Value in being different?

cbingham · Post by **cbingham** » April 15th, 2021, 4:00 pm

In seeing teams across the country move to modified spread RPO offenses we're seeing a premium put on smaller quicker receivers and OLs that can move to block outside zone on the offensive side of the ball. On defensive side we're all stuck recruiting smaller and quicker LBs and Safeties to match.

In thinking about fashioning an offense I wonder if a tier 2/3 program like USU would be better to run a very different offense. This would allow us to get outside the blast radius of tier 1 programs recruiting the same skill sets that we are and would give us a potential benefit as more defenses go base nickel with undersized players at the 2nd level and at safety. What would happen if USU went for a BYU-like line -- super big and only have to get 3 yards up field per play... mixed in more 12 or 21 offensive sets and really owned an inside zone power blocking scheme. The run then opens up play action. Am I dreaming?

USUaggie · Post by **USUaggie** » April 15th, 2021, 5:58 pm

I've had similar thoughts. Air Force is an example of getting more out of lesser ranked recruits on offence partly at least since their system is different and opponents base defences can't defend it. We have to put in a practice time in fall camp just on defending Air Force.

USU78 · Post by **USU78** » April 15th, 2021, 9:42 pm

cbingham wrote: ↑
April 15th, 2021, 4:00 pm
In seeing teams across the country move to modified spread RPO offenses we're seeing a premium put on smaller quicker receivers and OLs that can move to block outside zone on the offensive side of the ball. On defensive side we're all stuck recruiting smaller and quicker LBs and Safeties to match.

In thinking about fashioning an offense I wonder if a tier 2/3 program like USU would be better to run a very different offense. This would allow us to get outside the blast radius of tier 1 programs recruiting the same skill sets that we are and would give us a potential benefit as more defenses go base nickel with undersized players at the 2nd level and at safety. What would happen if USU went for a BYU-like line -- super big and only have to get 3 yards up field per play... mixed in more 12 or 21 offensive sets and really owned an inside zone power blocking scheme. The run then opens up play action. Am I dreaming?

Love your thinking

El Sapo · Post by **El Sapo** » April 16th, 2021, 12:31 pm

cbingham wrote: ↑
April 15th, 2021, 4:00 pm
In seeing teams across the country move to modified spread RPO offenses we're seeing a premium put on smaller quicker receivers and OLs that can move to block outside zone on the offensive side of the ball. On defensive side we're all stuck recruiting smaller and quicker LBs and Safeties to match.

In thinking about fashioning an offense I wonder if a tier 2/3 program like USU would be better to run a very different offense. This would allow us to get outside the blast radius of tier 1 programs recruiting the same skill sets that we are and would give us a potential benefit as more defenses go base nickel with undersized players at the 2nd level and at safety. What would happen if USU went for a BYU-like line -- super big and only have to get 3 yards up field per play... mixed in more 12 or 21 offensive sets and really owned an inside zone power blocking scheme. The run then opens up play action. Am I dreaming?

Yes you are dreaming. It's a good dream

But in reality, winning is not as simple as a scheme. We don't want just big guys, we want players who can win their matchups. I have hope for our future because Anderson brought in a couple of big guys (transfers) to compete for positions on our OL and DL. He see's our weakness (just like you have) and he's trying to fix it.

You win games with dominant line play. Boise had a dominant OL. SJSU had the best DL. They played for the championship.

LKGates · Post by **LKGates** » April 17th, 2021, 12:36 am

cbingham wrote: ↑
April 15th, 2021, 4:00 pm
In seeing teams across the country move to modified spread RPO offenses we're seeing a premium put on smaller quicker receivers and OLs that can move to block outside zone on the offensive side of the ball. On defensive side we're all stuck recruiting smaller and quicker LBs and Safeties to match.

In thinking about fashioning an offense I wonder if a tier 2/3 program like USU would be better to run a very different offense. This would allow us to get outside the blast radius of tier 1 programs recruiting the same skill sets that we are and would give us a potential benefit as more defenses go base nickel with undersized players at the 2nd level and at safety. What would happen if USU went for a BYU-like line -- super big and only have to get 3 yards up field per play... mixed in more 12 or 21 offensive sets and really owned an inside zone power blocking scheme. The run then opens up play action. Am I dreaming?

This is essentially the mirror image of what LaVell, and Norm Chow did at BYU. At the time, everyone, EVERYONE was running the wishbone. Consequently, that was what everyone was used to defending. BYU was an anomaly. No one new how to defend against them, and even if they did, that defensive approach was worthless in their other 11 games. People forget, but they won a lot of games by narrow margins. The advantage on offense was just slightly greater than their disadvantage (less talented players) on defense.

You can win games being the anomaly, and recruiting talented players that don't fit anyone else's scheme, but you have to be significantly ahead of the curve. It takes a lot of guts to be out there, totally exposed. For a timid coach, it's easier to do what everyone else is doing, and blame your failures on the inability to recruit four star players to a second or third tier school.

AggieFBObsession · Post by **AggieFBObsession** » April 18th, 2021, 3:10 pm

El Sapo wrote: ↑
April 16th, 2021, 12:31 pm

cbingham wrote: ↑
April 15th, 2021, 4:00 pm
In seeing teams across the country move to modified spread RPO offenses we're seeing a premium put on smaller quicker receivers and OLs that can move to block outside zone on the offensive side of the ball. On defensive side we're all stuck recruiting smaller and quicker LBs and Safeties to match.

In thinking about fashioning an offense I wonder if a tier 2/3 program like USU would be better to run a very different offense. This would allow us to get outside the blast radius of tier 1 programs recruiting the same skill sets that we are and would give us a potential benefit as more defenses go base nickel with undersized players at the 2nd level and at safety. What would happen if USU went for a BYU-like line -- super big and only have to get 3 yards up field per play... mixed in more 12 or 21 offensive sets and really owned an inside zone power blocking scheme. The run then opens up play action. Am I dreaming?
Yes you are dreaming. It's a good dream But in reality, winning is not as simple as a scheme. We don't want just big guys, we want players who can win their matchups. I have hope for our future because Anderson brought in a couple of big guys (transfers) to compete for positions on our OL and DL. He see's our weakness (just like you have) and he's trying to fix it.

You win games with dominant line play. Boise had a dominant OL. SJSU had the best DL. They played for the championship.

Sapo, your understanding of the game of football is spot on. You have to be able to recruit talent just about everywhere on the field that can win matchups consistently and then have 2 deep players that can come in and compete and make the starters feel that their starting role is at risk. The Aggies have the coaching staff in place to make this happen, but this is not a 1-year rebuild. It will take 2-3 years. We're off to a good start!

Upcoming Events

Event Results