If you guys have time, Tony Franklin does an excellent CFB podcast.
Here he is at 12:00 in, analyzing Cal's Offensive Personnel.
OL - Good Receivers - Talented RB - Good TE - Good QB: Talented, but misused.
Says he would love a chance to coach this offense -- it could do damage.
Underscores that this team is the type that needs to be unleashed offensively 35-40 ppg to contend for the Pac 12 Championship -- it's doable, but its a mind-set / paradigm shift.
I would concur w/ all of what he says based from what I can see.
Theres enough pieces and talent to really do damage offensively.
Good stuff. If you want to hear him talk about Furd too, that starts at about 8:00.
While I am largely a Tony Franklin fan (talkin' 'bout the man and the system), I do take issue with some of what he said about Cal here. He was describing Garbers as a potentially NFL-level passer (big arm, quick release, good reads, etc.) and I couldn't help thinking he was mixing him up with somebody else. I just don't see Garbers having the arm talent or processing post-snap information like an NFL QB.
Then he was talking about us having one "special receiver" and I would've liked him to identify the player by name, because I can't think for the life of me who it is (although I think we have a few guys who are pretty good).
Agree about the need to "turn the offense loose to score 40" because, to me, we should always be like that!
Good stuff. If you want to hear him talk about Furd too, that starts at about 8:00.
While I am largely a Tony Franklin fan (talkin' 'bout the man and the system), I do take issue with some of what he said about Cal here. He was describing Garbers as a potentially NFL-level passer (big arm, quick release, good reads, etc.) and I couldn't help thinking he was mixing him up with somebody else. I just don't see Garbers having the arm talent or processing post-snap information like an NFL QB.
Then he was talking about us having one "special receiver" and I would've liked him to identify the player by name, because I can't think for the life of me who it is (although I think we have a few guys who are pretty good).
Agree about the need to "turn the offense loose to score 40" because, to me, we should always be like that!
Id bet the special receiver is hunter. He's made some really impressive catches so far
If you guys have time, Tony Franklin does an excellent CFB podcast.
Here he is at 12:00 in, analyzing Cal's Offensive Personnel.
OL - Good Receivers - Talented RB - Good TE - Good QB: Talented, but misused.
Says he would love a chance to coach this offense -- it could do damage.
Underscores that this team is the type that needs to be unleashed offensively 35-40 ppg to contend for the Pac 12 Championship -- it's doable, but its a mind-set / paradigm shift.
I would concur w/ all of what he says based from what I can see.
Theres enough pieces and talent to really do damage offensively.
If I'm not mistaken, there is something that Chase does when he throws the long ball that affects his distance and accuracy. I see it happen about 40% of the time. I can't believe that the coaches haven't picked up on this. I'm not any kind of special football scout, etc. I won't say what it is here, but if you privately want to email me (and I recognize you as a Bear fan of at least more than 10 years) we can communicate about this and you can either verify my observation, or tell me IFOS.
joeyoust@sbcglobal.net. I'll reply to no more than the first 5 emails, if I get any.
Sure, let's bring back the Tony Franklin System, so we can go back to averaging 37 PPG on offense and 40 PPG on defense. Because that was "fun", or so some people thought.
Sure, let's bring back the Tony Franklin System, so we can go back to averaging 37 PPG on offense and 40 PPG on defense. Because that was "fun", or so some people thought.
We weren't giving up 40 PPG because we were using the Air Raid/TFS on offense, we were giving up 40 PPG because we were playing sh***y defense.
Or how do you explain the many winning programs who now use a similar offense?
Sure, let's bring back the Tony Franklin System, so we can go back to averaging 37 PPG on offense and 40 PPG on defense. Because that was "fun", or so some people thought.
We weren't giving up 40 PPG because we were using the Air Raid/TFS on offense, we were giving up 40 PPG because we were playing sh***y defense.
Or how do you explain the many winning programs who now use a similar offense?
Sure, let's bring back the Tony Franklin System, so we can go back to averaging 37 PPG on offense and 40 PPG on defense. Because that was "fun", or so some people thought.
We weren't giving up 40 PPG because we were using the Air Raid/TFS on offense, we were giving up 40 PPG because we were playing sh***y defense.
Or how do you explain the many winning programs who now use a similar offense?
Which programs?
Ok, I'll play. Alabama. I will say this, if you are going to use an up tempo offense you better have depth on the defensive side of the ball because they are going to be in the field alot (or not, and just give up a lot of points). I don't care what offense or defense we use just that we win.
Sure, let's bring back the Tony Franklin System, so we can go back to averaging 37 PPG on offense and 40 PPG on defense. Because that was "fun", or so some people thought.
We weren't giving up 40 PPG because we were using the Air Raid/TFS on offense, we were giving up 40 PPG because we were playing sh***y defense.
Or how do you explain the many winning programs who now use a similar offense?
Which programs?
Ok, I'll play. Alabama. I will say this, if you are going to use an up tempo offense you better have depth on the defensive side of the ball because they are going to be in the field alot (or not, and just give up a lot of points). I don't care what offense or defense we use just that we win.
I'm no expert either on football or Alabama, but when I watched their game vs Miami their offense didn't look anything like ours when we had Tony Franklin. Their base personnel package seemed to be 1-1, ours was 1-0. They mixed in a little 1-2 and even 1-3 and almost never 0-0. We used 0-0 more often than we used a TE. They had a 50-50 run/pass ratio. Tony talked a lot about pad level in his podcast. Theirs was consistently lower than ours. The primary similarities seemed to be that they went up tempo liberally and operated exclusively from the gun.
But assuming we take Alabama as an example, you hit on the problem: they have 40 four and five stars in their defensive 2-deep. Can anyone name a winning (P5) program that uses a system like Tony Franklin's and isn't a perennially elite recruiting team?
Sure, let's bring back the Tony Franklin System, so we can go back to averaging 37 PPG on offense and 40 PPG on defense. Because that was "fun", or so some people thought.
We weren't giving up 40 PPG because we were using the Air Raid/TFS on offense, we were giving up 40 PPG because we were playing sh***y defense.
Or how do you explain the many winning programs who now use a similar offense?
Which programs?
Ok, I'll play. Alabama. I will say this, if you are going to use an up tempo offense you better have depth on the defensive side of the ball because they are going to be in the field alot (or not, and just give up a lot of points). I don't care what offense or defense we use just that we win.
I'm no expert either on football or Alabama, but when I watched their game vs Miami their offense didn't look anything like ours when we had Tony Franklin. Their base personnel package seemed to be 1-1, ours was 1-0. They mixed in a little 1-2 and even 1-3 and almost never 0-0. We used 0-0 more often than we used a TE. They had a 50-50 run/pass ratio. Tony talked a lot about pad level in his podcast. Theirs was consistently lower than ours. The primary similarities seemed to be that they went up tempo liberally and operated exclusively from the gun.
But assuming we take Alabama as an example, you hit on the problem: they have 40 four and five stars in their defensive 2-deep. Can anyone name a winning (P5) program that uses a system like Tony Franklin's and isn't a perennially elite recruiting team?
Alabama runs a lot of 0-0 like Cal ran 0-0 with a TE spread out just like Richard Rodgers was, who ended up being a 3rd round pick. Where they differ is that Alabama maintained the ability to have a power run game and has packages for short yardage with 1-2 and 1-3 as you suggest. Franklin relied on the diamond back field and misdirection for short yardage, which didn't always work. Short yardage is hard with linemen moving backwards. Alabama still mauls people and puts linemen into the first round every single year. I believe they had two tackles drafted in the first round last year.
FYI, we rushed 40% of the time in Goff's last season, before he was the #1 overall draft pick. Alabama was 50/50 last year with a QB drafted 15th overall and a RB drafted 24th overall.
Where they differ is that Alabama maintained the ability to have a power run game and has packages for short yardage with 1-2 and 1-3 as you suggest.
Goodness this!
Least we forget a (the?) critical problem under Sonny was our singular inability to sustain long drives or get 3 and short or punch it in from First and goal from inside the 5. I mean HORRIBLY maddening. Probably lots of reasons but a big one was that the set doesn't lend itself to flexibility and uncertainty. Go under center? Well you never pass from that so we know a run off tackle is coming. Diamond formation - seen that on film. Shotgun - OK, VERY slow developing run coming.
Sometimes football is a VERY simply game - line up and hit the other guy hard. And being able to do that is critical in the college game because of the ability, with how the clock rules are, to be able to carry out soul killing 10 minute drives when up by 8+. This is where Tony failed and will always fail.
Good stuff. If you want to hear him talk about Furd too, that starts at about 8:00.
While I am largely a Tony Franklin fan (talkin' 'bout the man and the system), I do take issue with some of what he said about Cal here. He was describing Garbers as a potentially NFL-level passer (big arm, quick release, good reads, etc.) and I couldn't help thinking he was mixing him up with somebody else. I just don't see Garbers having the arm talent or processing post-snap information like an NFL QB.
Then he was talking about us having one "special receiver" and I would've liked him to identify the player by name, because I can't think for the life of me who it is (although I think we have a few guys who are pretty good).
Agree about the need to "turn the offense loose to score 40" because, to me, we should always be like that!
Id bet the special receiver is hunter. He's made some really impressive catches so far
That was my guess or Remigio. Of course Clark and Crawford are in the conversation.
Sure, let's bring back the Tony Franklin System, so we can go back to averaging 37 PPG on offense and 40 PPG on defense. Because that was "fun", or so some people thought.
We weren't giving up 40 PPG because we were using the Air Raid/TFS on offense, we were giving up 40 PPG because we were playing sh***y defense.
Or how do you explain the many winning programs who now use a similar offense?
Which programs?
Ok, I'll play. Alabama. I will say this, if you are going to use an up tempo offense you better have depth on the defensive side of the ball because they are going to be in the field alot (or not, and just give up a lot of points). I don't care what offense or defense we use just that we win.
I'm no expert either on football or Alabama, but when I watched their game vs Miami their offense didn't look anything like ours when we had Tony Franklin. Their base personnel package seemed to be 1-1, ours was 1-0. They mixed in a little 1-2 and even 1-3 and almost never 0-0. We used 0-0 more often than we used a TE. They had a 50-50 run/pass ratio. Tony talked a lot about pad level in his podcast. Theirs was consistently lower than ours. The primary similarities seemed to be that they went up tempo liberally and operated exclusively from the gun.
But assuming we take Alabama as an example, you hit on the problem: they have 40 four and five stars in their defensive 2-deep. Can anyone name a winning (P5) program that uses a system like Tony Franklin's and isn't a perennially elite recruiting team?
In 2018, Leach and WSU went 11-2, 7-2 in the PAC-12, with a win in the Alamo Bowl, finishing #10 in both polls. WSU has never recruited well, much less "elite." Leach had a pretty good record at Texas Tech. If anything, the Air Raid let's you punch above your weight class. That was until the Alabama's, Oklahoma's and USC's of the world adopted it too. If everyone runs the same schemes, then talent wins, right?
Running tempo gives the offense some big advantages and can increase your offensive efficiency. However, as in basketball, the key with increasing tempo and thus the number of possessions for each team is your points per possession needs to be higher than your points surrendered per possession. If that is the case, tempo is good. If not, tempo is bad. Cal in Dykes first year (especially, but most years other than 2015) and Wyking Jone's first year show how bad tempo can be when you are not better on both sides of the ball.
The best defense to pair with a high scoring offense is a gambling, take away defense, rather than a "bend but don't break" defense. People worry about your defense getting tired, but they forget how tired the other team's defense is getting especially when your tempo is preventing them from making substations.
I do agree that any team that runs something like the TFS should also have a "jumbo" package, not just for short yardage, but as a complete change-up to mess with the opposition. I'd have one of the back up QBs practice it and run it.
