back to GDL offensive schemes? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

back to GDL offensive schemes?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Husky25

Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
18,523
Reaction Score
19,507
We heard the same cupboard is bare stuff in year one for Coach P.
And you believed Pasqualoni when he said that. The offensive line returned 3 starters with Fiesta Bowl experience and a 5'-6" 168 lb. tailback gained over 1,150 yards on the ground. The Defense was not too shabby either. They were 23rd in the Country in total defense.

You'd have to be completely blind or Lou Marinelli in order to miss the inexperience and talent gap on the field this year.
 

Husky25

Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
18,523
Reaction Score
19,507
They would come off the field and listen to their OL coach tell them completely different things than he had told them prior to the plays/series, different things said to his boss and other coaches, than what he was telling them directly.

No they didn't. DeLeone was up in the press box. His instructions were transmitted through a grad assistant. Seriously, the only offensive group that consistently improved between August 2011 and now were the Tight Ends (Surprise, Surprise).
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
And you believed Pasqualoni when he said that. The offensive line returned 3 starters with Fiesta Bowl experience and a 5'-6" 168 lb. tailback gained over 1,150 yards on the ground. The Defense was not too shabby either. They were 23rd in the Country in total defense.

You'd have to be completely blind or Lou Marinelli in order to miss the inexperience and talent gap on the field this year.

I don't know about Lou, on this one. He's a jackhole for sure, for his blind support of Pasqualoni and comments (I'm not innocent there either), but I don't think that fits this scenario - we are goign to bat with Pasqualoni and Diaco players primarily on O.

On offense, Saturday night, 19 of 25 players on the depth chart on O, are 1st, 2nd, or 3rd year players, and if you consider that Mateas was a transfer, as was Whitmer, we have 3 upper classmen on offense for Tulane on Saturday, that were recruited by Edsall, and are upperclassmen now in 2014 as part of a natural recruiting cycle : Foxx, Davis and Cruz.
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
2,236
Reaction Score
2,482
The theme here may be similar. On defense we have a lb coach and dc that are relatively young and playing an energetic defense that is holding its own.
On offense the oc and qb coach seem old school to me. Seems like our main offense is the I formation. That might work in Iowa where they grow nfl lineman like soybeans but not good for us. I think we need younger blood here. I think we need shotgun spread formations
 

Husky25

Dink & Dunk beat the Greatest Show on Turf.
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
18,523
Reaction Score
19,507
I don't know about Lou, on this one. He's a jackhole for sure, for his blind support of Pasqualoni and comments (I'm not innocent there either), but I don't think that fits this scenario - we are goign to bat with Pasqualoni and Diaco players primarily on O.

On offense, Saturday night, 19 of 25 players on the depth chart on O, are 1st, 2nd, or 3rd year players, and if you consider that Mateas was a transfer, as was Whitmer, we have 3 upper classmen on offense for Tulane on Saturday, that were recruited by Edsall, and are upperclassmen now in 2014 as part of a natural recruiting cycle : Foxx, Davis and Cruz.
I was commenting on the representation of a bare cupboard in 2011 vs. 2014. 2011 was a Hogwarts Welcome Feast compared to the drippings for the poor this year.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
The theme here may be similar. On defense we have a lb coach and dc that are relatively young and playing an energetic defense that is holding its own.
On offense the oc and qb coach seem old school to me. Seems like our main offense is the I formation. That might work in Iowa where they grow nfl lineman like soybeans but not good for us. I think we need younger blood here. I think we need shotgun spread formations

That sure fits where we are right now with personnel, but it's not impossible to run an I based offense, and not with home grown players too - we've done this before!! It seems so long ago, but it's only 4 and 5 years. We went to Michigan to start the season, and played Oklahoma to finish the season with a massive OL depth chart - 10 deep, as we steamrolled through 2009 and South Carolina in Birmingham, with a similar line, that had a lot of home grown players on both - 10 deep.

also - we produced 2 fullbacks that went to the NFL and 2 RB's - how are you going to do that if you don't run an I based offense?

I disagree - it's possible - but we're trying to do it with mostly underdeveloped first and second year players right now, and rotating dozens of them to boot.
 

CL82

NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
56,979
Reaction Score
208,834
It's a simplification of course but when I see guys getting pushed out the way or out quicked I think difference in athleticism. When I see guys coming in untouched, I think bad coaching. It's not always the case but it is a fair rule of thumb.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
40
Reaction Score
94
"Scaling back" means the team was given too much to begin with. One would have thought that based on current personnel, and after some preseason practices, that things would have been simplified before the season even began. Just doesn't make sense. The comments about the young RB's still learning responsibilities is also a little disconcerting.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
4,606
Reaction Score
6,998
I appreciate it that BD calls a spade a spade....I will refer to him as being UConn's first direct and honest coach when evaluating the program.

This team simply does not have the horses right now to compete at a FBS level.

This is the second time within a month BD has stated they have to scale back schemes. How far back, or how simple do you make offensive plays? One thing for sure, we just made DC jobs on opponents teams much simpler also.

Are we back to GDL type offense, which looses to good FCS teams? Run, run, run, punt? Boy, talk about stacking the line with D players..and boring.
They already do. Oh sorry, you must not be watching.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
4,606
Reaction Score
6,998
That sure fits where we are right now with personnel, but it's not impossible to run an I based offense, and not with home grown players too - we've done this before!! It seems so long ago, but it's only 4 and 5 years. We went to Michigan to start the season, and played Oklahoma to finish the season with a massive OL depth chart - 10 deep, as we steamrolled through 2009 and South Carolina in Birmingham, with a similar line, that had a lot of home grown players on both - 10 deep.

also - we produced 2 fullbacks that went to the NFL and 2 RB's - how are you going to do that if you don't run an I based offense?

I disagree - it's possible - but we're trying to do it with mostly underdeveloped first and second year players right now, and rotating dozens of them to boot.

QB coach came from a school that kicked our ass the year prior. I assure you, they do not come from old school. Carl this doesn't really reply to you but rather the post you quoted.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,145
Reaction Score
32,992
Of offensive line recruited to play in the Big East should not be getting embarrassed by Stony Brook or Temple. If we were playing Alabama and Auburn or even Pitt and Syracuse, I could understand the excuses. We are getting abused by the dregs of college football.

The schemes don't work because the linemen do not understand them. That is clear watching just about any series of downs this year. How many times do you see linemen doing a head whiparound looking for someone to block while a d-linemen or blitzing linebacker goes by them untouched? When GDL got tossed last year, Foley simplified the blocking and told them to go hit someone. I think the right move is for the linemen to just go hit someone.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
20,540
Reaction Score
44,610
Personally I'm not sure that Diaco and staff realized how bad the line was.

And it's on P and Edsall for missing on too many recruits over the last 4 years (I'm leaving out the last class).

2010 - McKee, Paull, Hansson, Cruz
2011 - Gifford, Nwokeji, Hemingway
2012 - Rennick, Levy, Rugg, Samra
2013 - Hopkins, Scafenacker, Wright

Of 14 commits, only 8 are still with the program. Of those 8, only half (4) of them see significant minutes. Of those 4 (Gifford, Samra, Cruz, Levy) people can make their own judgements on how they've all performed.

You want to know what our issues are, here it is. 14 recruits in the last 4 years, only 4 are playing significant minutes. That's tough to overcome.

You did a much better job than I did, but this is the point I've been trying to make. The kids on Today's OL are being pressed into action before they're ready, because too many of the previously recruited OLs were total whiffs and non contributors.
 

Dooley

Done with U-con athletics
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
9,963
Reaction Score
32,822
Of offensive line recruited to play in the Big East should not be getting embarrassed by Stony Brook or Temple. If we were playing Alabama and Auburn or even Pitt and Syracuse, I could understand the excuses. We are getting abused by the dregs of college football.

The schemes don't work because the linemen do not understand them. That is clear watching just about any series of downs this year. How many times do you see linemen doing a head whiparound looking for someone to block while a d-linemen or blitzing linebacker goes by them untouched? When GDL got tossed last year, Foley simplified the blocking and told them to go hit someone. I think the right move is for the linemen to just go hit someone.

Completely agree. Our OL has always performed better when playing a physical brand of hat on hat...not zone blocking schemes. I don't know what is being coached now but I just want to see our OL take an aggressive, physical approach.
 

whaler11

Head Happy Hour Coach
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,374
Reaction Score
68,261
I'm not sure what language the first post in this thread was made in, but since this is a cogent reply I'll respond to this instead . . .

I have no issue whatsoever with the criticism of his decisions. Many of those criticisms came with an instant and elevated level of snark that I felt was unwarranted, and I was surprised that people were so surprised that Diaco is making mistakes. You use Strong as an example, but I think he's the exception. In most cases, any new coach will take a step backwards before moving forwards, and that's even more common with a first time head coach. I think that people are impatient because (1) we don't have time to wait this out given the conference situation and (2) we were so bad it was hard to imagine going backwards from where we were.

I also believe that, if we did not have one unit that was completely dysfunctional, our record and people's attitudes would be very different right now.

Completely fair.

But most of the snark is towards other posters and not Diaco.

Not that it makes it better.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,835
Reaction Score
8,011
responding to the title of this thread, and not the content:

GDL had wallpaper (300 plays with 300 variations therein). We sucked at all of them. It didnt change intil he was fired.

BD wants the exact opposite.

It's not even close to the same thing. It doesn't even have to be boring necessarily. A large percentage of the plays we do actually use could be very exciting...but it's not gdl.
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
2,236
Reaction Score
2,482
That sure fits where we are right now with personnel, but it's not impossible to run an I based offense, and not with home grown players too - we've done this before!! It seems so long ago, but it's only 4 and 5 years. We went to Michigan to start the season, and played Oklahoma to finish the season with a massive OL depth chart - 10 deep, as we steamrolled through 2009 and South Carolina in Birmingham, with a similar line, that had a lot of home grown players on both - 10 deep.

also - we produced 2 fullbacks that went to the NFL and 2 RB's - how are you going to do that if you don't run an I based offense?

I disagree - it's possible - but we're trying to do it with mostly underdeveloped first and second year players right now, and rotating dozens of them to boot.
Yes but wasn't ambrose the oc. Of those teams.
That sure fits where we are right now with personnel, but it's not impossible to run an I based offense, and not with home grown players too - we've done this before!! It seems so long ago, but it's only 4 and 5 years. We went to Michigan to start the season, and played Oklahoma to finish the season with a massive OL depth chart - 10 deep, as we steamrolled through 2009 and South Carolina in Birmingham, with a similar line, that had a lot of home grown players on both - 10 deep.

also - we produced 2 fullbacks that went to the NFL and 2 RB's - how are you going to do that if you don't run an I based offense?

I disagree - it's possible - but we're trying to do it with mostly underdeveloped first and second year players right now, and rotating dozens of them to boot.
Ok maybe I am being a little hard on them. I re looked at their resume and it seems like they have had offensive success at Iowa and central Michigan. Both teams had strong offensive lines that year. I think the frustrating thing is just seeing the I formation as 90 percent of our offense. We have an inability to throw out of it and it's like we are left with mostly weak side runs.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
Yes but wasn't ambrose the oc. Of those teams.

Ok maybe I am being a little hard on them. I re looked at their resume and it seems like they have had offensive success at Iowa and central Michigan. Both teams had strong offensive lines that year. I think the frustrating thing is just seeing the I formation as 90 percent of our offense. We have an inability to throw out of it and it's like we are left with mostly weak side runs.

Tough to play action pass out of it when your backfield either doesn't know who to pick up and block or whiffs/fails on the block. Defenders will be coming one way or other either to stop run out of formation or pass rush.

Again, we put 2 fullbacks and 2 tailbakcs in the NFL bw/ 2007-2011. THat doesn't happen only because they can run/catch.

Even still, the ability to pick up protections out the backfield is advanced football - not 100 level. The more complicated the defense or offense, the harder it gets.

WE are playing a rotation of 3 true freshmen tailbacks, and 2nd year players at Fullback- Delorenzo is the seniority guy back there, in year 3, and is relearning again - a new offense.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,244
Reaction Score
17,528
Of offensive line recruited to play in the Big East should not be getting embarrassed by Stony Brook or Temple. If we were playing Alabama and Auburn or even Pitt and Syracuse, I could understand the excuses. We are getting abused by the dregs of college football.

The schemes don't work because the linemen do not understand them. That is clear watching just about any series of downs this year. How many times do you see linemen doing a head whiparound looking for someone to block while a d-linemen or blitzing linebacker goes by them untouched? When GDL got tossed last year, Foley simplified the blocking and told them to go hit someone. I think the right move is for the linemen to just go hit someone.

Again, it is not the same line as the end of last year. Also, from my viewpoint, they don't look confused like they did last year -- they're just getting beat. On the run blocking side, I think the schemes have already been simplified as you mentioned. Against Temple, we were more effective running the ball then we had been at any point this year (4.16 ypc adjusted for sacks, first time over 4.0 this year). Pass protection, particularly on the edges, isn't about scheme. It's about footwork and technique, and our guys don't have it. Defensive ends either run right past them, or make one move and beat them inside.

I agree that there is talent on this team roughly equal to the rest of the conference with one glaring exception, the OL. The prior administrations whiffed on recruiting classes, never got kids on campus, and failed to develop them when they did arrive.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
Again, it is not the same line as the end of last year. Also, from my viewpoint, they don't look confused like they did last year -- they're just getting beat. On the run blocking side, I think the schemes have already been simplified as you mentioned. Against Temple, we were more effective running the ball then we had been at any point this year (4.16 ypc adjusted for sacks, first time over 4.0 this year). Pass protection, particularly on the edges, isn't about scheme. It's about footwork and technique, and our guys don't have it. Defensive ends either run right past them, or make one move and beat them inside.

I agree that there is talent on this team roughly equal to the rest of the conference with one glaring exception, the OL. The prior administrations whiffed on recruiting classes, never got kids on campus, and failed to develop them when they did arrive.

It's the backfield and TE's that have looked confused as to who to pick up. Expected when your depth chart is entirely rookies, but that's no excuse. Coaches got to coach them up BEFORE next season.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,244
Reaction Score
17,528
It's the backfield and TE's that have looked confused as to who to pick up. Expected when your depth chart is entirely rookies, but that's no excuse. Coaches got to coach them up BEFORE next season.

RB's generally learn pass protection through experience. Also, when most teams bring extra rushers they bring them on the inside, since just about any competent DE can beat our tackles one on one. The RB is then forced to choose between the end coming unobstructed around the edge and the blitzing linebackers coming through the middle on our overwhelmed interior linemen. They don't have much time to make that choice.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
RB's generally learn pass protection through experience. Also, when most teams bring extra rushers they bring them on the inside, since just about any competent DE can beat our tackles one on one. The RB is then forced to choose between the end coming unobstructed around the edge and the blitzing linebackers coming through the middle on our overwhelmed interior linemen. They don't have much time to make that choice.

Agreed. Last season, a simple DL shift was enough to have our OL standing in concrete shoes at the snap, never mind any sort of stunt from the DL. We've been better at handling that this year. I agree with you that our problems on the OL, this season, come mostly from lack of fundamentals - body positioning, balance, footwork, technique, leverage when you hit. There is a certain basic level of athletic ability that needs to be there, but those things are honed, developed, and trained with time and lots of practice. A high level boxer doesn't just walk into the ring and have what it takes to win a fight because they've got natural ability. It takes constant training. Mr. T, kicked the crap out of Rocky Balboa, when he wasn't trained up.

There are only 5 of them though, if a defense brings pressure, or if we've got somebody that is demanding extra help at the DL position we're facing, help blocking has to come from somewhere. (I'm not writing this for you BTW - I think you get it, just hopefully helping raise the collective IQ out there?) That pressure can come from anywhere, as we saw with Don Brown's defenses in 2011, 2012. But there are still only 3 gaps on each side where it can come from outside the tackles, b/w tackle/guard, or between guard/center. Those 6 gaps are what the backfield need to recognize and read where the pressure might be coming from. Lots about football, involves being able to count to 6.

We've seen failures through 5 games with both interior and edge pressure coming, from TE's, FB's, and TB's. .

I do agree, that the only way the TE's, TB's and FB's get better is by being in the game and seeing it come at them. That's where I"ve been at odds about the rotations of players. Seems to me, that it would be quicker and faster, to pick your 1 or 2 best backs right now, and keep them in the games, rather than try to develop them all with reps at the same time, but I'm not being paid to be the coach, and the decision was made, to play them all, to get them the experience, and hopefully it does pay off in the end, but it will be slow growth.

It makes sense to me that the offense would be simplified a bit, so that the backs, can have maybe 3 reads to make or something, rather than the entire defense or something.

I hope we win on Saturday night.
 
Last edited:

Bonehead

'Ollie North of the Cesspool'
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
9,360
Reaction Score
8,261
You don't need to TEACH NFL players - that's a different beast.
Telling and teaching two different things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
594
Guests online
4,969
Total visitors
5,563

Forum statistics

Threads
157,036
Messages
4,078,198
Members
9,973
Latest member
WillngtnOak


Top Bottom