Best Looking Triple Option We've Run in Three Years

[Dude69]

Can’t explain it but something changed in locker room. What ‘locker room’ means is, well, subjective I guess. But the boys decided to work together. Great effort! Great win! Go Army! Beat Navy! Under center didn’t hurt either. Did they not buy into bs and wanted to go old school? No clue. But that execution was not an accident.

[PrideandDream]

Can someone explain to me how we were able to make such a drastic change in a week?

Were these this years plays and blocking just under center?

Was this under center offense in the back pocket all year? I’m trying to wrap my head around how they seemingly changed offenses in a week and played so well.

Three things for starters,

1. All these guys had pretty extensive experience running the old offense.
2. Coastal was totally unprepared to play the kind of disciplined assignment football to stop it
3. We didn't run a ton of plays. We just ran a few. And true triple looks like 3 different ones anyways.

Monken said in the presser they'd been working on this for a few weeks. And had been running it in practice. He knew change was necessary after UMASS I suspect if not sooner.

But more importantly it highlights what I've said in a couple other posts and that is it's not impossible to implement a new offense. Now this was easier than any other change we could have made but when the scheme matches the players then it happens really fast. In other words Thatcher's scheme doesn't match our players. Not their athleticism and not their mindset. Under center triple does. It's fast, it's physical and it's imposing. It is perfect for teams with a chip on their shoulder.

I don't think we will move the ball on Navy like we did on Coastal. But I do think we will be physical and work to control the ball. Monken mentioned this several times in the presser. He thought with the new offense that we could still control the ball and control the game. And that turned out to be totally untrue.

PD

[Dong Fong '09]

It was impressive. I agree that it won’t be that easy now that teams will be expecting it, but that was the best version of the option for us in years.

Did we block it differently than last year?

I don’t know why, but it seemed like even on fullback dives, they were often running at different angles vs straight ahead.

[USMAPAFAN]

I also saw some great blocking on the perimeter plays by backs who obviously can’t cut. Monken mentioned this saying that although they blocked well we “left a bunch of yards out there”. I guess his feeling was some of the 7-10 yard runs could have been broken for more with the old rules were in effect. BLUF….we still executed very well.

[WrekDivr]

It looked like they had a couple of wrinkles to the old TO plays even though the total number of plays they ran were limited. For example they ran the option toward the slotback in motion instead of having him be the pitch back. Similar with the QB counter. This seemed to make it tougher for CC to know which way we were going to run it.

[kfan12]

Only 1 tiny bad call, imho. 4th and 1 w 4 min left. Ran Daily on a naked midline. Daily on a push sneak is 100%
Buchanan up the gut is 99%
Daily following Buchanan is 98%

Daily naked not so much.

Looked like he was supposed to follow Buchanan to the right and chose to force the issue inside. If he followed Buchanan, final score likely would have been 28-14.

[FSUBulldog0]

I also saw some great blocking on the perimeter plays by backs who obviously can’t cut. Monken mentioned this saying that although they blocked well we “left a bunch of yards out there”. I guess his feeling was some of the 7-10 yard runs could have been broken for more with the old rules were in effect. BLUF….we still executed very well.

I noticed this during the game. Multiple outside runs would have gone for even more yardage if the play side SBs were allowed to cut block.

[USMAPAFAN]

Having not played I’m gonna make a logical assumption. A slot back trying to block a line backer man v man on the outside isn’t a layup.

[kfan12]

Having not played I’m gonna make a logical assumption. A slot back trying to block a line backer man v man on the outside isn’t a layup.

The cut block rule limits the downfield impact of lighter players and that is what it was intended to do.

No matter what you do, the O line has to create and sustain blocks at the point of attack to manufacture 1st downs. We jsut haven't done that well for quite some time. Probably need to go after some heavier SBs.