Too much zone read offense?

We'll see after this game. I expect our offense to be shut down most of the time and our staff to make few noticeable adjustments. We'll keep trying to pound a square peg into a round hole instead of adjusting to what their defense is doing. Same sh#t, different day.

 
I'm more optimistic than you. While Okie State will more than likely have a better D than Washington or KState, they're not even in the same league talentwise as Texas. I just hope that we don't get into a shootout with Okie State. I have faith our D will shut them down.

 
I'm tired of going around and around about what offense works and what one doesn't. I'm in resignation mode.....just plain tired of facing good teams and not being able to score points. Scoring 100 on a cupcake means nothing to me. I'd be perfectly satisfied to score 28 points on a cupcake, as long as we win. All I want is to have our team field an offense that will be able to put up 21 against a ranked team pretty consistently. Bo, I don't care how you get us there, just please get there......and forgodsakes get Mike Leach in here as a consultant and tell him to bring his tennis ball machines.

 
I get what everyone is saying about "too much zone read" and putting up points against the best teams/defenses. But, we gotta remember this Nebraska offense had 3 dropped TD passes against arguably the best defense in the Big 12 last week. If we hold onto those passes, that's 21 points in the bag, which is exactly what our offense needs to be able to do in big games.

You can say you're tired of Watson all you want, but the fact remains, OUR PLAYERS DROPPED THE BALL on some great play calls that caught the opposing D off guard. Those play calls, which came at just the right times, were made by none other than Watson.

 
Your point is well taken about the points left on the field. I'm just running out of patience for the day when our moral victories will translate into actual ones against quality, ranked opponents. I only have so many years to live, yanno! LOL

 
I have a novel idea. How about we just stay completely open as an offense and run what will work depending on the defense we are playing. Run zone read for one game, I another, split backs another, shotgun, under center, isos, powers, throw deep, to TE's, screens, crossing routes, roll outs, boots, etc. Why do we need to be so dependent on one offensive set? Let's revolutionize football, be an offense that has sets and plays depending on what defense we play and how they can be exploited. I've always thought it was weird offenses haven't went to something like this, but I'm no expert, so what do I know. JMO.

Oh and why in the hell have we not run any misdirection. If we run the read to one side the defenses are flowing that way. How about some reverses and counters?

 
ESPY said:
I get what everyone is saying about "too much zone read" and putting up points against the best teams/defenses. But, we gotta remember this Nebraska offense had 3 dropped TD passes against arguably the best defense in the Big 12 last week. If we hold onto those passes, that's 21 points in the bag, which is exactly what our offense needs to be able to do in big games.

You can say you're tired of Watson all you want, but the fact remains, OUR PLAYERS DROPPED THE BALL on some great play calls that caught the opposing D off guard. Those play calls, which came at just the right times, were made by none other than Watson.
Click to expand...

very true, very ture, but 3rd and long (and we faced it many times) was caused by wayyyyyy too many calls for zone read plays called on 1st down....you have no make those long gainers when you are in 3rd and long, when you are in 3rd and 2 or 3, you don't have to throw the long ball. we couldn't sustain a drive and grind the ball down the field, we couldn't dominate their defensive line, we couldn't or for the most part didn't play enough smash mouth football either......oh well.

 
Hunter94 said:
ESPY said:
I get what everyone is saying about "too much zone read" and putting up points against the best teams/defenses. But, we gotta remember this Nebraska offense had 3 dropped TD passes against arguably the best defense in the Big 12 last week. If we hold onto those passes, that's 21 points in the bag, which is exactly what our offense needs to be able to do in big games.

You can say you're tired of Watson all you want, but the fact remains, OUR PLAYERS DROPPED THE BALL on some great play calls that caught the opposing D off guard. Those play calls, which came at just the right times, were made by none other than Watson.
Click to expand...

very true, very ture, but 3rd and long (and we faced it many times) was caused by wayyyyyy too many calls for zone read plays called on 1st down....you have no make those long gainers when you are in 3rd and long, when you are in 3rd and 2 or 3, you don't have to throw the long ball. we couldn't sustain a drive and grind the ball down the field, we couldn't dominate their defensive line, we couldn't or for the most part didn't play enough smash mouth football either......oh well.
Click to expand...
Great counter. You're right on about getting into better position on 3rd downs. We'll never be able to maintain drives until we can consistently put ourselves in favorable position to get 1st downs.

 
Zone read should not land us in 3rd and long. It's Taylor's awful misreads that were doing that. You make the right read, and it's going to be either a short gain or a long one, almost all the time. We should be in 3rd and 7's to 3rd and 4's, which is a manageable situation.

I have a novel idea. How about we just stay completely open as an offense and run what will work depending on the defense we are playing. Run zone read for one game, I another, split backs another, shotgun, under center, isos, powers, throw deep, to TE's, screens, crossing routes, roll outs, boots, etc. Why do we need to be so dependent on one offensive set
Click to expand...
Because it's not Playstation, and the ZR is our bread and butter? You don't just go away from what you do best. You change it up, but there's still a base, otherwise "changing it up" wouldn't be "changing" anything. I don't think you get how unrealistic that is out of Taylor. Niles Paul ran a freaking wide open crossing route, and did you see how badly Taylor missed him then? I also never thought I'd see the day when people actually started calling for screens. You think it's a lot of variety because the plays have different names, but the ZR doesn't lack in the power aspect, and I have no idea how it can't be considered misdirection. Taylor throws deep quite a bit, and as discussed before, roll-outs are a bit much to ask for from a guy that has trouble with standing-still throwing mechanics.

Also, the lack of throwing to McNeil, isn't really on the playcaller. That's on Taylor.

Zone Read is actually a great base play, matching up well in the numbers game against any defense not absolutely selling out to stop it. When they do, I'd love to say we can just start doing anything with Taylor, but the fact is we/he can't.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoogies said:
Zone read should not land us in 3rd and long. It's Taylor's awful misreads that were doing that. You make the right read, and it's going to be either a short gain or a long one, almost all the time. We should be in 3rd and 7's to 3rd and 4's, which is a manageable situation.

I have a novel idea. How about we just stay completely open as an offense and run what will work depending on the defense we are playing. Run zone read for one game, I another, split backs another, shotgun, under center, isos, powers, throw deep, to TE's, screens, crossing routes, roll outs, boots, etc. Why do we need to be so dependent on one offensive set
Click to expand...
Because it's not Playstation, and the ZR is our bread and butter? You don't just go away from what you do best. You change it up, but there's still a base, otherwise "changing it up" wouldn't be "changing" anything. I don't think you get how unrealistic that is out of Taylor. Niles Paul ran a freaking wide open crossing route, and did you see how badly Taylor missed him then? I also never thought I'd see the day when people actually started calling for screens. You think it's a lot of variety because the plays have different names, but the ZR doesn't lack in the power aspect, and I have no idea how it can't be considered misdirection. Taylor throws deep quite a bit, and as discussed before, roll-outs are a bit much to ask for from a guy that has trouble with standing-still throwing mechanics.

Also, the lack of throwing to McNeil, isn't really on the playcaller. That's on Taylor.

Zone Read is actually a great base play, matching up well in the numbers game against any defense not absolutely selling out to stop it. When they do, I'd love to say we can just start doing anything with Taylor, but the fact is we/he can't.
Click to expand...
I think you can be a running team or passing team, and one of those is what you will consider your "bread and butter." If you can run the ZR you can also do any other kind of runs.

Yes, alot of the TE's not getting the ball is on TM. However, I think I would practice some of those plays where he looks off and goes back to the TE. I know, you don't want to run passing plays that you are only going to throw it to one guy, but I don't feel it's a bad thing to have a couple of plays like that. Come to line of scrimmage, if D sets up like you want, you go to "hot" read.

The ZR is also more of sleight of hand than misdirection. When the ZR is run you are going ONE way, left or right with the fake and runs, unlike reverses.

 
C N Red said:
I have a novel idea. How about we just stay completely open as an offense and run what will work depending on the defense we are playing. Run zone read for one game, I another, split backs another, shotgun, under center, isos, powers, throw deep, to TE's, screens, crossing routes, roll outs, boots, etc. Why do we need to be so dependent on one offensive set? Let's revolutionize football, be an offense that has sets and plays depending on what defense we play and how they can be exploited. I've always thought it was weird offenses haven't went to something like this, but I'm no expert, so what do I know. JMO.

Oh and why in the hell have we not run any misdirection. If we run the read to one side the defenses are flowing that way. How about some reverses and counters?
Click to expand...
So learn a completely different offense every week? I'm sorry, but it doesn't quite work that way.

What they DO do is make adjustments and have certain plays within their primary scheme that they change according to what defense we're facing.

Trying to be a completely different offense all the time would be a disaster. You cater to your team's strengths, and you practice the hell out of it until it's a well oiled machine

 
Watson had a good gameplan against arizona last year, in fact, it was an amazing gameplan and well balanced. I havent seen that this year at all. Sure, the zone read can work to perfection, but you have to have the athletes to run it well against great defenses. TExas has a great defense which as more speed and athleticism. We are not even in the same ballpark when it comes to comparing out athleticism to their athleticism. The zone read takes two seconds to develop and it depends on the decision making of the qb. People fail to understand that no matter what read taylor made, it was still going to be blown up in the backfield or for a minimal gain. If you payed attention to all the details, you could see that they cleary had the rb and qb contained. Even if T=mart handed it off, they still would have a defender their. When a defense is cheating up to play the run, you throw in a pass, thats common sense 101. I saw maybe ONE pass on first down in the whole first half. Also, we ran I form last year so its not like "learning something new." Of course, he could run is zone read but you could also add in a few runs from i-formation and run counters, iso's and off tackles. Also, watson's playcalling put us in third and long numerous times. If you have heard any nfl coaches, the goal is to get it at 3rd and 4 or less, not 3rd and long. The coach is also in charge of everyone doing their assignments and being mentally focused so they can catch balls. Yes, you have to blame the players, but to a certain extent you have to also blame the coaches. We have had this problem for two years now and hopefully things will get fixed. Also, "any offense" can be a well oiled machine, but if you watch most great coordinators they do watch film and adjust accordingly. They may look at the weakness of the defense and put in some new wrinkles that week in practice. Also, how many teams run NUMEROUS offensive sets? We have mainly been running shotgun but not many sets from under center, but you see alabama, ohio state, oregon, etc not onlyrun NUMEROUS sets to keep the defense offguard. You guys are acting like its impossible to run a few plays from iform or any formation under center for that matter and that we have to "stick with the zone read because thats the watson's bread and butter." Also, watson is keying on the wrs BLOCKING in practice. Since they dont get as many reps, he is PART of the problem they are dropping so much considering they dont focus as much on catching, which can cause drops in actual game situations. Our offense seems to fall apart in big games, when is it time that the offensive coaches take blame for the consisten lackadaisicalness by the offensive players?

 
I think you can be a running team or passing team, and one of those is what you will consider your "bread and butter." If you can run the ZR you can also do any other kind of runs.
Click to expand...
I think that's a gross simplification of the many different styles different teams might be suited for, depending on their strengths and weaknesses. I wonder, by the way, how good Taylor is from under the center. The fault of a lot of spread college QBs when they project to the next level is, people wonder how they fare under the center, which is much more prevalent in the pro's. Not sure what Taylor's HS offense looked like, but I remember it was a concern with Cody Green when he came in, as his HS offense was very simple and he was just in the shotgun all the time.

Also, watson's playcalling put us in third and long numerous times
Click to expand...
Execution on the field put us in 3rd and long numerous times.

Watson had a good gameplan against arizona last year, in fact, it was an amazing gameplan and well balanced. I havent seen that this year at all.
Click to expand...
Yes, because it was decided that we were not going to build off of that success in the Holiday Bowl, and instead going to go in a new direction with a running quarterback in Taylor Martinez. This stuff we're seeing now? It's that offense that "Bo wanted", that direction he's been supposedly wanting to go to since he got here. Enjoy it - most of us couldn't wait for those days to return, but I guess they weren't anticipating that it would come with drawbacks.

" Also, watson is keying on the wrs BLOCKING in practice. Since they dont get as many reps, he is PART of the problem they are dropping so much considering they dont focus as much on catching, which can cause drops in actual game situations.
Click to expand...
Interesting that suddenly people are saying that an offense where we run the ball 70% of the time, isn't a good thing and that our receivers should be getting more action. You can't put the drops on Watson, but I agree our WRs all could be getting more chances than they have been getting. Take that up with Bo/Tom's vision for this offense. And Gilmore, who is really the guy responsible for WRs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top