really is all about history. Florida fans will never be content with anything less than 30 points a game because that's what their program experienced during their greatest years. Alabama? Well, we threw for 18 yards when we won our last national championship. Offense is just secondary at Alabama...but look at our most successful seasons...when we WERE legitimately the best team in the SEC in 2002 (despite the Auburn debacle), we averaged 28 a game and ran an efficient, physical offense...when we won the SEC in 99 we averaged 29 a game...when we won the National Championship, OBVIOUSLY the defense was the main reason...but the offense averaged 28 a game, the most during the Stallings era. Alabama always seems to have a solid defense (with a few exceptions), but it's when the offense clicks that we've had our best years over the past two decades. Not to compare us to Arizona State...but it is sort of like we are stuck in a funk such as their's, just the exact opposite. Whereas Arizona State (and a host of other Pac 10 teams) just can't seem to find the right ingredients for a good defense, Alabama has struggled mightily for years and years to establish a good offense. LSU, Arkansas, Auburn, Ole Miss, Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State, Kentucky, and South Carolina have all averaged at least 30 a game at least ONCE in the past 20 years. Alabama and Vanderbilt remain the only teams in the past two decades in the SEC to not break the 30 points a game mark.
Again, you are ignoring the fact that we have gone through some tough situations. Numerous coaching changes, serious injury problems, scholarship reductions, medicore recruiting prior to Shula's arrival...etc. But I suppose none of those matters. We should be going all out and score 50+ points every game. Just like how I do in my PS2 NCAA2007.
All I can say is... Watch out, or you might actually get what you wish for
No, I do not expect Alabama to score 50 a game. That is unrealistic. However, with the offensive players we have this season, Alabama should average no fewer than 26 a game this season.
Exactly...they are inferior programs that (for the most part) do not expect to realistically win national championships. So why should it be acceptable for programs like this to have superior offenses year in, year out compared to Bama? 22 points a game at programs like this would not cut it, because their defenses are not good enough (again, a couple of exceptions) to save the team every game.
No problem. I actually have been enjoying this debate.
I agree. It's nice to have a civilized discussion about the state of the Alabama offense. Hopefully I got all of those quotes right...:rolleye2:
BTW...not to put the conversation to a dead halt...but it's late...and this Joe Kines avatar has to be one of the 10 best things I've ever seen.
Hey Duck, why do you keep bringing up teams like Louisville and teams out of the Pac-10 to compare Bama's offense to? Do you honestly think that if they were in the SEC they'd be putting up those kind of numbers? Because I certainly don't. Just look at some of the examples given this year for instance. I know they are only one game but I think it gives you a general idea of how things would likely be. Go back and watch the opening drive of the second half against Vandy, and you'll see just how devastatingly effective this offense can be when run properly. It's not a bad offense and it doesn't take "perfect" plays for it to be successful, it just takes the players actually doing their jobs for the success to be seen.
Trending content
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
ESPN: Duke players say Mensah's transfer 'surprising'- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Texas Tech, Galaxy deal offers NIL opportunities
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: SMU coach: Duke should have made CFP, not JMU
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0