With Taylor running the offense I am guessing this is the direction we are going.

He played in the system in college at Nebraska, when he was a GA at Texas A&M the ran it and they ran the offense at Miami.

Anyone have any thoughts about us using this system?

West coast is lovely with the right personnel.

Otherwise, it's sort of an 8 track player in the current college game. Works with zone blocking with the ability to move the pocket, no need for a power running game, short accurate passing without the need for a strong arm, needs WRs who runs quick precise routes, needs good receiving TEs who can also block.

(01-10-2016 08:45 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  With Taylor running the offense I am guessing this is the direction we are going.

He played in the system in college at Nebraska, when he was a GA at Texas A&M the ran it and they ran the offense at Miami.

Anyone have any thoughts about us using this system?

At least next year we'll have the appropriate QB and RB for the system, and there is a heavier reliance on secondary pass catching options, so our TE's will be able to pick up some of the slack that losing all of our receivers will cots us. It'll be interesting, that much I know for sure.

Need receivers who can get open in a short space/time and then get lots of yards after catch. Do we have that? Just asking because if we don't it isn't going to work.

(01-10-2016 10:18 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  West coast is lovely with the right personnel.

Otherwise, it's sort of an 8 track player in the current college game. Works with zone blocking with the ability to move the pocket, no need for a power running game, short accurate passing without the need for a strong arm, needs WRs who runs quick precise routes, needs good receiving TEs who can also block.

Our WR corps is a big of a mystery. We do not know really what we are going to get as all the guys are unproven. The only person next year with considerable playing time is Nate Cole. We will need the two transfers (Kamara and Peterson) to contribute right away.

In the right offense I think DJ Dowdy can be a force at TE. Cogswell has impressive size but is also unproven as I think we only threw him the ball 3-4 times. He did have an impressive catch for a TD against Miami.

I would expect a variation, maybe something like what Stanford currently runs. Running game, short controlled passing game with TE's and WR crossing routes, occasional long balls. Will need to get a FB or move one of the H-back TE's into that role. Dowdy at TE would work well, has good hands and size. Thinking about it, probably very similar to UC's offense during Dantonio's last year.

(01-11-2016 11:34 AM)FLIP Wrote:  I would expect a variation, maybe something like what Stanford currently runs. Running game, short controlled passing game with TE's and WR crossing routes, occasional long balls. Will need to get a FB or move one of the H-back TE's into that role. Dowdy at TE would work well, has good hands and size. Thinking about it, probably very similar to UC's offense during Dantonio's last year.

Cincinnati doesn't have the OL to be Stanford.

Am I the only one who gets tired of seeing every snap taken out of the gun? It seems like a dumbed-down version of the game, eliminating the 3, 5, and 7 step drops.

If you have the wrong personel it ends up more Don Treadwell at Miami than Jim Harbaugh at Stanford.

There is a good reason the spread has taken over the college game.

I do think with how many teams are running the spread there is far less of an advantage to doing so now than there was in the past. If you can do something else well it could be advantageous. Not really taking a position one way or the other as to if we should switch. However, they key regardless of the formation is you cannot be predictable in what you do.

If your D is patched together, you better not run a control offense.

(01-11-2016 12:11 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  If your D is patched together, you better not run a control offense.

We return how many starters from this year? 9...10...? I'd hope it won't be "patched together" with almost a full two deep returning this coming year, especially with the flashes they all showed throughout the year. Sure they were below average, but when you're starting a lot of underclassmen there will be growing pains.

(01-11-2016 12:23 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 12:11 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  If your D is patched together, you better not run a control offense.

We return how many starters from this year? 9...10...? I'd hope it won't be "patched together" with almost a full two deep returning this coming year, especially with the flashes they all showed throughout the year. Sure they were below average, but when you're starting a lot of underclassmen there will be growing pains.

I'd also hope it won't be 'patched together.' That being said I'd be surprised if it wasn't below average again next year. We'll likely need the offense to again carry the weight.

I've always thought the D might be better if they ran a 3-4 seems like its been hard for them to get good D ends the last few years

(01-11-2016 01:32 PM)Racinejake Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 12:23 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 12:11 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  If your D is patched together, you better not run a control offense.

We return how many starters from this year? 9...10...? I'd hope it won't be "patched together" with almost a full two deep returning this coming year, especially with the flashes they all showed throughout the year. Sure they were below average, but when you're starting a lot of underclassmen there will be growing pains.

I'd also hope it won't be 'patched together.' That being said I'd be surprised if it wasn't below average again next year. We'll likely need the offense to again carry the weight.

I guess some of those returning starters do not impress me much. Neither do the guys with clipboards on that side of the ball.

(01-11-2016 07:22 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 01:32 PM)Racinejake Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 12:23 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 12:11 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  If your D is patched together, you better not run a control offense.

We return how many starters from this year? 9...10...? I'd hope it won't be "patched together" with almost a full two deep returning this coming year, especially with the flashes they all showed throughout the year. Sure they were below average, but when you're starting a lot of underclassmen there will be growing pains.

I'd also hope it won't be 'patched together.' That being said I'd be surprised if it wasn't below average again next year. We'll likely need the offense to again carry the weight.

I guess some of those returning starters do not impress me much. Neither do the guys with clipboards on that side of the ball.

Yea, these guys need to develop a lot before next year. I didn't see a ton of 'flashes' that made me think they'd be great with just another year of experience.

our defense looked clueless...second or third year in a row

(01-11-2016 07:36 PM)Racinejake Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 07:22 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 01:32 PM)Racinejake Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 12:23 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(01-11-2016 12:11 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  If your D is patched together, you better not run a control offense.

We return how many starters from this year? 9...10...? I'd hope it won't be "patched together" with almost a full two deep returning this coming year, especially with the flashes they all showed throughout the year. Sure they were below average, but when you're starting a lot of underclassmen there will be growing pains.

I'd also hope it won't be 'patched together.' That being said I'd be surprised if it wasn't below average again next year. We'll likely need the offense to again carry the weight.

I guess some of those returning starters do not impress me much. Neither do the guys with clipboards on that side of the ball.

Yea, these guys need to develop a lot before next year. I didn't see a ton of 'flashes' that made me think they'd be great with just another year of experience.

Ditto.

And anyone who thinks running QBs are a bad idea has not watched Clemson. Jesus that kid is gifted and that offense is scary.

If and when we're using HMoore and breaking in a ton of new WRs, it's as good of time as any to overhaul the offensive scheme.

My personal opinion, is the WCO is outdated because of QBs who are bred to buy time. There is less emphasize than ever on getting the ball out on time and forcing DBs to cover longer is more like a strategy than a problem for many offenses. I do think defenses will have to adapt or die to QBs who scramble to pass late in the down because it is everywhere. Easier said than done though.