Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Are The Orioles Bad Or Unlucky With Their Young Pitching?

Quack On: How Chip Kelly Keeps Rolling

I feel like I need to start this with a confession: Oregon’s offense scares the tar out of me.  Sure, part of it is the scheme, but the thing that amazes me is how consistent it’s been with variant personnel and changes in coaching.  Chip Kelly’s been there for a while now (and is, for all intents and purposes, the architect behind what we think of when someone says Oregon – well, what we think of after Donald Duck), and it’s a testament to his performance that the same basics have governed his offense for years.

At its heart, Oregon runs a spread offense; of course, that doesn’t really tell you much of anything.  Yes, the Ducks try and keep things at a high tempo, but that doesn’t tell you much.  They try and confuse the defense, get advantageous matchups (of the 2v1 and 1v0 variety), and generally make things difficult, but that doesn’t tell you much.  The offense is predicated in large part off of two plays:

- Inside Zone

- Outside Zone

That’s it.  Well, okay, so that’s not really it, but that’s what pretty much everything is based off of, and that goes for both the run and pass game.  However: the devil is in the details, and …we’ve got some details. We’ve got a lot of details.

Star-divide

The Basics: Zone Read in Inside and Outside Zone

First off, what does a basic inside zone look like?  Generally, it looks something like this - note that for simplicity's sake, I've eliminated the deep safety; this is defending from a 4-2-5 look, but it's similar with a 4-3 and with the offense using a TE.  The guy in light blue is the guy getting "read"; he'll be unblocked, but that's intentional.

Graphic_201_20-_20zone_20read_20basics_medium

As these things go, this is pretty simple for the offense: the QB "reads" the action of the defensive end, and depending on where the defensive end goes, that dictates how the play unfolds.  Basically, the QB asks "where was the DE's first step?" - if it's out or straight down the field, then the QB opts for the handoff.  If the DE commits and starts charging diagonally across the formation in pursuit of the HB, then the QB will keep.  This will pull the DE out of position regardless of which way he goes, provided the QB makes the correct read.  At the double-teams (both DTs), one player will look to release to the second level and kick out the LBs as they flow to pursuit (in other words, finish their first block and move up to block the LBs)..

The defense has a pretty simple answer to this:

Graphic_202_20-_20scrape_20exchange_medium

This is what's known as a "scrape exchange".   The defensive end always pursues the HB; since the QB is reading the DE, he should see him pursuing the HB and opt to keep.  While he makes that decision, the LB gets past the offensive line and gets a free shot in on the QB.  That's pretty cool, right?

Against most teams, that works - but in this case it's not so simple.   Oregon in particular has a nasty response to the scrape exchange:

Graphic_203_20-_20zone_20read_203-tech_medium

This is a bit different.  The DT (which for our purposes, we’re going to call 3-tech – he lines up on the OG’s left eye, putting him in that gap) is now getting read.  Functionally, it’s the exact same play for the QB, except he’s reading the DT.  Oregon knows how to use both of these reads, and will use both during the game.  This has the intended side effect of confusing the defensive line.  It also makes things like the scrape exchange difficult, since both players that were involved with the scrape before are initially blocked now.

Outside zone functionally looks similar; however, instead of looking to cut, the halfback will instead look to bounce to the outside - instead of going between the guard and tackle, he'll look to run outside the tackle and toward the sideline.  This will punish the LB sitting on the 1-tech DT, and if the cornerbacks / safeties on that side can't shed blocks, it spells trouble.

Power Up

Inside / Outside zone aren’t the only rushing plays that Oregon run.  They will run fly sweeps and other plays based off this sweep (clearly identified by the WR running across the formation as the ball is snapped).  They do run counter, and they’ll run simpler stuff like power.  But that’s only half the story, because the other thing they’ll do is read.  Oh, will they read.  And just when you think they’re reading you, you get an offensive guard pulling and they roll a 15-yard power on you.

Graphic_204_20-_20power_medium

Doesn’t that just look like fun …or doesn’t it look remarkably similar to a typical power run?  (Note that the exact blocking scheme may change from play to play; this is a zone blocking scheme, so in this particular configuration the C would release to block the currently-unblocked LB.  Also, the routes the blockers take are, um, blockier than they are in reality.)  The poor DE we’ve been picking on all post gets unblocked again, but based on how the blocks flow, he’s going to have issues getting to the HB in time.  Oregon ran this play against USC a few times and actually had their entire OL flow away from the unblocked DE, effectively taking him out of the play, along with any LB poor enough to get stuck on that side of the formation.

The simple answer to all this is to get more guys flowing to the point of attack and overwhelm the blocking schemes.  However, Oregon will build checks into nearly every play.  Bring a CB blitz?  Better not motion that guy in before the snap, or they’ll run a quick swing pass to the now-uncovered WR.  Shade coverage over or bring a safety down?  Bubble screens and deep posts.  There’s an entire passing game that I’m not covering here that’s built in part on the same principles.  Oh, and we haven’t even gotten into the check-downs, bubble screens, and quick-outs designed to take advantage of defenses that get aggressive trying to stop the zone game.  So what the heck do we have to do to deal with this?

Justin Wilcox

It helps to have the guy who completely shut down Oregon last year at home.  If anyone knows how to stop this, it’s him – and it begins with knowledge and discipline.  To be honest, I haven’t seen enough film to figure out if Kelly gets into patterns where he’ll consistently read the same player (or will consistently vary), but discipline will reign supreme here, especially on the defensive line.

It’s key for the defensive line to not get frustrated if they get confused (and this will happen, hopefully only once but realistically a bit more than that).  Montori Hughes, Chris Walker, and Malik Jackson in particular are critical here; they’re the leaders on the line, and Jackson is the only guy we have who’s seen this before aside from Wilcox  We’ll see a lot of situations where one guy is unblocked; the key is how everyone else reacts to it.

The other key is not tipping our hand.  There are check-reads built into this offense that I haven’t even begun to cover, so we need to be disciplined.  If we’re going to blitz, don’t show it until it’s too late for them to do anything about it.

Note that this doesn’t just include the zone rushing game that we’ve already talked about – this also includes everything else the zone rushing game is used to build on.  It might be simpler to change what we’re weak against and hope for the best.  But we have yet another thing working for us.

Does Darron Thomas know how to run this offense?

Don’t get me wrong; Thomas in my mind deserves to be the starter, and Thomas is going to be one heck of a quarterback sooner rather than later.  He should have the ability to make most of the check-reads; remember that he’s been around for three years now.  But it’s not all roses.  He didn’t have the kind of game you’d expect against New Mexico (13-23, 220 yards, 2 TD, 1 INT), but the telling stat is that he had no rushes.  That’s generally been the case for his PT, in truth; the most carries he’s ever had in a game is six – and that was against Washington State, in 2008.  I don’t feel too bad if we sell out a bit to stop Kenjon Barner and force Thomas to actually be effective as a rusher.  Does it mean we get burned?  Maybe once, but I’ll take that chance.

What’s it add up to?

In a nutshell, there’s a chance.  I don’t think it’s realistic to expect the Oregon offense to be shut down on every drive, but I think we can get most of them.  Wilcox did a good job with Boise State two years running against this team, so there’s no reason to think the magic has disappeared.  Stopping this team can be done, and expecting us to do what Boise has done may be slightly short of fair, but certainly reasonable.

And if we can force Darron Thomas into having a bad game, so much the better.

Advanced reading

There’s a ton of information out there on Oregon’s offense – specifically their run game. Trojan Football Analysis dedicated a whole section to their rushing game.  Smart Football has a few posts on Chip Kelly, along with this beauty that has some film from last season's Oregon-Cal and Oregon-USC games.

Also, video repositories abound:

Oregon-USC 2009:

 

Oregon-Cal 2009:

 

Oregon-Boise State 2009 (watch this on mute):

 

Oregon-Boise State 2008 (again, mute this guy):

FanPosts are most often submitted by users. The views and opinions expressed in FanPosts do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by the editorial staff of Rocky Top Talk or SB Nation.

Comment 59 comments  |  9 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Brilliant!!

______________________________________________
I will give my North Carolina for Tennessee Today. Apparently.

by bobothevol on Sep 9, 2010 1:08 PM EDT reply actions  

Great write up!

Neyland Stadium-It goes to eleven.

by jimvols on Sep 9, 2010 1:09 PM EDT reply actions  

Great write up. 2 things for you...

- Thomas didn’t run against New Mexico because he was making the correct read. The read man was constantly staying home, so Thomas handed off to the running back like you state above in your breakdown. Part of the reason Barner had so many yards is because Thomas consistently made the correct read. Chip Kelly actually confirmed that in his post game comments.

- LaMichael James will be the starter and carry a majority of the load. He was only suspended for week 1 and will be back in the starting lineup this week, despite Barner’s success. Chip has mentioned numerous times this offseason that we’ll be seeing a lot of them on the field together. We actually started to see some of this in a new wrinkle at the end of last season. (Notice LaMichael James, #21, lined up at RB and Barner, #24, in the slot)

And in the Yell-O corner, with a 2009 conference record of 8 wins, 1 loss...the REIGNING...DEFENDING...UNDISPUTED Champions of the PAC TEN...the Oregon Ducks!

by MarineCorpsDuck on Sep 9, 2010 1:32 PM EDT reply actions  

On those:

- Thomas consistently hasn’t run when he’s been in. I was a little surprised that was how New Mexico went about things, but I wasn’t able to catch any replays of the New Mexico game. I didn’t know if Thomas was running a simplified offense or that was an adjustment NM made to deal with it. (Aside: was the read man staying home, or were they confused as to who the read man was and they just stayed stationary?)

I haven’t seen Thomas run much, period (save that random Wazzu game); from what little I remember of the spring game, he didn’t run a ton there. The caveat is that I’m not sure if that’s playcalling or reluctance to run; the 2008 game against Boise State was mostly passing too. Has it been correct reads the entire time, or has he never been put in a position where he needs to win a game with his legs? That’s more of what I was getting at.

- Totally missed LaMichael James coming back, and I knew they were going to use them on the field together, but I forgot. That makes read screens more dangerous than they would be otherwise, and I’m wondering if Kelly may pull out some zone read option (i.e., if the zone read is to the HB on an inside zone, if RB2 matches his run it allows for a speed-option type approach). I think I saw this once or twice in the spring game.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

- NM was Thomas’s first start, and he was yanked in the 2nd quarter because the score was already getting out of hand. The only game that he played any significant time was against Boise State in 2008 when he was a true freshman. When he came into the game the Ducks were down by 3 TD’s and threw pretty much every play. Here’s his passing attempts vs rushing attempts in game action:

Opponent Pass Rush
Boise State 25 2 (down by 3 TD’s in the 4th quarter when he came in)
Wash St 3 6
USC 4 4
Arizona St 0 1
Oregon St 1 0
New Mexico 13 0

The reason I’m posting that is to dispute the statement that “Thomas hasn’t consistently run when he’s been in”. The reason for not running against New Mexico is that, as Chip stated, he made the correct reads. He didn’t run against Boise because he had to try to make up a 3 TD deficit in 1 quarter of play. If you take out those 2 games, he’s had 8 passing attempts versus 11 rushing attempts in all other combined game action, so he is running it more often than throwing. To answer this question:

Has it been correct reads the entire time, or has he never been put in a position where he needs to win a game with his legs?

He hasn’t been in a position to win any game except against Boise St, which we know about, and New Mexico. The other games were mop-up duty, and bringing him off the bench for 1 play.

I think that what we saw in the New Mexico game was a case of Thomas making the correct read, and Chip keeping the secrets under wraps for this game. I’m really interested to see what, if any, new formations and wrinkles come up. Last year, before Blount lost his mind, he kept talking about using LaMichael James a lot in the types of situations that I think we’ll see Barner in this year (i.e. in the slot, 2-back sets, etc).

Another thing about Wilcox. I’m not sure if it’s been brought up here or not, and a lot of people are dismissing it, but there is at least some chance that it’s true…there has been talk that some teams may have been stealing out signals last season. I remember BSU looking at the Ducks’ sideline for playcalls instead of their own when they were on defense. It’s addressed some in this article, but it was enough to make the coaches change the entire play-calling system!

I’m really enjoying all the work on this site. Great job! When the Ducks played the home-and-home with Purdue the last 2 seasons, Purdue became our “Big Ten Team” and I have a feeling that will be the case after this series too.

And in the Yell-O corner, with a 2009 conference record of 8 wins, 1 loss...the REIGNING...DEFENDING...UNDISPUTED Champions of the PAC TEN...the Oregon Ducks!

by MarineCorpsDuck on Sep 9, 2010 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well, he hasn't run when he's been in.

The question I had was why. The other salient point is he’s only been successful running against Wazzu (those four carries against USC went for -1 yards). The Boise State game makes sense to me that he wouldn’t run a ton. At some point, though, we’re drawing conclusions from a sample size of N = 20, which isn’t the best approach. Hence, I was drawing from the larger bodies of work we do have, which didn’t have him running.

Did he run in the spring game?

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

First play of this video

There’s also some other times in there that he runs. I don’t think it’s a matter of IF he will run, but a matter of IF Wilcox tries to pick his poison of trying to shut down LMJ/Barner or make Thomas use his legs more. We’ll see.

One thing I noticed a lot in the BSU 2009 game was that Wilcox brought the safety down near the LOS to bring in an extra defender to stop the run. Do you think that will be the case with UT? How is your guy’s secondary in trying to match up 1:1 with WR and TE’s?

Hey Daisy, git me anudder one!
Addicted to Quack

by Matt Daddy on Sep 9, 2010 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

We did that a lot last week too with the safety

Last year we were exceptional at not giving up deep pass plays, even with Eric Berry playing a LB/safety hybrid role. We still have CB Art Evans and FS Janzen Jackson from that secondary, and the new SS Prentiss Waggner had a pick six last week. The other two guys are all potential at this point: redshirt freshman Eric Gordon at CB, and sophomore Marsalis Teague at nickel, who was playing WR five weeks ago. We’re excited about the future with those two, but the potential for a bust right away is certainly out there – UTM tried to pick on them last week and failed, but I’m sure Oregon will both go at them and have more success doing it

by Will Shelton on Sep 9, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

So you guys play a lot of 4-2-5?

Hey Daisy, git me anudder one!
Addicted to Quack

by Matt Daddy on Sep 9, 2010 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

Seconded

We basically have five starters at both linebacker and DB though, so we can go heavy on either one and not be concerned with the guys we have on the field. There’s a co-starter at corner and WLB, and our backup MLB was the player of the game last week (a pick and a safety). The aforementioned co-starters at CB, however, are both green. We have a safety who played behind Berry last year, but our other corner and FS are very experienced. Four of the five linebackers started multiple games last year, and the other moved over from fullback and is playing too well to keep on the bench.

by Incipient_Senescence on Sep 9, 2010 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Sounds like you have really good experience with you defense, it’s just a question of depth, am I right?

Really looking forward to seeing how an ESS EEE SEE defense does against this wide open misdirection offense and what schemes they employ.

Hey Daisy, git me anudder one!
Addicted to Quack

by Matt Daddy on Sep 9, 2010 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Here's our defense regarding depth/experience/skill

DE: Arguably our best player on D starts at DE. A USCw transfer starts at the other end spot. Another senior with good experience sometimes plays end. Two true freshman have been stellar in camp and are playing too well to keep off the field.

DT: One sophomore beast. An aforementioned DE backup (250 lb) forced to start at the other DT, due to injuries and lack of depth. A couple bigger guys are in the rotation, but they haven’t done much.

LB: Seven linebackers started multiple games this year. One graduated, one is still recovering from injury, and another is buried on the depth chart. The other four, plus a guy who played FB last year, are good to go in the regular rotation. That’s 3 seniors, 1 junior, 1 sophomore.

Safety: One sophomore who is probably among our top three defenders. One sophomore who didn’t ever play last year (because Jackson and Berry never came out). A senior backup looked amazing in mop-up duty last week, but I don’t think our starters will see much rest.

CB: One returning starter, one redshirt freshman who impressed in camp, one sophomore who just converted from WR last month and has already made it to co-starter.

Basically: Good skill/depth/experience at DE/LB. Promising skill at 3 of 4 spots in the secondary. Question at the other safety spot, and loads and loads and loads of questions at DT.

by Incipient_Senescence on Sep 9, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

I haven't read all the stuff on here but I can say that I haven't seen this:

  DT is both quick and fast. He keeps his head up and has much better ball security than Masoli. Coach Kelly said at Oregon Club that we won’t miss Masoli’s 40 yard runs because we’ll have Thomas’ 50 and 60 yard runs. He can also throw off of the run or while on the move much better than Masoli. Can he match JM’s tuffness? We might find out tomorrow, maybe not.

"If you can't copy 'em, don't imitate ''em."
YOGI BERRA

by Famous Duck on Sep 10, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

In this case, DT refers to defensive tackle, not Darron Thomas.

With that being said, I’d love it if our DT(s) were quick and fast tomorrow.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 10, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

OK, my bad.

ALL the DT’s (delerium tremons) are BAD.

"If you can't copy 'em, don't imitate ''em."
YOGI BERRA

by Famous Duck on Sep 10, 2010 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

I wouldn't be surprised if we did.

If y’all bring in a TE, I expect a shift to 4-3-4, but aside from that I expect most plays to be based out of variants on 4-2-5. I don’t think we’ll run 3-3-5 or anything like that; I expect to see more 4-1-6 than 3-3-5.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

I know Boise State switched to a 4-2-5 last year. They didn’t run that in ‘08 though. So I don’t know if it is Wilcox’s flavor of the month, or it was a personnel change.

it’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-L-W-A-R-M-A-N-D-F-U-Z-Z-Y"

by JShufelt on Sep 9, 2010 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't see a reason not to, if there's appropriate cover for it.

The danger is that running a lot of Cover 1/3 could be an issue against 4 WRs without ways to negate it (I was going to write more about that during ‘Bama week, since Saban makes his bones on that – but I haven’t studied it enough yet).

I almost think it’s more likely that if a safety comes down, we’ll see uneven rotated coverage and the safety function something akin to Bud Foster’s rover. The CBs / FS can then rotate into some kind of cover 2 shell, or maybe even a rolling quarters akin to Monte Kiffin’s response to Florida last year.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

or maybe even a rolling quarters akin to Monte Kiffin’s response to Florida last year.

That’s what I was thinking, the difference is Kelly is more akin to mix up the outside zone read with the inside zone read than Meyer was willing to against UT last year. If your corners start dropping early, Kelly will check to an OZR and let our really good blocking WRs get the RB some space to make plays on the outside.

Hey Daisy, git me anudder one!
Addicted to Quack

by Matt Daddy on Sep 9, 2010 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

On-snap motion is going to be critical.

We got in a bad habit against UTM last week of showing coverages pre-snap. That isn’t going to, um, fly this weekend.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

Here are a couple of runs from the Spring Game: Link & Link

I feel like he hasn’t run when he’s been in the game because of play-calling and making the correct read. I don’t feel like he’s not running because he doesn’t want to or anything. In fact, during Fall Camp, there was a lot of complaining from people that Costa (whom we thought was going to win the job) was handing off to the RB way too much and in the wrong situations.

All that being said, that’s just my opinion and until he actually starts running during games I could be wrong. Chip saying he made all the right reads makes me more comfortable than I was when I reviewed the stats.

One other thing…the QB competition was very close, so if Thomas isn’t doing well there’s at least a small chance that Nate Costa gets in the game.

And in the Yell-O corner, with a 2009 conference record of 8 wins, 1 loss...the REIGNING...DEFENDING...UNDISPUTED Champions of the PAC TEN...the Oregon Ducks!

by MarineCorpsDuck on Sep 9, 2010 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

That was what I was getting at.

I’d like to see how he runs in game situations, when challenged to. That’s partly a function of confidence in our LB corps, but there’s a strong element of “prove it”. But I do agree that he’s making correct reads in the film I’ve seen before; I just question selling out to stop him as a runner, it would seem.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

There's definitely something there

Thomas is able to run, but I don’t think it’s his strong suit. Stay away from the stereotypes that are spouted by so-called “experts” who don’t read anything but the headlines – Nate Costa is a better runner than Thomas, and Masoli was a much better runner.

That doesn’t necessarily change the fact that Thomas didn’t run against NM because he was making good reads and because Kelly didn’t have him in long enough to really open up the playbook. There was no need for him to run.

But I don’t expect him to keep the ball as much as Masoli did last year. First, because while he’s a solid runner, he’s not as good at it as our previous QBs (and Kelly does a great job of designing the offense around personnel strengths). Second, because having Barner and James on the field at the same time will mean more plays focused on giving one of those two the ball.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Sep 9, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

I expect to see some speed option off zone read.

However, I can see that happening one of a few different ways – either with RB2 parallel to the QB on the other side, or behind the QB. If he’s parallel, it’s optioning off RB1, but behind it can be speed option in either direction, but it requires RB2 to make the read as well.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

You’ll see a lot more of the double read option with both guys lined up in the backfield. And if the defense gets too aggressive, you’ll also see the double RB screen play that sent Barner on a 60 yard run for the end zone last week.

I expect to see both guys in the backfield a lot on Saturday. Tune into to tonight’s podcast if you want to hear me talk about it more.

/totally cheap plug :)

Hey Daisy, git me anudder one!
Addicted to Quack

by Matt Daddy on Sep 9, 2010 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Wow Graysnail!

Putting in some hours in the film room I see. Impressive work! Many Duck fans don’t even know the intricacies of the Oregon offence as well as you. It’s a tough nut to crack, but at least you know what you’re dealing with. We shall see how the Vols defense responds.

by Bubaduck on Sep 9, 2010 1:55 PM EDT reply actions  

Another thing you have to realize too

is that there are plays that Kelly runs that are straight hand off, power formations, plays that look like zone reads. He’ll do it to set up counters later and to keep the D-line off balanced and wondering was that a zone read or not? Kelly doesn’t have tendencies, he’s mentioned many times that he doesn’t script plays but just reads off what the defense gives him.

The biggest problem that Oregon had in the 2009 BSU game was how new the starting o-line was. They had a combined 22 starts going into that game, and this year all 5 starters are returning.

Great work putting this together. Thanks for talking with us Duck fans about it.

Hey Daisy, git me anudder one!
Addicted to Quack

by Matt Daddy on Sep 9, 2010 2:30 PM EDT reply actions  

So basically

The ‘10 Vols are the ’09 Ducks regarding experience. We had a combined 3 starts on O-line (all from Shaw, I think) going into this year, but 4 of the 5 will return next year. We’re also breaking in a new QB and RB (both juniors).

by Incipient_Senescence on Sep 9, 2010 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd fully expect that.

Part of the reason I put power in there is because there’s no reason not to run simpler runs if you have defenses guessing on complex stuff.

I’d also fully expect he has playcalling tendencies unless he’s spent a lot of time self-scouting. (Heck, Gus Malzahn gets into playcalling tendencies. It happens to nearly everyone.)

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think he has tendencies

but because he has options build on top of options built on top of options it’s really difficult to tell. For example, he started the games last year throwing the ball a lot. The first couple of drives were usually really pass heavy.

But it’s tough to tell if he’s calling an inside zone read play, a straight dive play or a screen. Or maybe he didn’t call any of it and the QB, RB, O-line and WR just read what the defense was doing.

I consider myself pretty astute on defensive schemes, but Kelly has been one guy that has always baffled me with his play calling. I can tell you this though, inside the 20, you’re going to get a steady diet of zone read plays until Oregon punches it in. That’s a tendency I’ve definitely picked up on.

Hey Daisy, git me anudder one!
Addicted to Quack

by Matt Daddy on Sep 9, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, and the issue here was one of brevity.

One of the fascinating things from the USC / Cal videos are the obvious (on replay) built-in checks. That, and your WRs are pretty good at blocking.

I suspect that his tendencies are to go bread-and-butter until something else is set up, then he exploits that for a bit. Then it’s back to bread-and-butter. Of course, the issue is that bread-and-butter also has 25 different kinds of jam, and he has some challah sitting around he’ll use sometimes, and….

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Thank you, Graysnail

Excellent stuff.

...just apologize for not thanking me.

by kidbourbon on Sep 9, 2010 2:56 PM EDT reply actions  

Rec'd

Fantasitc write-up. If your coaching staff is half as well informed as you guys are, I think my panic level will go up a tick or two.

axemen23: the human vuvuzela

by HoodRiverDuck on Sep 9, 2010 3:15 PM EDT reply actions  

Oh they'll be just as prepared

remember, Kiffin left and went to USC.

Hey Daisy, git me anudder one!
Addicted to Quack

by Matt Daddy on Sep 9, 2010 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Addition by subtraction

I’m all for it. Great, now I really do have to panic.

axemen23: the human vuvuzela

by HoodRiverDuck on Sep 9, 2010 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

James & Barner

The problem with this analysis, which is generally really good, is that ignores one thing you are likely to see at least some of on Saturday—a 2 RB set with James and Barner in at the same time.

Good luck to anyone figuring out what Kelly is going to do with both of those guys in the backfield.

by eloomis20 on Sep 9, 2010 3:52 PM EDT reply actions  

Strictly speaking

we’re likely to see some under center stuff and a tight end in the game at least once, while we’re at it. (Also, check the comments – we cover some of the 2 RB stuff further up.)

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 9, 2010 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

I doubt that you'll see much if any under center stuff unless we're really close to our own end zone.

Also, when Kelly was asked about the possibility of running the wildcat he answered that “We run the wildcat every play. Teams that use what is called the wildcat formation don’t usually have a QB who can run very well.”

"If you can't copy 'em, don't imitate ''em."
YOGI BERRA

by Famous Duck on Sep 10, 2010 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed; that type of set makes very little sense for their offense.

The only reason I can see it is if Kelly wants to go 2 RB / 4 WR or some such, but that doesn’t make a lot of sense either.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 10, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yup, I agree and, I agree with the many contributors herein;

This has been great fun on a great post and site. Thanx for your hospitality!

"If you can't copy 'em, don't imitate ''em."
YOGI BERRA

by Famous Duck on Sep 10, 2010 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

This was a great read

Should be an interesting matchup on Saturday!

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Sep 9, 2010 4:07 PM EDT reply actions  

Excellent Post!

Breaking down the inside/outside zone reads is always entertaining. Anyone who’s ever had the misfortune of being the DE or DT being read knows how frustrating it is to make one misstep and see the QB or RB taking off on a long run. Shutting down the read option takes a tremendous amount of discipline before and after the snap and every player on defense has to take care of their assignment.

Regardless of the outcome of this game, good luck on the rest of your season Vols fans! We look forward to seeing some of you at Autzen in a couple of years. Remember to bring your ear plugs!

"KENNY WHEATON'S GONNA SCORE!! KENNY WHEATON!!--Jerry Allen, 1994"

by M. Fletcher on Sep 9, 2010 4:42 PM EDT reply actions  

Good job, Graysnail.
You covered the basics really well.

it’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-L-W-A-R-M-A-N-D-F-U-Z-Z-Y"

by JShufelt on Sep 9, 2010 4:51 PM EDT reply actions  

That was a great breakdown,

Especially for someone who does not watch Oregon games all of the time. It took most of us Oregon fans quite some time to notice the technique of reading the DT instead of the DE.
Masoli was exceptional in his abilities to read both linebackers and defensive linemen, so we may see this offense move away slightly from the zone read game. We have not really been able to see much of this season’s offense yet, so it is tough to tell how it might be different.

Self anointed President of the Kenjon Barner fan club.
Only after disaster can Tennessee's defense be resurrected -Tyler Durden

by CaDuck on Sep 9, 2010 5:48 PM EDT reply actions  

Tremendous post

Great stuff…

You ain't hurt...

by Peter Bean on Sep 9, 2010 9:05 PM EDT reply actions  

Now do you understand????

I am not rubbing it in. I AM talking about Time of Possession (TOP.) UT actually won the TOP by over 3 minutes, I believe.

"If you can't copy 'em, don't imitate ''em."
YOGI BERRA

by Famous Duck on Sep 12, 2010 3:05 PM EDT reply actions  

Remember how TOP looked in the first quarter?

That’s what we were talking about that we needed to win. Didn’t get it, because we couldn’t sustain a drive in the second half. If we had, we might’ve given you more than two quarters of a game.

by Incipient_Senescence on Sep 12, 2010 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah

Winning TOP by 3 minutes doesn’t mean anything in a football game between either of two teams. We needed to win by 10+ or 15+ minutes for it to be a factor, which we did not. Really, Oregon’s drives took up more time per drive than Tennessee’s, we just got two extra because of a Special Teams fumble and TD by Oregon.

______________________________________________
I will give my North Carolina for Tennessee Today. Apparently.

by bobothevol on Sep 13, 2010 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

That said, it wasn't the sheer number of plays that was the problem.

In 28-29 minutes, Oregon ran 76 plays. That’s within the normal range of plays, if a bit on the high end of normal. Either way, fatigue should not have been a factor. And fatigue wasn’t the factor. The number of Vols who basically gave up on the game was the problem, and that happened long before Oregon ran that many plays.

As an aside, I tend to prefer number of plays as a metric of ball control over time of possession. With that, Oregon led 76-65 which speaks a little more to the advantage we saw than TOP does. Neither tells the whole story, obviously, but number of plays does seem to be closer.

by David Hooper on Sep 14, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, and I think that you still missed the whole point.

48-13 would seem to indicate not only a huge disparity in # of plays (3x as much?) but also in time of TOP. Neither of those things happened. Further, in the final time consuming drive in which UO ran the same play 9 of 10 times, the balance of TOP really leveled out, no intentionally but to end the game that was already over.

What I am trying to illustrate here is that this is an entirely new way of looking at college football. We had to come to this conclusion too after being last (or very close to last) in the the country in TOP three years in a row and winning 10 games each year.

Anyhow, good luck and beat the Stalkers…beat ’em bad!

"If you can't copy 'em, don't imitate ''em."
YOGI BERRA

by Famous Duck on Sep 14, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

sigh

This isn’t the first time we’ve dealt with this concept. We had this same discussion last year when we played Malzahn’s Auburn, and it’s something that came up when Malzahn was at Arkansas, though Nutt always didn’t let him run it at as fast of a tempo as he wanted. There may not be a lot of teams who are looking at playcount maximization as an offensive strategy, but Oregon’s not the only one.

But score rarely describes TOP differences that well. Florida has made a living off of that over the last two decades; both Spurrier and Meyer have had great success with huge plays, meaning they get the ball down the field in a hurry. They did it with fewer plays, but it still skewed TOP relative to the score.

Anyhow, we’re on the same page. You’ll have to trust me on that.

by David Hooper on Sep 14, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm still wondering how this devolved into a discussion on TOP

when the original post had nothing to do with it. ;)

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 14, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Aside:

this isn’t a new way of looking at college football offense, and it’s not as innovative as you’re making it out to be.

Buuuuuut: I also would rather not get into it in the comments here. Shoot me an email if you’d like to discuss further.

Simulated Gameday Experience - just like the real thing, only we have smoke machines.

by Chris Pendley on Sep 14, 2010 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, and I think that you still missed the whole point.

48-13 would seem to indicate not only a huge disparity in # of plays (3x as much?) but also in time of TOP. Neither of those things happened. Further, in the final time consuming drive in which UO ran the same play 9 of 10 times, the balance of TOP really leveled out, no intentionally but to end the game that was already over.

What I am trying to illustrate here is that this is an entirely new way of looking at college football. We had to come to this conclusion too after being last (or very close to last) in the the country in TOP three years in a row and winning 10 games each year.

Anyhow, good luck and beat the Stalkers…beat ’em bad!

"If you can't copy 'em, don't imitate ''em."
YOGI BERRA

by Famous Duck on Sep 14, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

I have to say

I’m really impressed with this breakdown. Thanks for the post.

Quack Quack Bitches.

by NewBorne on Sep 15, 2010 11:37 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Tennessee Volunteers.

SHOP THE ROCKY TOP TALK STORE

Gameday Depot University Apparel

Animated Drive Charts

RTT Classics

RTT Classics 2008 Animated BlogPoll2007 Animated BlogPollLOL! Your logo is so scary! Welcome to Rocky Top Talk Tradition! Fiddlin' on the Roof2008 Animated BlogPoll The Season of Which We Do Not Speak Pearlfection Case Study: 2QB Systems and the 2005 Tennessee Volunteers The 2007 College Football Blogger Awards The 2006 College Football Blogger Awards The 20 coolest college football logos The 10 worst college football logos The 29 most boring college football logos 2006 Animated BCS Race 2005 Animated Race to the Rose Bowl

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

Football opener vs. NCSU moved to Friday, August 31
Tee Martin leaves Kentucky for USC
Kenneth Bynum is All Vol!
Oh, look. Kentucky fans got their feelwins hurt.
Softball - #9 Tennessee defeats #1 Arizona State 3-0 in Tempe
#9 Lady Vols softball opens the season in the Kajikawa Classic
Peyton Manning's face is everywhere!!
Potential Alzheimer's treatment with results.
Volunteer baseball TV schedule announced
Feelslike98 Film Room

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

YouTube


Editor-in-Chief

Gameday_depot_hat_guy_190x190__no_drop_shadow__small Joel Hollingsworth

Senior Editor

Gromit_small David Hooper

Associated_20press_clayliston_1965_l_small kidbourbon

Tennessee_logo_small Will Shelton

Tumblr_lx1hpdd3yx1r2a42bo1_250_small Chris Pendley

Mutantenemy_small Incipient_Senescence

Ut_small Brad Shepard

Author

Avatar2_small rustytanton

Vols_dooley_hair_small Getoffmyvols

Pygmy_marmoset_small marmotman

Picture_081_small Joseph Stanley

Jackson_the_mule_avatar_small Jackson the Mule

Img_0171_small RockyTopinKY

6156218740_03c5ca84f5_m_small VolnVA

Top_small _trey_

Small Chien Rouge