What should our offensive philosophy be?

11,002 Views | 87 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by BearlyCareAnymore
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am sure most of you will say one that complements our heavy emphasis on defense (i.e. defense first). So what kind of offense is successful then considering our situation that has the following factors:

--defense first philosophy
--pedestrian recruitment of playmakers on offense
--investment in BB's system for key players like Garbers, Brown and the o-line
--if new offense is completely different from BB, do we transition slowly or rip the band aid off so players need to learn it from scratch?

Seems like this fundamental question needs to be asked before we start interviewing.
Fyght4Cal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm still trying to figure out Baldwin's system. But I do like our emphasis on the run/pass balance. Wilcox always emphasizes the importance of explosive plays (20+ yards). So clearly he wants quick strike capability, along with the ability to sustain drives. I expect that we will remain 'multiple', with increased attention on an effective ground game.
Patience is a virtue, but I’m not into virtue signaling these days.
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mobile Quarterback
Big O-line
Big Tight Ends

Everything else, do your best to recruit the best.

Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Our offensive philosophy should be very simple--Score more points than our opponent.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KoreAmBear said:

I am sure most of you will say one that complements our heavy emphasis on defense (i.e. defense first). So what kind of offense is successful then considering our situation that has the following factors:

--defense first philosophy
--pedestrian recruitment of playmakers on offense
--investment in BB's system for key players like Garbers, Brown and the o-line
--if new offense is completely different from BB, do we transition slowly or rip the band aid off so players need to learn it from scratch?

Seems like this fundamental question needs to be asked before we start interviewing.
.

2005 offense. 2004 adjusted for a QB better at running than passing.
AlphaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
49ers offense! Run first, mobile OL, beast TE, serviceable WR, QB who can make plays when needed, and a play caller that is top notch. Too much to ask?
89Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I loved the JT years when we had maulers on the O-Line, like Mack and O'Callaghan, and we could stuff it down teams' throats!!! I also like a big tight end, like C. Stevens, who could block and catch.
OneTopOneChickenApple
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I also like good blocking fullbacks who can also get crucial short yardage. Will Ta'ufo'ou, McMorris.
89Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OneTopOneChickenApple said:

I also like good blocking fullbacks who can also get crucial short yardage. Will Ta'ufo'ou, McMorris.
Man!!! Two players I LOVED cheering on!
CALiforniALUM
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Let's go triple option. Old school. Run correctly there is no way to stop it. Focuses on 4 year players. Works at academic institutions. Relies on players who are disciplined and who don't need to be 5* recruits.

Fyght4Cal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That'll fill the seats!
Patience is a virtue, but I’m not into virtue signaling these days.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Run an offense that is fun for the players and attractive to top recruits.
That means a balanced offense that utilizes all of our skill positions.
Run plays that are creative.
Focus on depth and development at OL so the plays will be executed successfully.
calgo430
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mis direction. deception. gadget plays. go for it. take calculated risk.
calgldnbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Play to win the game ..... (borrowed from Herm)
Cave Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Shanahan Niners, 2002-2005 Tedford, Harbaugh Stanford, Wisconsin, etc. Primarily under center, heavy formations, fullbacks**, tackles in 3pt sets except in shotgun, shotgun only on pass downs, etc. Power run blocking schemes, establish the run to PA pass, protection heavy pass schemes, etc. Be more physical than every opponent and dominate the LOS.

There is no reason an offense with bigger and tighter formations cannot also be creative. Invest in the superior intelligence of our players by relying on autonomous reads and options. Befuddle opponents with precisely choreographed pre-snap motion. Give your QBs who earn your confidence the authority to audible at their own discretion.

The end of the Tedford era traumatized so many Cal fans so severely that they forgot how incredibly effective this style of offense can be when done well. During the Tedford era this offense seemed to go stale mostly because our offensive coaching had declined severely in quality, but also partly because our offense was largely mirrored by the philosophies of the defenses we were facing while teams like Oregon and Texas Tech were benefiting from asymmetry of their lighter, spread field schemes against defenses that weren't tailored to face them. Over the last 10-15 years the CFB defensive world has adapted with lighter fronts and base sets intended to defend in space and depth. By going power, we will have the offense that forces uncomfortable asymmetry onto all of these defenses whose base sets feature 225# OLBs, or even 4-2-5 or 3-3-5.

Also, resist the temptation to rely on running the QB by design. Yeah it can be effective but it places the QB at excessive risk. Use mobility to defeat the pash rush and take advantage when containment is broken, not as a substitute for the ability to run with your RBs.

** There's a reason FBs are so frequently fan favorites. More than any other offensive skill position, FBs earn their keep by excelling at skills that make everyone else more effective while capturing very little individual glory. Teams that use FBs naturally promote unselfishness and physicality. Those are great things to have on a football team.
I Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yep, it's just this simple: score more points than the other team!
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Great thread question, KoreAm (and good timing!). I'm gonna go contrarian with it. NO, it doesn't need to compliment our defense. I honestly think that's something people say when they want to sound like they know football. What it needs to do is...

1. Score points
2. Move the ball
3. Not shoot itself in the foot with turnovers, penalties, minus yards, etc

I would go with something like an AirRaid, maybe with a bit more emphasis on running. A QB who can, first and foremost pass, with a high completion percentage, and hopefully run a bit, too. (Of course, wouldn't that be nice to have, all the time?)

Folks here are living in the past, citing their favorite offenses from their glory days, but people, it's 2019 (and it's only even that for a few more weeks).


Cave Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

Great thread question, KoreAm (and good timing!). I'm gonna go contrarian with it. NO, it doesn't need to compliment our defense. I honestly think that's something people say when they want to sound like they know football. What it needs to do is...

1. Score points
2. Move the ball
3. Not shoot itself in the foot with turnovers, penalties, minus yards, etc

I would go with something like an AirRaid, maybe with a bit more emphasis on running. A QB who can, first and foremost pass, with a high completion percentage, and hopefully run a bit, too. (Of course, wouldn't that be nice to have, all the time?)

Folks here are living in the past, citing their favorite offenses from their glory days, but people, it's 2019 (and it's only even that for a few more weeks).
It can't just be that those of us who want an offense like those have valid reasons for doing so? How far in the past does one have to be living in to want the offense the Niners run?

If I wanted to be similarly dismissive I'd say folks who want an Air Raid are living in a video game. There's a reason Air Raid teams tend to have lousy defenses, and it's not simple coincidence.
tigertim
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cave Bear said:

Shanahan Niners, 2002-2005 Tedford, Harbaugh Stanford, Wisconsin, etc. Primarily under center, heavy formations, fullbacks**, tackles in 3pt sets except in shotgun, shotgun only on pass downs, etc. Power run blocking schemes, establish the run to PA pass, protection heavy pass schemes, etc. Be more physical than every opponent and dominate the LOS.

There is no reason an offense with bigger and tighter formations cannot also be creative. Invest in the superior intelligence of our players by relying on autonomous reads and options. Befuddle opponents with precisely choreographed pre-snap motion. Give your QBs who earn your confidence the authority to audible at their own discretion.

The end of the Tedford era traumatized so many Cal fans so severely that they forgot how incredibly effective this style of offense can be when done well. During the Tedford era this offense seemed to go stale mostly because our offensive coaching had declined severely in quality, but also partly because our offense was largely mirrored by the philosophies of the defenses we were facing while teams like Oregon and Texas Tech were benefiting from asymmetry of their lighter, spread field schemes against defenses that weren't tailored to face them. Over the last 10-15 years the CFB defensive world has adapted with lighter fronts and base sets intended to defend in space and depth. By going power, we will have the offense that forces uncomfortable asymmetry onto all of these defenses whose base sets feature 225# OLBs, or even 4-2-5 or 3-3-5.

Also, resist the temptation to rely on running the QB by design. Yeah it can be effective but it places the QB at excessive risk. Use mobility to defeat the pash rush and take advantage when containment is broken, not as a substitute for the ability to run with your RBs.

** There's a reason FBs are so frequently fan favorites. More than any other offensive skill position, FBs earn their keep by excelling at skills that make everyone else more effective while capturing very little individual glory. Teams that use FBs naturally promote unselfishness and physicality. Those are great things to have on a football team.
Agree with all of this. Also: run-first, heavy schemes can succeed with three star talent.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

Our offensive philosophy should be very simple--Score more points than our opponent.
Brilliant. Hire this man.
ducky23
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cave Bear said:

Big C said:

Great thread question, KoreAm (and good timing!). I'm gonna go contrarian with it. NO, it doesn't need to compliment our defense. I honestly think that's something people say when they want to sound like they know football. What it needs to do is...

1. Score points
2. Move the ball
3. Not shoot itself in the foot with turnovers, penalties, minus yards, etc

I would go with something like an AirRaid, maybe with a bit more emphasis on running. A QB who can, first and foremost pass, with a high completion percentage, and hopefully run a bit, too. (Of course, wouldn't that be nice to have, all the time?)

Folks here are living in the past, citing their favorite offenses from their glory days, but people, it's 2019 (and it's only even that for a few more weeks).
It can't just be that those of us who want an offense like those have valid reasons for doing so? How far in the past does one have to be living in to want the offense the Niners run?

If I wanted to be similarly dismissive I'd say folks who want an Air Raid are living in a video game. There's a reason Air Raid teams tend to have lousy defenses, and it's not simple coincidence.


Agreed.

Also, problem with air raid is that you need to recruit a whole bunch of athletic wide receivers (something we've had trouble doing so far under Wilcox)

I think we are more likely to recruit TE/FB types.

Also someone mentioned this already, but there is definitely value in going big when the majority of college defenses are now geared towards stopping air raid/spread type offenses.

I would kill to take anyone off of shannahan's staff. That was one of the most creatively called games I've ever seen. Don't tell me fullbacks and TE's are boring after watching the saints game. They can be multiple when used correctly.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
all of a sudden BI adores a run-heavy/run-first offense
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cave Bear said:

Big C said:

Great thread question, KoreAm (and good timing!). I'm gonna go contrarian with it. NO, it doesn't need to compliment our defense. I honestly think that's something people say when they want to sound like they know football. What it needs to do is...

1. Score points
2. Move the ball
3. Not shoot itself in the foot with turnovers, penalties, minus yards, etc

I would go with something like an AirRaid, maybe with a bit more emphasis on running. A QB who can, first and foremost pass, with a high completion percentage, and hopefully run a bit, too. (Of course, wouldn't that be nice to have, all the time?)

Folks here are living in the past, citing their favorite offenses from their glory days, but people, it's 2019 (and it's only even that for a few more weeks).
It can't just be that those of us who want an offense like those have valid reasons for doing so? How far in the past does one have to be living in to want the offense the Niners run?

If I wanted to be similarly dismissive I'd say folks who want an Air Raid are living in a video game. There's a reason Air Raid teams tend to have lousy defenses, and it's not simple coincidence.


I'd say no D has a chance with Sonny/TFS brand of air raid.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OneTopOneChickenApple said:

I also like good blocking fullbacks who can also get crucial short yardage. Will Ta'ufo'ou, McMorris.
And can throw to - Chris Manderino, the best Cal FB in the last twenty years.



71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KoreAmBear said:

I am sure most of you will say one that complements our heavy emphasis on defense (i.e. defense first). So what kind of offense is successful then considering our situation that has the following factors:

--defense first philosophy
--pedestrian recruitment of playmakers on offense
--investment in BB's system for key players like Garbers, Brown and the o-line
--if new offense is completely different from BB, do we transition slowly or rip the band aid off so players need to learn it from scratch?

Seems like this fundamental question needs to be asked before we start interviewing.
A run first mentality with the ability to go deep

This requires......

Ability to control games via a strong rushing attack.
An OL that can master zone blocking concepts
A versatile TE who can block and receive equally well
A playmaker at WR who can stretch the field

And absolutely, positively NO pinball offense that puts unreasonable pressure on the D. We saw what happens when a coach goes down that path.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ducky23 said:

Cave Bear said:

Big C said:

Great thread question, KoreAm (and good timing!). I'm gonna go contrarian with it. NO, it doesn't need to compliment our defense. I honestly think that's something people say when they want to sound like they know football. What it needs to do is...

1. Score points
2. Move the ball
3. Not shoot itself in the foot with turnovers, penalties, minus yards, etc

I would go with something like an AirRaid, maybe with a bit more emphasis on running. A QB who can, first and foremost pass, with a high completion percentage, and hopefully run a bit, too. (Of course, wouldn't that be nice to have, all the time?)

Folks here are living in the past, citing their favorite offenses from their glory days, but people, it's 2019 (and it's only even that for a few more weeks).
It can't just be that those of us who want an offense like those have valid reasons for doing so? How far in the past does one have to be living in to want the offense the Niners run?

If I wanted to be similarly dismissive I'd say folks who want an Air Raid are living in a video game. There's a reason Air Raid teams tend to have lousy defenses, and it's not simple coincidence.


Agreed.

Also, problem with air raid is that you need to recruit a whole bunch of athletic wide receivers (something we've had trouble doing so far under Wilcox)

I think we are more likely to recruit TE/FB types.

Also someone mentioned this already, but there is definitely value in going big when the majority of college defenses are now geared towards stopping air raid/spread type offenses.

I would kill to take anyone off of shannahan's staff. That was one of the most creatively called games I've ever seen. Don't tell me fullbacks and TE's are boring after watching the saints game. They can be multiple when used correctly.


Agreed. I'd also consider "Power Spread" but the Niners and the Rams run offenses that are more than the sum of the parts and make stars of guys who wouldn't be otherwise .

The keys:
1. Develop a walkon OL (DL) program emphasizing strength training (like Nebraska). Lots of big smart 18 year old kids who are still growing and want the admissions preference to Cal. This can include international kids. The best get rewarded with scholarships down the road.
2. Bring in lots of big athletic kids and then sort out their position later. Many high schools go spread so that great future TE might be an OL or a DL. UH is run and shoot so Hawaii's best TEs leave the islands. Some schools these days don't even have football teams and have 6'6 260 lb athletes with good hands playing center on their basketball teams. Similarly there are guys playing basketball who could be great WRs. Invite guys from the Cal basketball team who haven't developed their shot by year 3 to walkon.
3. We have had great success with JC RBs over the years. Keep going to that well.
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't think it really matters. The most important thing is that the team execute and perform the system at a really high level.
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't think it really matters. The most important thing is that the team execute and perform the system at a really high level.
Pigskin Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OaktownBear said:


2005 offense. 2004 adjusted for a QB better at running than passing.
Yeah, i really don't want to see a repeat of the 2005 offense, thanks.

6th in PPG, dead last in completion percentage, dead last in passing yards per game, 8th in interceptions and turnovers per game.

Even if we had the next Lynch and Forsett on our team, I don't want that offense. And we definitely don't have the next Desean.
Pigskin Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AlphaBear said:

49ers offense! Run first, mobile OL, beast TE, serviceable WR, QB who can make plays when needed, and a play caller that is top notch. Too much to ask?
Maybe when we recruit the beast TE and have an OL that actually wins the LoS battle more often than not. Perhaps a good college offense would be a better measure.
Pigskin Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fyght4Cal said:

That'll fill the seats!
If it wins the conference, I'll root on the single-wing
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cave Bear said:

Big C said:

Great thread question, KoreAm (and good timing!). I'm gonna go contrarian with it. NO, it doesn't need to compliment our defense. I honestly think that's something people say when they want to sound like they know football. What it needs to do is...

1. Score points
2. Move the ball
3. Not shoot itself in the foot with turnovers, penalties, minus yards, etc

I would go with something like an AirRaid, maybe with a bit more emphasis on running. A QB who can, first and foremost pass, with a high completion percentage, and hopefully run a bit, too. (Of course, wouldn't that be nice to have, all the time?)

Folks here are living in the past, citing their favorite offenses from their glory days, but people, it's 2019 (and it's only even that for a few more weeks).
It can't just be that those of us who want an offense like those have valid reasons for doing so? How far in the past does one have to be living in to want the offense the Niners run?

If I wanted to be similarly dismissive I'd say folks who want an Air Raid are living in a video game. There's a reason Air Raid teams tend to have lousy defenses, and it's not simple coincidence.
Of course you think your reasons are valid.

Hey, the current 49ers offense is good, but is it that simple to just plug it in here? Can we trade Jake Tonges and two second rounders for George Kittle?

Don't look now, but a lot of the best teams in college football are using mostly spread concepts.
Pigskin Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cave Bear said:

The end of the Tedford era traumatized so many Cal fans so severely that they forgot how incredibly effective this style of offense can be when done well. During the Tedford era this offense seemed to go stale mostly because our head coach sucked at recruiting and developing good quarterbacks.
I fixed the typos in your post
Pigskin Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tigertim said:


Agree with all of this. Also: run-first, heavy schemes can succeed with three star talent.
Two things.

First off, the original post did not specify a run-first scheme, which was certainly not we had under Tedford and if you watched the most recent 49er game, it's not what they do either. They generally run the ball well, but they are not run first.

Secondly, when that offense worked really well for us, we had either a QB who has been in 8 Pro Bowls, a RB that has been in 5, and/or a WR that has been in 3. If you want to go to something extreme like what Paul Johnson did, yeah maybe you don't need the highest rated talent, but I don't think anyone is advocating for that.
Pigskin Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

Golden One said:

Our offensive philosophy should be very simple--Score more points than our opponent.
Brilliant. Hire this man.
It was brilliant. It was saying that the type of offense is irrelevant. Unless you were thinking one of us should apply for the offensive coordinator job, I don't think it matters much what kind of offense we want.
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.