What’s in a number?

Ian Boyd has another informative post up, this one about how defenses are shifting away from traditional 4-3 and 3-4 sets into a variety of sets allowing them to better face up against spread attacks, get their best athletes on the field, or both.

For example, this one should sound familiar to us:

The 2-4-5 is ultimately a defense of specialization as the main pass-rushers are going to be the two stand-up edge rushers. The defense deploys them on the edge because that’s the easiest way to utilize a pure pass-rusher and they aren’t asked to do a great deal other than control the edge and provide pressure. The defensive tackles will tend to specialize in clogging up the interior and helping collapse the pocket while the linebackers are running free as support players.

Without access to the kind of elite pass-rushers that can attack the edge and overcome an offense’s best efforts at pass protection, the 2-4-5 is not a superior nickel package. It can also struggle against the run if defensive tackles aren’t sturdy or the linebackers are deficient. However, it is the simplest and best way to allow big, fast, and powerful athletes to impact the game and attack the quarterback.

Having access to elite pass-rushers isn’t going to be something Jeremy Pruitt worries about this season.  Struggling against the run?  Well, we’ll just to wait and see.

6 Comments

Filed under Strategery And Mechanics

The NCAA has a mission? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, wait.  They’re serious about that?

6 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

SOD’s final Vol legacy

Derek Dooley, good on teaching personal hygiene, not so good on recruiting and developing talent.

11 Comments

Filed under Because Nothing Sucks Like A Big Orange

The spread spreads… to offensive coordinator jobs.

I watched this Bulldog Illustrated interview with Mark Richt…

…  out of interest about what changes are being made on offense (no surprise with regard to nomenclature, as it makes too much sense for the mountain – a forty-year old system that traces its roots back to Bobby Bowden – not to come to Mohammed, i.e., the guys who will be calling the plays this season), but the most interesting part comes at the clip’s end, starting at about the 2:25 point, when Richt talks about the search he underwent for Bobo’s successor.

“With so many people going to the spread, it’s hard to find a guy that truly wants to do it the way we want to do it…”

And that meant there was a bigger pool of candidates for Richt to sift through at the NFL level than in college.

I’m a fan of contrarian thinking as an offensive philosophy.  There are clear advantages to being able to run a power, pro-style offense in a world where college defenses gear up more and more to deal with the spread.  But in light of my earlier post today, you have to wonder if there’s a limit to going against the grain.  You’ve got fewer kids coming out of high school who can step right into a pro-style scheme in college.  And now you’ve got fewer college offenses running pro-style attacks. Georgia’s already doing its best to deal with that.  What happens if the paradigm shift at the NFL level I hypothesized about in my last post actually comes into play?

Obviously, I’m not predicting that.  But Richt has to stay nimble with what he’s doing on offense, because a lot of the surroundings have changed – and keep changing – on him.  And that’s not just a matter of terminology.

28 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, Strategery And Mechanics

The spread that breaks the camel’s back?

Confession time:  I pay more attention to the NFL Draft than I do to the NFL season.  Sure, some of that is just out of natural curiosity to see where former Georgia players go and how well they do, but there is the occasional bit of information to glean that may have some bearing on the college game.

Along those lines, one thing you may have noticed is that after the two obvious talents in Winston and Mariota came off the board, it hasn’t exactly been the Year of the Quarterback.  And maybe that says something bigger.

Not to be too dramatic, but it feels as if we are seeing the deterioration of the quarterback pipeline before our very eyes. In the past 15 years, there has only been one other occasion when fewer than four quarterbacks were drafted in the first three rounds. That came two years ago, in 2013, when every signal-caller except EJ Manuel, Geno Smith and Mike Glennon remained on the board when the fourth round began.

It’s no secret that the spread offense has left NFL teams leery of college quarterbacks and clinging to their aging pocket passers. The average age of the top 10 quarterbacks last season, as measured by Total QBR, was 33. The 2013 and 2015 classes will do little to alleviate that imbalance, and the 2014 class — which includes Blake Bortles, Johnny Manziel, Teddy Bridgewater and Derek Carr — can’t yet be counted on for salvation.

Once again, I’ll pass along the working theory of Steve Clarkson, one of the country’s top youth quarterback coaches. The NFL, Clarkson believes, is at a crossroads at the position. It must either find a better way to transition spread quarterbacks into pro schemes, or it will have to make a major philosophical change to account for the injuries caused when pro teams run the spread. At the NFL level, teams would probably have to rotate quarterbacks to run the spread full time.

That’s some crossroads you got there, fella.

It’s almost existential, if you think about it.  If the NFL can’t figure out how to train college quarterbacks coming out of spread offenses to play the NFL game, then the NFL game will have to come to the spread quarterbacks, because that’s what the pros will have to work with.  That means either a radical change in how the QB position is stocked at the NFL level, or quarterbacks being prepared differently than they are at the college level.

There’s one other possibility not mentioned:  taking quarterback preparation out of the hands of college football altogether. What if the NFL doesn’t want to change and college football doesn’t want to, either?  After all, as David Shaw said the other day, it’s not the business of a college head coach to develop the NFL’s players for the league.  If this trend continues and neither side is willing to move, is the spread what ultimately forces the NFL’s hand on creating a developmental league?

13 Comments

Filed under Strategery And Mechanics, The NFL Is Your Friend.

Competition is good for the special teams’ soul.

Sure, we’ve seen Mark Richt run guys at kickers before, but a walk on who’s not even on campus yet?  It sounds like a couple of folks are going to be hearing Rodrigo Blankenship’s name a lot before the season starts.

Richt continues to talk up Rodrigo Blankenship as someone who could be a factor in the kicking game. Blankenship is set to join the team this summer as a walk-on, with the possibility of a scholarship the following season.

Richt said Blankenship has “a very powerful leg,” and could give Marshall Morgan a “run for his money” as the kickoff specialist.

“But he’s got the ability to punt a little bit too, and Collin Barber has got his work cut out for him to become a consistent performer again and do what’s gotta get done, as far as punting is concerned,” Richt said.

Waving another leg in front of Barber’s face doesn’t shock me in the slightest, because you can sense there’s some concern about his lack of consistency.  But I’m a little surprised about looking at someone to supplant Morgan on kickoffs.  Georgia wasn’t great on kickoff yardage last season, but it was at least respectable.  However, you wonder if Richt wouldn’t like to improve on that touchback percentage figure.  I can see how that would appeal to his conservative philosophy (***  cough  ***  Logan Gray *** cough ***) on special teams.

Anyway, it may not be as high profile as the fights at quarterback and center, but it might be another battle to keep an eye on come August.

11 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football

The CFP and the nobility of consistency

If there’s one thing you can count on from college head coaches, it’s that they’ll never run out of nonsensical justifications for taking a stance out of naked self-interest.

Take Cal’s Sonny Dykes, for instance.  The Pac-12 is that rare bird:  a two-division conference that plays a nine-game conference schedule.  That’s allowed Cal to keep its longstanding rivalries with two powerhouses in UCLA and USC.  Evidently, that’s not something he relishes.  But he can’t come out and just say that.  Instead, he’s got to look around for… something… aha!

Dykes said he’s willing to sacrifice the tradition of playing long-time, in-state rivals USC and UCLA every year if that’s necessary to reduce the Pac-12 schedule to eight games in order to achieve consistency with other power conferences.

“I don’t think it would be my first choice. I don’t think it would be our fans’ first choice,” he said. “But something’s got to give. We just need to have some (nationwide) consistency.”

The Pac-12 and Big 12 play nine conference games, while the SEC, ACC and Big Ten play just eight, allowing them to schedule one more nonconference game of their choosing. The uneven playing field creates potential disparities when teams are selected for the College Football Playoff, which has huge financial implications.

By playing nine games, the Pac-12 has allowed schools to play each of the other five teams in their division, plus three from the other division on a rotating basis. But the annual games between Cal and Stanford and their southern California rivals have been preserved so far.

Screw what the fans want, or what Sonny wants.  If we don’t get national consistency on this, the next thing you know we’ll have dogs and cats living together, or something. This isn’t about Dykes, people.  He’s just offering a sacrifice to save college football from a looming crisis.

Or he could just be full of crap.

(h/t)

7 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs, It's All Just Made Up And Flagellant, Pac-12 Football