Recent Comments
I would be happy to be wrong. They did run some zone blocking, but it was rarely stretch. They ran inside zones with the fullback leading inside. Most of the time it looked like a classic isolation play, but without double teams. Often, their version of the stretch was more like the old Green Bay sweep, where they would pull two guys, delay with Ball, and then have those two lead while sealing on the play side. It worked really well against cover 3 coverage because the guard would have time to get through traffic to kick him out.
So even with the clashing philosophies you would take Bostad over the other 2?
🚀🛡️
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." The point is because if you consistently get 10 wins, you may get 2 Auburn style bounces that go you're way, and suddenly you're in the championship picture.
🚀🛡️
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." I never suggested that every time you get close you change something. Risk for the sake of risk is just as pointless as consistency for the sake of consistency. What you do is try what got you there for a while until it becomes obvious it's not working, then you take a risk and change it up.
Which is exactly what Beamer did. It became obvious it wasn't working when we took a step back and went 7-6. So we changed it up.
Unless my memory fails me, I actually think that Wisconsin ran a large amount of zone blocking under Chryst/Bostad.
They definitely used a lot of power blocking (especially in goalline situations, hence all the td's being a power-O scheme in the highlight videos) but when I recall their games I remember being infatuated with the way they mixed their two schemes together to keep the defense off balance. I think this would fit in perfectly with Loeffler's scheme. Remember that time Loeffler bragged after the game he called the same run play over and over in the fourth quarter to seal the game? That play was a power-O scheme.
Again, this is going off of memory from games taking place in 2011. I could very well be wrong. If Bostad winds up being the man, a close viewing of his time at Wisconsin will settle that question once and for all though.
But, if we hired Bostad, I would probably be all like this.
00:00:46–00:00:58
EDIT The tool isn't working. Start at 0:46 end at 0:58.
Texas has run the spread (although Mack Brown, like Beamer, has not had offensive staffs that would be regarded as "innovative" in any way.) Searles has also had a national championship offensive line (at LSU... granted it was his first year and he didn't recruit those players.)
If the pick was in a vacuum, Bostad is my guy. But, given the comfort level with Beamer and the SEC/Big 12 recruiting prowess, and the background coaching multiple style systems and having success, Searles may be the guy.
My biggest worry is his recruiting in the areas that Grimes targeted (PA, NJ, and Ohio.) Searles has been more of a regional recruiter, ie, he recruits in his backyard. At Georgia, he hit in-state and Memphis, at Texas he recruited Texas. Can he go into homes in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New Jersey and get those kids to leave their home state and come to Blacksburg? That is a MUST, because talent besides Austin Clark and Matthew Burnell is SPARSE in the Commonwealth next year.
For sure, cause we definently don't need our own guys blocking each other, no matter if he wasn't on the staff of uf
Well said, French!
Except that cake is better.
I think that's what French meant
Would Searels be a better fit?
Thanks, French. Makes a lot of sense.
The Badgers run mostly man blocking, with lots of down blocking and pulling back side linemen to overload the point of attack. It is a system that creates a designed hole and the back tends to run to that location. It is more similar to VT's offense in the 90's (although VT used much more speed option.)
Here is video on Monte Ball's huge season in 2011. You will note, a vast majority of the running plays (especially after the first minute) are plays where the Badgers down block and pull someone through the hole.
Now, this is great, and Bostad is a great coach. They are mashing. But, the Hokies offense last season fully committed to zone blocking principles this season, and his group of linemen really adapted to it well (the backs struggled to get accustomed to the fluid reads of cutting off zone blocks, as the same play could end up with the back running inside or bouncing outside.) The Hokies only used down blocking and pulling guards on the inverted veer. More critically, Grimes was recruiting offensive linemen to fit a zone-stretch blocking scheme, as we discussed during the summer recruiting season.
http://www.thekeyplay.com/content/2013/july/1/grimes-recruiting-blueprint
This Grimes, zone-stretch archetype is reflected in this class. Our recruits are long, athletic, with good feet who can stay engaged on blocks and stretch guys to the sideline. I am not sure any besides Pettit are guys you watch on film and think they are going to be elite I formation drive blockers like a Jake Grove.
Bostad is a GREAT offensive line coach. I haven't even researched his recruiting record, but he has developed guys who were not necessarily elite recruits. They have had terrific running games, and currently seven of his offensive linemen play in the NFL including Joe Thomas (a seven time Pro Bowler) who was ranked the 18th best tackle in the country coming out of high school. His paycheck on draft day showed how much he improved. My only worry is can the Hokies take the personnel that in theory was supposed to fit a zone-stretch/spread multiple offense, and turn it back into the smash mouth approach, and if not, can Bostad adjust to Loeffler's style.
*I think Searles is the guy based on all the connections between Brown and Beamer, BUT, Marshawn Williams and Shai McKenzie look much more like a Wisconsin back than the kind of backs that succeed in the running game we saw last year.
It hard not to think Bostad is heads and tails above those other two. Somehow getting him on staff would be the one guy who could really eliminate he sting of losing grimes.
He's got the pro experience to sell to recruits and the college experience to know how to sell it to them (soemthing a candidate like say Todd Washington lacked and made me wary, TBH). Plus those lines at Wisky were the type of thing we all dreamed of having here.
Bostad is one of the names I would always use when people would challenge me about who exactly I thought we should replace BS with as OC.
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." The notion of a stepping stone necessitates that you continue escalating. When you no longer keep stepping up, you're no longer on the stairs you're just on a floor.
Now what you did is take my argument and try to make it absurd. I never suggested that every time you get close you change something. Risk for the sake of risk is just as pointless as consistency for the sake of consistency. What you do is try what got you there for a while until it becomes obvious it's not working, then you take a risk and change it up.
What's ironic is that Beamer did the extreme thing you suggests, just the opposite extreme. He kept doing the same thing over and over expecting the result to change. After 10 years it did, just not in the way he expected it to.
there really is no discussion...
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." Who the hell is Graham Watson? Some chick with a dude's name that no one has ever heard of. I'm sure her knowledge and insight are worth considering.
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." Taking risks like firing your obviously yerrible OC and OL Coach even though you are winning 10 games.
Do I really need to spell this out? The offensive coaching was obviously inadequate, the recurring and talent level on that side of the ball were plummeting, but Beamer didn't want to do anything about it because he didn't want to risk losing the 10 wins.
Then he lost the 10 wins and had to fire the problems anyway, so what was the point other than delaying the inevitable for 5 years?
Has Frank ever been fired from anywhere?
Oh boy another Pie discussion...
To quote Bobby Bowden:
"There are only two kinds of coaches; those that have been fired, and those that haven't been fired yet."
(I heard this in an interview that he gave a few years before FSU let him go in reference to one of his sons.)
Interesting that she would choose to make pie instead of cake...
This.
And Burrell sounds more likely to set fire to Lane Stadium than play his home games there. Hokiehater.