Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 109

Insight Into the Vad Dilemma

This is a discussion on Insight Into the Vad Dilemma within the Georgia Tech Football forums, part of the Georgia Tech Sports Message Boards category; It is a different play in some respects as it gives a different perspective to the guy with the ball, ...

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    8,940
    It is a different play in some respects as it gives a different perspective to the guy with the ball, who is a pretty important person on said play. The people that run these offenses for a living disagree with me because they run these offenses for a living and don't want to say "I am a purist and an absolute fanatic of this offense and there is no need to do anything more than execute, execute, execute, repeat!."

    Different formations and motions do matter. Why else does Chip Kelly, Friedgen, Monken, etc. run them?! Is CPJ just smarter than they are? Or is it all for show? Hell, I like a good show!


  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Sep 2012
    Posts

    325
    I think that we should run more out of the Pistol it is a GREAT formation. To me it's the best formation that's the least complicated out there.

    GO JACKETS THWG

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Location

    Decatur
    Posts

    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by AllGT View Post
    No one said angles and timing weren't important...all I said was that the angles and timing were different from the pistol than under center...but somehow you equated that to making it a different play. Well, people who actually run these offenses for a living disagree with you.

    Don't get fooled by what happens before the snap, it's the execution from the snap on that makes the play. It's like Ralph Friedgen's offense that had a million moving parts before the snap, but in reality a lot of his plays were actually the same.
    Any video compilations out there of Fridge's offense here at GT? I always thought that was the most imaginative and effective play calling we've ever had.
    For those who would like a reminder: http://gtsports.blogspot.com/2009/11...-contract.html

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    8,940
    Quote Originally Posted by LongforDodd View Post
    Any video compilations out there of Fridge's offense here at GT? I always thought that was the most imaginative and effective play calling we've ever had.
    It was all smoke and mirrors. They were really the same 4 or 5 plays over and over with pointless motioning and alignment variations to trick dumb fans like is into thinking they were different plays.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Dec 2011
    Posts

    1,758
    I can't and won't argue what "should" excite people but I'd just ask: is Vad Lee running 50 yards on a speed option against UVA not exciting? Is Vad Lee running 25 yards on a counter option against Maryland not exciting? Throwing a Post-Corner for 81 yards off of playaction against PC not exciting?
    Would it really excite you more if he did these plays but started 7 yards farther back?

    I'm not saying it should or shouldn't, I'm just asking.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Location

    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts

    339
    Quote Originally Posted by stylee View Post
    I can't and won't argue what "should" excite people but I'd just ask: is Vad Lee running 50 yards on a speed option against UVA not exciting? Is Vad Lee running 25 yards on a counter option against Maryland not exciting? Throwing a Post-Corner for 81 yards off of playaction against PC not exciting?
    Would it really excite you more if he did these plays but started 7 yards farther back?

    I'm not saying it should or shouldn't, I'm just asking.
    I think we all know Helluva's answer to this already...

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Dec 2011
    Posts

    1,758
    Quote Originally Posted by HelluvaMGTmjr View Post
    And that's not what we run in Pistol.

    I'm tired of hearing all the things you CAN do, I'm more interested in what we actually do. And that is a different play to me as the BB gets the ball deeper in the backfield (almost 2x deeper). When you say it's the same play with different angles and timing, that is a different play. What constitutes a play if not angles and timing?! It's basically everything except blocking. Funny how you want to call this offense creative because of CPJ's blocking nuances as if they are different plays, but you don't want to call it a different play when timing and angles are different.

    Timing and angles are almost everything to the ball carrier. Otherwise you could call almost every running play in any offense as the same as any other only with different angles and timing.
    We don't run the Ski-Gun. That's what I coached and I can tell you, based on GT's alignment, they're not running anything like it anytime soon.

    But the triple out of the ski-gun IS the same dang play as the triple out of undercenter flexbone. It's the same play. It was developed by Tony Annese out of Muskegon High (who has since jumped through some smaller colleges) when he was a flexbone coach. He did it because his QB was having trouble getting back to read the End on the regular triple, so Annese just started him farther back.

    Same exact play.

    No one's going to convince Helluva anything about X's and O's. No one's going to convince him anything about how exciting anything is (nor should they). It's just the same tired dialogue every time; dodging between arguments about performance ("it gives the runner more time to cut!" "It's not as effective as it would be farther back.") and aesthetics ("It's just bad football." "It's boring." "I don't like it.")

    I have no desire to argue about what is fun to watch. And I realize discussing who missed which block or who made which read is boring to Helluva. There's just not much room for information to be exchanged from either side.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    4,364
    Quote Originally Posted by stylee View Post
    We don't run the Ski-Gun. That's what I coached and I can tell you, based on GT's alignment, they're not running anything like it anytime soon.

    But the triple out of the ski-gun IS the same dang play as the triple out of undercenter flexbone. It's the same play. It was developed by Tony Annese out of Muskegon High (who has since jumped through some smaller colleges) when he was a flexbone coach. He did it because his QB was having trouble getting back to read the End on the regular triple, so Annese just started him farther back.

    Same exact play.

    No one's going to convince Helluva anything about X's and O's. No one's going to convince him anything about how exciting anything is (nor should they). It's just the same tired dialogue every time; dodging between arguments about performance ("it gives the runner more time to cut!" "It's not as effective as it would be farther back.") and aesthetics ("It's just bad football." "It's boring." "I don't like it.")

    I have no desire to argue about what is fun to watch. And I realize discussing who missed which block or who made which read is boring to Helluva. There's just not much room for information to be exchanged from either side.
    Question: What exactly is the difference between the Ski Gun and the Pistol? I can see the Slot/AB position isn't quite as close to the tackles, but I've seen us line up with ABs wide from tackles before. Sometimes the "ski" will flex the slot/AB out wider like "traditional" slots in twins, but again, I've seen us do that as well.

    Everything I've read, the ski and pistol are pretty much the same thing, and both can run CPJ's flex plays out of them. There are slight alignment differences, but for all intents and purposes, they're the same:

    Smart Notes 9/25/09 | Smart Football

    I’ve been getting a lot of questions about a funky shotgun triple-option offense run by Muskegon, MI high school. (“Ski-gun” or “skee-gun” refers to Muskegon.) It’s basically Paul Johnson’s flexbone triple option offense run from a pistol set. They use a shallower pistol-gun set than does Nevada, but that’s because Nevada is more focused on traditional runs than with the quick hitting veer. Below are some clips of Muskegon’s triple: first the give reads, second the QB keeps, and third the pitches.
    About

    The Pistol Spread Option is an offensive system utilizing the Pistol Formation developed by Coach Christ Ault at Nevada Reno. The system combines the best of the Spread Option system and the run game of the Triple Option. The system is designed to utilize the talent of the players that you have. The base of the offense is triple option out of the Pistol Formation. We utilize 4 wide receivers on every play. The Depth of the QB is 4 yards and the depth of the HB is 7. The key to the offense is that nearly every play that we run is designed to be a triple option. Combine that concept with the best of the spread offensive 4 and 5 wide receiver passing game as well as quick screens and you have the PSO!

    The Pistol Spread Option system was founded by Anthony M. Pratley. Coach Pratley is currently the Offensive Coordinator at Concordia University Ann Arbor. He was previously the Head Football Coach at Leonardtown High School in Leonardtown, Md, served as Defensive Coordinator at Frankfort High School in Frankfort, MI and was the Head Football Coach at Mesick High School in Mesick, MI.

    As a player in High School, Coach Pratley learned the Split Back Veer while he played on 2 Michigan High School Football State Championship teams as well as a State-Runner Up team. From there he went on the play college football at Concordia University Wisconsin where he learned more about the passing game. In his first Head Coaching job, Coach Pratley studied and implemented the Navy, Air Force style of Flexbone Offense from under center. He then switched to the Spread Offense back in the year 2000. It was in 2005 that Coach Ault began to run the Pistol Offense at Nevada, and the idea was born. Utilizing the Pistol formation and combining the best of the spread and triple option. It was this background which led to the formation of the Pistol Spread Option Offense and the many features that it has to offer.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    8,940
    Quote Originally Posted by stylee View Post
    We don't run the Ski-Gun. That's what I coached and I can tell you, based on GT's alignment, they're not running anything like it anytime soon.

    But the triple out of the ski-gun IS the same dang play as the triple out of undercenter flexbone. It's the same play. It was developed by Tony Annese out of Muskegon High (who has since jumped through some smaller colleges) when he was a flexbone coach. He did it because his QB was having trouble getting back to read the End on the regular triple, so Annese just started him farther back.

    Same exact play.

    No one's going to convince Helluva anything about X's and O's. No one's going to convince him anything about how exciting anything is (nor should they). It's just the same tired dialogue every time; dodging between arguments about performance ("it gives the runner more time to cut!" "It's not as effective as it would be farther back.") and aesthetics ("It's just bad football." "It's boring." "I don't like it.")

    I have no desire to argue about what is fun to watch. And I realize discussing who missed which block or who made which read is boring to Helluva. There's just not much room for information to be exchanged from either side.
    I'm not going to argue if it's more or less effective. I just prefer to watch it more. It is basically the same play with a little more room to maneuver but again, we don't run it. For years we've heard about all the different things we can do but we never do it. I've given up. My last hope is that we can at least pass more with a better passer and that a more athletic QB will make the option more fun to watch. TW, although pretty effective running the ball even with his lack of athleticism, just isn't that exciting to watch running the ball.

    And like I've said a hundred times, there is no right or wrong answer as to what people like to watch. I just happen to like the "more traditional running plays" as opposed to the "quick hitting veer" and the pistol veer seems to be a little less quick hitting. But it is what it is and it's not changing anytime soon. I had hoped that all the pistol we ran with VL in practice was a foreshadowing of what we might see the offense evolve or expand into but it appears it is just a passing formation, although it seems it would be a more effective passing formation if we ever ran out of it and vice versa.
    Last edited by HelluvaMGTmjr; 11-07-2012 at 11:00 PM.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Dec 2011
    Posts

    1,758
    Pratley was doing his thing before Muskegon's stuff got popular, I believe. It's based on flexbone principles as well, but he's got a little bit of a different idea of how to do it.

    "Pistol" usually just refers to the formation. You can run tons of different offensive systems from it - it's just the idea of having a RB or two behind the QB. Ault's Nevada system is mostly based on Zone Read (though he also does some Inside Veer).

    "Ski Gun" (later "raygun" and now something else now that Annese is at Ferris State) refers to a specific offensive system.

    Usually, the Ski-Gun will have the QB in a shorter pistol. I'd put our guys at 2.5 yards behind the center. I think Annese might have his guys a little closer. The B-Back is in a 3 point stance a few yards behind him. The slots are 5 yards off the offensive tackles.

    But the offensive system is basically just the flexbone/spread option system. You run Inside Veer triple option first, then you run Midline, complement both with Zone Dive, run Rocket (though the SkiGun guys run a ton of Jet too), complement that with a counter play, complement all the running plays with some playaction, etc.

    Annese likes his quick passing game too and runs a slant/bubble combo with the slots and WRs a ton. He's also got a variety of screens.
    As far as I can tell, Annese doesn't run much Run and Shoot stuff, preferring the quick game and playaction. He's also running a lot of shotgun this year, but that's a different story.

    Here at Georgia Tech, we're more in a Nevada-type pistol, with the QB 4 yards back instead of 2 or 3. Our B-Back is in a 2 point stance and his role in our Pistol offense is more analogous to a Run and Shoot "Superback" than a B-Back ---- he's pass protecting most of the time, or getting the ball on screens. The RnS backs would get a nice dose of traps too, so maybe that's somewhere on the horizon for us.

    It'd be tough to see us running a true Inside Veer triple option out of our current pistol set, just because it'd hit quite a bit slower if we had the B-Back diving. He's also so close to the QB that it'd be tough to get the timing right. I'm not saying it'd be impossible... Florida under Meyer would run some inside veer from shotgun, which hit at about the speed you'd be able to get from us...the only difference was he'd have the aiming point for the running back be more inside, usually at the inside leg of the offensive guard, rather than his outside leg, which is the usual aiming point.

    We'd probably be able to pull off a Zone Read triple option the way Nevada sometimes does.

    Right now our option play out of it seems to be an interesting kind of inverted veer. Usually the QB has the running lane outside the tackle and the running back has the lane inside of it. With our Jet Read, the QB, if he pulls, is supposed to follow a pulling guard through the inside lane. (I think. There's a thread on here about this play somewhere).

    So... yeah. I think we've only run two running plays out of the pistol this year
    1) QB Draw - same one we do from under center
    2) Jet Read - Never seen it before.

    Passing plays I've seen:
    1) Mesh/Inside Cross - we did this from both under center and from pistol in the VT game, scoring on it from the pistol.
    2) BB Screen - similar to what we did with Dwyer from under center once or twice
    3) 4 Verticals - with different tags and option route adjustments.
    4) Go - run and shoot play that we do from under center
    5) etc. Just a lot of basic drop back stuff.

    I'd guess we've got more running plays than that in the pistol playbook, but I don't think we've used any more than that.
    Last edited by stylee; 11-07-2012 at 11:14 PM.

 

 
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •