Offense with Great Athletes

[groundchuck]

This may be a stupid question but we spend a lot of time talking about what to do with below average athletes etc. So in your mind if there was an offense that would be devistating with mostly above average players what would it be? I would think there are lots of answers but option and wing-t with a ton of speed at all the skill spots would be tough IMO.

[jhanawa]

To me, the most dangerous offense is the type that has chain moving efficiency both run and pass combined with the talent to take it the distance on any given play. When every hitch, zone or toss has the opposing coaches team holding its breath, you know your there. IMO, this "explosive offense" is most represented by the various one back and spread teams that throw the ball, run zone/ct trey and run various option schemes. Not saying Wing T, DW or "I" can't be explosive, just saying that the spread teams have a tendency spread the ball around to more players in situations where they have open field possibilities.

[coachjd]

I will agree with jhanawa. The threat to have a RB and QB who both can run with the threat of 4 verticals would be a lot of fun to coach IMO.

[senatorblutarsky]

Offense with great athletes? "Do whatever you want guys....Bus leaves at five."

I know what I would say, but I don't think it matters- as long as it is sound, easily teachable and reasonably easy to learn. One thing, when you have a bunch of studs on O, their D is going to throw anything and everything at you... in our really good years (we are a 90/10 run-pass team usually) we've seen everything from a everyone in the box (7-4 and Bear/46 with CB and FS @ 3 yds)., to a 2-5 (Okla State vs. Nebraska in 97/98? type) with everyone stunting everywhere. We spent more time on ourselves and less time on their defensive scouting report because I knew whatever we saw on tape- we would probably see something different in the game.

A lot of us (myself included) have a strong desire to over-coach and get "too creative" in those situations because it seems like our guys can do anything- it's hard not to do that, but necessary in my opinion. At least, that is what I learned (the hard way).

[realdawg]

The whole purpose of the spread is to get your athletes in space right? The more you have the merrier. Imagine a spread w/ Vince Young at QB, Bush at RB and 4 break away receivers and 5 big uns up front, who would wanna face that?

[kkennedy]

As long as you get your kids to execute, ANY offense is better with above average athletes.

[coachcalande]

triple option looked pretty good at Oklahoma for a few years.

[lochness]

Seriously, with tons of good athletes, it doesn't matter if you are running straight-t or spread. I'd say what DOES matter is what kind of OL you have more than anything else.

[coachcalande]

I kinda disagree...i have watched some teams that were talented lose alot of winnable games because they had too many passes in the dirt.

[coachveer]

Being an option guy I hate to say this but….We got a Coach up here that runs the straight T better then anyone I have ever seen. He runs 4 plays FB trap, Power, QB keep, and Counter. A few years back he was coaching at a small class B school and hung like 770 points on everyone in his last year. He then got the job at one of those mega schools where there where all kind of athletes walking the halls. People in the community were screaming because he ran that boring straight T offense. They thought they needed someone that was going to come in and run some fancy 4 or 5 wide and chuck the bean left and right. Well he ran that darn straight T there and in his 3rd or 4th season hung another 700 points with those guys. Then he goes to a 3rd school and hangs almost 400 in his first year there,

IMHO the only thing more frighten then watching a big slow FB lumber down the field after he made his cut off of a trap block…is a kid that runs a 10.7 hundy making that same cut off of a trap block.

Run what you can fix and as the late great brother Bob once soulfully sang “Everything is going to be alright”

[blb]

What you neglected to mention, coachveer, was that the "mega school" replaced him with a Spread guy who went 2-7 with all those great athletes and the assistant coaches in the stands are now screaming they don't run the ball enough.

[knight9299]

blb said:

and the assistant coaches in the stands are now screaming they don't run the ball enough.

Those bleacher assistants can be a pain at times!

[coachdawhip]

why not the wing-t, I'm sure Alex Smith and Reggie Bush's coach didn't mind. That's the beauty of the Wing-t, you can go empty and shotgun and still run all the same plays.

Olympic Gold Medalists Terrance Trammell and Angelo Taylor played on the same team in High School as wings in a Double Wing/Wing-T offense and if they wanted to throw they would just split out wide, talk about world class speed!!

[coachveer]

blb,
Well...I was trying to stay on the positive side.....but 2-7 is 2-7

[knighter]

if the system is sound enough, and kids can execute it should make no difference if you have 11 studs, or 11 average players...the goal is consistency. That can be any one a ton of different systems. That is why we never change here offensively...we run the dw. if we have a qb that can throw well, and a couple of kids who can catch we throw a little more, if we don't we don't. If a system is truly going to work there has to be some flexibility within it in order to best utilize the talent you have.

we are 52-11 in 6 years, we have thrown as many as 90 passes in a season, we have thrown as little as 47 passes in a season, but the bottom line is we still win games, and are competitive in the games we have not won. why? system is very sound, and easily understood. (no not saying convert to my system, not debating which o is better, just saying the same can be true for a number of offensive schemes) smaller schools like mine are not ALWAYS able to find a qb that can throw, or find kids who can consistently catch. so we have to run the ball more some times.

[edwardslv]

When Lou Holtz was at South Carolina he said that when he was at ND he all but had to run the I-backs and just make sure he didn't over-coach them. He said he didn't enjoy it, but that's what he did b/c he had the horses to run it.

But, IMO, I would strongly agree w/ coachdawhip. That ought to make you feel good, coachdawhip. I've sided with you over Lou Holtz.

[coachdawhip]

Coach Edwards,
anytime you side with me over Lou, I have to be happy

[spreadjet31]

Two years ago I had the pleasure of coaching an above average group of athletes on the offensive side of the ball. We had a senior QB w/a gun for an arm and an engineer's brain. 4 receivers w/great feet and hands, a bruising FB w/sprinters speed and a large, experienced line. My QB knew he had a ton of weapons and spread the ball out efficiently (X&Z 40+ rec. ea. in 11 games, slots 20+ rec. ea., fb 6.5 ypc 11 tds).

We were (are) a spread gun team that runs alot of zone and option. We throw mostly short and intermediate routes, lots of Coverdale stuff, and of course, go deep when we can. My long-winded point is that I feel a spread system benefits multiple weapons a little more than a power type system.