Flexbone. Control the clock.

(04-17-2013 05:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I'm not sure i agree with pressuring Manziel. He's most dangerous when he is on the move. Keep him in the pocket and spy him. If they can beat us with him in the pocket playing dink and dunk (40's mantra of no big plays) then they will have earned it.

Don't go crazy with trick plays, they are too talented for them to work and we can't afford a screw up. Fool them with things like RU suggests... unbalanced or unique formations they aren't prepared for.

What I mean is, a halfback pass is something our halfback hasn't done much of (read a secondary and throw an accurate pass)... but having our linemen block or a TE go out for a pass IS something they've done a lot of, just from an unexpected starting point creating a mismatch. A shovel pass to our former RB who is now an H-back against that quick d-line. THESE are the "type" of "trick plays" I want to see, and not some flea-flicker... if that makes sense

Point One: This thread is great. We need to beat AtM, for many reasons, but chief among them is this: a victory over the Ags increases the likelihood of acheving several strategic goals for Rice athletics that Parliamentarians have advocated and debated (ad infinitum) for years. Winning takes a lot of things (execution execution execution), but in the mix of additional requirements (beyond execution) the requirements include good planning and a winning attitude. I see both reflected in this thread.

Point Two: After Owls' Armed Forces Bowl victory I put up a post that argued we needed to focus on beating AtM. I do not recall any specific response to my post but I did see a lot of "beat AtM? Fuggedabouddit" posts. Negativity and defeatism are at least as bad as pollyanna optimism and rah rah BS. They are, however, substantially worse than sober but optimistic analysis which seeks to identify ways to improve team play and improve our chance of winning. So I'll repeat my first statement: This thread is great.

Point Three: Hambone, you may recall I mentioned Luke Turner's halfback pass to Donte Moore. I saw it live and loved it. It is even better on the video. I accede to your expertise regarding executing trick plays. BUT: Luke Turner has already demonstrated he can execute. No, it wasn't the most perfect of passes, but Donte caught it in stride (with a minor adjustment, but you jocks know real execution demands adjustment-- you're athletes, not Xs and Os).

Moore has blazing speed. I know speed does not equate to getting open but is there an Ag corner who can really match him stride for stride? If there is, say so. Maybe Luke Turner isn't the arm. Maybe it's Billups (a QB, not a RB), out of some strange formation, taking a lateral from Jackson and heaving. (?)

Here's the raison d'etre behind Point Three: I want the Owls to shake mental heck out of the Ags with a sophsticated surprise. And here is the historical footnote: The Texas Special, 1965

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/...as-special

Yeah, the Horns ultimately beat the Ags. But the play still gets buzz.

We need buzz, Hambone.

(04-17-2013 08:33 PM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  Point Three: Hambone, you may recall I mentioned Luke Turner's halfback pass to Donte Moore. I saw it live and loved it. It is even better on the video. I accede to your expertise regarding executing trick plays. BUT: Luke Turner has already demonstrated he can execute. No, it wasn't the most perfect of passes, but Donte caught it in stride (with a minor adjustment, but you jocks know real execution demands adjustment-- you're athletes, not Xs and Os).

Moore has blazing speed. I know speed does not equate to getting open but is there an Ag corner who can really match him stride for stride? If there is, say so. Maybe Luke Turner isn't the arm. Maybe it's Billups (a QB, not a RB), out of some strange formation, taking a lateral from Jackson and heaving. (?)

Here's the raison d'etre behind Point Three: I want the Owls to shake mental heck out of the Ags with a sophsticated surprise. And here is the historical footnote: The Texas Special, 1965

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/...as-special

Yeah, the Horns ultimately beat the Ags. But the play still gets buzz.

We need buzz, Hambone.

I agree we need Buzz, but I highlight the two pieces because they demonstrate my point. The need to adjust can negate the speed differential if it exists. It can turn a home run momentum builder into a momentum killer/turner... I don't even recall right now whom we threw the HB pass against, but I'm betting they weren't as good as A&M, and wasn't it at home? Different world executing in front of 90,000 Aggies. It's not a high percentage play because it relies on them messing up, or you executing nearly perfectly.

I prefer to use formations to get Donte isolated on a safety or a linebacker, and then just execute to your advantage. Dumb idea, but an obvious example would be to line up in the I with Ross at FB and Moore at TB. How do you think they would react to that? Then go to the spread and flex Ross out leaving Donte in the backfield. Then bring Donte to the wing... then motion Ross across so he ends up in the backfield blocking or on a swing, or better, a delayed shovel. You now could have a cornerback on Ross and a safety or linebacker on Donte. I like my chances there. They're starting from different places, but those are skills they use every single day. I know it's a dumb idea... but the concept is (i think) valid. If they switch, then you've created some confusion which can create openings. Dump the ball to Ross against a linebacker who is playing catch-up.

I think A&M having to burn a T.O. on the first play because we come out in a formation they aren't prepared for would generate buzz, especially if we then beat their adjustment anyway.

Think about it this way. What is the "bunch" formation but an attempt to create some confusion/delays/create some space to operate. Originally, people backed off from the bunch and waited for the offense to "declare". You beat the bunch by attacking it. We're doing a similar thing, and their initial reaction would be to back off, favoring Ross, or to attack, favoring Moore.

This is the problem I have trick plays. They rely on the other team to not do their job to succeed. Things do get a little fuzzy with the definition of "not doing their job".

This is an area where Rice should succeed. Coaches and officials have dumbed down the game over the years. It actually makes it easier to confuse opponents because they don't know how to think.

Let's break down the referenced "Texas Special". I come away with a much different take than most. The base play has a very low probability of success. It is a single receiver deep route. To increase the probability, a separate receiver becomes the passer. To increase the probability even more, the QB throws the ball so it hits the ground before it reaches the "passer". Why shouldn't this work? First clue is the coach telling the ref not to blow the whistle before the play is dead. Even if you don't know the rules, players are taught to play until they hear the whistle. Doesn't matter if the other guy gives an Oscar worthy performance. He should be drilled if he has the ball and the whistle hasn't sounded. Rule #1: There can only be [/b] forward pass attempt per play. Rule #2: A forward pass that touches the ground before before being caught is incomplete (and whistle blows signifying the play is dead). Rule #3: A forward pass can't be thrown beyond the line of scrimmage. Therefore, every player should know that 1) you play to the whistle, 2) a forward pass has to be forward, 3) a forward pass that isn't forward is a lateral, 4) a lateral that touches the ground is still a live ball, and 5) a player should never abandon [b]their responsibility until the play is blown dead. In other words, it turns the trick play back into a single receiver deep route with a very low probability of success.

What Hambone is basically saying is that predicting the stupidity (while common) of your opponent is unpredictable. Identifying a vulnerability and then exploiting it repeatedly through superior resource allocation management is much more reproducible and productive over any extended period of time.

(04-18-2013 07:25 PM)ruowls Wrote:  This is the problem I have trick plays. They rely on the other team to not do their job to succeed. Things do get a little fuzzy with the definition of "not doing their job".

This is an area where Rice should succeed. Coaches and officials have dumbed down the game over the years. It actually makes it easier to confuse opponents because they don't know how to think.

Let's break down the referenced "Texas Special". I come away with a much different take than most. The base play has a very low probability of success. It is a single receiver deep route. To increase the probability, a separate receiver becomes the passer. To increase the probability even more, the QB throws the ball so it hits the ground before it reaches the "passer". Why shouldn't this work? First clue is the coach telling the ref not to blow the whistle before the play is dead. Even if you don't know the rules, players are taught to play until they hear the whistle. Doesn't matter if the other guy gives an Oscar worthy performance. He should be drilled if he has the ball and the whistle hasn't sounded. Rule #1: There can only be [/b] forward pass attempt per play. Rule #2: A forward pass that touches the ground before before being caught is incomplete (and whistle blows signifying the play is dead). Rule #3: A forward pass can't be thrown beyond the line of scrimmage. Therefore, every player should know that 1) you play to the whistle, 2) a forward pass has to be forward, 3) a forward pass that isn't forward is a lateral, 4) a lateral that touches the ground is still a live ball, and 5) a player should never abandon [b]their responsibility until the play is blown dead. In other words, it turns the trick play back into a single receiver deep route with a very low probability of success.

What Hambone is basically saying is that predicting the stupidity (while common) of your opponent is unpredictable. Identifying a vulnerability and then exploiting it repeatedly through superior resource allocation management is much more reproducible and productive over any extended period of time.

Yes indeed.

(04-18-2013 07:25 PM)ruowls Wrote:  This is the problem I have trick plays. They rely on the other team to not do their job to succeed. Things do get a little fuzzy with the definition of "not doing their job".

This is an area where Rice should succeed. Coaches and officials have dumbed down the game over the years. It actually makes it easier to confuse opponents because they don't know how to think.

Let's break down the referenced "Texas Special". I come away with a much different take than most. The base play has a very low probability of success. It is a single receiver deep route. To increase the probability, a separate receiver becomes the passer. To increase the probability even more, the QB throws the ball so it hits the ground before it reaches the "passer". Why shouldn't this work? First clue is the coach telling the ref not to blow the whistle before the play is dead. Even if you don't know the rules, players are taught to play until they hear the whistle. Doesn't matter if the other guy gives an Oscar worthy performance. He should be drilled if he has the ball and the whistle hasn't sounded. Rule #1: There can only be [/b] forward pass attempt per play. Rule #2: A forward pass that touches the ground before before being caught is incomplete (and whistle blows signifying the play is dead). Rule #3: A forward pass can't be thrown beyond the line of scrimmage. Therefore, every player should know that 1) you play to the whistle, 2) a forward pass has to be forward, 3) a forward pass that isn't forward is a lateral, 4) a lateral that touches the ground is still a live ball, and 5) a player should never abandon [b]their responsibility until the play is blown dead. In other words, it turns the trick play back into a single receiver deep route with a very low probability of success.

What Hambone is basically saying is that predicting the stupidity (while common) of your opponent is unpredictable. Identifying a vulnerability and then exploiting it repeatedly through superior resource allocation management is much more reproducible and productive over any extended period of time.

Fine analysis and great discussion. Thanks, gentlemen. I defer to your expertise. By the way, I like Hambone's play. Let me toss out another wrinkle. Why not split Eddington wide, to the side of the field Moore won't be taking when he goes deep? Eddington's so fast he ought to draw corner coverage and he's so big he may get a safety as well.

I love you smart guys

I think the important thing is to lose the coin toss. That way we can get the ball first.

You have to think globally. There are few individual match ups. The goal to defend receivers is to create a high low bracket. This is why 3 man fronts are more difficult to read. A standard coverage deploys 7 in coverage and 4 in the rush. In a 4 man front, unless you drop a lineman, you know which 7 will be in coverage. In a 3 man front, there are 8 possibilities to fill the 7 coverage spots. Recognizing the vices is more difficult.

Because of the ability to place a vice on either side simultaneously, putting speed on both sides mitigates the receiver advantage. The receiver has to run through 2 coverage zones which is a difficult task. Even with speed it is difficult. The receivers are trying to turn the tables and form their own bracket on one element of the defensive vice. If you know which 7 will form the brackets, it is easier to manipulate the receiver movements to create tandems to break the brackets. The extra defender option in a 3 man front requires greater data processing by the receiver to identify the brackets. As such, the bracket breaking tandems become varied.

Though I love your play Hambone, you basically have moved Ross from the I back to the I. In other words, you haven't really made the defense change anything.

(04-19-2013 12:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the important thing is to lose the coin toss. That way we can get the ball first.

Too funny. Way to puncture hot air in a thread. LOL.

By the way, Hambone, I think RuOwls is the smart guy here.

(04-19-2013 01:28 AM)ruowls Wrote:  You have to think globally. There are few individual match ups. The goal to defend receivers is to create a high low bracket. This is why 3 man fronts are more difficult to read. A standard coverage deploys 7 in coverage and 4 in the rush. In a 4 man front, unless you drop a lineman, you know which 7 will be in coverage. In a 3 man front, there are 8 possibilities to fill the 7 coverage spots. Recognizing the vices is more difficult.

Because of the ability to place a vice on either side simultaneously, putting speed on both sides mitigates the receiver advantage. The receiver has to run through 2 coverage zones which is a difficult task. Even with speed it is difficult. The receivers are trying to turn the tables and form their own bracket on one element of the defensive vice. If you know which 7 will form the brackets, it is easier to manipulate the receiver movements to create tandems to break the brackets. The extra defender option in a 3 man front requires greater data processing by the receiver to identify the brackets. As such, the bracket breaking tandems become varied.

Though I love your play Hambone, you basically have moved Ross from the I back to the I. In other words, you haven't really made the defense change anything.

My example was meant to lead to the numerous possible combinations, including the idea that the original look you showed was ultimately your best option... I admitted it was ultimately a bad idea, but I was merely trying to show how you can show various looks and get them thinking... and then take advantage of what they do when you get aggies thinking.

(04-19-2013 10:06 AM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 12:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the important thing is to lose the coin toss. That way we can get the ball first.

Too funny. Way to puncture hot air in a thread. LOL.

By the way, Hambone, I think RuOwls is the smart guy here.

Um.... yeah. Exactly... but LOTS of you guys "get it" and articulate it well.

(04-19-2013 10:06 AM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 12:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the important thing is to lose the coin toss. That way we can get the ball first.

Too funny. Way to puncture hot air in a thread. LOL.

By the way, Hambone, I think RuOwls is the smart guy here.

They're both smart guys, but for X's and O's, I'll take RU.

Ham for AD, RU for coach.

How about using any ticket allotment we get, and showing the team some support at the game? We had a small but loud crowd in El Paso last Thanksgiving, and the guys knew it.

(04-19-2013 04:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 10:06 AM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 12:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the important thing is to lose the coin toss. That way we can get the ball first.

Too funny. Way to puncture hot air in a thread. LOL.

By the way, Hambone, I think RuOwls is the smart guy here.

They're both smart guys, but for X's and O's, I'll take RU.

Ham for AD, RU for coach.

I'm too opinionated and un-PC to be AD, but I'll gladly be an Assistant. RU for coach and RiceDoc for AD

(04-19-2013 05:02 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  How about using any ticket allotment we get, and showing the team some support at the game? We had a small but loud crowd in El Paso last Thanksgiving, and the guys knew it.

Great comment. I wonder if we have the ability to monitor whom we sell tickets to? I doubt it through ticketmaster or whomever, which means that anyone can call up and buy tickets and there are many many more Aggies. Too bad we can't simply "take them down" in the department and take Ticketmaster out of the equation. That's probably not allowed

(04-19-2013 05:09 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 05:02 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  How about using any ticket allotment we get, and showing the team some support at the game? We had a small but loud crowd in El Paso last Thanksgiving, and the guys knew it.

Great comment. I wonder if we have the ability to monitor whom we sell tickets to? I doubt it through ticketmaster or whomever, which means that anyone can call up and buy tickets and there are many many more Aggies. Too bad we can't simply "take them down" in the department and take Ticketmaster out of the equation. That's probably not allowed

In my perfect world, season ticket holders, Owl Club members and other major donors get an advance notice of any of the tickets available and an exclusive window to buy them (like baseball post-season). I am hoping that for Notre Dame next year, too. It could even be part of the next promotional push for season ticket sales.

(04-19-2013 05:09 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 04:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 10:06 AM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 12:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the important thing is to lose the coin toss. That way we can get the ball first.

Too funny. Way to puncture hot air in a thread. LOL.

By the way, Hambone, I think RuOwls is the smart guy here.

They're both smart guys, but for X's and O's, I'll take RU.

Ham for AD, RU for coach.

I'm too opinionated and un-PC to be AD, but I'll gladly be an Assistant. RU for coach and RiceDoc for AD

I can live with that. Just promise you will text us daily with a list of who you talked to, what they said, and when it will all happen.

I told you all we had to do was follow Manziel around with a camera:

http://outkickthecoverage.com/johnny-man...ff-arm.php

Kid sure likes to have fun (well, if anything, fun with photoshop).

(04-19-2013 05:02 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  How about using any ticket allotment we get, and showing the team some support at the game? We had a small but loud crowd in El Paso last Thanksgiving, and the guys knew it.

I thought so as well, there was actually some noise from us during UTEP's 3rd downs!

(04-19-2013 05:21 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  In my perfect world, season ticket holders, Owl Club members and other major donors get an advance notice of any of the tickets available and an exclusive window to buy them (like baseball post-season). I am hoping that for Notre Dame next year, too. It could even be part of the next promotional push for season ticket sales.

Notre Dame still has to drop a couple of games from their 2014 season, I hope Rice is not one of them. Since Rice is scheduled as the season opener, maybe there's a greater chance we're kept.

(04-19-2013 05:21 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  In my perfect world, season ticket holders, Owl Club members and other major donors get an advance notice of any of the tickets available and an exclusive window to buy them (like baseball post-season). I am hoping that for Notre Dame next year, too. It could even be part of the next promotional push for season ticket sales.

What do you you think are the odds of that happening? This is Rice.