ADVERTISEMENT

Offensive Thoughts

michaeltsims

michaeltsims

Member
Oct 10, 2002
656
188
43
Lexington, SC
So with all the offense/Roper talk I’m throwing my 2 cents out there because I’m sure you all care.

I do not think our problems on offense are a scheme issue. There were many brilliant plays that would have worked wonderfully IF we would have run them properly. I can’t count how many holes I saw our rb’s miss, how many over throws to wide open receivers, how many dropped passes, and how many misreads that I saw throughout the season, but had we been clicking, our offense would have been a completely different monster. But it didn’t, and we just looked monstrous.

With that said, I don’t think we necessarily need to look/hope for an Oklahoma-style gun-slinging offense. I think our system could work. So what are the issues? You already know them and they’ve been repeated hundreds of times here.


QB Development – There’s been an anti-development it seems and someone’s got to help Jake get right mentally.

Play-calling – I sat on the couch and called our plays before we ran them so many times. I’m no coach and have been removed from college ball for 17 years. If I can do that, you better believe that professional coordinators can do that. There was zero creativity, unless you call a jet sweep by Hurst creative.

Talent – RB’s missing holes and not breaking tackles is a talent issue. WR’s dropping wide open passes or not being able to get open is a talent issue. Depth is also an issue as we have little to no talent that we trust behind our starters in many areas.


So while most of us are hoping for a change in OC, we do not necessarily have to hope for a new scheme or style. What we run could work well, and could be exactly what Muschamp wants. But we’ve got to find someone who can get creative, who can help our qb get over his mental/confidence issue, and can establish some trust within the fan base. We’ve also got to do a better job at selling the program and bringing in better talent.

I’m actually hoping that we keep the scheme/style on offense. Our players know it and it could work. I’m just hoping we find the right person to lead it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cyclone94
I’ve wondered if we can’t put a receiver in motion more so Jake can make a better read on the defense. When we do that it seems to help him.
 
I don't disagree with anything you posted. Times are different. Dabo is disingenuous but he's not dumb. He brought Chad and his offense in and claimed it was Clemson's offense. The high paced run it and throw it around is a recruiting advantage. They have an offensive philosophy to sell. Even though Chad is gone, thy are still running it. To me, that's what we are missing. An offensive strategy that the high star recruits want to be a part of. We are only going to get that with an OC change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CavDad62 and 92Pony
BleedsGB said:
I don't disagree with anything you posted. Times are different. Dabo is disingenuous but he's not dumb. He brought Chad and his offense in and claimed it was Clemson's offense. The high paced run it and throw it around is a recruiting advantage. They have an offensive philosophy to sell. Even though Chad is gone, thy are still running it. To me, that's what we are missing. An offensive strategy that the high star recruits want to be a part of. We are only going to get that with an OC change.
Click to expand...

Yes. And imagine IF Bentley was hitting it like we imagined he would preseason and Deebo stayed healthy. We could have had a dangerous pair with the potential talk of a Heisman candidate. THAT sells to recruits too. "See what we can make you. You can step in and be a 1,200 yard receiver here in no time." I think Alshon and Sydney have helped us recruit the likes of Ortre and Bryan Edwards simply by being able to point out their careers here and in the NFL. We need more success stories like that. This scheme could provide that with the right OC
 
  • Like
Reactions: CavDad62, rogue cock and Cyclone94
michaeltsims said:
Yes. And imagine IF Bentley was hitting it like we imagined he would preseason and Deebo stayed healthy. We could have had a dangerous pair with the potential talk of a Heisman candidate. THAT sells to recruits too. "See what we can make you. You can step in and be a 1,200 yard receiver here in no time." I think Alshon and Sydney have helped us recruit the likes of Ortre and Bryan Edwards simply by being able to point out their careers here and in the NFL. We need more success stories like that. This scheme could provide that with the right OC
Click to expand...
Bentley hitting it was theorized on developmental strides which never happened and even with Deebo we didn’t have an offense that scared anybody, pointing to the Mizz game.
 
Cyclone94 said:
How many instances do we have to look at and OWN the idea that it is a TALENT ISSUE, NOT a scheme issue.
Click to expand...

I agree, but again, it's more than just talent though. I think we would have struggled against good competition even with better skill players. Our qb was highly touted and is very talented, but he is not developing. And our play calling is less than vanilla. We need upgrades in talent on the fiend and in the box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ken in sacramento
Cyclone94 said:
How many instances do we have to look at and OWN the idea that it is a TALENT ISSUE, NOT a scheme issue.
Click to expand...
Non P5 school scored loads of points on La Tech. Tiny school Mizz played first game of the season scores twice as many points as we did. Wofford ran all over our defense. Our offense is less productive than 2015 3-9 season and can assure you we have far more talent on the field offensively than 2015.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LandingSC
Under Spurrier, there would be plays called in the huddle and then pre-snap everyone would look at the sideline to get the correct play. This usually took out any "mis-reads" by the QB/WR and got us to run "in theory" the correct play. With Roper, at the line the QB calls the run/pass option and on the pass we have to rely on the QB and WR to make the same/correct read on coverage. I have seen many times this year (not just the Clemson pick-6) where the QB threw for one route and the WR was running a different route. Maybe we need to take some of that decision making away from our young QB/WR's and say "here's the play, run it...."
 
  • Like
Reactions: AngloCock and rogue cock
SILVERSPUR-rier said:
Under Spurrier, there would be plays called in the huddle and then pre-snap everyone would look at the sideline to get the correct play. This usually took out any "mis-reads" by the QB/WR and got us to run "in theory" the correct play. With Roper, at the line the QB calls the run/pass option and on the pass we have to rely on the QB and WR to make the same/correct read on coverage. I have seen many times this year (not just the Clemson pick-6) where the QB threw for one route and the WR was running a different route. Maybe we need to take some of that decision making away from our young QB/WR's and say "here's the play, run it...."
Click to expand...
Worked for the run game. They took some of the RPO options out of the run game and called design runs later in the season which helped the run game down the stretch.
 
1vagamecock said:
I’ve wondered if we can’t put a receiver in motion more so Jake can make a better read on the defense. When we do that it seems to help him.
Click to expand...


This is one of the things I think needs to change. I don't think it's necessarily scheme either, or our receivers wouldn't be getting open. However, I remember the commentators saying on one occasion that the Clemson offense, for example, uses a lot of "window dressing" and pre-snap motions to try and move the eyes of the defense. (I am parroting this, as I'm not a football coach) It would seem that some misdirection worked into our scheme could be useful. I, too, am usually able to call the plays from my couch before they happen, and I've never really played a snap of competitive football. If we line up, and the defense knows the play, then we have to basically beat them with superior athletes. We don't have the superior athletes at this point. Very few teams can line up and say "I'm gonna run the ball through that gap" and actually do that succesfully. I would say UGA, Alabama, and Auburn are really the only ones. Even though Clemson has some great backs, they don't really play that smash mouth ball too much, though they do have that in the playbook.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fftar
michaeltsims said:
So with all the offense/Roper talk I’m throwing my 2 cents out there because I’m sure you all care.

I do not think our problems on offense are a scheme issue. There were many brilliant plays that would have worked wonderfully IF we would have run them properly. I can’t count how many holes I saw our rb’s miss, how many over throws to wide open receivers, how many dropped passes, and how many misreads that I saw throughout the season, but had we been clicking, our offense would have been a completely different monster. But it didn’t, and we just looked monstrous.

With that said, I don’t think we necessarily need to look/hope for an Oklahoma-style gun-slinging offense. I think our system could work. So what are the issues? You already know them and they’ve been repeated hundreds of times here.


QB Development – There’s been an anti-development it seems and someone’s got to help Jake get right mentally.

Play-calling – I sat on the couch and called our plays before we ran them so many times. I’m no coach and have been removed from college ball for 17 years. If I can do that, you better believe that professional coordinators can do that. There was zero creativity, unless you call a jet sweep by Hurst creative.

Talent – RB’s missing holes and not breaking tackles is a talent issue. WR’s dropping wide open passes or not being able to get open is a talent issue. Depth is also an issue as we have little to no talent that we trust behind our starters in many areas.


So while most of us are hoping for a change in OC, we do not necessarily have to hope for a new scheme or style. What we run could work well, and could be exactly what Muschamp wants. But we’ve got to find someone who can get creative, who can help our qb get over his mental/confidence issue, and can establish some trust within the fan base. We’ve also got to do a better job at selling the program and bringing in better talent.

I’m actually hoping that we keep the scheme/style on offense. Our players know it and it could work. I’m just hoping we find the right person to lead it.
Click to expand...
I agree that our offensive scheme overall isn’t bad and is not the problem. But there are several areas of concern on offense (list below in no particular order):

Lack of imagination in the run game. Example: how many reverses did we run this year? How many times did we (SC fans) know where the run was going before the play was called? I could list example after example of the lack of imagination and preparation in the run game. That’s on the Coaches.

Lack of speed at receiver. Deebo has the speed we need, obviously he went down early. Shi is the only other receiver w great speed and we have to get the ball to him. W out those two on the field (preferably at the same time) opposing defenses don’t have to worry about the deep ball or the jet sweep as we can’t stretch the field.

Utilization of RB’s. For example, I would have Turner in on every 3rd down that’s an obvious passing situation. He’s an elusive pass catching threat and a good pass blocker. So many times we had Dowdle or Williams in for that situation and they weren’t good at both of those. It makes no sense. Another coaching issue.

Bentley has to improve his throwing overall but especially the mid to deep balls.
 
I don't think the scheme is the issue. I see 2 glaring problems: 1) we have some good plays but don't call the right play at the right time against the right defense. I think I was going to puke if I saw one more time when we threw a pass on a fly pattern on 3rd and 2. If it wasn't a ridiculous call like that it was a predetermined inside hand off to Turner who is the smallest RB we have. 2) I don't see so much a lack of talent as a lack of intensity and concentration on this team. They just could not make plays when they had to. When a receiver makes an athletic move and a fabulous catch on one play but drops the ball on another, it isn't lack of talent. It is simply a lack of focus and concentration. When a RB misses the open seam, it is simply a lack of focus on reading the play, not a lack of athletic ability. It was worse in the clemsux game than at any other time.
 
michaeltsims said:
I agree, but again, it's more than just talent though. I think we would have struggled against good competition even with better skill players. Our qb was highly touted and is very talented, but he is not developing. And our play calling is less than vanilla. We need upgrades in talent on the fiend and in the box.
Click to expand...
Any play call that don’t work looks like it sucks. If it works it was brilliant
 
  • Like
Reactions: 01fatboy and apex73
michaeltsims said:
I agree, but again, it's more than just talent though. I think we would have struggled against good competition even with better skill players. Our qb was highly touted and is very talented, but he is not developing. And our play calling is less than vanilla. We need upgrades in talent on the fiend and in the box.
Click to expand...
He is a true soph...We have to remember that, ALSO our supposed high powered WR are mostly freshman...They do freshman things. And to have a true soph throwing to ffresh WR, not a good recipe I dont care how highlly touted they are. Throw in an incompetant line who cant give you a yard when you need it...Its a recipe for disaster. This is purely a talent/youth issue
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 01fatboy
Our wide receivers are immensely talented. That is not the issue. They are very young. That is an issue. It can be solved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rogue cock
MTsumner92 said:
Our wide receivers are immensely talented. That is not the issue. They are very young. That is an issue. It can be solved.
Click to expand...
Very young! Nobody to stretch the field when deebo went down. Edwards and ortre are poss receivers and 50-50 ball guys. Shi will be good, in time
 
It is the scheme if it is asking players to attempt plays which they can not handle. We are basically running a 1990s offense in 2017.

And let us be real....Syracuse put up 37 pts on the greatest defense in football history....SYRACUSE!!!!!!!!! Roper could not get the ball past the 50yd line.

Hasn't anyone ever noticed that there are NO easy throws in Roper's offense? Every pass is into tight coverage or to a window 20yds downfield between a CB, S, LB? Often times the DBs get to the spot before our WRs because good DCs laugh at the route combinations being the old archaic ones from the 96 Redskins.

Went to the TxAM game and even with a true freshmen QB, he was often throwing to a wide open WR about 8 yds downfield. Hell, the Tater's QB never throws the ball over 10 yds down the field with throws to wide open WRs that I can still make today. Bentley on the other hand is trying back shoulder throws 25yrs down field on go routes to tightly covered WRs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rod Dangerfield
Cyclone94 said:
Any play call that don’t work looks like it sucks. If it works it was brilliant
Click to expand...
Oh, I see. Since your only criteria is if it has good results, you must think that play against Florida when Jake threw the interception which the DB fumbled at the goal line was a brilliant play. After all, AJ picked it up and ran back beyond the original LOS and created a first down. Yeah, that was pure brilliance.
 
I ran a few errands in the MILF district of Charlotte today and had quite a few offensive thoughts.
 
LandingSC said:
It is the scheme if it is asking players to attempt plays which they can not handle. We are basically running a 1990s offense in 2017.

And let us be real....Syracuse put up 37 pts on the greatest defense in football history....SYRACUSE!!!!!!!!! Roper could not get the ball past the 50yd line.

Hasn't anyone ever noticed that there are NO easy throws in Roper's offense? Every pass is into tight coverage or to a window 20yds downfield between a CB, S, LB? Often times the DBs get to the spot before our WRs because good DCs laugh at the route combinations being the old archaic ones from the 96 Redskins.

Went to the TxAM game and even with a true freshmen QB, he was often throwing to a wide open WR about 8 yds downfield. Hell, the Tater's QB never throws the ball over 10 yds down the field with throws to wide open WRs that I can still make today. Bentley on the other hand is trying back shoulder throws 25yrs down field on go routes to tightly covered WRs.
Click to expand...
Dude, ARE YOU IGNORANT??? Wonder why we are throwing those types of passes. A. Bentley is hurting with accuracy (Pick 6). B. Our WR are freshman, do freshman stuff, run wrong routes and no one to stretch the field and OR get good seperation....
 
JGH 35 said:
Oh, I see. Since your only criteria is if it has good results, you must think that play against Florida when Jake threw the interception which the DB fumbled at the goal line was a brilliant play. After all, AJ picked it up and ran back beyond the original LOS and created a first down. Yeah, that was pure brilliance.
Click to expand...
Ok, thanks bro...Now i can dismiss you from being stupid as a rock!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D

Best Defense in Men's Basketball

Replies
1
Views
561
Gamecocks Forum
Cybercock
C
Southern Fried Chicken

Why do we go CHEAP on the End Zone Coloring???

Replies
3
Views
413
Gamecocks Forum
DeeDave
D
D

What you think about Lamont now?

Replies
61
Views
2K
Gamecocks Forum
gamecock stock
G
Southern Fried Chicken

Pull out the checkbook, Fire Shaney Beamer, Hire Jim Harbaugh in that order.

Replies
7
Views
592
Gamecocks Forum
Flameout12
Flameout12
D

Miss State Game- Good, Bad,and ugly

Replies
8
Views
597
Gamecocks Forum
detective29
D
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back