I was going to say the same exact post last week...why don't we run a wishbone / option type offense... why not play to our strengths ?
I don't get this idea.
We already run an extremely run heavy attack, with multiple run looks and formations for the run. We run the speed option and the power option and we have receivers in the mix as well with jet sweeps. We run 2 back sets (similar to the wishbone). Also a lot of read option and QB draws.
What is the difference? Sure it isn't the traditional triple option, but it is the run heavy attack that they ran at Nebraska back the last time they were really good. The difference is that our formations are a little more pass friendly. And we don't use a FB and the dive much.
D
Deleted member 308
Guest
I think the biggest difference between teams that you'd say "play that offense" and us is that those teams will almost never drop back even half the number of times we drop back. 21 pass attempts is really more like 30. Armani was sacked what 3 or 4 times? Gotta imagine he drops back and is pressured 5 or 6 more, so 30 drop backs. Drop that number to like 12-15 drop backs and I think that argument is effectively gone.
I think we do a decent job mixing up where the ball is going when keeping it on the ground, but wouldn't hate to see more option than straight-ahead, downhill running. Either way, I don't think it's the specific run plays called, I think it's the number of run plays that should be called.
Hardy freaking harr.
Well if you want to compare to AFA, who runs a triple option as we all know, they average 18 pass attempts a game this season. We average just under 21. So it's 3 passes a game.
Your right that's a huge difference.
D
Deleted member 308
Guest
I’m seeing 14 attempts per game, a better completion percentage of 50 (41% for us), and only 1 interception for AF.
It’s sad that they have a better passing attack than our star QB.
Let’s run that triple! What’s the worst that can happen? It’s not like Amari will panic and never make the pitch.
Can’t install something like that now. Maybe it could be criticized for not recognizing the complete inability to complete a pass and coming with something even more run oriented. But we are pretty run oriented now and we are facing stacks. So I’m not so sure scheme would make the hugest difference now that I think about it. We could have any offensive set you want, we won’t be a good passing team, we will have a strong running game, we will be heavily defended against the run.
In the end there are three options. Complete some passes and have a better shot at winning, don’t complete them and lose more than you should, or just run 80 percent of the time and try to overcome the mountain of run defenders. Or a fourth option, make a change at QB. I don’t see number four happening. I don’t see one happening. I’m guessing number three is what we will have here on out.
3 games. 13 attempts, 20 attempts, and 21 attempts if i remember correctly.
Sure they are passing it more efficiently, but we surr are running it better then them right now.
We have a run centric offense already. Its working. Thats not the problem
He has every single remaining game to lose from this point forward. Is that what you want? To those who have never coached and operated a read option attack, it takes just as much time to install as a spread attack. One week under the relatively new NCAA practice limitations is barely enough time to install one play let alone an entirely different offense with drastically different blocking schemes.
We didn't lose the last game simply because of passing in the rain, which we aren't likely to see every week from here on out.
Armani is a RS Soph. He can improve quite a bit over this season. If not, then it's next man up....that's how you build a winning program.
How sad is it for your comparison that we have a far superior rushing attack to AFA's wingbone offense?
Average Yds Per Rushing Attempt
UNLV = 6.35
AFA = 3.95
And even with the poor passing stats, we still average more yards per offensive play.
UNLV = 5.81 per play
AFA = 4.62
And more total offense per game
UNLV = 428.8
AFA = 402.0
Most importantly, and in spite of our poor passing attack, our scoring offense is superior to AFA per game
UNLV = 34.8
AFA = 32.3
Now that's what's sad.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 308
Guest
I quoted you directly from >
Thus, if I'm coming from left field, then it's because I had to go there to reply to your own post.
D
Deleted member 308
Guest
Sigh.
I didn’t bring up Air Force. Dcut did. I only started talking about Air Force because he wanted to make a comparison between UNLV and AFA. Please reread the thread and then slap yourself on the forehead and say “doh”
I have no grand argument about Air Force and UNLV or taken a stance beyond the fact that it sucks that they are better passers than we are. Cause they suck and so do we.
So when I read your posts, I have very little idea what you are going on about, what it has to do with me, or how it is a counter to my opinion that we suck at passing to learn that AFA sucks at running.
Please don’t start giving me statistics about left field.
When you post from left field, you'll get quoted and given statistics for left field. That's just how it goes.
You clamored for a triple option AFA is a pretty fair comp. Same conference, runs about as pure of a triple option as there is and have for years.
Point being is that they throw it 3 less times a game than us, and run is less effectively.
I like having an offense that allows the ability to pass it a little more easily. One of the biggest strengths of the team is our WR corps. I don't think we should relegate them to blockers only.
I think they are sticking to Armani to try to develop him quicker. It's hard to argue that he will get better as a passer in actual games vs sitting on the sidelines, or playing a different position.
If you think he won't get any better, that is fair. He may not. But it is also hard to argue that the potential of this team is at it's best if he does develop better as a passer.
You don't want to sacrifice the season for it. It is a tough call. But I don't think it is blind loyalty.
Point being is that they throw it 3 less times a game than us, and run is less effectively.
I like having an offense that allows the ability to pass it a little more easily. One of the biggest strengths of the team is our WR corps. I don't think we should relegate them to blockers only.
I think they are sticking to Armani to try to develop him quicker. It's hard to argue that he will get better as a passer in actual games vs sitting on the sidelines, or playing a different position.
If you think he won't get any better, that is fair. He may not. But it is also hard to argue that the potential of this team is at it's best if he does develop better as a passer.
You don't want to sacrifice the season for it. It is a tough call. But I don't think it is blind loyalty.
