We are trending away from under-center snaps, which I feel diminishes A-gap power running game. Hang in here.
Our base offense is predicated off of A-gap power, but we run power all the way out to D-gap. Not being under-center, IMO, “frees” the LBs to have more depth pre-snap, which then makes it more difficult for our Oline getting/releasing to and connecting at the second level. IOW, LBs are more difficult to get pads on.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bisonville: Making football coaches out of arm-chair-QB's and jock sniffers for years!
Today's CAS GASF = ZERO
RELUCTANT MEMBER of the TOHBTC
And, don’t believe everything you think—jussayin’.
Liberals of BV need not respond to my posts. I don’t need to get any more dumb.
Fair esp if there is a mesh out of offset. Tougher angles for second level fits if the backers have a quick trigger. On the flip side running Power from gun/pistol allows you to tag an RPO on the backside and keep a second level defender out of run support. I’m not sure how much NDSU utilizes tags as a part of the run game but that could be an answer. I love the formational balance of having the back in the dot under center but esp with a mobile smart QB I think it restricts your ability to conflict a defender and gain numbers.
Seems to me like the adjustments are all based around playing to the strengths and utility of Lances skillset.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You’re a bit beyond me here, but we do better power blocking in tight spaces, if that makes sense. It’s more seal, and release blocking and letting the RB run it up in there, and occasionally hitting a quick-opening seam. But we’ll take the 3-4 yard run for the most part and wait for something to break.
Another Bison fan here mentioned this earlier: we are patient and have a method to our madness (wear out the opponent) methodically.
Not sure that will work with the Ducks, and, as mentioned, we are getting away from that because of an Uber-talented QB. I’d rather see us stay the course and use Lance as a game-changer when called for and or at critical or unsuspecting opportunities.
Readers Digest version—>I feel we are more effective overall on O when we run QB under-center.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bisonville: Making football coaches out of arm-chair-QB's and jock sniffers for years!
Today's CAS GASF = ZERO
RELUCTANT MEMBER of the TOHBTC
And, don’t believe everything you think—jussayin’.
Liberals of BV need not respond to my posts. I don’t need to get any more dumb.
After the UFC fights tonight when everyone leaves I’m going to fire up some more NDSU tape to see for sure but my initial take is that NDSU is transitioning the offense to best take advantage of Lances legs. With ZR, QB Power or any other QB option run play you immediately get a numbers advantage against an even box. With the more traditional power run game you can just tag a run pass option on for example the back side hook defender. If he comes up to play the run pull it out and hit a seam or slant in the hook. If he stays disciplined hand the ball off and now if you win your 6on6 power run game (11 Pers for this example) you might be able to break a big one because you held the hook defender away from the play for an extra couple seconds.
My general issue with the more traditional power out of an under center 21 Pers look is it’s less flexible in terms of reading defenders and limits your ability to punish teams for cheating. If you’re getting the 4 yards a carry the efficiency based run games are based on it doesn’t matter because they can’t stop you.
2019 Oregon was primarily a efficiency run game as well: 11/12 Pers with a ton of split zone, tight zone and wide zone out of pistol. We didn’t run the QB much till the last two games so we just tagged an RPO. Pistol gave us balance from a formational perspective and the pistol allowed us to add RPO.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk