CSNbbs

Im a long time fan of option football. Do you guys prefer the spread option your running now or would you rather run the flexbone offense you guys perfected for 3 decades?

(09-09-2019 07:09 PM)MadEagle Wrote: [ -> ]Im a long time fan of option football. Do you guys prefer the spread option your running now or would you rather run the flexbone offense you guys perfected for 3 decades?

Hmm...that’s a good question. I think at our current level, we’d be harder to beat in the old flexbone (with a Monken type coach). It really was a beautiful thing to watch when that machine was humming. At the same time, we have the potential to be much MUCH more versatile in our current system. The downside to it though is that it looks initially similar to much of what everyone else runs, with a few changes of course. This still makes it a bit easier to prepare for overall. I like what Furman did with their offense. They blended the flexbone with a bit of what we currently run. They had passing lanes open all day against GaState. It gives opposing teams really too much to prepare for in a week’s time.

I was initially skeptical but I loved the explosiveness of the Fritz offense we ran in 2014/15. Really it doesn't matter to me so long as we win games.

This is a pretty contentious issue among our fans.

This is how I would summarize the differences between the offenses (obviously some might not agree)

Advantages the IZ-based pistol option has over the flexbone:
1. More explosive plays, especially running up the middle.
2. Easier to recruit linemen because you're using a more common blocking scheme (especially tackles).
3. Pistol formation makes passing game easier on QB and OL (we have fewer passing plays where the QB has to run for his life). You also use 3 wideouts which gives you more flexibility in the passing game.
4. More difficult for defenders to get in the way on perimeter option plays.


Advantages the flexbone has over our current offense
1. You can more easily negate size differences between your OL and the opponent DL with veer blocking than zone blocking.
2. Fewer three and outs, lower percentage of no or minimal gain running plays, better on goal line and shot-yardage palys.
3. Recruiting a great A-back is not nearly as hard as recruiting a great running back.
4. Primary back gets to the LoS more quickly.

(09-09-2019 07:39 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote: [ -> ]I was initially skeptical but I loved the explosiveness of the Fritz offense we ran in 2014/15. Really it doesn't matter to me so long as we win games.

The question with the 14/15 offense though...was it explosive because of the offense itself, or was it explosive because we had a boss oline and an unexpected freak of a running back?

I’m sure there’s an argument both ways. From my observations, once the flexbone got to churning, it seemed easier to plug and play pieces year after year. Currently our offensive system probably could be very explosive, but our oline has to be really good in order to do so, else there a crack in the system which limits our explosiveness.

I've seen us be good and bad in both our historical flexbone offense and our current spread offense. When the flex is run like we did in 85, 86, 89,90, 99 and 2000, with a deadly dual QB threat that passes the ball not only efficiently but with precision ... it is something to behold. We have had 4 of those QB's in our history (Tracy Ham, Raymond Gross, Greg Hill and JR Revere) ... the other QB's we've had all could run but their passing wasn't on that elite level.

As a fan of the program for 35 years now, the nostalgia behind our historic style is hard to keep tamped down, and understandably so. Saw some very dominant teams over our years in I-AA/FCS, but it was always dependent on a finite coaching pool that operated at an expert or near-expert level understanding of the intricacies and nuances of that triple option style. Success led others to poach our coaches, and there wasn't always a well-suited candidate waiting to be our next HC. To me, that more than anything became the primary reason to consider something a little more conventional or mainstream, especially once we moved to FBS.

The key to the flexbone thriving (not just surviving) as a contrarian offense in this day and age IMO is based on having a QB who can pass for 60%+ coupled with an OC who is steeped in triple option play. That isn't a combination that you see everyday.

I think once we get our OL recruiting ironed out our current 'style' of option will become more welcomed by our fans. To be sure though, there is a cadre of diehards who absolutely hate that we left I-AA and that flex offense and feel that we've abandoned our roots needlessly. I think it is more a matter of adjusting to the times and just seeing the option played out in a different sense.

Flexbone by far. What we run now is cookie cutter. It makes zero sense why we adopted it.

(09-09-2019 08:06 PM)Eagle22 Wrote: [ -> ]I've seen us be good and bad in both our historical flexbone offense and our current spread offense. When the flex is run like we did in 85, 86, 89,90, 99 and 2000, with a deadly dual QB threat that passes the ball not only efficiently but with precision ... it is something to behold. We have had 4 of those QB's in our history (Tracy Ham, Raymond Gross, Greg Hill and JR Revere) ... the other QB's we've had all could run but their passing wasn't on that elite level.

As a fan of the program for 35 years now, the nostalgia behind our historic style is hard to keep tamped down, and understandably so. Saw some very dominant teams over our years in I-AA/FCS, but it was always dependent on a finite coaching pool that operated at an expert or near-expert level understanding of the intricacies and nuances of that triple option style. Success led others to poach our coaches, and there wasn't always a well-suited candidate waiting to be our next HC. To me, that more than anything became the primary reason to consider something a little more conventional or mainstream, especially once we moved to FBS.

The key to the flexbone thriving (not just surviving) as a contrarian offense in this day and age IMO is based on having a QB who can pass for 60%+ coupled with an OC who is steeped in triple option play. That isn't a combination that you see everyday.

I think once we get our OL recruiting ironed out our current 'style' of option will become more welcomed by our fans. To be sure though, there is a cadre of diehards who absolutely hate that we left I-AA and that flex offense and feel that we've abandoned our roots needlessly. I think it is more a matter of adjusting to the times and just seeing the option played out in a different sense.

It all depends on this. If we had a coach that knew what he was doing in running it, or even a good competent OC, then I think MOST fans would say go with the flex. But because the coaching pool is so limited, and the ability to transition a roster to and from a flex offense is so difficult, it makes more sense to focus on the pistol/gun option.

However, I think if Brent Davis or Brian Bohannon were to return to Statesboro not many people would complain. Wait, actually yes they would because our fanbase always finds something to complain about.

I just want to win! As much as I love to watch the flex when it is run to perfection, it limits the type of QB that will commit, it limits the OL that will commit, and it limits the pool of head coaches that we have to choose from. If we lose a coach, I want to be able to choose from the entire pool of available head coaches, not just two or three that run the flex.

(09-10-2019 07:06 AM)ChiefGSU275 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-09-2019 08:06 PM)Eagle22 Wrote: [ -> ]I've seen us be good and bad in both our historical flexbone offense and our current spread offense. When the flex is run like we did in 85, 86, 89,90, 99 and 2000, with a deadly dual QB threat that passes the ball not only efficiently but with precision ... it is something to behold. We have had 4 of those QB's in our history (Tracy Ham, Raymond Gross, Greg Hill and JR Revere) ... the other QB's we've had all could run but their passing wasn't on that elite level.

As a fan of the program for 35 years now, the nostalgia behind our historic style is hard to keep tamped down, and understandably so. Saw some very dominant teams over our years in I-AA/FCS, but it was always dependent on a finite coaching pool that operated at an expert or near-expert level understanding of the intricacies and nuances of that triple option style. Success led others to poach our coaches, and there wasn't always a well-suited candidate waiting to be our next HC. To me, that more than anything became the primary reason to consider something a little more conventional or mainstream, especially once we moved to FBS.

The key to the flexbone thriving (not just surviving) as a contrarian offense in this day and age IMO is based on having a QB who can pass for 60%+ coupled with an OC who is steeped in triple option play. That isn't a combination that you see everyday.

I think once we get our OL recruiting ironed out our current 'style' of option will become more welcomed by our fans. To be sure though, there is a cadre of diehards who absolutely hate that we left I-AA and that flex offense and feel that we've abandoned our roots needlessly. I think it is more a matter of adjusting to the times and just seeing the option played out in a different sense.

It all depends on this. If we had a coach that knew what he was doing in running it, or even a good competent OC, then I think MOST fans would say go with the flex. But because the coaching pool is so limited, and the ability to transition a roster to and from a flex offense is so difficult, it makes more sense to focus on the pistol/gun option.

However, I think if Brent Davis or Brian Bohannon were to return to Statesboro not many people would complain. Wait, actually yes they would because our fanbase always finds something to complain about.

THIS!

complains about a coaching staff and OC that won 10 games last year and was a top 10 rushing team with a qb that was 30th in the nation in total qbr and threw zero interceptions......

then says how our fan base always finds something to complain about.......

(09-10-2019 07:32 AM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ]complains about a coaching staff and OC that won 10 games last year and was a top 10 rushing team with a qb that was 30th in the nation in total qbr and threw zero interceptions......

then says how our fan base always finds something to complain about.......

I never said I excluded myself from those that complain.

Georgia Southern fans, what is going on with your team this year? Or is it too early to tell? 1-1 isn't bad but these performances take me back to the Tyson Summers years.

Flexbone. It's like a beautiful symphony orchestra.

(09-10-2019 09:35 AM)ericsaid Wrote: [ -> ]Georgia Southern fans, what is going on with your team this year? Or is it too early to tell? 1-1 isn't bad but these performances take me back to the Tyson Summers years.

Tomlin(Redshirt Freshman) with his first start with Shai injured, but he does not have much to clean up in terms of his game. Tomlin's intermediate/quick release passing game will help this offense greatly. We will look back at Maine and be thankful he got those snaps. Watching the Maine film, there were clear examples of where Shai would have made the correct pitch, and it would have gone to the house. Pitch relationship is something that is developed overtime and some of this is on JD King as well.

Starting center was injured, and we killed ourselves with high snaps.

O line is still still trying to gel.

This team is not far from really clicking offensively, again first time since 2012 we've had 3 players with 100 yards rushing.

Nothing from Saturday should remind you of a Tyson Summer performance, unsure what game you were watching.

Let me help you:

(09-10-2019 09:35 AM)ericsaid Wrote: [ -> ]Georgia Southern fans, what is going on with your team this year? Or is it too early to tell? 1-1 isn't bad but these performances take me back to the Tyson Summers years.

Well, we played LSU for starters. Apparently they're decent.

As for the Maine game, we were missing our starting QB, but the backup filled in great. We had some issues with sloppy play and our starting center being injured, resulting in some reshuffling on the OL and some bad snaps, but overall it was an ugly performance that could have been a dominant performance had a few bad snaps gone our way.

We play Minnesota this week, which we could win or very likely lose, and then have a bye week before opening conference play against ULL at home. So really, it's too early to tell what we have right now.

(09-10-2019 09:35 AM)ericsaid Wrote: [ -> ]Georgia Southern fans, what is going on with your team this year? Or is it too early to tell? 1-1 isn't bad but these performances take me back to the Tyson Summers years.

Tyson Summers years??

Work on your defense before throwing stones

(09-10-2019 10:38 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2019 09:35 AM)ericsaid Wrote: [ -> ]Georgia Southern fans, what is going on with your team this year? Or is it too early to tell? 1-1 isn't bad but these performances take me back to the Tyson Summers years.

Tyson Summers years??

Work on your defense before throwing stones

Would be easy to do if you didn't have to poach coaches to make yours relevant...



And LSU's defense isn't as great as you all made it seem. I believe, eventually, you will come to accept my comments about Southern's lack of speed to the edge and through the gap to be a problem, on offense. Time will tell.

I say on Halloween we play Justin Tomlin versus Jacob Huesmam. That should be entertaining.

(09-10-2019 11:47 AM)EigenEagle Wrote: [ -> ]I say on Halloween we play Justin Tomlin versus Jacob Huesmam. That should be entertaining.

We very well could be and that's ok... but we def need to get more push from the O-line if we want to win many games in the SB this year. Six times within the 5 yard line and can't score against an FCS team.. not good.