re: If UGA flames out in their first game, does that sour a potential run-heavy offense?

quote:

---

Did you watch the Michigan State game? Michigan had to pass to keep up and lost because of it.

---

You brought up the scenario of Georgia losing. If Michigan can’t throw to keep up and they’re not winning on the ground, how do they win?

quote:

---

If Michigan can’t throw to keep up and they’re not winning on the ground, how do they win?

---

They can't and lose to the vastly more talented team.

UM beating UGA is a huge upset and would have been an insane one 2 weeks ago.

BKs slight preference towards the run is because the OL talent has been near the best in college football while at the same time, the QB potential is really really average

youre not going to be pass heavy if you literally do not have a QB that can pass

im not even sure ian book can throw it 40 yards down the field

kizer
wimbush
rees
book
coan

you can not be "pass heavy" with this type of player

zaire, maybe? but thats still pushing the envelope

quote:

---

Literally the same stuff was said about me re: Les for about 10 years. Now it's commonly accepted.

---

I can't prove you wrong because I was on other LSU fansites back then, but heavy, heavy, heavy doubt. Every other LSU fansite was bitching about how Miles never threw the ball his entire tenure. I don't see why tigerdroppings would be different. If you truly got pushback for this, then you were almost assuredly being way less reasonable than you are saying right now.

quote:

---

It's by passing first and allowing that to open up the running game.

---

This is the whole crux of your argument and is just completely and utterly dead wrong. When I think modern, high powered offense, I think Lincoln Riley and Ryan Day. Both of them are run first guys who open up the passing game with power spread running. The systems are very dissimilar outside of that. Whether or not you run to set up the pass or vice versa literally does not matter. In a vacuum it's preferable to run to set up the pass because running will more consistently get you a significantly positive play because fewer people need to not frick up to make a run work/running back decision making is significantly easier than QB decision making in most systems, but that's not a big enough difference to get worked up about.

The whole point of "setting up" plays is that the defense can't sell out against anything because you could do anything on that particular play. Run up the middle, run to the outside, medium pass over the middle, homerun pass down field, quick screen, etc. Balance is what actually matters. This is literally the whole secret sauce of UGA's defense that was killing everyone. The LBers freeze at the snap to take away the "P" in the RPO on first down while still being close enough to their gap to get the tackle in the gap for a less than 2 yard gain. Then you're behind schedule and are forced to throw which is much easier to defend against. If you watch UGA play, they actually rarely get stops when the opposing offense has a successful first down play and is still on schedule second down. Not always of course, but the entire defense is literally designed to make opposing offenses one dimensional, and it's one of the best defenses college football has ever seen.

And I can't remember if this was you or someone else, but no, Denbrock does not run 3 TE sets. Maybe the wildcat goalline package has 3, I never counted because it's the wildcat, but that's the wildcat if it does. He spends most of his time in 12 or 11. You're straight up lying when you say he runs 3 TE sets. He has a very simple system which can be a blessing and a curse depending on details of how you introduce wrinkles, but it's very modern.

about blank …. I feel about your take buddy

Michigan has a higher run % than Georgia, so why would Michigan winning the game be a detriment to a run heavy offense's success in today's era? Honestly both of them being in the playoff is already a showing that a run heavy offense can succeed. In fact 3/4 teams in the playoffs run more than pass. The whole premise behind this thread is stupid.

quote:

---

This is literally the whole secret sauce of UGA's defense that was killing everyone.

---

UGA's defense appears to be a paper tiger that feasted on an absolutely shitty schedule. They've been tested once and failed.

They have a really good D but not some elite/historic D

quote:

---

but the entire defense is literally designed to make opposing offenses one dimensional,

---

Much easier to do when you face crappy offenses all year long like Clemson or the SEC East

Enjoy your down votes

IMO, it’s all about balance. And when I say balance, I don’t mean 50/50 pass/run. I mean the ability to do either of them well.

If a DC decides he’s not going to let us beat them with the pass, and shows 3 man fronts dropping 8 into coverage, I’m gonna pound the ball until they relent. If they put 8 in the box, I’m spreading and going air raid. And that may go back and forth all game.

So the key is not being pass heavy, or run heavy. It’s being able to take what the D gives you. And you have to do both well. So when I note that BK has a history of having a plethora of giant, mobile, disciplined OL, knowing they can run and pass block, I get excited.

Great coaches field teams that do both well, depending on what the defense gives them. Because if you can’t do one well, you’ll be forced to depend on the other for the majority of plays. And become one dimensional.

I don’t want to watch a team force “pass heavy” against a team that’s playing the pass. An innovative offense isn’t simply pass heavy. It’s the ability to adjust and do both well, despite the ratio numbers.