Any changes to the O scheme?

[UNC71-00]

I'm enjoying this new activity we have on Blitz.


So here's something I pondered while watching UNC football last year:

Will Fedora change his scheme and sets to better take advantage of the players we have instead of those he thinks we have? Is he stubborn or are the guys capable but just not executing?

 

[gteeitup]

agree

 

[tarheelblueee]

Coach will fit mold the offense to what the players can do. Anytime u try to do the opposite it won't work.

 

[gteeitup]

Originally posted by tarheelblueee:
Coach will fit mold the offense to what the players can do. Anytime u try to do the opposite it won't work.

sorta like not understanding the value of 3-4 running backs until the notre dame game last year?...i think fedora is of the spurrier ilk, forget scheming for an opponent, "it's about what we do"...it's not a terrible philosophy if you can stop people.

This post was edited on 4/16 7:51 PM by gteeitup

 

[UNC71-00]

Originally posted by tarheelblueee:
Coach will fit mold the offense to what the players can do. Anytime u try to do the opposite it won't work.

So that's what happened last year?

 

[gunslingerdick]

Originally posted by gteeitup:

i think fedora is of the spurrier ilk, forget scheming for an opponent, "it's about what we do"...

It's a UNC thing because Roy is exactly the same way. Neither staff seems to watch film of the week's opponent. It's all about "doing what we do and making the opponent stop it". Like you said, with the right personnel, it will work and you can subscribe to that philosophy. But both Fedora and Roy appear to stubborn to admit that neither team has had the personnel to continue to go that route.

**I greatly apologize for bringing basketball talk to this board. In no way was I attempting to upstage the football program with my comparison.

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by UNC71-00:

Will Fedora change his scheme and sets to better take advantage of the players we have instead of those he thinks we have? Is he stubborn or are the guys capable but just not executing?

Fedora and Blake Anderson, the previous OC, were both adamant in post-hire interviews that they change schemes to fit personnel. I haven't heard that same committment from Littrell, although he hasn't done as many interviews.

Fedora and Anderson seemed to be very in sync when it came to offensive game planning and play calling. I haven't gotten the same feeling about Fedora and Littrell, and there have been suggestions that they didn't always mesh well in Littrell's first season. Whether that was just trying to understand each other or outright disagreements who knows. It would be interesting to be on the headset on game days.

To the original question, we know that Fedora likes to use multiple backs but Gio got a disproportionate number of carries when he was on the roster. Ebron led the team in receptions and yards in 2013. Last season, we often saw two-back sets, which was a wrinkle in the offense and something that a few of us were hoping for because of the talent and depth we have at the position (unfortunately, injuries to Logan, Hood, and Francis kept it from becoming a staple).

I think Fedora is stubborn but he's not stupid. That's three pretty clear examples of him knowing where his talent is (and isn't) and trying to get that talent the ball. You could even make the argument that Marquise's production as a runner has occurred because of the RB injuries and the ineffectiveness of the O line.

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by gteeitup:

i think fedora is of the spurrier ilk, forget scheming for an opponent, "it's about what we do"...

There's definitely some truth to that. I'd say that Spurrier has a much better history of exposing opponents' defensive vulnerabilities, though.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by gteeitup:

i think fedora is of the spurrier ilk, forget scheming for an opponent, "it's about what we do"...

There's definitely some truth to that. I'd say that Spurrier has a much better history of exposing opponents' defensive vulnerabilities, though.

Yep and yep.

Raising, you could be on to something with your post above, talking about how Fedora and Anderson seemed to be much more in sync than Fedora and Littrell have been. Another explanation -- or at least partial explanation -- though, could be simply the Jimmy and Joe's portion of the equation.

As someone brought up in the "1,000 yard RB or WR" thread, Gio did so well because he was running behind the likes of Cooper and Bodine who both start in the NFL as well as Hurst, and Gio, himself, was/is obviously a great NFL talent. We just haven't had quite the same collection of elite players -- at least on the O-Line -- since then. BD recruits vs Fedora's recruits and all that.

Hopefully that's a problem that gets rectified and I believe it is with players like William Sweet coming in to the fold. It just might not help us in 2015.

 

[UNC71-00]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by UNC71-00:

Will Fedora change his scheme and sets to better take advantage of the players we have instead of those he thinks we have? Is he stubborn or are the guys capable but just not executing?

Fedora and Blake Anderson, the previous OC, were both adamant in post-hire interviews that they change schemes to fit personnel. I haven't heard that same committment from Littrell, although he hasn't done as many interviews.

Fedora and Anderson seemed to be very in sync when it came to offensive game planning and play calling. I haven't gotten the same feeling about Fedora and Littrell, and there have been suggestions that they didn't always mesh well in Littrell's first season. Whether that was just trying to understand each other or outright disagreements who knows. It would be interesting to be on the headset on game days.

To the original question, we know that Fedora likes to use multiple backs but Gio got a disproportionate number of carries when he was on the roster. Ebron led the team in receptions and yards in 2013. Last season, we often saw two-back sets, which was a wrinkle in the offense and something that a few of us were hoping for because of the talent and depth we have at the position (unfortunately, injuries to Logan, Hood, and Francis kept it from becoming a staple).

I think Fedora is stubborn but he's not stupid. That's three pretty clear examples of him knowing where his talent is (and isn't) and trying to get that talent the ball. You could even make the argument that Marquise's production as a runner has occurred because of the RB injuries and the ineffectiveness of the O line.

If I take this at face vaule, then this strikes me as a little odd. Wouldn't Fedora have a pretty damn good idea of what Littrell wanted to do when he hired him? And lets say it gets a little into the season and Fedora isn't 100% satisfied with Littrell- then wouldn't Fedora step in and dictate adjustments? I understand that you have to let a coordinator be his own man, but if what the OC (or DC) is doing isn't consistent with original strategy, then isn't it incumbent on the HC to step in and make some changes?

 

[gunslingerdick]

Originally posted by UNC71-00:

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by UNC71-00:

Will Fedora change his scheme and sets to better take advantage of the players we have instead of those he thinks we have? Is he stubborn or are the guys capable but just not executing?

Fedora and Blake Anderson, the previous OC, were both adamant in post-hire interviews that they change schemes to fit personnel. I haven't heard that same committment from Littrell, although he hasn't done as many interviews.

Fedora and Anderson seemed to be very in sync when it came to offensive game planning and play calling. I haven't gotten the same feeling about Fedora and Littrell, and there have been suggestions that they didn't always mesh well in Littrell's first season. Whether that was just trying to understand each other or outright disagreements who knows. It would be interesting to be on the headset on game days.

To the original question, we know that Fedora likes to use multiple backs but Gio got a disproportionate number of carries when he was on the roster. Ebron led the team in receptions and yards in 2013. Last season, we often saw two-back sets, which was a wrinkle in the offense and something that a few of us were hoping for because of the talent and depth we have at the position (unfortunately, injuries to Logan, Hood, and Francis kept it from becoming a staple).

I think Fedora is stubborn but he's not stupid. That's three pretty clear examples of him knowing where his talent is (and isn't) and trying to get that talent the ball. You could even make the argument that Marquise's production as a runner has occurred because of the RB injuries and the ineffectiveness of the O line.

If I take this at face vaule, then this strikes me as a little odd. Wouldn't Fedora have a pretty damn good idea of what Littrell wanted to do when he hired him? And lets say it gets a little into the season and Fedora isn't 100% satisfied with Littrell- then wouldn't Fedora step in and dictate adjustments? I understand that you have to let a coordinator be his own man, but if what the OC (or DC) is doing isn't consistent with original strategy, then isn't it incumbent on the HC to step in and make some changes?

I completely agree with 71-00. It's weird to hear that Fedora and Littrel weren't always on the same page. Because in my world, if I'm the head coach, I say, "here's my page...get on it."

 

[gteeitup]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by gteeitup:

i think fedora is of the spurrier ilk, forget scheming for an opponent, "it's about what we do"...

There's definitely some truth to that. I'd say that Spurrier has a much better history of exposing opponents' defensive vulnerabilities, though.

yep, from four pass patterns the last 30+ years...as you are aware, spurrier has put many defensive players in the league as well.

 

[94tarheel]

The first thing I would like to see is more two back sets. Logan/Hood, Francis/Morris/Williams. Any combination with a decrease of QB runs.

Switzer/Prohl in the slot to take advantage of his speed against LBs. Bubble screens, bubble screens, bubble screens.

Mack Hollins stretching the D with Bug and Q dragging across the middle.

Throw in a couple of TE passes up the mid field seams.

But most importantly, stop getting cute and trying to out trick the opponent. If we are within the 5 yard line, line up and punch the D in the mouth on 1st with Hood. If we don't get it, then a jump ball to Q, Bug or Mack. If that doesn't work, then line back up and punch them again with Hood. Hood does not come off the field on goal line situations, period.

 

[Raising Heel]

Originally posted by UNC71-00:

If I take this at face vaule, then this strikes me as a little odd.

I'm only passing along rumblings I've heard, which may not have any basis in truth. Was just trying to provide context for some of the strange play calling we saw last year. The point was that regardless of the coordinator, Fedora has been willing to modify the offense to focus on its strengths.

 

[UNC_Blue]

Originally posted by Raising Heel:

Originally posted by UNC71-00:

If I take this at face vaule, then this strikes me as a little odd.

I'm only passing along rumblings I've heard, which may not have any basis in truth. Was just trying to provide context for some of the strange play calling we saw last year. The point was that regardless of the coordinator, Fedora has been willing to modify the offense to focus on its strengths.

Heard that as well, in fact (while the season was going on) I was told that Fedora took over the play calling. Incidentally, those games covered when our offense played much, much better.

That said, I think it was a case of Fedora knowing the offense and personnel better than Seth did. Not that he disliked Seth, because we could have easily replaced him in the off season if there was a conflict.

 

[uncboy10]

Shrink the playbook. Stop being cute.

 

[Tigertown_a_Rick]

Originally posted by uncboy10:
Shrink the playbook. Stop being cute.

I think this is more to the point of what needs to be done, especially inside the 20yd line.......If Ty' Shon Williams is as good as he seems to be, both he and Hood would be a load on first and goal situations, and it could also help Marquise Williams with a bootleg here and there.....Carolina's got talent.... Very Good Talent.....And we need to use it....Hopefully, the O-line will mature and grow over those first few games this season to where we can better utilize our offensive weapons, which are many!.....A productive offense will help our defense tremendously, and we all know that the defense needs as much help as it can get!

 

[TarHeelNation11]

As I believe has been mentioned already, the main change I want to see is the willingness to adapt and to scrap the spread formation when the need arises -- most notably, inside the red zone, specifically inside the 5. Sometimes, you just need to be able to line up with two backs in the back field, zero or one wide receiver out wide, and just overpower the d-line and punch it in. We have the backs and the QB to do it. It just remains to be seen if we have the O-Line to do it...

It isn't a secret that the biggest drawback of the spread offense is that it becomes harder to run inside the 10. You can no longer spread the field horizontally because the field itself is already shrunk and the DB's and LB's can play closer to the line and more in the box, respectively. This, compounded with our kicking issues (which seemingly won't be any better this season unless the light comes on for Freeman Jones) means RZ possessions will always be a bit of an adventure (to put it lightly) if we don't adapt.

Of course, all that being said, we did OK in the red zone last year due to Quise's tough running and, frankly, due to the necessity to go for it a lot on 4th down because our kicking was terrible and because we knew we needed 6 not 3 because of our defense.

 

[Raising Heel]

^^^ Good post. I think you cited all the factors that allowed us to be so successful in the red zone last season, none of which existed in 2013 when we were so bad there.

We managed to finish 2014 ranked 5th nationally in red zone TD percentage.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Originally posted by TarHeelNation11:
As I believe has been mentioned already, the main change I want to see is the willingness to adapt and to scrap the spread formation when the need arises -- most notably, inside the red zone, specifically inside the 5. Sometimes, you just need to be able to line up with two backs in the back field, zero or one wide receiver out wide, and just overpower the d-line and punch it in. We have the backs and the QB to do it. It just remains to be seen if we have the O-Line to do it...

Yes! Yes, yes, yes! Stanford style. I loathe the spread but whatever, I can stomach it moving us down the field. But when the ball gets inside the 5, it's no longer about scheme. It's about toughness and wanting it more.