I know everyone really appreciate the breakdown of the Air Raid when Dykes came on Board and the tweaks to the O when Spavital joined us. Am really curious about an offense that had three 1,000 yard receivers and still uses a Tight End!

NVBear78;842796985 said:

---

I know everyone really appreciate the breakdown of the Air Raid when Dykes came on Board and the tweaks to the O when Spavital joined us. Am really curious about an offense that had three 1,000 yard receivers and still uses a Tight End!

---

Come on you experts. I am dying for your analysis. Honest no sarcasm.

The offense will look much closer to Oregon with a TE and a power running game in a spread concept. The TE can become an H back or A FB or split out. The nice thing about a spread power running game is there are less people in the box because the perimeter guys need to be accounted for. Then it becomes a counting game. You can speed it up or slow it down. You can count men in the box to determine run/pass. You can also determine men each side of the ball to gain man advantage or match up.

Easy to have a lead blocker with H Back or stay in for max pass pro. You can overload. Lots of options. Baldwin will also play to the strengths of the personnel if we have a read option QB, a pass first guy, a speed back like a DAT at Oregon, or a power guy. Much more versatile IMO. I love the spread but there is nothing like running the ball down the throat of the other team and breaking their spirit.

Ncsf;842797173 said:

---

The offense will look much closer to Oregon with a TE and a power running game in a spread concept. The TE can become an H back or A FB or split out. The nice thing about a spread power running game is there are less people in the box because the perimeter guys need to be accounted for. Then it becomes a counting game. You can speed it up or slow it down. You can count men in the box to determine run/pass. You can also determine men each side of the ball to gain man advantage or match up.

Easy to have a lead blocker with H Back or stay in for max pass pro. You can overload. Lots of options. Baldwin will also play to the strengths of the personnel if we have a read option QB, a pass first guy, a speed back like a DAT at Oregon, or a power guy. Much more versatile IMO. I love the spread but there is nothing like running the ball down the throat of the other team and breaking their spirit.

---

Thanks, Ncsf. Three questions...

How essential is it to have a QB that poses a running threat in this offense (the "Oregon"/"power"/"read-option" spread)?

What is the advantage to the "Leach"/"Air Raid"/"passing" spread? In other words, why run it? And, along these lines, do you have a "post mortem" on Cal's four years using the Bear Raid?

What is your opinion on the amount of time needed for an "adjustment period" to any new system, offense or defense? (I'm kind of thinking that aspect has been somewhat overblown on this board.)

I will take my answers off the air. Thanks again and Go Bears!

In another thread, killa22 said it looked like Baldwin's offense was "a passing spread with some nun n shoot elements" (hope I'm not misquoting). Interesting...

I've been impressed with the way both Wilcox and Baldwin seem to be willing to shape their schemes around the personnel they have. Also, I loved BB's similar comment about the importance of putting the QB in a position to succeed.

Big C_Cal;842797191 said:

---

Thanks, Ncsf. Three questions...How essential is it to have a QB that poses a running threat in this offense (the "Oregon"/"power"/"read-option" spread)?What is the advantage to the "Leach"/"Air Raid"/"passing" spread? In other words, why run it? And, along these lines, do you have a "post mortem" on Cal's four years using the Bear Raid?What is your opinion on the amount of time needed for an "adjustment period" to any new system, offense or defense? (I'm kind of thinking that aspect has been somewhat overblown on this board.)I will take my answers off the air. Thanks again and Go Bears!

---

In my opinion, the air raid is a simplified offense that focuses on one concept, vertical routes to spread the defense vertically and open up passing attacks by exploiting that most defenses focus on stopping short gains near the LOS. Baldwin's version of the spread is an attempt to merge the air raid with a more traditional running game, or pro-style offense. This enables a wider variety of looks that is harder to game plan against. The downside is that the offense is more complex to teach and recruit because you are teaching a variety of different formations and offensive styles.

Big C_Cal;842797195 said:

---

In another thread, killa22 said it looked like Baldwin's offense was "a passing spread with some nun n shoot elements" (hope I'm not misquoting). Interesting...

I've been impressed with the way both Wilcox and Baldwin seem to be willing to shape their schemes around the personnel they have. Also, I loved BB's similar comment about the importance of putting the QB in a position to succeed.

---

Depending upon the type of QB, the QB run game is a factor as well.

A lot of the pass game will look familiar in parts to what we ran under Tony more so than Spav. The majority of the screen game utilizes misdirection and motion to set things up which is nice.

There's a lot of similar concepts to the air raid -- lots of mesh, scat and snag. The vertical pass looks very run n shoot ish to me, especially in how the slots find action up the seam and how perimeter coverage is attacked by leverage.

If anything, i would equate it to more what Tony ran, with just a lesser emphasis on vertical RPO shots. I like what Baldwin does with the short and intermediate pass game, there's a lot of efficiency in how the concepts fit together.

Another point is how well he is able to utilize formations and personnel groupings to get action to his playmakers. Tony did this fairly well -- the two opening drives at Northwestern and at Arizona in 2014 are evidence of this, but we always ended up just running Power RPO and throwing four verts anyway.

Spav was all about screens and taking shots off of screens.

Ultimately, both were a similar approach, set up a play and use play action to get some cheap ones against one on one,

The run game that EWU used, lots of power read, inverted veer, wide trap -- then your standard inside and outside zone with a pin n pull with an H or F and RPO off of that.

Lots of nice short yardage pick plays. The more l watch them play, the more It looks TFS esque mixed with some RNS as opposed to an air raid influence.

Diverse spread run game, mix of west coast/air raid quick game paired with a run n shoot vertical game + RPO.

killa22;842797212 said:

---

Depending upon the type of QB, the QB run game is a factor as well.

A lot of the pass game will look familiar in parts to what we ran under Tony more so than Spav. The majority of the screen game utilizes misdirection and motion to set things up which is nice.

There's a lot of similar concepts to the air raid -- lots of mesh, scat and snag. The vertical pass looks very run n shoot ish to me, especially in how the slots find action up the seam and how perimeter coverage is attacked by leverage.

If anything, i would equate it to more what Tony ran, with just a lesser emphasis on vertical RPO shots. I like what Baldwin does with the short and intermediate pass game, there's a lot of efficiency in how the concepts fit together.

Another point is how well he is able to utilize formations and personnel groupings to get action to his playmakers. Tony did this fairly well -- the two opening drives at Northwestern and at Arizona in 2014 are evidence of this, but we always ended up just running Power RPO and throwing four verts anyway.

Spav was all about screens and taking shots off of screens.

Ultimately, both were a similar approach, set up a play and use play action to get some cheap ones against one on one,

The run game that EWU used, lots of power read, inverted veer, wide trap -- then your standard inside and outside zone with a pin n pull with an H or F and RPO off of that.

Lots of nice short yardage pick plays. The more l watch them play, the more It looks TFS esque mixed with some RNS as opposed to an air raid influence.

Diverse spread run game, mix of west coast/air raid quick game paired with a run n shoot vertical game + RPO.

---

I agree with most of this...it's what I saw in the WSU game vs EWU. I'm still geeked we're getting the TE position back. It forces teams to deal with another possible running lane and make teams possibly commit a safety to stopping it. I'm still salty we basically wasted Richard Rodgers...though to be fair, run blocking wasn't his strength lol. Besides Tony G, Craig Stevens was always my favorite Cal TE..great blocking TE with good size and good hands.

Spav also seemed to experiment with some power runs throughout the season -- I was really excited to see how it'd evolve next season with Vic back. I hope that Baldwin incorporates some of that especially now that we're putting more focus on TEs.

No pick six's or RZ ints or fumbles especially at crucial points of the game!!!

will we throw over the middle again? Jk but not really


Tempo?

H back vs H receiver is there much of a difference ? Duties/Responsibility ?
I'm guessing Hudson will get that work but I'm curious as to Vesay , will be come a primary Y Wr ?
Laris just might have the frame to get up to weight and playing at avBulletin high level.

Is the TE always the H ___?

Will there be a separate TE coach ?

Curious to hear his take on the offense talent on deck and the plan to execute his vision for success here at Cal.

What does he call his offense?

Of those that know about him what you call his offense/play calling style?

When is the last time he called plays?
Troy was their OC right

going4roses;842797218 said:

---

Curious to hear his take on the offense talent on deck and the plan to execute his vision for success here at Cal.

What does he call his offense?

Of those that know about him what you call his offense/play calling style?

When is the last time he called plays?
Troy was their OC right

---

One thing to keep in mind is that both he and Wilcox both seemed to say that it was important that they flex whichever system to fit the players.

Troy was their OC for one year (last year).

going4roses;842797218 said:

---

Curious to hear his take on the offense talent on deck and the plan to execute his vision for success here at Cal.What does he call his offense?Of those that know about him what you call his offense/play calling style?When is the last time he called plays?Troy was their OC right

---

I read one story where he joked that he called his offense the Nation Offense, because he borrows different things from different offenses all over the nation. Basically, his offense is a spread offense that combines the Air Raid with West Coast Offense and Pro-Style concepts. That's the best way to explain it. It doesn't really fit a pre-existing bucket. A lot of the time it will look like what we had under Dykes, but then he will switch it up and go with something more like what we saw with Tedford with tight ends and fullback/halfback sets.

Big C_Cal;842797191 said:

---

Thanks, Ncsf. Three questions...

How essential is it to have a QB that poses a running threat in this offense (the "Oregon"/"power"/"read-option" spread)?

What is the advantage to the "Leach"/"Air Raid"/"passing" spread? In other words, why run it? And, along these lines, do you have a "post mortem" on Cal's four years using the Bear Raid?

What is your opinion on the amount of time needed for an "adjustment period" to any new system, offense or defense? (I'm kind of thinking that aspect has been somewhat overblown on the board.)

I will take my answers off the air. Thanks again and Go Bears!

---

It is that you force the defense to defend the entire field, play in space and defend both horizontally and vertically. I read once where Leach tracks the number of plays that he calls to each quadrant of the field and seeks balance to each quadrant (not run vs pass balance as most do). Leach just gave an interview where he criticized the SEC for having offenses where they "put all their asses together and you could blow everyone up with a grenade". Leach/Air Raid, et. al. are meant to be the complete opposite of that.

To the original OP - in the very little I've seen of EWU when they've played PNW schools the offense looks like Oregon's on the surface but it has been much more pass-centric.

Ok and thanks

Lec says Sec offenses suck lol he is full of personality

Big C_Cal;842797191 said:

---

Thanks, Ncsf. Three questions...

How essential is it to have a QB that poses a running threat in this offense (the "Oregon"/"power"/"read-option" spread)?

---

To get into this, I'd say that there's one important thing about any kind of read run game (whether it's zone read, Power read, whatever): It's not a play that's meant for the QB to run the ball. Reading an unblocked defender is, first and foremost, a way to protect your base run game to the RB. In the zone read, the QB "blocks" the DE that he's reading. He's not doing this so that he can get big stats in the run game, but so that that DE can't make a play on the RB. The QB only needs to run the ball to keep that DE honest. If he's a great athlete then he can turn his runs into huge gains, which is why the zone read got people's attention, but at their core they aren't runs designed for the QB.

With that in mind, there are other ways to "block" an unblocked defender in the same way. You could leave a LB unblocked and have a WR run a slant at him. If he chases the run, then the slant is going to be open. The QB reads the LB and decides to either hand off or throw. You're accomplishing the same thing as the zone read, but with a pocket passer at QB. Obviously the very best thing is to have a QB like Brett Hundley, and to give him the option to: (1) hand off, (2) throw a slant, (3) run it himself, and (4) throw a screen if someone comes up on the QB run. Packaged plays that only have a run and a quick pass are at least as effective as the plain simple zone read, though, and we saw a ton of them with Tony Franklin and Goff.

Another aspect of the "Power spread" comes from guys like Urban Meyer, though. Meyer's teams aren't big zone read teams. They use the QB like a RB. Basically, they have a big RB that they can use like a FB, and he lead blocks on called runs to the QB. It lets you run 2-back plays out of 1-back personnel. You have to have a running QB to do that kind of thing, and Baldwin used some of these plays at EWU as well.

berk18;842797304 said:

---

To get into this, I'd say that there's one important thing about any kind of read run game (whether it's zone read, Power read, whatever): It's not a play that's meant for the QB to run the ball. Reading an unblocked defender is, first and foremost, a way to protect your base run game to the RB. In the zone read, the QB "blocks" the DE that he's reading. He's not doing this so that he can get big stats in the run game, but so that that DE can't make a play on the RB. The QB only needs to run the ball to keep that DE honest. If he's a great athlete then he can turn his runs into huge gains, which is why the zone read got people's attention, but at their core they aren't runs designed for the QB.

With that in mind, there are other ways to "block" an unblocked defender in the same way. You could leave a LB unblocked and have a WR run a slant at him. If he chases the run, then the slant is going to be open. The QB reads the LB and decides to either hand off or throw. You're accomplishing the same thing as the zone read, but with a pocket passer at QB. Obviously the very best thing is to have a QB like Brett Hundley, and to give him the option to: (1) hand off, (2) throw a slant, (3) run it himself, and (4) throw a screen if someone comes up on the QB run. Packaged plays that only have a run and a quick pass are at least as effective as the plain simple zone read, though, and we saw a ton of them with Tony Franklin and Goff.

Another aspect of the "Power spread" comes from guys like Urban Meyer, though. Meyer's teams aren't big zone read teams. They use the QB like a RB. Basically, they have a big RB that they can use like a FB, and he lead blocks on called runs to the QB. It lets you run 2-back plays out of 1-back personnel. You have to have a running QB to do that kind of thing, and Baldwin used some of these plays at EWU as well.

---

Good summary. The read option is meant to neutralize opposing DE's - often the other team's best athlete - by leaving them unblocked and forcing them to make a decision about who to tackle, the QB or RB. Having a running QB certainly helps punish the D more when the DE chooses to take the RB, but it is still effective to gain regular smaller gains too with a QB who isn't a super athlete. Also note, another benefit of the system is the person who normally blocks the TE gets to go downfield and block someone else instead, which increases the chances of a long gain.

It's funny because this sounds like what Tedford unsuccessfully tried to move us toward in his latter years. Hopefully Beau's system works for us. What it proves is that it's less about philosophy and more about execution that will determine success. Being reactionary most people tended to think that we would succeed if Tedford took us back to our 2004 offense but that isn't necessarily the case.

I'm hopeful that this offense will be great but the fact that it's complicated does lead me to wonder whether it will Lake for a rough 2017.

Does anyone know how well Beau did integrating young QBs? If I recall correctly Vernon Adams started 3 years so he must have been young at the beginning.

Those of you that like tight end play will like this one.

clawman;842797662 said:

---

Those of you that like tight end play will like this one.

---

That was a ballsy play call down 2 that late in the 4th q.

killa22;842797212 said:

---

A lot of the pass game will look familiar in parts to what we ran under Tony more so than Spav. The majority of the screen game utilizes misdirection and motion to set things up which is nice.

---

Is that not Spav's offense in a nutshell?

Vandalus;842797664 said:

---

That was a ballsy play call down 2 that late in the 4th q.

---

Thats BB

concernedparent;842797685 said:

---

Is that not Spav's offense in a nutshell?

---

Spav's offense in a nutshell was the screen game.

BB's offense uses parts of it, but it is not built entirely around the screen game.

Vandalus;842797664 said:

---

That was a ballsy play call down 2 that late in the 4th q.

---

That play is very similar to the fake FG that Sonny ran against NW on the opening drive of his tenure.

berk18;842797304 said:

---

Obviously the very best thing is to have a QB like Brett Hundley, and to give him the option to: (1) hand off, (2) throw a slant, (3) run it himself, and (4) throw a screen if someone comes up on the QB run.

---

Sounds like Vic might have a future in this system.