The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Time to talk about our offense and why it has yet to translate to the Fordham level of production.
This is especially relevant in light of our lack of Fordham-like success vs a DII transitional program. That would seem to negate the argument of "well things are different at FBS"

Here is a link to Fordham's last season results. Notice anything familiar about the scores?
https://www.espn.com/college-football/te...eason/2022

In 2023 Fordham had fewest sacks allowed (1.67/game) in the Patriot.
In the commentary, I believe it was stated that all 5 OL starters had returned from 2021. That is a very big deal.
I saw a few of things from the included highlight reel.

Morat has a quick release when needed (not always needed)
At 1:23 on a long route, Morat throws in just over 2 seconds
Further, the WR routes were simple and direct, allowing the long play to develop quickly.

At 2:19 a WR play countering the blitz was very effective. I don't believe I have seen that from us yet.





Note that one game and a couple of observations are not complete, nor necessarily indicative of extended patterns.
I will be interested to see more analysis from others on here.

NOTE: Subjective bloviating about softness and lack of player intensity are not in keeping with the intent of this thread and will be summarily deleted.

(09-25-2023 11:19 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  Time to talk about our offense and why it has yet to translate to the Fordham level of production.
This is especially relevant in light of our lack of Fordham-like success vs a DII transitional program. That would seem to negate the argument of "well things are different at FBS"

Here is a link to Fordham's last season results. Notice anything familiar about the scores?
https://www.espn.com/college-football/te...eason/2022

In 2023 Fordham had fewest sacks allowed (1.67/game) in the Patriot.
In the commentary, I believe it was stated that all 5 OL starters had returned from 2021. That is a very big deal.
I saw a few of things from the included highlight reel.

Morat has a quick release when needed (not always needed)
At 1:23 on a long route, Morat throws in just over 2 seconds
Further, the WR routes were simple and direct, allowing the long play to develop quickly.

At 2:19 a WR play countering the blitz was very effective. I don't believe I have seen that from us yet.





Note that one game and a couple of observations are not complete, nor necessarily indicative of extended patterns.
I will be interested to see more analysis from others on here.

NOTE: Subjective bloviating about softness and lack of player intensity are not in keeping with the intent of this thread and will be summarily deleted.

We have run this same WR screen multiple times. I believe it was either the first or 2nd drive when we tried throwing it to Granger.

(09-25-2023 11:27 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(09-25-2023 11:19 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  Time to talk about our offense and why it has yet to translate to the Fordham level of production.
This is especially relevant in light of our lack of Fordham-like success vs a DII transitional program. That would seem to negate the argument of "well things are different at FBS"

Here is a link to Fordham's last season results. Notice anything familiar about the scores?
https://www.espn.com/college-football/te...eason/2022

In 2023 Fordham had fewest sacks allowed (1.67/game) in the Patriot.
In the commentary, I believe it was stated that all 5 OL starters had returned from 2021. That is a very big deal.
I saw a few of things from the included highlight reel.

Morat has a quick release when needed (not always needed)
At 1:23 on a long route, Morat throws in just over 2 seconds
Further, the WR routes were simple and direct, allowing the long play to develop quickly.

At 2:19 a WR play countering the blitz was very effective. I don't believe I have seen that from us yet.





Note that one game and a couple of observations are not complete, nor necessarily indicative of extended patterns.
I will be interested to see more analysis from others on here.

NOTE: Subjective bloviating about softness and lack of player intensity are not in keeping with the intent of this thread and will be summarily deleted.

We have run this same WR screen multiple times. I believe it was either the first or 2nd drive when we tried throwing it to Granger.

I remember the screens.

I don't remember any screen setting up like that one.
The WR turns in just beyond the line of scrimmage, the QB hits him across the middle behind two OLinemen that came off their blocks and set up the blocking screen in the middle of the field.

Embarrassingly, I don't recall ODU ever running a screen like that in our history.
In any event, I like the play and I like the call to counter the blitz. That should be especially effective vs any interior blitz
with the DBs playing man way off our WRs. (like we are now seeing regularly)

We ran this on the 3rd down play on the second drive.

(09-25-2023 07:05 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  We ran this on the 3rd down play on the second drive.

So, after looking at more highlights from other games, I am here so far:

1. We must have a quarterback who is mobile, accurate, can go through his progressions quickly, keep or release within 3 seconds, even if to throw it away.
I am not sure yet about Shields' release time, but he seems to be more accurate than Wilson at this point, and less prone to forcing the ball into coverage. The jury is still out on his vertical running ability vs Wilson.

2. Wide receiver routes must be faster. It seems to me that right now our "double" routes are way too slow for quick strike football. Curiously, the Fordham long routes were simple, often with the ball in the air before the route was completed.
I believe that we have a very solid corps of WRs, between Williams, Harvey, and Murphy - with Dutton being the Bob Hayes sleeper. (see what I did there Aggie? ). And Granger and Paige as well.
I like our chances with the over-the-middle screens vs the blitz if we can execute.

3. With Wicks and Roche we can run, and the OL can run block.

4. This brings me to point #4, the offensive line. I have no doubt that these guys are playing hard, and size doesn't always matter. However, we have one of the smallest OLs in all of FBS. Based on the OurLads depth chart, we average 298.3 pounds (Stat Geek may have more up-to-date figures, but our #2s aren't really any bigger).
Fordham's OL was bigger as was TAMCs.
Marshall will bring an OL that averages 318.8, a whopping 25 pounds heavier than ours.

It will be up to whomever is the QB going forward to compensate for the size weakness in the OL.

(09-25-2023 10:01 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  So, after looking at more highlights from other games, I am here so far:

1. We must have a quarterback who is mobile, accurate, can go through his progressions quickly, keep or release within 3 seconds, even if to throw it away.
I am not sure yet about Shields' release time, but he seems to be more accurate than Wilson at this point, and less prone to forcing the ball into coverage. The jury is still out on his vertical running ability vs Wilson.

2. Wide receiver routes must be faster. It seems to me that right now our "double" routes are way too slow for quick strike football. Curiously, the Fordham long routes were simple, often with the ball in the air before the route was completed.
I believe that we have a very solid corps of WRs, between Williams, Harvey, and Murphy - with Dutton being the Bob Hayes sleeper. (see what I did there Aggie? ). And Granger and Paige as well.
I like our chances with the over-the-middle screens vs the blitz if we can execute.

3. With Wicks and Roche we can run, and the OL can run block.

4. This brings me to point #4, the offensive line. I have no doubt that these guys are playing hard, and size doesn't always matter. However, we have one of the smallest OLs in all of FBS. Based on the OurLads depth chart, we average 298.3 pounds (Stat Geek may have more up-to-date figures, but our #2s aren't really any bigger).
Fordham's OL was bigger as was TAMCs.
Marshall will bring an OL that averages 318.8, a whopping 25 pounds heavier than ours.

It will be up to whomever is the QB going forward to compensate for the size weakness in the OL.

Scary to think about our O line being that undersized compared to other teams. Seems like we have not recruited HS well or landed quality transfers that are bigger. Our program needs to improve there.

I hate the design of our offense. I really don't see much of a difference than the last couple of years with the exception of stacking the WRs (which I like). I have stated before that I don't like the RPO as a dominant factor of any offense, but that's a personal preference.

I think our problem starts with the O-line. If you don't have at least an equal advantage vs. the D-line, I believe it is difficult to simply block the guy in front of you and hope to create a hole without some sort of physical advantage. In this situation, trap blocks, sweeps with pulling lineman, etc. are necessary to keep the defense off balance. We almost never run wide.

For example, according to the box scores, here are the RB runs in the first 3 games:

Game 1 (VT):
Middle = 18 Right = 1 Left = 5

Game 2 (ULL)
Middle = 24 Right = 3 Left = 1

Game 3 (WF)
Middle = 17 Right = 1 Left = 3

Now I get that if something works, you keep doing it until it is stopped. But I also believe in an offense that uses opposites to create defensive uncertainty (run to set up the pass, pass short to set up the long pass, run middle to set up the runs wide, etc., and vice versa).

This offense does not attack all 9 zones of the defense with enough balance.

I mentioned that I like to see stacked receivers. That's because I think it puts stress on communication and reaction of the defenders to determine which one to cover. But when we split the stacks out wide, it only leaves 2 options; a run up the middle or a pass play that requires time in the pocket. We can't get a receiver crossing the middle soon enough to make a quick pass because they are too far away from the middle of the field.

It was clear by halftime of the VT game that we struggle with pass protection. But there is little that I see that has changed to offset this through 4 games. Maybe there were mistakes made in the first two games that they hoped can be cleaned up, but here we are after 4 games and still no improvement.

3 years, 3 different OCs, same HC. I'm beginning to believe that our offensive design is the way Rahne wants it. But I don't believe that this design is the best for a team that does not have an advantage in personnel.

Well, last year's offense was nothing like this one. In fact last year's offense was at best incomplete. It appeared to be kind of like the Auburn offense of a few years ago, sort of, maybe.

On our running plays, we ran what set up like a naked bootleg option, but it wasn't, because the QB never kept the ball. Instead, it was just an inside zone handoff. I love the naked bootleg option because there are so many options. The QB can handoff, usually an inside zone run, The QB can keep and run, the QB can keep and pass, or a RB can come behind the QB rollout for what amounts to the triple option.
However, in our version, we ALWAYS made the inside zone handoff.
What's worse, a prime requirement of that offense is a mobile QB. HW was not a mobile QB. Our passing plays were usually straight drop back.
In both cases the defense knew exactly what we were going to do.

This year's offense is an Air Raid Spread RPO. Usually 4 WRs split wide and often stacked, not so different from the Spread of TH/BW except that we will run more, usually inside zone, but off tackle is an option.
We have the RBs, and we seem to have the WRs.

I believe we are just a few tweaks from making it work. Our OL is small but can run block.
IMHO we just need to simplify the pass routes, and have the QB position react faster than it has so far.
If the QB can go through his progressions faster, make his decisions faster (release faster on a pass), the pass blocking will not seem like such a weakness.

I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

Nailed it!
I often have screamed out loud "hike the damn ball!!!" as the defense was scrambling to get set.

(09-26-2023 08:36 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

Nailed it!
I often have screamed out loud "hike the damn ball!!!" as the defense was scrambling to get set.

There was at least one opportunity Saturday where we could have gotten a free play because defense had 12 men on field, but we were so slow to snap after the first down that they were able to get off the field. Agree, need to get those plays in faster.

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

We have done this a number of times this year. I believe 2 of Duttons TDs were plays were we rushed to the line of scrimmage and ran a play. We also did it a lot vs. Louisiana when they had a mismatch in personnel and we gutted them on 3 straight plays before they called timeout.

OTOH, I have no idea what this boards infatuation with outside run plays is. I know everyone likes them in Madden.

(09-26-2023 08:36 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

Nailed it!
I often have screamed out loud "hike the damn ball!!!" as the defense was scrambling to get set.

Truth to the gods of football.

(09-26-2023 09:41 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

We have done this a number of times this year. I believe 2 of Duttons TDs were plays were we rushed to the line of scrimmage and ran a play. We also did it a lot vs. Louisiana when they had a mismatch in personnel and we gutted them on 3 straight plays before they called timeout.

OTOH, I have no idea what this boards infatuation with outside run plays is. I know everyone likes them in Madden.

Agree - but it seemed to fall dramatically against WF and last Saturday. They appear confused at times getting the play in and set up. Needs to go faster.

(09-26-2023 10:26 AM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 09:41 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

We have done this a number of times this year. I believe 2 of Duttons TDs were plays were we rushed to the line of scrimmage and ran a play. We also did it a lot vs. Louisiana when they had a mismatch in personnel and we gutted them on 3 straight plays before they called timeout.

OTOH, I have no idea what this boards infatuation with outside run plays is. I know everyone likes them in Madden.

Agree - but it seemed to fall dramatically against WF and last Saturday. They appear confused at times getting the play in and set up. Needs to go faster.

I think there have been times where there has been confusion but I think the primary motivation is just to vary tempo fast and slow. And then catch them off guard.

Not saying there werent times to speed it up, there likely were, but its not going to be fast all the time. Part of the issue if you go fast too often in not knowing what alignment the defense is in and not being able to recognize where blitzes may come from. The OL has to make checks on every single play based on the defensive alingment. "OMAHA!"

(09-26-2023 10:32 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 10:26 AM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 09:41 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

We have done this a number of times this year. I believe 2 of Duttons TDs were plays were we rushed to the line of scrimmage and ran a play. We also did it a lot vs. Louisiana when they had a mismatch in personnel and we gutted them on 3 straight plays before they called timeout.

OTOH, I have no idea what this boards infatuation with outside run plays is. I know everyone likes them in Madden.

Agree - but it seemed to fall dramatically against WF and last Saturday. They appear confused at times getting the play in and set up. Needs to go faster.

I think there have been times where there has been confusion but I think the primary motivation is just to vary tempo fast and slow. And then catch them off guard.

Not saying there werent times to speed it up, there likely were, but its not going to be fast all the time. Part of the issue if you go fast too often in not knowing what alignment the defense is in and not being able to recognize where blitzes may come from. The OL has to make checks on every single play based on the defensive alingment. "OMAHA!"

That is waiting to long for the defense to tell ya what you need to do after a bang bang play. Its not going to matter what alignment the defensive line is in when their hands are on their hips and the secondary is scrabbling to tell each other who they got cover. Strike them when their winded, as soon as the ball is set.

(09-26-2023 09:41 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

We have done this a number of times this year. I believe 2 of Duttons TDs were plays were we rushed to the line of scrimmage and ran a play. We also did it a lot vs. Louisiana when they had a mismatch in personnel and we gutted them on 3 straight plays before they called timeout.

OTOH, I have no idea what this boards infatuation with outside run plays is. I know everyone likes them in Madden.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I believe playcalling is about opposites, Ying/Yang, whatever. A quick pitch or a sweep would require the LBs to move laterally and the DBs to come up to defend. Running a fake off of a sweep or pitch motion may cause the DBs to lose a WR deep or open something over the middle if the LBs get out of position. It can also slow the rush off the edge. Running outside also gives the defense something to think about when wanting to blitz MLBs. I just think that we are too heavily weighted up the middle.

(09-26-2023 03:01 PM)The Flagship Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 09:41 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:28 AM)AimHigher Wrote:  I'd like to see us have an automatic/ hurry up play ready after a first down conversion with no substitutions. Catch the defense out of position. Many times this year we have shown a hurry up after a big play and the defense is scrabbling to get in position and by the time we get our play from the sidelines its no advantage for us. I understand we play what the defense gives us in this system but dayum it would be nice to catch them scrabbling to cover our guys on a bang bang play.

We have done this a number of times this year. I believe 2 of Duttons TDs were plays were we rushed to the line of scrimmage and ran a play. We also did it a lot vs. Louisiana when they had a mismatch in personnel and we gutted them on 3 straight plays before they called timeout.

OTOH, I have no idea what this boards infatuation with outside run plays is. I know everyone likes them in Madden.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I believe playcalling is about opposites, Ying/Yang, whatever. A quick pitch or a sweep would require the LBs to move laterally and the DBs to come up to defend. Running a fake off of a sweep or pitch motion may cause the DBs to lose a WR deep or open something over the middle if the LBs get out of position. It can also slow the rush off the edge. Running outside also gives the defense something to think about when wanting to blitz MLBs. I just think that we are too heavily weighted up the middle.

obviously, different coaches have different views on what systems to run. Having said that, I do like this system and it certainly comes with less outside run options bc of the alignment of the WRs and often times the lack of a TE. We have run a few outside run plays to varying degress of success, but I don't see it as a staple.

Its actually really simple and I expect that we will see more success as the WRs and QB adjust to a different way of playing that they've been taught. We have been very successful on the ground this season. I think if we can do a little bit better threatening the pass, it will open up more run opportunities, and they don't have be to creative runs bc they are 5 OL vs. 5 or 6 defenders in the box.

Here is a great article that explains the offense

https://theathletic.com/3756306/2022/11/...e-georgia/

We have talked about Grant Wilson being the heir-apparent to the starting QB job at Fordham had he stayed.
However, after Decker came here in December, Fordham got, in January, a high school 3 star transfer from New Mexico (Mountain West) who is lighting it up.

CJ Montes so far this season is passing at 63.7% for 1,785 yards and 17 touchdowns against NO interceptions!

I am not sure Grant would have been starting at Fordham this season.