Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
49 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Does offense translation to the nfl make it easier for Texas to win games/have an elite offense or harder? Draftable players will get drafted. NFL offenses aren’t the things they were in the 90s and 00s. They now have more in common with college. 

It's funny how the offensive innovation of the last 20-30 years has flowed upstream from high schools > college > NFL. 

But, I guess maybe it's always been that way. 

Posted
6 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

I feel the Texas offense is missing a component. They get shut down against teams with strong DLs. So it was interesting to hear Joel Klatt talking about the Tech offense.

He said he’s in love with what they are doing, that they’ve taken the Leach offense, combined it with the Gus Malzahn running game and the Briles deep game to create an offense that can respond to whatever a defense tries to stop.

I don’t know specifically what that means, but it sounds intriguing and now I want to watch Tech play to see what they are doing. They also won against Utah with a true freshman backup QB who supposedly played great. So it has to be an offense that isn’t too difficult to learn. 

 

1 hour ago, Dbeasy said:

It’s weird how this thread went down the path of “Arch is the problem”, rather than discussing the Sark scheme vs what Tech is supposedly doing. My original comment wasn’t specific to this year. 

So, in the interest of getting back to the original comment by Klatt, here is what a combined Leach, Malzahn and Briles offense looks like compared to the Sark Pro/West Coast scheme, which has some complexity,according to an LLM analysis:
 

Leach (Air Raid core)

  • Philosophy: Simplicity, small playbook, repetition, high completion %.
  • Signature Elements: Mesh, Four Verts, Y-Cross, shallow crosses, spacing concepts.
  • QB Role: Quick decision-maker, distribute ball, throw accurately.

Malzahn (Power Spread tempo)

  • Philosophy: Play fast, wear out defenses, force misalignments.
  • Signature Elements: Inside zone, power, buck sweep, QB run game, jet sweeps, RPOs.
  • QB Role: Must be a run threat, making zone-read and RPO decisions.

Briles (Baylor wide-split vertical spread)

  • Philosophy: Maximize horizontal space to open vertical shots.
  • Signature Elements: Ultra-wide WR splits, deep choice routes, glance/slant RPOs, power run paired with vertical bombs.
  • QB Role: One- or two-read throws — if safety creeps, bomb it deep.

A Hybrid “Leach + Malzahn + Briles Offense”

It would look something like this:

  1. Base Identity:
    • Air Raid passing core (simplicity, repetition, QB-friendly concepts).
    • Run game from Malzahn (power spread, tempo, QB run threat, jet sweeps).
    • Formational stress from Briles (extreme splits to force defenses to declare coverage and create space).
  2. Tempo & Install:
    • Playbook size: Small (like Leach/Briles), maybe 20–25 core concepts.
    • Play speed: Malzahn-style hurry-up, one-word calls.
    • Execution: Drill same plays endlessly until automatic.
  3. How it Attacks Defenses:
    • Horizontal stretch: Briles’s extreme WR spacing widens the field.
    • Vertical stretch: Air Raid Four Verts + Briles deep shots keep safeties honest.
    • Run-game stress: Malzahn’s inside zone, QB power, and sweeps force defenses to load the box.
    • Tempo stress: Defenses have no time to sub or disguise coverages.
  4. QB Responsibility:
    • Make simple RPO/zone-read decisions (Malzahn).
    • Identify coverage leverage pre-snap using wide splits (Briles).
    • Execute quick timing throws and progressions (Leach).
    • Must be mobile enough to be a run threat.

What It Would Look Like on the Field

  • Formation: WRs spread almost to the sideline (Briles).
  • Tempo: Snap ball within 10–15 seconds of play end (Malzahn).
  • Play Call: One-word code (e.g., “Vegas” = inside zone + glance RPO + backside mesh tag).
  • Options Built-In:
    • QB can hand off (Malzahn),
    • Throw quick glance/slant to WR if DB is off (Briles),
    • Or hit a mesh/spacing route if pressure shows (Leach).

Bottom Line:

This hybrid offense would be simple to learn (like Leach/Briles), brutal to defend (like Malzahn/Briles), and adaptable across talent levels.

It would stress defenses in every dimension — width, depth, tempo, and assignment discipline.

I think you're really overreacting to what Klatt said quite a bit. Mack Leftwich was a good hire by Tech, and he runs a scheme that can be effective in CFB, but it's not some revolutionary scheme that takes all the best aspects of the three most popular forms of offense with none of the downsides. Basically every offense in CFB has Air Raid elements to it these days. He comes from a run n shoot background, which has a lot of similarity to the Briles offense. In general they will have 3 or 4 WRs and it's very much a spread out to run offense, like Briles. These offenses look amazing and unstoppable against overmatched competition who can't stop the run with a light box or struggle to account for the QB run, but they also get shut down pretty severely against better competition who can stop the run with a light box. 

Tech had 10 points through 3 quarters with their starting QB in. Morton is a good, experienced college QB, and Tech's scheme wasn't doing much at all. If the reason for their success was this brilliant, revolutionary scheme, then they would've had more success through 3 quarters with their starter. Morton isn't a threat to run; Hammond is. This was more of the classic situation where a team didn't prepare for the QB run game and then the backup comes in and starts running and the defense isn't ready for it. Similar to how UGA had success moving the ball when Gunner Stockton came in against us in the championship game because we didn't prep for it and our defense did a poor job accounting for his mobility. 

Tech is extremely high on Hammond, and it's possible he ends up being elite, but we'll see how he does when defenses gameplan for him. Either way, if the Tech scheme was the key to their success, they would've scored more than 10 points against Utah through 3 quarters.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
3 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

 

I think you're really overreacting to what Klatt said quite a bit. Mack Leftwich was a good hire by Tech, and he runs a scheme that can be effective in CFB, but it's not some revolutionary scheme that takes all the best aspects of the three most popular forms of offense with none of the downsides. Basically every offense in CFB has Air Raid elements to it these days. He comes from a run n shoot background, which has a lot of similarity to the Briles offense. In general they will have 3 or 4 WRs and it's very much a spread out to run offense, like Briles. These offenses look amazing and unstoppable against overmatched competition who can't stop the run with a light box or struggle to account for the QB run, but they also get shut down pretty severely against better competition who can stop the run with a light box. 

Tech had 10 points through 3 quarters with their starting QB in. Morton is a good, experienced college QB, and Tech's scheme wasn't doing much at all. If the reason for their success was this brilliant, revolutionary scheme, then they would've had more success through 3 quarters with their starter. Morton isn't a threat to run; Hammond is. This was more of the classic situation where a team didn't prepare for the QB run game and then the backup comes in and starts running and the defense isn't ready for it. Similar to how UGA had success moving the ball when Gunner Stockton came in against us in the championship game because we didn't prep for it and our defense did a poor job accounting for his mobility. 

Tech is extremely high on Hammond, and it's possible he ends up being elite, but we'll see how he does when defenses gameplan for him. Either way, if the Tech scheme was the key to their success, they would've scored more than 10 points against Utah through 3 quarters.

This isn’t my opinion. It’s Klatt’s. Take it up with him. 

Posted
1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

For you? Probably another failed marriage walking through your office doors. 

 

Hey now, he can write one hell of a prenup too. 

 

 

 

46 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

It was 10-3 after 3 quarters.  It's not some unstoppable offense.

 

Still have to execute. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
59 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

This was more of the classic situation where a team didn't prepare for the QB run game and then the backup comes in and starts running and the defense isn't ready for it. Similar to how UGA had success moving the ball when Gunner Stockton came in against us in the championship game because we didn't prep for it and our defense did a poor job accounting for his mobility. 

Another example is aggy's Marcel Reed absolutely shredding LSU with the zone read keepers. I was really surprised by corndog's futility trying to stop that high school shit.

Not so much when UT prepped for him and his running.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dbeasy said:

 

edit: oh, and as far as using LLM’s to game plan and call plays, it’s already happening. 

How exactly would that be beneficial?

LLMs are just fancy search engines that are prone to hallucinations. They don't think up anything new. They just aggregate existing information and parse into relevant data based on keyword input. 

Maybe that's why offenses have really sucked to start the year in college and the NFL. 

Edited by Hermanator
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

How exactly would that be beneficial?

LLMs are just fancy search engines that are prone to hallucinations. They don't think up anything new. They just aggregate existing information and parse into relevant data based on keyword input. 

Maybe that's why offenses have really sucked to start the year in college and the NFL. 

Yeah, that isn't a particular good use of an LLM. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

How exactly would that be beneficial?

LLMs are just fancy search engines that are prone to hallucinations. They don't think up anything new. They just aggregate existing information and parse into relevant data based on keyword input. 

Maybe that's why offenses have really sucked to start the year in college and the NFL. 

I mean most football coaches are meat heads that just steal concepts from actual innovators , and are prone to bad clock management and bad judgement calls. They aggregate existing information and parse into relevant analytics and playcall sheets based on play call labels. 

There are very few innovators . 

I can be overly reductionist too 

Posted
3 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

It’s weird how this thread went down the path of “Arch is the problem”, rather than discussing the Sark scheme vs what Tech is supposedly doing. My original comment wasn’t specific to this year. 

So, in the interest of getting back to the original comment by Klatt, here is what a combined Leach, Malzahn and Briles offense looks like compared to the Sark Pro/West Coast scheme, which has some complexity,according to an LLM analysis:
 

Leach (Air Raid core)

  • Philosophy: Simplicity, small playbook, repetition, high completion %.
  • Signature Elements: Mesh, Four Verts, Y-Cross, shallow crosses, spacing concepts.
  • QB Role: Quick decision-maker, distribute ball, throw accurately.

Malzahn (Power Spread tempo)

  • Philosophy: Play fast, wear out defenses, force misalignments.
  • Signature Elements: Inside zone, power, buck sweep, QB run game, jet sweeps, RPOs.
  • QB Role: Must be a run threat, making zone-read and RPO decisions.

Briles (Baylor wide-split vertical spread)

  • Philosophy: Maximize horizontal space to open vertical shots.
  • Signature Elements: Ultra-wide WR splits, deep choice routes, glance/slant RPOs, power run paired with vertical bombs.
  • QB Role: One- or two-read throws — if safety creeps, bomb it deep.

A Hybrid “Leach + Malzahn + Briles Offense”

It would look something like this:

  1. Base Identity:
    • Air Raid passing core (simplicity, repetition, QB-friendly concepts).
    • Run game from Malzahn (power spread, tempo, QB run threat, jet sweeps).
    • Formational stress from Briles (extreme splits to force defenses to declare coverage and create space).
  2. Tempo & Install:
    • Playbook size: Small (like Leach/Briles), maybe 20–25 core concepts.
    • Play speed: Malzahn-style hurry-up, one-word calls.
    • Execution: Drill same plays endlessly until automatic.
  3. How it Attacks Defenses:
    • Horizontal stretch: Briles’s extreme WR spacing widens the field.
    • Vertical stretch: Air Raid Four Verts + Briles deep shots keep safeties honest.
    • Run-game stress: Malzahn’s inside zone, QB power, and sweeps force defenses to load the box.
    • Tempo stress: Defenses have no time to sub or disguise coverages.
  4. QB Responsibility:
    • Make simple RPO/zone-read decisions (Malzahn).
    • Identify coverage leverage pre-snap using wide splits (Briles).
    • Execute quick timing throws and progressions (Leach).
    • Must be mobile enough to be a run threat.

What It Would Look Like on the Field

  • Formation: WRs spread almost to the sideline (Briles).
  • Tempo: Snap ball within 10–15 seconds of play end (Malzahn).
  • Play Call: One-word code (e.g., “Vegas” = inside zone + glance RPO + backside mesh tag).
  • Options Built-In:
    • QB can hand off (Malzahn),
    • Throw quick glance/slant to WR if DB is off (Briles),
    • Or hit a mesh/spacing route if pressure shows (Leach).

Bottom Line:

This hybrid offense would be simple to learn (like Leach/Briles), brutal to defend (like Malzahn/Briles), and adaptable across talent levels.

It would stress defenses in every dimension — width, depth, tempo, and assignment discipline.

What in the ChatGPT is going on in this thread?

  • Haha 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, hornian said:

What in the ChatGPT is going on in this thread?

It's just the usual Surly clusterfuck that veers off in many directions thanks to ADHD posters.

Just your typical weekday afternoon

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...