We lead the SEC in Rushing Offense

#28
#28
rjd970 said:
IF and it is a big IF - we can hit some deep shots and force Bama to respect the pass we should see light boxes and our running game should eat all afternoon.

However, if we can't get the passing game going it's going to be a tough afternoon. We barely skated by UF without a passing attack and they are awful. I don't see us beating Bama trying to do what we did against UF.
Click to expand...
How much better is South Carolina (the tram Bama barely skated by) than Florida? Are they better? Probably not much of any would be my assessment
 
#29
#29
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Alabama is likely to do exactly what FL did, only better.

Load the box and dare us to throw before they get to the QB or hurry him into running or bad throws. Bama has a stronger secondary and a stronger D Line than FL and that worked pretty well for FL to keep our offense from really opening it up.

Can we beat Bama with a decent run game, sputtering passing game, and great defense? Maybe. Hopefully, even, but the evidence is on film about our O Line and Wommack and DeBoer aren't going to miss that.
Click to expand...
Bama's pass D is statistically worse than Florida's. They have been a major question mark.

The Florida game is so frustrating because the short throws could have really helped there against that loaded front. Just need a few quick release plays.
 
#34
#34
Tenacjim said:
www.secsports.com

2024 SEC Football Stats - Southeastern Conference

Comprehensive coverage of SEC football, basketball, baseball and more, including live games, scores, schedules, standings and news
www.secsports.com www.secsports.com

There’s a pdf that sorts them all by category and “all games” vs “conference games”.

The individual per game rushing stats I just pulled from here:

2024 Football Schedule - University of Tennessee Athletics

The official 2024 Football schedule for the University of Tennessee Volunteers
utsports.com utsports.com

Each game has a box score link.
Click to expand...
The SEC only data is really interesting. If I am understanding this correctly, we are the 2nd best rushing defense in conference play so far, while Bama is the 4th worst in rushing offense. They do have more rushing TDs though.

Alabama also has the 2nd worst pass D in conference play. Unfortunately our passing attack is ranked right with Kentucky and Oklahoma, which is miserable company to be associated with in that category. A movable object vs a stoppable force for sure.

Also unfortunately for us their passing game is near the top in most categories. They will get chunk plays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tenacjim
#35
#35
Nico ee-ah-MAH-LAY-ah-va said:
Bama's pass D is statistically worse than Florida's. They have been a major question mark.

The Florida game is so frustrating because the short throws could have really helped there against that loaded front. Just need a few quick release plays.
Click to expand...
Some of those were there and open, I think, but they were the second or third read which is difficult to reach when you've got 2 or 3 guys in your face or closing on you.

I'd suggest taking those short routes early in the game as priorities instead of Heupel's usual and exciting habit of trying to jump on them early with big pass plays. But Heupel appears to Heupel and either run the counters and take shots or run the step back screens. He's just not a dink and drabs guy, as a rule, with his normal passing game down the field.

The offense is inefficient. Breakdowns occur in various areas at various times and that's very hard to pinpoint to correct, I think.
 
#36
#36
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Some of those were there and open, I think, but they were the second or third read which is difficult to reach when you've got 2 or 3 guys in your face or closing on you.

I'd suggest taking those short routes early in the game as priorities instead of Heupel's usual and exciting habit of trying to jump on them early with big pass plays. But Heupel appears to Heupel and either run the counters and take shots or run the step back screens. He's just not a dink and drabs guy, as a rule, with his normal passing game down the field.

The offense is inefficient. Breakdowns occur in various areas at various times and that's very hard to pinpoint to correct, I think.
Click to expand...
Man I would be pleased with dinks and dunks at this point. If our D is really good, then why not just dink, dunk, run, and play a little ball control?

I agree with you; invert the route tree and get our WRs the ball early rather than late. Let Bru (if he can catch a ball with taped fingers) truck somebody. Let Mathews make a play. Get Brazzel going on a crossing route again. Just get some routes that are open in 2 seconds instead of 4 or 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and SayUWantAreVOLution
#37
#37
GVF said:
One dimensional is a RB that doesn't know how to collect yardage. Sampson is the type of player that asks for it to fall on him and he delivers.
Click to expand...
No, being one Dimensional as an offense is only being able to run the football or pass the football and not being able to do both. Right now we cant pass the football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeTrain
#38
#38
Nico ee-ah-MAH-LAY-ah-va said:
Man I would be pleased with dinks and dunks at this point. If our D is really good, then why not just dink, dunk, run, and play a little ball control?

I agree with you; invert the route tree and get our WRs the ball early rather than late. Let Bru (if he can catch a ball with taped fingers) truck somebody. Let Mathews make a play. Get Brazzel going on a crossing route again. Just get some routes that are open in 2 seconds instead of 4 or 5.
Click to expand...
Heupel has yet to do anything like that for more than a few plays. He always reverts back to the "vanilla playbook" we saw in the Milton era a lot.

We're winning, mostly, but it certainly feels like we're putting extreme pressure on our D every week.

I'm concerned Heupel simply doesn't have a "Plan B" beyond what we've seen and I'm not convinced his current "Plan B" play calls and our execution can pull us up to the next level.
 
#39
#39
DGAVOL said:
Are we really one dimensional if we run the ball and play defense at an elite level? Michigan won a National Championship last year doing exactly that. Yes, we need to mix in other looks but play to your strengths
Click to expand...
Michigan also cheated the whole year and knew everyone’s plays. One dimensional teams aren’t beating the likes of Bama and UGA. We can’t even pass for 200 yards.
 
#41
#41
Nico ee-ah-MAH-LAY-ah-va said:
The SEC only data is really interesting. If I am understanding this correctly, we are the 2nd best rushing defense in conference play so far, while Bama is the 4th worst in rushing offense. They do have more rushing TDs though.

Alabama also has the 2nd worst pass D in conference play. Unfortunately our passing attack is ranked right with Kentucky and Oklahoma, which is miserable company to be associated with in that category. A movable object vs a stoppable force for sure.

Also unfortunately for us their passing game is near the top in most categories. They will get chunk plays.
Click to expand...
I would agree with your assessment sir!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nico ee-ah-MAH-LAY-ah-va
#42
#42
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Heupel has yet to do anything like that for more than a few plays. He always reverts back to the "vanilla playbook" we saw in the Milton era a lot.

We're winning, mostly, but it certainly feels like we're putting extreme pressure on our D every week.

I'm concerned Heupel simply doesn't have a "Plan B" beyond what we've seen and I'm not convinced his current "Plan B" play calls and our execution can pull us up to the next level.
Click to expand...
To me it’s a question of emphasis. Heupel wants a read-based offense that allows his QB to throw at favorable matchups and run into light boxes—two ways of getting playmakers in space—while playing really fast.

To get those reads at that speed, you need spacing. Running faster-developing routes requires more condensed spacing, which then allows defenses to play more compactly… which in turn makes the reads more complex and harder to process as defenses disguise coverage and pressures. Rinse and repeat and now you just have a pro-style offense.

I think UT will ride or die with Heupel’s system, though the addition of 12 personnel is a nice wrinkle. I’d think speed option would be a challenge for defenses, too, especially if it allows the tackles to down block and lets the QB read the end man on the line of scrimmage. But UT has to be able to make teams pay for being too light against the run or leaving DBs on islands in the passing game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SayUWantAreVOLution, Nico ee-ah-MAH-LAY-ah-va and sami
#44
#44
aRmo said:
Unfortunately we are one demensional
Click to expand...

Nico missed 4-5 open looks that if he even completes 2-3 of them the Florida game is a two-score win and that statement is blatantly false. WR's were creating separation, Nico just missed some throws that he's already proven he can make. It's going to click for him at some point, hopefully this week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dadof2Vols
#46
#46
sami said:
Nico missed 4-5 open looks that if he even completes 2-3 of them the Florida game is a two-score win and that statement is blatantly false. WR's were creating separation, Nico just missed some throws that he's already proven he can make. It's going to click for him at some point, hopefully this week.
Click to expand...
Sure, we can play the IF game and i understand that completely, but still doesnt change the fact that we havent completed those balls.
 
#47
#47
who calls the plays for the Vols?

execution and utilizing the QB earpiece to make a solid play call from the sideline for our Freshman QB should be a winning recipe!
 
#48
#48
Visidog said:
To me it’s a question of emphasis. Heupel wants a read-based offense that allows his QB to throw at favorable matchups and run into light boxes—two ways of getting playmakers in space—while playing really fast.

To get those reads at that speed, you need spacing. Running faster-developing routes requires more condensed spacing, which then allows defenses to play more compactly… which in turn makes the reads more complex and harder to process as defenses disguise coverage and pressures. Rinse and repeat and now you just have a pro-style offense.

I think UT will ride or die with Heupel’s system, though the addition of 12 personnel is a nice wrinkle. I’d think speed option would be a challenge for defenses, too, especially if it allows the tackles to down block and lets the QB read the end man on the line of scrimmage. But UT has to be able to make teams pay for being too light against the run or leaving DBs on islands in the passing game.
Click to expand...
Man.....there are times I wish we ran a normal offense because if you look back at the last 20 years of national championships, they ran college versions of pro stuff. I know a lot of that is Saban, but look how much he changed over his tenure. When he started at Bama is was all power run, game manager QB, slow developing play action. Then he jumped on the spread train but kept some of those concepts while introducing new wrinkles. However, his concepts were always close to what we see in the pros, but simplified enough for a college QB.

Not criticizing Heupel at all here, but he is running a scheme that is more likely to work in a bush league like the Big 12 but may or may not work in the SEC. Plus pace and space are not concepts in the NFL, meaning other schools can go open season trash talking you to recruits about how we run a gimmick offense that is too reliant on things that are not relevant to their ultimate goal of playing on Sunday.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top