re: More shotgun and pistol formations now?

quote:

---

Maybe it is the formation that we seem to go to over and over, but we dont "need" the I formation.

---

I realize that formation and philosophy aren't the same thing, but our line isn't cut out for a "spread" attack, at least in the traditional sense. They are big and physical. They are all pretty athletic for their size, but there is a reason that spread and spread option offenses usually recruit smaller, faster linemen.

Again, the Tigers run some spread formations and implement some of the concepts, but like it or not, this team is built to power run. So, the I isn't going away. However, you see a LOT more flexibility in how the staff is using it this year. We see personnel groups with Williams at FB, where he is a legit threat to get the ball. The staff can do the same thing with Mouton, thanks to his athleticism. Both can also run routes and catch the ball, as well as Fournette and Guice. This balance and ball distribution will help keep defenses off balance. Last year, we were so situational with the RBs that defenses had a very good idea what we were doing when someone checked in.

We are also seeing a lot more 3 WR sets out of the I, and 2 WR unbalanced sets. Those are particularly challenging for the defense now, because we are regularly throwing the ball to the TE. Do you keep 3 LBs out there to deal with Fournette? Can they cover Fournette or our TEs in the pass game?

I understand the complaints with the I based on last year. However, that is verifiably changing. Yes, we are going to see the toss dive out of it more than anything else, but the staff is diversifying enough to create big plays off that expectation. If the staff can force defenses to play a little more honest based on the threat of passing effectively out of the I, then the FB becomes an advantage in a more open box rather than a 95% indicator that we are running the ball.