AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Should the Buffs go with a 4 WR offense this year?
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
CB17Cubed
Well-Known Member
I think the 4 WR set would best fit our offense next year. Without having a TE that is a decent blocker, it would better help our running game. It may serve us better to put in a 6th lineman when we want an extra blocker. Remember Lindsay's best runs came when we he was able to get into space, especially when our WRs were able to set the edge with their blocks. I do think we will be about 8 deep at WR this year if not more. My guess the starters will be Shay, Devin, Bryce, and Juwann. One thing we could try to do is if we feel like we have more than 4 WRs that can be starters, then we could possibly just try to run opposing DBs off the field.
Read this analsys of their 2015 season vs prior and then factor in they were more successful running the ball, with more attempts in 2016.
#2 in 2015 in the country in Red-Zone offense.
The other thing your comparison is ignoring is that WSU minimizes rushing attempts by their QB and also minimizes sacks, which are (likely) included in the comparison numbers.
The fact is indisputable that the Air Raid is a very effective offense, can eat clock (utilizing running plays and high % completion plays) can be effective in the red zone.
#2 in 2015 in the country in Red-Zone offense.
The other thing your comparison is ignoring is that WSU minimizes rushing attempts by their QB and also minimizes sacks, which are (likely) included in the comparison numbers.
The fact is indisputable that the Air Raid is a very effective offense, can eat clock (utilizing running plays and high % completion plays) can be effective in the red zone.
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
CU should utilize a TE or FB only in running downs. CU played a ton of 4-WR sets last year. They don't have a guy of Irwin's blocking abilities and no one at TE is as talented as probably the Top 9 WRs. I say yes. That's why you signed 4 WRs. Nixon isn't sitting. Use him all over field.
And yes splittingbhim with Phil is exciting option too.
And yes splittingbhim with Phil is exciting option too.
Jaximus
Club Member
I like that idea. With Montez, we would have essentially THREE RB's to account for. This causes mismatches that will cause DC's a lot of sleepless nights!!!
Some of the most dynamic offenses in college football (Ohio State & Baylor, for example) do a lot of spread veer type stuff. Can use a TE or not with this. And those are run offenses. Maryland is also doing some interesting stuff with the young OC they brought from Arkansas State with mostly spread sets but running 55-60% of the time. With this type of setup, a guy like Keeney would be in the H-Back spot, often in a close-in slot, and crack block down to seal the edge. TE could also play with a hand on the ground. Or, you can go with no TE and have 2 backs with a big back to lead or run inside on option and a main back to follow or stretch. Options out of this are to have a single back like a Lindsay with the close-in slot being a guy like Nixon/Lee or even Ross who can take a handoff on a reverse off of faked inside run action or take a shovel pass behind the LOS off of motion. Buffs need to mix in more of this stuff, I think.
Jaximus
Club Member
We look to have the makings of the most prolific offense we've seen in Boulder for a long time. We may have some ground to make up on defense, but we do have guys who can create turnovers. I'm just fine with winning games 52 to 30!!!
CULifer
Well-Known Member
I know this has been said generally before, but this is the kind of creativity that would keep D's guessing and would really create some exciting plays. Hoping MM challenges Lindgren and Chev to add some reverse and wildcat runs (and fakes).
More successful running the ball is a low standard.
That #2 red zone offense was only 35th in TD percentage. None of this screams crazy good running game to me.
Back-the-Buffs
Well-Known Member
I wonder how much Eddy Lopez will be a factor in the run game? Are they just going to use him in goal line situations or will it be a more expanded role. They want him to get down to about 280 so I'm guessing he'll be on the field similar to how Frazier was used. I love the idea of Beau getting downhill behind Lopez and gashing opposing defenses.
Good stuff
It's a good question. And it also begs another question: if we're going with a "Jumbo" package for short yardage & goal line type situations, are we better off with Lopez lining up at TE... or would we be better off bringing in a Miller or Moretti as a tackle eligible TE at the ends of the line?
Back-the-Buffs
Well-Known Member
If they were going to do that I see Miller in that role. At least for 2017 I see Jake as being a RS. But I like the idea. Miller is an athletic guy who could catch a pass here and there to keep the defense honest. Not so sure Lopez could do the same.
Jeric
Club Member
Seems ironic to say we have too much talent to be getting our QB killed, when Sefo was killed because of our lack of talent not because of QB runs, so I don't follow that logic. Would be a waste not to use one of Montez's best attributes and a staple of the modern successful offense, but we just have to use him more intelligently than we did with Sefo.
I hope we have enough talent to keep Montez from being our #1 option on short yardage situations, cause no QB should have to put as much on his shoulders as Sefo did.
So you are ok with Montez being put in a greater position to get injured?
Our D will still be good however I dont see them matching last year. Hope Im wrong.
We will need to put points on the board. We need Montez to stay healthy and on the field.
We run him like we did last year and he wont finish the season.
I like the 2 young guns but I don't want to have to depend on them.
Our D will still be good however I dont see them matching last year. Hope Im wrong.
We will need to put points on the board. We need Montez to stay healthy and on the field.
We run him like we did last year and he wont finish the season.
I like the 2 young guns but I don't want to have to depend on them.
Bufffan68
Club Member
I would say yes BUT as much as I'm not dissing Lindgren anymore, I am not convinced he has the chops to coordinate and call a top 20 offense. We were top 20 for a while, but the O seemed marred by inconsistency later in the season. Hope I'm wrong.
Pretty much exactly what I've suggested in this thread is the Clemson offense. http://smartfootball.com/grab-bag/s...belichick-match-quarters#sthash.KjGkUm22.dpbs
Here are a few of the base play diagrams (no true hand-on-the-ground TE). And this is primarily a run offense, but can light you up in the passing game if teams overload to stuff run:
My point, maybe not made well, was we have so much talent at WR, I would rather see him distributing the ball and letting the play makers make plays. I know running him is inevitable, however I don't want to see it as a staple of our offense like what we did with Sefo last year.
I believe Montez is a better passer than Sefo and I hope we can use that to our advantage, and keep him out of multiple runs up the middle. Plus the Pac saw it last year, they will adjust and he will be a target next year.
God help us if we do anything resembling the most successful CFB offenses!
Never was this board so happy as when EB proclaimed we were going to line it up in a pro-style fashion and run it down their throats, circa 1980s. Until we found out that didn't work.
Never was this board so happy as when EB proclaimed we were going to line it up in a pro-style fashion and run it down their throats, circa 1980s. Until we found out that didn't work.
8Jah
Well-Known Member
Run Montez like Oregon used to run Mariotta. O ran him less than they had with previous QBs and it was sometimes the option, but usually a broken play when he went. The point is, if Mariotta was tackled, it was a safety or CB that hit him.
On those QB powers we had Sefo gang tackled by the defensive lineman and LBs who were locked in and licking their chops to hit the QB. Was never fast enough to explode through anyway. It was like he was a part-time fullback. Then we wonder why he seems less accurate and the passing game slides as the year goes on.
Even better to have Montez use his athleticism more often to scramble behind the LoS. That is where he dangerous.
On those QB powers we had Sefo gang tackled by the defensive lineman and LBs who were locked in and licking their chops to hit the QB. Was never fast enough to explode through anyway. It was like he was a part-time fullback. Then we wonder why he seems less accurate and the passing game slides as the year goes on.
Even better to have Montez use his athleticism more often to scramble behind the LoS. That is where he dangerous.
Yeah. I see no way that the offense in 2017 is Montez running power into the G-T gap as a base play. It would be an absolute waste of his ability and way too high risk. I expect scheme to reflect what the personnel are best at doing.
With that said, the zone read continues to be very effective and Montez can run it now and then, for big yards, then get down and save himself. He doesn't have to run it more than a couple times for teams to respect it on film and know it's there.
Almost everything they do on offense is predicated on the read option with the threat of a QB run, which includes the passing game with the RPO concepts. Montez is going to run the ball.