Serious Question About Our Offense

[grizcountry420]

Nice side step Fred Astaire!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The truth will set you free.

They run the ball 3-6 times a game...... good call!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Nice try Alphie. You must be taking stat-manipulation lessons from your buddy PR.

In 2015, New England had 383 rushing attempts for 1404 yards (22.5 rushes/game, including playoffs)

In contrast, their opponents had 397 rushes, for 1580 yards, a narrow difference of 176 yards for the season. NEXT!

New England ranked 30th in rushing play percentages at 35% while ranked 3rd in passing play percentages at 65%..

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/rushing-play-pct

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/passing-play-pct

 

[CV Griz Fan]

Let me help put your finger on it. Stitt's offense is a gimmick offense, variations of which have been tried over the past 25 years or so, with some success, but which always disintegrate against really good defenses. The problem is the lack of a solid, consistent running game. Yeah, I understand that Stitt's teams at Mines had some 1000-yard rushers. But, I would bet that most of those yards were on a few longer runs. And, it was against Division II defenses. As you go up the scale from NAIA, Div. III, Div. II, FCS, FBS, to the NFL, it gets increasingly more difficult to execute gimmick offenses. The defenses are just too good.

Here is another example of why the yards/per/carry (YPG) stat is meaningless. 5-receiver offenses tend to create a few long runs each game, due to the defenses' responsibility to stop the pass. However, it is the inability to gain the tough 2-3 yards on third/fourth down by running the ball that is the downfall of these gimmicky offenses. And, good defensive teams have the ability to put offenses into many 3rd-n-short situations, as we saw last season. If you can't get the tough short yards to sustain a drive, you are punting the ball.

I disagree with the characterization of his offense as a "gimmick." The truth is - it is now prevalent throughout the college game. Playing fast is the new normal - even Alabama has transitioned in many ways. Certainly defenses have transitioned to stop it.

I do agree the Griz must improve their ability to get the tough short yardage to convert on 3rd down. It most noticeably played out in the Red Zone. They were not good enough in this area last year.

I also guarantee Stitt and his coaches knows this as well - and we saw them make some adjustments in-season to mitigate the shortcoming. I think we'll see improvement in this area this season.

I dont agree at all that its a gimmick offense....and the best defense in the country the last 5 years couldnt stop it when it was most important that first go around...so i think it has a ton of potential.

But they did stop it when it was most important in the second round..

Stoping the offense? Is that what that was called in Fargo? I was thinking of maybe "curb stomping" the offense myself....To Bandland's point though, it's not a gimmick offense if you have the right kind of talent employed....

 

[mcg]

I generally also dislike the spread offenses and high volume play calling....but when watching the Griz and Stitts offense...idk what it is, but it just seems a bit different, I cant quite put my finger on it.

Let me help put your finger on it. Stitt's offense is a gimmick offense, variations of which have been tried over the past 25 years or so, with some success, but which always disintegrate against really good defenses. The problem is the lack of a solid, consistent running game. Yeah, I understand that Stitt's teams at Mines had some 1000-yard rushers. But, I would bet that most of those yards were on a few longer runs. And, it was against Division II defenses. As you go up the scale from NAIA, Div. III, Div. II, FCS, FBS, to the NFL, it gets increasingly more difficult to execute gimmick offenses. The defenses are just too good.

Here is another example of why the yards/per/carry (YPG) stat is meaningless. 5-receiver offenses tend to create a few long runs each game, due to the defenses' responsibility to stop the pass. However, it is the inability to gain the tough 2-3 yards on third/fourth down by running the ball that is the downfall of these gimmicky offenses. And, good defensive teams have the ability to put offenses into many 3rd-n-short situations, as we saw last season. If you can't get the tough short yards to sustain a drive, you are punting the ball.

Hard to have ANY run game with 5 receivers. I'll let you figure out why #MathIsYourFriend
Also Stitts O rarely uses 5 receivers. Carry on...

He doesn't use 5 receivers??? What team have you been watching?

I think the Griz offense is almost always four receivers, 5 lineman, RB and QB. I can't say there were never five receivers in the game, but I'd say it would be a really tiny fraction.

 

[brewskis]

If you think Stitts offense is anything like Oregons then you truly are a soccer coach.

 

[Htowngriz]

I generally also dislike the spread offenses and high volume play calling....but when watching the Griz and Stitts offense...idk what it is, but it just seems a bit different, I cant quite put my finger on it.

Let me help put your finger on it. Stitt's offense is a gimmick offense, variations of which have been tried over the past 25 years or so, with some success, but which always disintegrate against really good defenses. The problem is the lack of a solid, consistent running game. Yeah, I understand that Stitt's teams at Mines had some 1000-yard rushers. But, I would bet that most of those yards were on a few longer runs. And, it was against Division II defenses. As you go up the scale from NAIA, Div. III, Div. II, FCS, FBS, to the NFL, it gets increasingly more difficult to execute gimmick offenses. The defenses are just too good.

Here is another example of why the yards/per/carry (YPG) stat is meaningless. 5-receiver offenses tend to create a few long runs each game, due to the defenses' responsibility to stop the pass. However, it is the inability to gain the tough 2-3 yards on third/fourth down by running the ball that is the downfall of these gimmicky offenses. And, good defensive teams have the ability to put offenses into many 3rd-n-short situations, as we saw last season. If you can't get the tough short yards to sustain a drive, you are punting the ball.

Hard to have ANY run game with 5 receivers. I'll let you figure out why #MathIsYourFriend
Also Stitts O rarely uses 5 receivers. Carry on...

He doesn't use 5 receivers??? What team have you been watching?

You really do set the gold standard for stupidity.

 

[grizindabox]

I wish people would quit using facts here....ATL thought he was finally on to something BIG.....

 

[Atlanta Griz1]

Let me help put your finger on it. Stitt's offense is a gimmick offense, variations of which have been tried over the past 25 years or so, with some success, but which always disintegrate against really good defenses. The problem is the lack of a solid, consistent running game. Yeah, I understand that Stitt's teams at Mines had some 1000-yard rushers. But, I would bet that most of those yards were on a few longer runs. And, it was against Division II defenses. As you go up the scale from NAIA, Div. III, Div. II, FCS, FBS, to the NFL, it gets increasingly more difficult to execute gimmick offenses. The defenses are just too good.

Here is another example of why the yards/per/carry (YPG) stat is meaningless. 5-receiver offenses tend to create a few long runs each game, due to the defenses' responsibility to stop the pass. However, it is the inability to gain the tough 2-3 yards on third/fourth down by running the ball that is the downfall of these gimmicky offenses. And, good defensive teams have the ability to put offenses into many 3rd-n-short situations, as we saw last season. If you can't get the tough short yards to sustain a drive, you are punting the ball.

Hard to have ANY run game with 5 receivers. I'll let you figure out why #MathIsYourFriend
Also Stitts O rarely uses 5 receivers. Carry on...

He doesn't use 5 receivers??? What team have you been watching?

You really do set the gold standard for stupidity.

Oh boy! 6 carefully-selected screen shots showing 4 WRs and a RB. Very credible. Have you considered running for president? :thumb: :stupid:

 

[Atlanta Griz1]

Hometown, does this now mean that, because we only need 4 WRs on every play, we now have a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th string of wide receivers among the 20 on the team??? Nice to be 5-deep at every receiver position, especially when we are down a few schollies!

 

[RobGriz]

Let me help put your finger on it. Stitt's offense is a gimmick offense, variations of which have been tried over the past 25 years or so, with some success, but which always disintegrate against really good defenses. The problem is the lack of a solid, consistent running game. Yeah, I understand that Stitt's teams at Mines had some 1000-yard rushers. But, I would bet that most of those yards were on a few longer runs. And, it was against Division II defenses. As you go up the scale from NAIA, Div. III, Div. II, FCS, FBS, to the NFL, it gets increasingly more difficult to execute gimmick offenses. The defenses are just too good.

Here is another example of why the yards/per/carry (YPG) stat is meaningless. 5-receiver offenses tend to create a few long runs each game, due to the defenses' responsibility to stop the pass. However, it is the inability to gain the tough 2-3 yards on third/fourth down by running the ball that is the downfall of these gimmicky offenses. And, good defensive teams have the ability to put offenses into many 3rd-n-short situations, as we saw last season. If you can't get the tough short yards to sustain a drive, you are punting the ball.

Hard to have ANY run game with 5 receivers. I'll let you figure out why #MathIsYourFriend
Also Stitts O rarely uses 5 receivers. Carry on...

He doesn't use 5 receivers??? What team have you been watching?

I think the Griz offense is almost always four receivers, 5 lineman, RB and QB. I can't say there were never five receivers in the game, but I'd say it would be a really tiny fraction.

This guy gets it! And can do math!

 

[grizindabox]

Hard to have ANY run game with 5 receivers. I'll let you figure out why #MathIsYourFriend
Also Stitts O rarely uses 5 receivers. Carry on...

He doesn't use 5 receivers??? What team have you been watching?

You really do set the gold standard for stupidity.

Oh boy! 6 carefully-selected screen shots showing 4 WRs and a RB. Very credible. Have you considered running for president? :thumb: :stupid:

Can you carefully select 6 that show 5 wr sets....

 

[RobGriz]

If you think Stitts offense is anything like Oregons then you truly are a soccer coach.

And if you can't see the similarities between the two you should NEVER talk about football again...with anyone...ever.

 

[MrTitleist]

Name ONE, besides the perennial wannabee, Oregon.

Oklahoma and TCU just this prior year. We've seen them plus West Virginia and other teams running a variation of that offense in major bowl games in recent years as well.

You can even throw in Texas Tech, Bowling Green, Cincinnati that all run an offense similar to ours.

Yeah, let's emulate the success of these three! :lol:

Yes, let's emulate their success. All are successful teams in their conferences. Bowling Green was one of the top offenses in the country last year, and was one of the best "Group of Five" schools in the country. Their QB was also terrific. Texas Tech's offense speaks for itself. Cincy was a BCS bowl team in the last five years, maybe?

You've basically proven throughout the course of this thread that you have no idea about anything college football, FCS or FBS. You have no idea who runs what offense, you have no idea the statistical rankings of those teams, and have basically been wrong on just about every point you've made here. Everyone in this thread has handed you your ass because you fail to do even one minute of research on anything.

 

[Htowngriz]

He doesn't use 5 receivers??? What team have you been watching?

You really do set the gold standard for stupidity.

Oh boy! 6 carefully-selected screen shots showing 4 WRs and a RB. Very credible. Have you considered running for president? :thumb: :stupid:

Can you carefully select 6 that show 5 wr sets....

I'm sure he can, but he just doesn't want to. :lol:

 

[brewskis]

If you think Stitts offense is anything like Oregons then you truly are a soccer coach.

And if you can't see the similarities between the two you should NEVER talk about football again...with anyone...ever.

The only similarity is space of play.

 

[doc3kgt]

He's got a valid point though, if you can't run the ball effectively you're not going to win many games, at least the ones that matter anyway. It's never a good idea to be one-dimensional. Shtitt should be bringing in a couple stud running backs instead of putting all his eggs in the WR basket.

Do you really believe that Stitt doesn't want to be able to run the ball effectively......Do you not think that UM has any quality at running back.....

Have you seen um's rushing stats last year? Go look them up, I'll wait.

 

[PlayerRep]

He's got a valid point though, if you can't run the ball effectively you're not going to win many games, at least the ones that matter anyway. It's never a good idea to be one-dimensional. Shtitt should be bringing in a couple stud running backs instead of putting all his eggs in the WR basket.

Do you really believe that Stitt doesn't want to be able to run the ball effectively......Do you not think that UM has any quality at running back.....

Have you seen um's rushing stats last year? Go look them up, I'll wait.

UM's leading rb had more yards than MSU's leading rb. UM's top 2 rb's had more yards than MSU's top 2 rb's. Don't bother mention your QB, because he dumped you for Oregon, and won't be gaining any yards for you next fall.

Have you seen the win-loss records of UM and MSU. Go look them up. We'll wait.

 

[RobGriz]

If you think Stitts offense is anything like Oregons then you truly are a soccer coach.

And if you can't see the similarities between the two you should NEVER talk about football again...with anyone...ever.

The only similarity is space of play.

Thanks for proving my point. If you don't see the similarities in the read option or the QB/receiver reads in the passing game than you definately should not talk football.

 

[CV Griz Fan]

Debating this is foolish. You don't like Stiit and that is really at the heart of the issue. You would be happy with Bobbyball and ground/pound. Bobby did not get the job. Deal with it and support the coach and team. He had a damn good first year. This is not about debating schemes and football. This is about your whining that he got hired.

He didn't like Bobby either.

Right, I didn't like Bobby, as a person, or because he turned our program into a thug-fest, with kids being arrested when they exited the team bus for armed robbery, assault with intent, and theft of controlled substances. Another brandished a gun from a car downtown. A RB beat his girlfriend into unconsciousness. One of his recruits murdered a dude, got off on a technicality, et. al, et. al. Do I need to go on? (Playa Rape will "correct" me on these criminals in 5-4-3-2-1 minutes).

I liked Glenn, Dennhey, Read, and Pflu (somewhat). We missed the opportunity to get back more quickly to a national power by hiring Stitt instead of Pease, or a defensive-minded coach after a TRUE national search. Hiring a career Div.II coach with essentially a .500 W/L record was the best we could do? Oh, I forgot, he invented the famous Fly Sweep. :roll:

Did I get here in time?

Yes, a couple guys from the bus and one other, I believe, got felonies. Don't think theft was a charge, tho. Small point. Were kicked off team and never played or practiced for UM again. Some or most got probation, and not jail.

Yes, Smith waived a gun from a car. He was charged with misdemeanor. Despite being a pre-season all-American, he was kicked off the team. He played the next year at a lower level and had a very good year.

What rb beat his girlfriend to unconsciousness? Don't recall that one.

If the recruit was Wilson, he didn't get off on a technicality. One jury voted 11-1 to acquit, and one voted 12-0 to acquit. He was allowed to come back to UM, and later played in the NFL. You should direct your anger at the police and prosecutors in CA, not at UM coaches or the player.

At least, you have kept your streak alive of never getting any stats or facts correct.

I believe PR has the facts correct on Wilson. Anyway, Jimmy was defending his mother or aunt against a domestic abuser right? He stepped in to protect his family member and the guy pulled a weapon from what I remember. Things got out of hand during a struggle and the gun discharged.
Jimmy paid the price and got his life back on track. He should be commended for the turn around...Yes it was an unfortunate situation but things happen when violence and alcohol mix.

 

[grizindabox]

He's got a valid point though, if you can't run the ball effectively you're not going to win many games, at least the ones that matter anyway. It's never a good idea to be one-dimensional. Shtitt should be bringing in a couple stud running backs instead of putting all his eggs in the WR basket.

Do you really believe that Stitt doesn't want to be able to run the ball effectively......Do you not think that UM has any quality at running back.....

Have you seen um's rushing stats last year? Go look them up, I'll wait.

That doesn't mean that Stiit would not like to run more effectively.....nor does it mean that UM does not have a quality running back.....and imo it relates more to OL play and offensive execution....

 

[doc3kgt]

He's got a valid point though, if you can't run the ball effectively you're not going to win many games, at least the ones that matter anyway. It's never a good idea to be one-dimensional. Shtitt should be bringing in a couple stud running backs instead of putting all his eggs in the WR basket.

Do you really believe that Stitt doesn't want to be able to run the ball effectively......Do you not think that UM has any quality at running back.....

Have you seen um's rushing stats last year? Go look them up, I'll wait.

That doesn't mean that Stiit would not like to run more effectively.....nor does it mean that UM does not have a quality running back.....and imo it relates more to OL play and offensive execution....

I guess so if that's how you want to spin it. I'm just saying maybe focusing more on beefing up and improving the run game rather than having an excessive number of incoming WRs might be a good idea. PR we aren't talking about MSU, and spinning your stats to try to prove that um had a better running game than Montana State last year is laughable. MSU's offense was one of the best in the nation last year. Newell will be near the top in rushing this year, and certainly a hell of a lot higher than any UM RB.