My only thought on top of what everybody else has said is that I hope you guys dont get too committed to this basketball on grass type of mentality. Its been alluded to in other post, but once that mentality takes over and becomes your program, you are already set back a few years when you figure out that its not going to accomplish what you want long term. Look at *uburn. They had one good season with superman, then fell back in mediocrity, lost their mastermind and now they find themselves trying to reinvent what Bama and LSU already have down to a science.
I'm an aTm aggie: Our up tempo no huddle throw it around offense...
- Thread starter SEC_Aggie
- Start date
I woudn't have put it like this but I think A&M should focus on the long term. They'll have a hard time initially competing with us, LSU, etc., but everything changes and moving to the SEC might be exactly what they needs to compete with and eventually surpass Texas. They have loads of money at A&M and a fertile recruiting ground. Sure their schedule gets much tougher now but over time they'll have better access and eventual success recruiting in SEC states. Most importantly, as a team A&M should improve with higher quality opponents. The SEC has won so many consecutive NCs for a simple reason - all SEC teams have to play 3 or 4 championship quality teams every year just to make it to the NC and when they do, they're much more prepared. A&M is in a much better position than say Arky or USCe to be competitive in the SEC over a 20 yr period. In 10 years time I wouldn't be surprised to see A&M win the SEC once or twice and possibly play for a NC. Look at Texas's schedule this year - only 2 tough games @ OKSt and the Sooners at home and a bunch of very weak teams. A&M probably won't have a better record this year, but the tougher schedule will make them better over time.The one thing all you Texas A&M Aggie fans need to remember is that as long Nick Saban is at Alabama you will not likely sniff a championship in the SEC! Your recruiting will get better and better as corresponding to your success but Saban will always recruit better than you.
Now how long it will take for ya'll to catch up is depending on how well you do against the also-runs of the SEC, the Mississippi, Tennessee schools as well as the others in your class. Ya'll should worry about winning those games first and foremost! Don't spend time working or worrying on Bama or LSU at least till game week. It will cost ya'll wins against the ones you can beat and will not help your recruiting! Success breeds success!
Don't get discouraged with your program if you have a 7-8 year or more losing streak to Bama! There is schools who have been in this league from its inception that have that today! Its not shameful!!! Like I said as long as Saban is coach you fans can not blame any coach you can hire if he has a long losing streak to Bama! And coach Saban will be here as long as he wants which could be 1 to 10, 12 years or more although I suspect he will learn from coach Bryant and Paterno. And his better half will have a say so in that decision you can bet!!!
Most of all remember who you were before you came in to the SEC! If in a few short years you look back and can say "man look how much we have passed Texas", then your coaching staff will have did a wonderful job! Eventually Bama's reign may decline and someone else will takeover and that someone could be Texas A&M who knows! But most likely not in any of our life times! But just knowing "you" were the ones who planted the seeds to possible future glory should be a warm feeling for you Aggie fans, even while going through the upcoming humility by Bama for the next couple decades or so that you will endure!
HSV, don't agree that it takes a different O line type. All of Baylors O line is over 300 lbs and they are heading to the NFL at the same pace as the Alabama O line. The Baylor offense had five drafted this year including two first rounders. I don't see where a hurry up is hurting their NFL chances.
Some great points made previously in this discussion.
1. Spread only means one thing: spreading the defense out to cover the field both horizontally and vertically. There are many different flavors of the spread (Urban Meyer's power running spread, Mike Leach's pure Air Raid system, Dana Holgorsen's WVU hybrid, Art Briles at Baylor, etc. Go check out those old Texas Tech Mike Leach Offensive Lines: every OL was 6'5 and 325, but all they could do was pass block. Sumlin has inherited a very athletic OL, with two Junior tackles that could go pro in the 1st-2nd Rounds (Matthews and Joeckel--I predict they return for a Senior Year.) I suspect our OL will look trim to some used to seeing swamp hawgs rooting on the OL, but we go 300 lbs across the OL.
2. Sumlin will have a stable of running backs at A&M that he's never had before (at least since he was co-O.C. at Oklahoma). Christine Michael is a 5* RB, incoming Trey Williams is a 5*, and OU transfer Brandon Williams is a 5* (we're waiting until Jul 1st--when we're in the SEC--to submit a transfer waiver request to the NCAA so he can play this year). A&M also has a power back from Texarkana, Tra Carson, a 6'0 225 lb Oregon Duck transfer, coming in this summer (he won't play this year), along with a very serviceable utility RB Ben Malena. My point here is not to say that A&M has the best SEC backfield--it is to say that we'll have some RB weapons, and only a fool of a coach would chunk it all over the field and ignore his run game with those kinds of horses in the stable. Now, A&M may not be in a two-TE jumbo set when we run, but I just can't see taking the time and effort to land these guys on campus and then letting them drink gatorade all day on the sidelines and watch the Air Show.
3. Defensive depth is where I'm worried. Assuming some guys get healthy, A&M can trot out a good secondary, a good LB corps, and a serviceable DL. But we can't, as of right now, rotate in enough SEC-quality 2nd teamers. That's where we are going to really take the beating. So I think Sumlin knows he can't sledgehammer his way through to a 12-9 win ... his best shot against regular SEC teams is to try to get points up early and throw an opponent off his game plan to play catch-up. I've heard him say you pass to score and run to win, so at least he understands the theory--we'll see soon enough how he puts things into practice.
1. Spread only means one thing: spreading the defense out to cover the field both horizontally and vertically. There are many different flavors of the spread (Urban Meyer's power running spread, Mike Leach's pure Air Raid system, Dana Holgorsen's WVU hybrid, Art Briles at Baylor, etc. Go check out those old Texas Tech Mike Leach Offensive Lines: every OL was 6'5 and 325, but all they could do was pass block. Sumlin has inherited a very athletic OL, with two Junior tackles that could go pro in the 1st-2nd Rounds (Matthews and Joeckel--I predict they return for a Senior Year.) I suspect our OL will look trim to some used to seeing swamp hawgs rooting on the OL, but we go 300 lbs across the OL.
2. Sumlin will have a stable of running backs at A&M that he's never had before (at least since he was co-O.C. at Oklahoma). Christine Michael is a 5* RB, incoming Trey Williams is a 5*, and OU transfer Brandon Williams is a 5* (we're waiting until Jul 1st--when we're in the SEC--to submit a transfer waiver request to the NCAA so he can play this year). A&M also has a power back from Texarkana, Tra Carson, a 6'0 225 lb Oregon Duck transfer, coming in this summer (he won't play this year), along with a very serviceable utility RB Ben Malena. My point here is not to say that A&M has the best SEC backfield--it is to say that we'll have some RB weapons, and only a fool of a coach would chunk it all over the field and ignore his run game with those kinds of horses in the stable. Now, A&M may not be in a two-TE jumbo set when we run, but I just can't see taking the time and effort to land these guys on campus and then letting them drink gatorade all day on the sidelines and watch the Air Show.
3. Defensive depth is where I'm worried. Assuming some guys get healthy, A&M can trot out a good secondary, a good LB corps, and a serviceable DL. But we can't, as of right now, rotate in enough SEC-quality 2nd teamers. That's where we are going to really take the beating. So I think Sumlin knows he can't sledgehammer his way through to a 12-9 win ... his best shot against regular SEC teams is to try to get points up early and throw an opponent off his game plan to play catch-up. I've heard him say you pass to score and run to win, so at least he understands the theory--we'll see soon enough how he puts things into practice.
By exception proving the rule, I meant that every team would like to be in Baylor's position, but few are. All flavors of the spread require wide splits, hence the name. It's not the "hurry-up" which puts special demands on OL, it's the spread concept itself. Each OL must be able to play in space, including the interior OL, not just the tackles and TEs. Sure, you'd like all the OLs to be 300 lb, 6'6" with long arms and athletic as hell. Not many teams have that across the board. For the last couple of years, our guards, by and large, weren't suited to the spread, either by somatype or by training. IOW, there just isn't a spot for a true "road-grader" in any flavor of the spread. Again, hurry-up has nothing to do with it. Some spreads - Mumme/Leach/Sumlin, feature the hurry-up. Meyer's run-oriented spread is almost stately in the way it uses clock. Both still require OL who can handle wide splits. Coach Hand's quote says it: "With that being said, we put a high premium on speed for offensive skill players. We also want to recruit athletic and physical offensive linemen – we will sacrifice some size for athleticism..."
What highlights I saw of the TAMU spring game, the offense looked like some Homer Smith stuff. With a score of 48-44, they better learn some D quickly.
It's really a shame, because the the Air-Raid is conceptually fascinating. It just hasn't proven that it can beat hard-nosed football.
I think Petrino's offense (and note that McElwain and Nussmeier are from the same tree) is probably the best compromise.
I think Petrino's offense (and note that McElwain and Nussmeier are from the same tree) is probably the best compromise.
First off I have no infatuation with the spread, I'm simply playing devils advocate. I would never suggest Bama should run this system.
But I think Texas A&M would be perfectly fine with being stuck at the 9-10 game level in the SEC and hoping to catch a year with a great QB and compete for a national championship. If they ran a more traditional offense I'm not sure they would do much better.
Also it's kind of contradictory to say Cam and Tebow are once in a generation players when they played 2 years apart from each other and were on the same team at one point. I get your point that they are remarkable athletes but it's clearly possible to catch a QB who can perform well in the system.
For a lot of teams it is unrealistic to try to play Bama, LSU, and Southern Cal's game against them they will simply get outathleted. They feel it is necessary to use some schematic advantage in order to beat us.
And like I said before, most teams in the country would be willing to deal with short term success if it involved winning a national championship.
I think you can run the spread and be a threat in the SEC but the nature of the offense makes the fullback runner type QB necessary to get that consistent, possession-controlling offense to really navigate through the schedule to win a championship.
The way the spread is aligned, the whole tailback handoff lends itself to out-flanking type runs rather than pure power runs. The early mesh point, the lack of the ability to get the tailback going downhill into the LOS before the mesh point affect this problem. The direct snap to a quarterback who can go downhill immediately eliminates those issues and allows power runs to be more prevalent in the offense. It really isn't a schematic issue, the plays are there to produce the power runs most would agree a title-contender needs to win in the SEC. It's a personnel issue, you aren't always going to have an effective quarterback who can also be that type of runner.
I imagine that if I was running the spread in the SEC, I'd put a premium on elite perimeter players and accurate quarterbacks and hiring a defensive staff that can keep things ugly. I realize that I'm not going to field a depth chart of solid passing QBs who can run power and inside zone plays. I can always keep my passing game crisp and always be on the hunt for that type of QB. The variability of the program will probably be higher than what Alabama is establishing but not many programs should aspire or even think they can do the "contend for a national title every year" thing. Still, if I keep the passing game together I can win enough games to play in NYD bowls and keep the boosters happy. When I get my hands on an athlete QB that can execute the passing game, I can try to contend for titles.
The way the spread is aligned, the whole tailback handoff lends itself to out-flanking type runs rather than pure power runs. The early mesh point, the lack of the ability to get the tailback going downhill into the LOS before the mesh point affect this problem. The direct snap to a quarterback who can go downhill immediately eliminates those issues and allows power runs to be more prevalent in the offense. It really isn't a schematic issue, the plays are there to produce the power runs most would agree a title-contender needs to win in the SEC. It's a personnel issue, you aren't always going to have an effective quarterback who can also be that type of runner.
I imagine that if I was running the spread in the SEC, I'd put a premium on elite perimeter players and accurate quarterbacks and hiring a defensive staff that can keep things ugly. I realize that I'm not going to field a depth chart of solid passing QBs who can run power and inside zone plays. I can always keep my passing game crisp and always be on the hunt for that type of QB. The variability of the program will probably be higher than what Alabama is establishing but not many programs should aspire or even think they can do the "contend for a national title every year" thing. Still, if I keep the passing game together I can win enough games to play in NYD bowls and keep the boosters happy. When I get my hands on an athlete QB that can execute the passing game, I can try to contend for titles.
The funny thing about the spread (and I'm referring to all iterations - the run-heavy version, the spread option, the Air Raid, etc.) is that it used to be an equalizing offense that allowed teams with mediocre talent to match wits with their heavyweight counterparts. Today it's so prevalent that the equalizing effect has simply vanished and it's more like any other offense - it looks really good with top-notch talent, but it can also look horrendously bad if the pieces don't fit together properly. It's no longer a novelty offense that gives you an instant advantage by simply running it.
I don't think A&M will carry some hidden advantage into their SEC foray by simply running an up-tempo spread offense, although I'll venture that they will probably toss the ball around more than anyone since the Mumme era at Kentucky. Sumlin and Kingsbury are good offensive coaches that are well-versed in the Mumme/Leach/Holgorsen Air Raid and I think they'll bring a lot in terms of strategy, positioning and playcalling. They also have pretty good talent to work with, so there's a lot of potential there. However, the defensive speed (and particularly the back-end speed) is better in the SEC and they'll find receivers more blanketed and QBs more pressured than they anticipate. It will be crucial for the A&M staff to develop offensive constraint plays that take advantage of the defensive speed they'll face - screens, misdirections, trickery. It won't be as simple as just lining up quickly and throwing it a lot.
I think the talent is there for A&M to be successful quickly in the SEC, but a lot depends on coaching. The schedule is brutal as well. IMO, 2012 will look more like your typical "transitional" year and I think if they break even it will be a good season.
I don't think A&M will carry some hidden advantage into their SEC foray by simply running an up-tempo spread offense, although I'll venture that they will probably toss the ball around more than anyone since the Mumme era at Kentucky. Sumlin and Kingsbury are good offensive coaches that are well-versed in the Mumme/Leach/Holgorsen Air Raid and I think they'll bring a lot in terms of strategy, positioning and playcalling. They also have pretty good talent to work with, so there's a lot of potential there. However, the defensive speed (and particularly the back-end speed) is better in the SEC and they'll find receivers more blanketed and QBs more pressured than they anticipate. It will be crucial for the A&M staff to develop offensive constraint plays that take advantage of the defensive speed they'll face - screens, misdirections, trickery. It won't be as simple as just lining up quickly and throwing it a lot.
I think the talent is there for A&M to be successful quickly in the SEC, but a lot depends on coaching. The schedule is brutal as well. IMO, 2012 will look more like your typical "transitional" year and I think if they break even it will be a good season.
jagvocate, good analysis. SEC Aggie, not so much. A&M is NOT going to look like tech. We will be balanced on offense, but we will spread the defense.
Defense is where we will be suspect.
Defense is where we will be suspect.
Which is where SEC championships are won. Defense and quality depth on defense is where SEC separates itself from the rest of the country.
Could you give me an estimate (your best guess) as to what you believe Sumlin's offensive scheme will be in regards to run/pass attempts and tempo?
For example, what do you think Sumlin's ideal numbers would be as far as what he would like to run per game as far as:
Pass Attempts,
Rushing Plays, and
Total Offensive Plays.
To put that in perspective or at least give you a frame of reference, here are last years averages per game for Alabama, Texas A&M, Houston, and Oklahoma State:
Alabama - 2011
Pass Attempts: 27.5
Rushing Plays: 39.0
Total Offensive Plays: 66.5
Texas A&M - 2011
Pass Attempts: 41.2
Rushing Plays: 39.0
Total Offensive Plays: 80.2
Houston - 2011
Pass Attempts: 48.7
Rushing Plays: 30.0
Total Offensive Plays: 78.7
Oklahoma State - 2011
Pass Attempts: 45.8
Rushing Plays: 30.2
Total Offensive Plays: 76.0
So, what do you (and any other aggie fans) think Sumlin would want these numbers to look like for next season?
Last edited:
buzzard, very well aware of that! DL depth will be our biggest concern (for now, but it is already being addressed with recruiting) against Bama and lsu. You guys got some hoss' on the OL!
uafan4life, I think we will be closer to 50/50, maybe leaning more to the pass. It really depends on what the defenses show us. QB will be key since he has to read the defense very quickly, keep things moving. I think we will be a lot like the OU offense when Sumlin was an OC a few years ago. OU had a lot of talent and Sumlin used all his weapons. At UofH, Sumlin's talent pool was limited and he made the best with what he could recruit. Mike Leach did the same at tech. A&M's recruiting has been slightly behind texas and ou. Now that we are in the SEC, recruiting will start going in our favor with the best players in Texas that want to play with the big boys. We are also making inroads in Louisiana. Lsu is the only big time school in La. and they can't take all of them. Louisiana has some good football players and A&M is another strong option for them.
Pace will be fast, we will try to run 80+ plays per game and won't allow defenses much time to set up.
When we play y'all, I expect Saban to eat the clock, run it up the middle and wear out our DL and LBs.
We'll see what happens. I'm looking forward to it. I don't expect to beat Bama or lsu, but we won't lay down either. In two years, if recruiting goes the way I think it will, we'll be right there with you guys. It's going to be fun.
uafan4life, I think we will be closer to 50/50, maybe leaning more to the pass. It really depends on what the defenses show us. QB will be key since he has to read the defense very quickly, keep things moving. I think we will be a lot like the OU offense when Sumlin was an OC a few years ago. OU had a lot of talent and Sumlin used all his weapons. At UofH, Sumlin's talent pool was limited and he made the best with what he could recruit. Mike Leach did the same at tech. A&M's recruiting has been slightly behind texas and ou. Now that we are in the SEC, recruiting will start going in our favor with the best players in Texas that want to play with the big boys. We are also making inroads in Louisiana. Lsu is the only big time school in La. and they can't take all of them. Louisiana has some good football players and A&M is another strong option for them.
Pace will be fast, we will try to run 80+ plays per game and won't allow defenses much time to set up.
When we play y'all, I expect Saban to eat the clock, run it up the middle and wear out our DL and LBs.
We'll see what happens. I'm looking forward to it. I don't expect to beat Bama or lsu, but we won't lay down either. In two years, if recruiting goes the way I think it will, we'll be right there with you guys. It's going to be fun.
Last edited:
I'm looking at 3-4 years before enough quality of depth is built to be on the same level with Bama & LSU. But I do believe y'all will get there.
Coaches, whether they be position coaches or coordinators or even head coaches, typically have a primary basic philosophy that they prefer and, if possible, work off of in their coaching. This philosophy is almost always either offensive or defensive. Coaches also typically have specialties, i.e. certain tactics or positions within that unit that they are very particular about. Head coaches will typically be heavily involved in, if not completely controlling, the coordination of the offense or defense, depending on their philosophy. Head coaches will often directly coach the position(s) that are a part of their specialty(ies), with and/or without an additional position coach. When it comes to the counterpart unit, e.g., the offense for a defensive minded coach, the head coaches' approach will usually fall somewhere between a janitor role and a general manager role. The janitor role means that he doesn't really do anything regarding the design and administration of the unit but will lend a hand when needed and clean up any messes left behind. The general manager role means that he dictates the overall philosophy(ies), goals, individual responsibilities, etc. for the units coaches but leaves the details up to the coaches. Very rarely will a head coach perform "coordinator" responsibilities for both the offensive and the defensive units. For example, Coach Saban is a defensive coach who plays the general manager role when it comes to the offense; he calls the plays for the defense while allowing the OC to call plays for the offense while reserving the right to overrule the OC if he desires. Mike Leach played more of the janitor role when it came to defense; he called the plays for the offense while leaving virtually all play-calling duties to the DC, often paying seemingly little to no attention to what was happening on the field with his defense.
Coach Saban is primarily a defensive minded coach. His primary basic philosophy revolves around defensive pressure. His specialty is in the defensive backfield, particularly coverage and blitz schemes. He dictates that his offense will follow a certain philosophy with certain goals in order to complement his defense.
So, in this vein, where does Sumlin fall? He's definitely an offensive minded coach. It seems that his primary basic philosophy revolves around the passing game. His specialty seems to be working with the receivers. Short of whatever Sumlin himself has publicly revealed about his coaching philosophies we really don't have much to go on. He's only been fully in control of an offense for four years now, all with Houston. Before that he was a Co-Offensive Coordinator and Receivers Coach at Oklahoma for a couple years but he wasn't the one primarily devising the game plans nor the one calling the plays. For the three years before that, at Oklahoma, he was coaching the Special Teams and Tight Ends. Prior to that he was the OC at Texas A&M for R.C. Slocum's final two years. Of course, we all know that R.C. wasn't anywhere close to giving Sumlin free reign of the offense. Up until that point he had only been a Receivers and/or Quarterback coach at a few other schools.
For that reason, again aside from anything Sumlin himself has said, all we have to go on regarding what Sumlin wants to do offensively is the last four years at Houston.
Looking at the last four years at Houston it seems that Sumlin's desired run to pass ratio is anything but balanced, leaning heavily towards the passing game, while his preference for an up-tempo pace seems to very consistent. I've posted a table below with the individual numbers and averages for those four years. There is an oddity in there, though, in the form of the 2010 season. While his offensive pace was still very much up-tempo it was slightly less so than the other three years. The Pass/Run Balance, however, is where the real disparity lies as it leaned much, much heavier to the rushing side than the other three years. The reason for this disparity? I'd say the fact that he lost his top two quarterbacks for the season in only the third game of the year had something to do with that. For that reason I've added two averages columns instead of one; one averages column shows the averages for all four years and a second one shows the averages for the three years besides 2010 which I believe more accurately represents what he wanted to do offensively while at Houston.
I'd say that you're dead-on with the 80 plays a game target as that falls perfectly in line with what he did at Houston. However, I'm really puzzled by the notion that the pass/run balance will be close to 50/50 given the numbers from his time at Houston which was, again, the only time he was ever in full control of an offense.
I know that he'll have some pretty good running backs at A&M and will want to utilize them. However, I think he wants to use them a lot more as receivers and a lot less between the tackles than most other offensive coaches. Heck, even in the year where he had to play his 3rd and 4th string quarterbacks for nine and a half games he was still leaning heavily to the pass in his play-calling. In the years that he seemingly able to do what he wanted he threw the ball over 60% of the time. It's a pretty major paradigm shift to go from an offensive philosophy that tries to throw the ball almost two-thirds of the time to one that tries to maintain and even balance between passing and rushing.
What exactly makes you think that he'll more or less completely change his offensive philosophy?
EDIT: Spring Game Info...
After having finished this post initially I decided to take a look at the numbers from the Texas A&M Spring game. Now I know the starting RB was out for the game (just like ours, btw) and so that could affect the numbers a little bit. It is also a spring scrimmage and so the play-calling is likely to not be exactly as it would be in a real game in the fall. However, you would expect the overall philosophy and general tempo and play-calling tendencies to be pretty close. The Aggie spring game seems a little odd in that the White Team outscored the Maroon Team 48 to 44 but the White Team is listed as the offense and the Maroon Team is listed as the defense. (By the way, I'd like to watch the game but couldn't find it last night on ESPN3. Do any of you know where I can watch it online?) Since all of the offensive stats are lumped together I thought that I would look at it as cumulative stats from two games and divide the numbers in half to get an "average". However, those numbers didn't seem right. I got these numbers from the aggieathletics website but there's something very odd going on. For example, the article accompanying the stats says that the offenses combined ran a total of 105 plays in the first half. However, the numbers at the bottom only total 107 plays. How were they counting plays? Were there only two plays run in the second half? I'm also curious as to whether there was extensive situational work such as two-minute or red-zone offense. Anyway, here are the numbers I found:
Granted these numbers may be a little off given that A) it's a spring game and B) this spring game seems to be very oddly run. However, it still should generally follow the offensive philosophy that Sumlin wants to run. If so, this seems to fall perfectly in line with what Sumlin ran at Houston, i.e., a very up-tempo offense that leans very heavily on the pass - throwing it almost two-thirds of the time.
So, again, what makes you think that he's going to completely change his offensive philosophy away from what he ran the last few years at Houston as well as what he ran in the Texas A&M Spring Game???
Coach Saban is primarily a defensive minded coach. His primary basic philosophy revolves around defensive pressure. His specialty is in the defensive backfield, particularly coverage and blitz schemes. He dictates that his offense will follow a certain philosophy with certain goals in order to complement his defense.
So, in this vein, where does Sumlin fall? He's definitely an offensive minded coach. It seems that his primary basic philosophy revolves around the passing game. His specialty seems to be working with the receivers. Short of whatever Sumlin himself has publicly revealed about his coaching philosophies we really don't have much to go on. He's only been fully in control of an offense for four years now, all with Houston. Before that he was a Co-Offensive Coordinator and Receivers Coach at Oklahoma for a couple years but he wasn't the one primarily devising the game plans nor the one calling the plays. For the three years before that, at Oklahoma, he was coaching the Special Teams and Tight Ends. Prior to that he was the OC at Texas A&M for R.C. Slocum's final two years. Of course, we all know that R.C. wasn't anywhere close to giving Sumlin free reign of the offense. Up until that point he had only been a Receivers and/or Quarterback coach at a few other schools.
For that reason, again aside from anything Sumlin himself has said, all we have to go on regarding what Sumlin wants to do offensively is the last four years at Houston.
Looking at the last four years at Houston it seems that Sumlin's desired run to pass ratio is anything but balanced, leaning heavily towards the passing game, while his preference for an up-tempo pace seems to very consistent. I've posted a table below with the individual numbers and averages for those four years. There is an oddity in there, though, in the form of the 2010 season. While his offensive pace was still very much up-tempo it was slightly less so than the other three years. The Pass/Run Balance, however, is where the real disparity lies as it leaned much, much heavier to the rushing side than the other three years. The reason for this disparity? I'd say the fact that he lost his top two quarterbacks for the season in only the third game of the year had something to do with that.
For that reason I've added two averages columns instead of one; one averages column shows the averages for all four years and a second one shows the averages for the three years besides 2010 which I believe more accurately represents what he wanted to do offensively while at Houston.
I'd say that you're dead-on with the 80 plays a game target as that falls perfectly in line with what he did at Houston. However, I'm really puzzled by the notion that the pass/run balance will be close to 50/50 given the numbers from his time at Houston which was, again, the only time he was ever in full control of an offense.
I know that he'll have some pretty good running backs at A&M and will want to utilize them. However, I think he wants to use them a lot more as receivers and a lot less between the tackles than most other offensive coaches. Heck, even in the year where he had to play his 3rd and 4th string quarterbacks for nine and a half games he was still leaning heavily to the pass in his play-calling. In the years that he seemingly able to do what he wanted he threw the ball over 60% of the time. It's a pretty major paradigm shift to go from an offensive philosophy that tries to throw the ball almost two-thirds of the time to one that tries to maintain and even balance between passing and rushing.
What exactly makes you think that he'll more or less completely change his offensive philosophy?
EDIT: Spring Game Info...
After having finished this post initially I decided to take a look at the numbers from the Texas A&M Spring game. Now I know the starting RB was out for the game (just like ours, btw) and so that could affect the numbers a little bit. It is also a spring scrimmage and so the play-calling is likely to not be exactly as it would be in a real game in the fall. However, you would expect the overall philosophy and general tempo and play-calling tendencies to be pretty close. The Aggie spring game seems a little odd in that the White Team outscored the Maroon Team 48 to 44 but the White Team is listed as the offense and the Maroon Team is listed as the defense. (By the way, I'd like to watch the game but couldn't find it last night on ESPN3. Do any of you know where I can watch it online?) Since all of the offensive stats are lumped together I thought that I would look at it as cumulative stats from two games and divide the numbers in half to get an "average". However, those numbers didn't seem right. I got these numbers from the aggieathletics website but there's something very odd going on. For example, the article accompanying the stats says that the offenses combined ran a total of 105 plays in the first half. However, the numbers at the bottom only total 107 plays. How were they counting plays? Were there only two plays run in the second half? I'm also curious as to whether there was extensive situational work such as two-minute or red-zone offense. Anyway, here are the numbers I found:
| Texas A&M Spring Game | |
| Rushes: | 37.0 |
| Passes: | 70.0 |
| Pass/Run Ratio: | 65.4% / 34.6% |
| Total Plays: | 107.0 |
Granted these numbers may be a little off given that A) it's a spring game and B) this spring game seems to be very oddly run. However, it still should generally follow the offensive philosophy that Sumlin wants to run. If so, this seems to fall perfectly in line with what Sumlin ran at Houston, i.e., a very up-tempo offense that leans very heavily on the pass - throwing it almost two-thirds of the time.
So, again, what makes you think that he's going to completely change his offensive philosophy away from what he ran the last few years at Houston as well as what he ran in the Texas A&M Spring Game???
Last edited:
Latest threads
-
What are yall thoughts about the potential of UNC making a bid for the SEC?- Started by Bama Lee
- Replies: 15
-
-
Trump signs executive order prohibiting 'third-party, pay-for-play payments' to athletes- Started by CrimsonJazz
- Replies: 10
-
