Welcome to Hogville!      Do Not Sell My Personal Information

split vear

Started by snoop hawgy hawg, May 02, 2015, 01:24:31 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TOM "tbw1"

Quote from: whippersnapper on May 03, 2015, 06:50:11 pm
JT Curtis runs it in Louisiana.

Vear is a village in Vestfold, Norway
Well see, there's your problem. What you should be thinking is, what would Harry Rex do?

FrozenHam

Quote from: TOM "tbw1" on May 07, 2015, 11:58:28 am
Vear is a village in Vestfold, Norway

Hmmm, Norwegian.  English is weird.

It can be understood through tough thorough thought, though.

 

MuskogeeHogFan

Quote from: bphi11ips on May 07, 2015, 10:53:45 am
Option football has been around for a long time.  Broyles ran something called "the belly series" in the early 60's that was built around virtually the same thing now referred to as "the inside zone read".  As with the wishbone, and the Rodriguez/Kelly/Malzahn offenses of modern college football, the option starts with the middle.  Establish the middle and the edges and seams open up.  Shut down the middle, and you shut down the option.  Modern spread formations help create space in the middle.

Here are a couple of good articles on the option and the difficulty in defending it:

http://static.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/davie/1447132.html   

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/291342-paul-johnsons-spread-option-a-beginners-guide

For my taste, nothing is more exciting than watching a great option QB like Jack Mildren or Pat White operate an option offense at full speed.  Google Alabama or Oklahoma games from the 70's if you think option football is boring.

Could Arkansas install an effective option attack with its current personnel? Yes, but we don't have the speed at QB and RB to run it to perfection.  We're built for power and play-action, and that's fun to watch, too.  This won't happen, but if Brandon Allen is injured, the wishbone and its variations is easy to install and would take teams a while to adjust to.  Peavey is probably best suited to run it.  Kody Walker, Jonathan Williams and Alex Collins would be hard to stop behind our huge OL.  When the defense loads 11 in the box, Sprinkle and Henry would get 20 yards behind the defense.  Google Keith Jackson at OU.  Again, it won't happen because that's not what we do, but it would work in a pinch.   

Problem is, we don't have the qualified depth at the key positions of QB and RB to run that offense. Would it be fun to watch? You bet. What a lot of folks forget is that in OU's hey-day of running the "Bone" they also usually had really tough defenses that limited opponents. They needed that because the Wishbone offense while exciting, usually saw the offense either putting the ball on the carpet a lot or worst case, turning it over and if your defense didn't keep you in the game, you found yourself playing from behind. And the Wishbone is generally considered to not be a great offense when you have to play "catch-up".
Go Hogs Go!

snoblind

Quote from: MuskogeeHogFan on May 07, 2015, 05:07:30 pm
Problem is, we don't have the qualified depth at the key positions of QB and RB to run that offense. Would it be fun to watch? You bet. What a lot of folks forget is that in OU's hey-day of running the "Bone" they also usually had really tough defenses that limited opponents. They needed that because the Wishbone offense while exciting, usually saw the offense either putting the ball on the carpet a lot or worst case, turning it over and if your defense didn't keep you in the game, you found yourself playing from behind. And the Wishbone is generally considered to not be a great offense when you have to play "catch-up".

Yep, usually an all-American or two or three on those defenses.

If Matt Jones had been at Arkansas when DMac, Felix, and Hillis were here, that could have been a dream backfield for the wishbone.

snoop hawgy hawg

Quote from: snoblind on May 07, 2015, 06:28:04 pm
Yep, usually an all-American or two or three on those defenses.

If Matt Jones had been at Arkansas when DMac, Felix, and Hillis were here, that could have been a dream backfield for the wishbone.
So What you are saying is we need to get both wahley and white in the our backfield with peavey as the starting qb??

snoblind

Quote from: snoop hawgy hawg on May 07, 2015, 06:32:41 pm
So What you are saying is we need to get both wahley and white in the our backfield with peavey as the starting qb??

Is Peavey a legit 4.37?

MuskogeeHogFan

Quote from: snoblind on May 07, 2015, 06:28:04 pm
Yep, usually an all-American or two or three on those defenses.

If Matt Jones had been at Arkansas when DMac, Felix, and Hillis were here, that could have been a dream backfield for the wishbone.

1st teamers, yes. But again, when you run that kind of offense you need to be 2 to 3 deep in the excellent skilled position players (players in waiting) in the backfield. And, they all had to work together. Lose the QB and unless you have someone skilled in running that offense and making all the reads, make a split second decision to turn up or pitch out, and being able to execute an accurate pitch that leads the "pitch back". And that is just one position.

Fun to watch, scary to execute, but rewarding when it works.
Go Hogs Go!

snoop hawgy hawg

Quote from: snoblind on May 07, 2015, 06:35:51 pm
Is Peavey a legit 4.37?
I find that hard to believe....more like 4.6

MuskogeeHogFan

Quote from: snoop hawgy hawg on May 07, 2015, 06:32:41 pm
So What you are saying is we need to get both wahley and white in the our backfield with peavey as the starting qb??

You seem to be obsessed with RB's in most of your posts so far. They are vital, no doubt. But there are other positions that offer them an opportunity for success. Great RB's behind a bad O-Line end up being a lot less than they could have been. Poor receivers or a QB that can't deliver the ball in stride, makes an offense one dimensional, which means they key on those "star" RB's. If you have played football at the level you have stated, you know this, I would guess. It's a team sport.
Go Hogs Go!

snoblind

Quote from: snoop hawgy hawg on May 07, 2015, 06:39:02 pm
I find that hard to believe....more like 4.6

Seems that was what Matt was timed at once.

snoop hawgy hawg

Quote from: MuskogeeHogFan on May 07, 2015, 06:46:25 pm
You seem to be obsessed with RB's in most of your posts so far. They are vital, no doubt. But there are other positions that offer them an opportunity for success. Great RB's behind a bad O-Line end up being a lot less than they could have been. Poor receivers or a QB that can't deliver the ball in stride, makes an offense one dimensional, which means they key on those "star" RB's. If you have played football at the level you have stated, you know this, I would guess. It's a team sport.
well I would like us to have great players at every position, but our offense is run based..you need a good o-line for any good offense So that's besides the point, and as far as receivers go, I feel like we only need One good one for this offense, I would Bet my life savings our tight end core will collectively get more receiving yards then our WR core next season.

MuskogeeHogFan

Quote from: snoop hawgy hawg on May 07, 2015, 06:55:40 pm
well I would like us to have great players at every position, but our offense is run based..you need a good o-line for any good offense So that's besides the point, and as far as receivers go, I feel like we only need One good one for this offense, I would Bet my life savings our tight end core will collectively get more receiving yards then our WR core next season.

You are braver than I am. I think you see more balance in who receives thrown balls. Again, you need more than one threat so your "one threat", isn't doubled all the time. And by the way, as much as you focus on the need for good RB's, you should probably ask our backfield if having a superior O-Line is "besides the point". All positions have to be hitting on all cylinders for the maximum possible success of the team as a whole.
Go Hogs Go!

snoop hawgy hawg

Quote from: MuskogeeHogFan on May 07, 2015, 07:06:40 pm
You are braver than I am. I think you see more balance in who receives thrown balls. Again, you need more than one threat so your "one threat", isn't doubled all the time. And by the way, as much as you focus on the need for good RB's, you should probably ask our backfield if having a superior O-Line is "besides the point". All positions have to be hitting on all cylinders for the maximum possible success of the team as a whole.
when I say "besides the point" I don't mean they don't matter..I mean they matter the most, because NO offense in football can be ran effectively without a good o-line So to say you need a good o-line is besides the point and yes we only need one because we only throw the ball about 25 times a game..and who are the two best receiving threats on our team?? Our two starting tight ends..So I assume they will be targeted more..

 

GoHogs1091

The veer is one of the most innovative offenses ever invented, perhaps more so than the wishbone, the run-and-shoot, and definitely more so than Robert Petrino's garbage finesse "power spread" offense.

Malzahn has been using the inverted veer ever since he got to Auburn as their OC, and now as their Head Coach.  The inverted veer has helped Malzahn make some seasoned collegiate defensive Coaches (Saban and Chavis) look rather pedestrian.

TheRazorback500

Quote from: MuskogeeHogFan on May 07, 2015, 06:36:45 pm
1st teamers, yes. But again, when you run that kind of offense you need to be 2 to 3 deep in the excellent skilled position players (players in waiting) in the backfield. And, they all had to work together. Lose the QB and unless you have someone skilled in running that offense and making all the reads, make a split second decision to turn up or pitch out, and being able to execute an accurate pitch that leads the "pitch back". And that is just one position.

Fun to watch, scary to execute, but rewarding when it works.
I was at OU in the fall of '78. Lott, Sims, Overstreet and Kenny King ran that thing to perfection and stayed healthy all year. They might have won it all until that cold day in Lincoln, NE.

:razorback:
Do you wanna get Rocked?

bphi11ips

Quote from: MuskogeeHogFan on May 07, 2015, 05:07:30 pm
Problem is, we don't have the qualified depth at the key positions of QB and RB to run that offense. Would it be fun to watch? You bet. What a lot of folks forget is that in OU's hey-day of running the "Bone" they also usually had really tough defenses that limited opponents. They needed that because the Wishbone offense while exciting, usually saw the offense either putting the ball on the carpet a lot or worst case, turning it over and if your defense didn't keep you in the game, you found yourself playing from behind. And the Wishbone is generally considered to not be a great offense when you have to play "catch-up".

Wasn't suggesting a change, only stating we have the personnel to run it.  I disagree on depth.  Brandon Allen could run the option, but he is probably not durable enough day in and day out.  And why risk a fifth year senior? Peavey can run it.  Storey had some impressive rushing stats in a playoff game.  Don't know much more than that.  Mitchell could definitely run it.  If we don't have the OL depth to run it we don't have OL depth period.  Some say we don't now. Not sure I agree.  Our OL is not where it will be in two more years, but it's pretty impressive.

Although this staff is not likely to consider it, a red-zone package featuring Peavey or Mitchell and a bone variation option set full house backfield would be pretty darn scary.
Life is too short for grudges and feuds.

urkillnmesmalls

I think there are two main reasons why we won't, and shouldn't, try anything like that. 

1.  QB's take hits in those offenses,  It was one thing to get drilled by players back in that era, but across the board players are about 20-30 lbs heavier now (probably more on the lines).  On those plays where the QB pitched late in the wishbone back in the OU hey-day, they simply wouldn't get up with today's players hitting them.  Also...think Brandon Allen, and durability.

2.  If our O-line allegedly doesn't have the speed to block for a screen pass and they're not built for that, then there's no way they would have the speed and agility to block for a veer or wishbone offense.

Having said that, to me saying it won't work is a misnomer.  With the right personnel I think it could work, even in the SEC.  Auburn is employing something that is very close, and it has worked pretty well to this point.  I would argue that it could work even more if they get an elite athlete at QB, and some RB's that have some variety in their skill set.  But...on any given play, the QB can go down, so you have to have some depth at that position to even think about running that style of offense.   

 
I've never wanted a Hog coach to be successful more than I do for Pittman.  He's one of the good guys.

demonHOG1013

Just like Novocaine. Give it time, it always works.

MuskogeeHogFan

Quote from: bphi11ips on May 08, 2015, 08:39:53 am
Wasn't suggesting a change, only stating we have the personnel to run it.  I disagree on depth.  Brandon Allen could run the option, but he is probably not durable enough day in and day out.  And why risk a fifth year senior? Peavey can run it.  Storey had some impressive rushing stats in a playoff game.  Don't know much more than that.  Mitchell could definitely run it.  If we don't have the OL depth to run it we don't have OL depth period.  Some say we don't now. Not sure I agree.  Our OL is not where it will be in two more years, but it's pretty impressive.

Although this staff is not likely to consider it, a red-zone package featuring Peavey or Mitchell and a bone variation option set full house backfield would be pretty darn scary.

I must admit that I would love to see us at Alabama, 1:00 left in the 4th, tie ball game, 1st down at their 10 yard line, and we shift out of our standard power formation into a Wishbone Formation and run the Triple Option. I would love to see the faces of the Alabama staff when that happens.

Now, it doesn't make very much sense from a coaching standpoint to roll the dice like that on execution of a high risk-high reward offense when you are so close to scoring and with so little time remaining, but I would still love to see the camera cut to the look on Saban's face when we shifted.
Go Hogs Go!

urkillnmesmalls

Quote from: MuskogeeHogFan on May 08, 2015, 12:19:05 pm
I must admit that I would love to see us at Alabama, 1:00 left in the 4th, tie ball game, 1st down at their 10 yard line, and we shift out of our standard power formation into a Wishbone Formation and run the Triple Option. I would love to see the faces of the Alabama staff when that happens.

Now, it doesn't make very much sense from a coaching standpoint to roll the dice like that on execution of a high risk-high reward offense when you are so close to scoring and with so little time remaining, but I would still love to see the camera cut to the look on Saban's face when we shifted.

...I think his face would have a T in front of it.   :razorback:
I've never wanted a Hog coach to be successful more than I do for Pittman.  He's one of the good guys.

thirrdegreetusker

Before I render an opinion about the vear, I think I will need to get out my VHS recordings of the option Hogs of the 70s and 80s, open a bear, and sea if I think it will still work. I think those are stored in the same box as my dear-hunting videos.

Inhogswetrust

May 09, 2015, 11:24:05 am #71 Last Edit: May 09, 2015, 01:45:29 pm by Inhogswetrust
Quote from: snoblind on May 07, 2015, 06:28:04 pm
Yep, usually an all-American or two or three on those defenses.

If Matt Jones had been at Arkansas when DMac, Felix, and Hillis were here, that could have been a dream backfield for the wishbone.

And how many of those would have signed a LOI if we were doing that? I'd bet MAYBE one.
If I'm going to cheer players and coaches in victory, I damn sure ought to be man enough to stand with them in defeat.

"Why some people are so drawn to the irrational is something that has always puzzled me" - James Randi

jrulz83

Only if this guy is brought in as an offensive specialist:

Lenin is cautiously optimistic.

LSPRazorbac

Also, it takes alot of practice at running option style offenses.

To have a good efficient offense you almost have to focus on one style (pro-style, spread, read-option, etc...)

You can run one style really good or multiple styles really mediocre.  That's your options.

 

MuskogeeHogFan

Quote from: Inhogswetrust on May 09, 2015, 11:24:05 am
And how many of those would have signed a LOI if we were doing that? I'd bet MAYBE one.

I'd have to disagree. They all would have had significant carries and Hillis would have been properly utilized at FB in a Wishbone attack. With his speed at FB he would have broken some long runs while defenses were more concerned with protecting the edges against a pitch to McFadden or Felix Jones. And then there is Matt Jones, and he might have been a perfect threat at QB with his speed and arm, if he could execute the pitch properly 99% of the time. But that is also based on 99% hindsight too. ;)
Go Hogs Go!

Inhogswetrust

Quote from: MuskogeeHogFan on May 09, 2015, 05:11:30 pm
I'd have to disagree. They all would have had significant carries and Hillis would have been properly utilized at FB in a Wishbone attack. With his speed at FB he would have broken some long runs while defenses were more concerned with protecting the edges against a pitch to McFadden or Felix Jones. And then there is Matt Jones, and he might have been a perfect threat at QB with his speed and arm, if he could execute the pitch properly 99% of the time. But that is also based on 99% hindsight too. ;)

I'd bet when they signed they would not have wanted to play in a bone. That's not to say it wouldn't have worked when they were all here. I do think it would have.
If I'm going to cheer players and coaches in victory, I damn sure ought to be man enough to stand with them in defeat.

"Why some people are so drawn to the irrational is something that has always puzzled me" - James Randi