blackbug
Freshman
Posts: 589
Member is Online
|
Post by blackbug on Oct 27, 2016 8:10:59 GMT -8
THAT IS NOT WHAT GARY ANDERSEN SAID... Coach Andersen was on 1080 The Fan yesterday talking about all sorts of different things. It was the hosts who brought up the air raid and originally made a comment about how the Beavers could potentially move in the direction of an air raid offense... AS A JOKE. Then towards the end of the interview, again the hosts brought it up, and Coach Andersen said that they will be looking to do more of that sort of thing in the future... for a number if reasons. But he wasn't talking about changing the offense at all... just focusing a bit more on having a good passing game. But early on in the interview he also said that his offenses will always need to run the ball... run the ball a lot... and run the ball very well. Andersen's comments about the air raid offense were more of a complement towards the teams that are currently using it. And IMO, he was probably saying that so some recruits could hear it... receivers and quarterbacks who may have reservations about coming to a Beaver program that appears to be a run first, run heavy offense, when in reality we've only been doing that the past couple of seasons because of the fact we haven't been able to pass with any consistency due to numerous dropped balls and QB's who struggle to get the ball to receivers in the first place. As long as Gary Andersen is the coach, we will always run the ball a lot... but he wants to have a truly balanced offense. Much like Rileys philosophy... we want to run to open up the pass. But we need a significant upgrade in talent at WR and QB before that can happen. Thanks for bringing sanity to this thread.
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Oct 27, 2016 8:11:21 GMT -8
Most importantly, what in the world is gorilla dust?
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Oct 27, 2016 8:22:08 GMT -8
Yeah, he definitely said "in the future," but towards the end of the interview, he did say that running that offense would give us a "niche" in recruiting, and that we need to get back to recruiting "elite" wide receivers. Certainly sounded like something we are going to move towards in the future. I find that amusing, because really only one of our WRs (Cooks) was what anyone would consider an elite recruit. The rest developed into great WRs. Wheaton went from 8 catches as a freshman to 55 as a sophomore to 73 as a JR to 91 as a senior. Stroughter had no catches as a freshman, 5 as a sophomore, 74 as a junior, and 70 again as a senior. Cooks is about the only WR I can remember who was legit from the day he walked onto campus. (Housh and Ocho excepted).
And really, how much of a niche is it? It's not like Washington State is winning with incredible recruits. Luke Falk was a walk on. Washington State's recruiting classes the past four years have been 11th, 9th, 8th, and 11th in the Pac-12. Cal has been between 6th and 9th in that same time frame.
It seems too early in the game for this to be the case, but I wonder if the VFC expansion isn't having the anticipated effect they thought it would on recruiting. Maybe there is a realization that we can't recruit the kind of athletes we need to be successful in the system we're currently running, so we're looking at a school like Washington State, which has some of the same recruiting challenges we do (maybe to an even greater extent) and saying "maybe we need to be more like them to compete."
All of this to say that obviously the offense we have now isn't ideal, so any change should be welcome. I'm not sure any change can be fully implemented until we have a QB that can deliver the ball quickly and accurately though.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Oct 27, 2016 8:29:18 GMT -8
Stats are stats. Under Riley Mannion tossed the rock 40 times a game. That's about as close to an air raid as you can get at OSU under Riley since you are snapping the ball with less than 5 seconds on the play clock all game long. On the Flip Side, Moore, Katz and Canfield were closer to 30. DA was at 40 as well. Average plays per game for OSU the past 4 seasons: 2013: 75.3 2014: 70.7 2015: 65.8 2016: 68.0 We're not going any faster with Andersen than we did with Riley. You can say "well obviously we're running fewer plays because our offense isn't moving the ball and the D is out there more" but when you give up as many points as we have the past few seasons, your offense is getting the ball back pretty quickly. This offense isn't the Oregon "snap it as fast as possible while running the exact same play every time" style. It's more "get to the line quickly, then evaluate matchups and make a call."
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Oct 27, 2016 9:08:33 GMT -8
Stats are stats. Under Riley Mannion tossed the rock 40 times a game. That's about as close to an air raid as you can get at OSU under Riley since you are snapping the ball with less than 5 seconds on the play clock all game long. On the Flip Side, Moore, Katz and Canfield were closer to 30. DA was at 40 as well. Average plays per game for OSU the past 4 seasons: 2013: 75.3 2014: 70.7 2015: 65.8 2016: 68.0 We're not going any faster with Andersen than we did with Riley. You can say "well obviously we're running fewer plays because our offense isn't moving the ball and the D is out there more" but when you give up as many points as we have the past few seasons, your offense is getting the ball back pretty quickly. This offense isn't the Oregon "snap it as fast as possible while running the exact same play every time" style. It's more "get to the line quickly, then evaluate matchups and make a call." For the most part true. But ultimately it is because we aren't moving the ball. Riley's offense was prolific at moving the ball down field and getting first downs, even if quite often it bogged down in the redzone. This team is mostly prolific at 3 and out. And OS does implement tempo on ocassion, which was very rare under Riley. I'm not certain, but I'm guessing more often than not this offense snaps the ball with more than 10 seconds on the play clock. Riley's rarely did, by design.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Oct 27, 2016 9:38:45 GMT -8
I posted this on another thread about Riley in the Red Zone:
"We're currently converting 90% of our red zone chances into points. Problem is, we're on pace for 34 red zone opportunities this season. Last year, we had 31 (converted 83.87%) into scores. from 2008 to 2014, we averaged 54 red zone attempts. We converted 84.25% of those attempts into scores.
In looking at Coach Andersen's run at Utah State, they never had more than 51 red zone opportunities, and they converted 85.1% of those chances into points."
As for "bogging down," our TD % of RZ opportunities by year: 2016 - 65.00% (20 RZ attempts, on pace for 34, 2-5 record) 2015 - 61.29% (31 RZ attempts, 2-10 record) 2014 - 50.94% (53 RZ attempts, 5-7 record) 2013 - 63.24% (68 RZ attempts, 7-6 record) 2012 - 70.69% (58 RZ attempts, 9-4 record) 2011 - 48.89% (45 RZ attempts, 3-9 record) 2010 - 67.50% (40 RZ attempts, 5-7 record) 2009 - 73.21% (56 RZ attempts, 8-5 record) 2008 - 60.66% (61 RZ attempts, 9-4 record)
I don't think you can make a blanket statement that Riley's offense "bogged down" in the red zone. There were years where it was bad (2011 and 2014), but there were also years where we made the most of our opportunities (2009, 2012)
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Oct 27, 2016 10:06:09 GMT -8
I posted this on another thread about Riley in the Red Zone: "We're currently converting 90% of our red zone chances into points. Problem is, we're on pace for 34 red zone opportunities this season. Last year, we had 31 (converted 83.87%) into scores. from 2008 to 2014, we averaged 54 red zone attempts. We converted 84.25% of those attempts into scores. In looking at Coach Andersen's run at Utah State, they never had more than 51 red zone opportunities, and they converted 85.1% of those chances into points." As for "bogging down," our TD % of RZ opportunities by year: 2016 - 65.00% (20 RZ attempts, on pace for 34, 2-5 record) 2015 - 61.29% (31 RZ attempts, 2-10 record) 2014 - 50.94% (53 RZ attempts, 5-7 record) 2013 - 63.24% (68 RZ attempts, 7-6 record) 2012 - 70.69% (58 RZ attempts, 9-4 record) 2011 - 48.89% (45 RZ attempts, 3-9 record) 2010 - 67.50% (40 RZ attempts, 5-7 record) 2009 - 73.21% (56 RZ attempts, 8-5 record) 2008 - 60.66% (61 RZ attempts, 9-4 record) I don't think you can make a blanket statement that Riley's offense "bogged down" in the red zone. There were years where it was bad (2011 and 2014), but there were also years where we made the most of our opportunities (2009, 2012) OS was 86th and 87th in red zone efficiency during 2013 and 2014. I'm guessing worse in 2011. 3 out of Riley's last 4 years at the bottom 3rd of the NCAA? I'd call that bogging down in the red zone. I'm certainly not taking a shot at Riley's offensive system, I'm just being objective. Much of that had to do with virtually no running game to speak of, and pretty bad O-line play.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2016 10:16:26 GMT -8
Yeah, he definitely said "in the future," but towards the end of the interview, he did say that running that offense would give us a "niche" in recruiting, and that we need to get back to recruiting "elite" wide receivers. Certainly sounded like something we are going to move towards in the future. You heard what i heard. And yes that sounds exactly like wanting to change to a throwing offense. All of this to say that obviously the offense we have now isn't ideal, so any change should be welcome. I'm not sure any change can be fully implemented until we have a QB that can deliver the ball quickly and accurately though. Agreed. You need a slinger and you need to throw and catch in practice a ton. Which, to some extent comes at the expense of receivers practicing run blocking for the running game (Which Beaver receivers have done a nice job of this year).
GA is going to get it down by hook, crook, or shank. No he isn't tied to any offense, has no ego in that game. He's a defensive coach and so far the defense has played better this year. Get some offense and this thing will start to take off again. But of course some people are happier being unhappy and want to complain:-)
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Oct 27, 2016 10:20:57 GMT -8
All I'm saying is that in three of Riley's final six seasons, we scored TDs at a higher rate than we are this season or did last season. We're currently 28th in the nation in RZ% (which is good), but our TD % is no better or worse than it has been for the better part of a decade.
|
|
|
Post by jefframp on Oct 27, 2016 10:28:23 GMT -8
So, Mike Riley's offense of the last few years here? Mannion tossed the ball a lot. RUN THE DAMN BALL!!! Thanks Giles/Glove. lol
|
|
|
Post by Bill79 on Oct 27, 2016 10:58:10 GMT -8
THAT IS NOT WHAT GARY ANDERSEN SAID... Coach Andersen was on 1080 The Fan yesterday talking about... But he wasn't talking about changing the offense at all... just focusing a bit more on having a good passing game. But early on in the interview he also said that his offenses will always need to run the ball... run the ball a lot... and run the ball very well. Correct. He didn't say he was going to change to a predominately passing offense.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Oct 27, 2016 10:59:47 GMT -8
I posted this on another thread about Riley in the Red Zone: "We're currently converting 90% of our red zone chances into points. Problem is, we're on pace for 34 red zone opportunities this season. Last year, we had 31 (converted 83.87%) into scores. from 2008 to 2014, we averaged 54 red zone attempts. We converted 84.25% of those attempts into scores. In looking at Coach Andersen's run at Utah State, they never had more than 51 red zone opportunities, and they converted 85.1% of those chances into points." As for "bogging down," our TD % of RZ opportunities by year: 2016 - 65.00% (20 RZ attempts, on pace for 34, 2-5 record) 2015 - 61.29% (31 RZ attempts, 2-10 record) 2014 - 50.94% (53 RZ attempts, 5-7 record) 2013 - 63.24% (68 RZ attempts, 7-6 record) 2012 - 70.69% (58 RZ attempts, 9-4 record) 2011 - 48.89% (45 RZ attempts, 3-9 record) 2010 - 67.50% (40 RZ attempts, 5-7 record) 2009 - 73.21% (56 RZ attempts, 8-5 record) 2008 - 60.66% (61 RZ attempts, 9-4 record) I don't think you can make a blanket statement that Riley's offense "bogged down" in the red zone. There were years where it was bad (2011 and 2014), but there were also years where we made the most of our opportunities (2009, 2012) OS was 86th and 87th in red zone efficiency during 2013 and 2014. I'm guessing worse in 2011. 3 out of Riley's last 4 years at the bottom 3rd of the NCAA? I'd call that bogging down in the red zone. I'm certainly not taking a shot at Riley's offensive system, I'm just being objective. Much of that had to do with virtually no running game to speak of, and pretty bad O-line play. Riley's offense bogged down in the redzone because the vertical threat was diminished and we did not have a threatening running game in 2013 and 2014. We did in 2012, and we did in most years from 2004-2010 with Riley. We have spoken of this before, but the hallmark of the pro offense is the route tree. not just the literal thing of what it is, but what that means in context of a pro offense. Riley ran clear out routes, crossing routes, deep TE out and seam routes. complex multi-route packages that was proflic at moving the ball because Riley opted to stretch defenses vertically. We did a lot of damage with intermediate passing built on something happening over top and underneath that opened holes for our slot guy and TE to settle into. But, when you hit the 20, your vertical game is limited by the end line. There is less space to use multiple patterns to get an open guy. So it became a game of one on one matchups that favored defense, and no threat to run, so more people could cover less space. Andersen has decent TD% numbers at Utah State and improving here because he is establishing the running game as more of a threat. If you can man up and power your way to 4 yards on the 50, you can do it on the 20. the endline doesn't provide advantage to the defense. One thing that should be noted, a high of 51 RZ trips? The home run ball was a big component of Andersen's game plan.
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Oct 27, 2016 11:16:18 GMT -8
RIP @gilesb Went down in flames here, the only person ever to be banned for going sideways about the Dutch Bros. ad.
|
|
|
Post by nforkbeav on Oct 27, 2016 11:40:31 GMT -8
I posted this on another thread about Riley in the Red Zone: "We're currently converting 90% of our red zone chances into points. Problem is, we're on pace for 34 red zone opportunities this season. Last year, we had 31 (converted 83.87%) into scores. from 2008 to 2014, we averaged 54 red zone attempts. We converted 84.25% of those attempts into scores. In looking at Coach Andersen's run at Utah State, they never had more than 51 red zone opportunities, and they converted 85.1% of those chances into points." As for "bogging down," our TD % of RZ opportunities by year: 2016 - 65.00% (20 RZ attempts, on pace for 34, 2-5 record) 2015 - 61.29% (31 RZ attempts, 2-10 record) 2014 - 50.94% (53 RZ attempts, 5-7 record) 2013 - 63.24% (68 RZ attempts, 7-6 record) 2012 - 70.69% (58 RZ attempts, 9-4 record) 2011 - 48.89% (45 RZ attempts, 3-9 record) 2010 - 67.50% (40 RZ attempts, 5-7 record) 2009 - 73.21% (56 RZ attempts, 8-5 record) 2008 - 60.66% (61 RZ attempts, 9-4 record) I don't think you can make a blanket statement that Riley's offense "bogged down" in the red zone. There were years where it was bad (2011 and 2014), but there were also years where we made the most of our opportunities (2009, 2012) OS was 86th and 87th in red zone efficiency during 2013 and 2014. I'm guessing worse in 2011. 3 out of Riley's last 4 years at the bottom 3rd of the NCAA? I'd call that bogging down in the red zone. I'm certainly not taking a shot at Riley's offensive system, I'm just being objective. Much of that had to do with virtually no running game to speak of, and pretty bad O-line play. Objective means looking at the whole puzzle, not just one piece. In 2013 we made the redzone 68 times and converted 54 for 79%. You're suggesting it's better(and objective) to have an 83% conversion rate, but fail to include that's based on only making the redzone 31 times and converting 26? LOL 54 > 26 More than double the conversions in fact, so who cares about the percentage. By your logic we can objectively say in comparison to Riley's offense, GA's offense "bogs down" before it ever reaches the redzone and that would be actually very accurate.
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Oct 27, 2016 12:24:47 GMT -8
OS was 86th and 87th in red zone efficiency during 2013 and 2014. I'm guessing worse in 2011. 3 out of Riley's last 4 years at the bottom 3rd of the NCAA? I'd call that bogging down in the red zone. I'm certainly not taking a shot at Riley's offensive system, I'm just being objective. Much of that had to do with virtually no running game to speak of, and pretty bad O-line play. Objective means looking at the whole puzzle, not just one piece. In 2013 we made the redzone 68 times and converted 54 for 79%. You're suggesting it's better(and objective) to have an 83% conversion rate, but fail to include that's based on only making the redzone 31 times and converting 26? LOL 54 > 26 More than double the conversions in fact, so who cares about the percentage. By your logic we can objectively say in comparison to Riley's offense, GA's offense "bogs down" before it ever reaches the redzone and that would be actually very accurate. LOL...we are talking about two mutually exclusive topics. I am not in any way comparing Riley's red zone success to Anderson's red zone success. In fact, you are basically reinforcing my original point, so you might want to read through the thread to get an idea what we are even talking about. I asserted (and Atown emphasized) Riley's offense was prolific at extending drives and moving the chains, which is why OS averaged more plays per game with Riley than they are up to now under CGA. I mentioned, offhandedly that OS's offense was getting bogged down in the red zone, and that was specifically relating to the end of Riley's tenure. It really had nothing to do with the topic or the point I was making, which is Riley's offense was far and away better than CGAs offense the past two years and that's why OS ran more plays per game. However, someone made it a topic, and as such, I was only only relating it to Riley's offense his last four years here. So again, objectively speaking, red zone efficiency was not a bright spot toward the latter years of Riley's tenure. For all the reasons mentions.
|
|