Bronco called Anae out without exactly naming him

Mingjai wrote:
Ever since Anae took over, I've thought that BYU could do the same things in pro-set or I-formation they were doing in the shotgun spread. The only difference is that offense wouldn't be tipping its hand to the defense by lining up in a certain formation.



For the past 5 years, when BYU lines up in I with tight line splits, it's either run 70% or play-action 30%. In spread with wide line splits, it's either pass 70% or counter-draw 30%. Against fast defenses, like TCU or FSU, the threat of a draw out of shotgun doesn't scare them enough to change their defensive call--meaning the defense will key on stopping the pass. The key is not where the backs line up, but the splits of the offensive line. The o-line splits dictate the type of play BYU runs.



When I watch USC and Stanford, I see the heirs to classic 80s BYU offense. Timing based throws, quick-hitting draws, power runs when necessary--all out of the same line splits. The wide line splits were supposed to help QB protection, but it didn't seem to make much of a difference for Max Hall against TCU, Utah, or Florida State.

kitic77 wrote:
Amen. Great post. I think BYU would be much more effective to run ONE offensive set and simply run more plays out of this set.

Mars wrote:

Amen. Great post. I think BYU would be much more effective to run ONE offensive set and simply run more plays out of this set.

Thirded.

mtnradio wrote:
Fourthed ... with one note:



I think the (wide) line splits were designed to open passing lanes, and less about protection. The protection was supposed to come from big, strong and talented guys up front. They can open up a passing lane, but that doesn't do any good if 1) the receivers don't hang onto the ball; 2) the defense knows its a pass and so has coverage sewn up; or 3) the QB is so green that he stares down the only receiver he'll throw to.

mtnradio wrote:

kitic77 wrote:
Amen. Great post. I think BYU would be much more effective to run ONE offensive set and simply run more plays out of this set.

Thirded.

Fourthed ... with one note:



I think the (wide) line splits were designed to open passing lanes, and less about protection. The protection was supposed to come from big, strong and talented guys up front. They can open up a passing lane, but that doesn't do any good if 1) the receivers don't hang onto the ball; 2) the defense knows its a pass and so has coverage sewn up; or 3) the QB is so green that he stares down the only receiver he'll throw to.

Lawboy wrote:
For how many weeks have many of us here been calling for BYU to go from the "I" formation, play smash mouth ball, and to let Heaps manage games rather than try to win them? When we do, it works really well. We run better from the I than the spread without question. It worked without fail v. TCU, yet Anae stubbornly refused to stick with it. It reminded me of Utah 2008 when we ran it down their throats but chose not to stick with it. And why not? Because Coach Anae is not a good play caller. The guy may understand an O, how to try to break down a D, but his play calling does not support it. And Bronco agrees with us. Read this:



On the struggles of the offense:



"It has a long ways to go still. From just a production standpoint, and use of our resources, and execution, and just confidence.

It is a good defense [we played against] today, so I don't want to only say it was about us, because TCU, every year they are a good defense, and statistically they are a good defense

You saw glimpses I think in that third quarter, with Bryan Kariya running the ball hard, and then we had some play actions coming off of it. That to me, that is kind of going to be the identity of where we need to go.

So I saw glimpses, still, against a good defense in the third quarter. And that would be what I will hang my hat on for kind of the identity of what we need to take from here."





Power football, with play action. Winning formula with our massive O line, inexperienced QB and inexperienced TE's, underperforming WRs. Wisconsin ran it down tOSU's throat last night doing just this. I

t is time to play power I, like USC, and get it done.



Source: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogs/byusports/50489416-65/team-half-tcu-defense.html.csp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mingjai wrote:
Ever since Anae took over, I've thought that BYU could do the same things in pro-set or I-formation they were doing in the shotgun spread. The only difference is that offense wouldn't be tipping its hand to the defense by lining up in a certain formation.



For the past 5 years, when BYU lines up in I with tight line splits, it's either run 70% or play-action 30%. In spread with wide line splits, it's either pass 70% or counter-draw 30%. Against fast defenses, like TCU or FSU, the threat of a draw out of shotgun doesn't scare them enough to change their defensive call--meaning the defense will key on stopping the pass. The key is not where the backs line up, but the splits of the offensive line. The o-line splits dictate the type of play BYU runs.



When I watch USC and Stanford, I see the heirs to classic 80s BYU offense. Timing based throws, quick-hitting draws, power runs when necessary--all out of the same line splits. The wide line splits were supposed to help QB protection, but it didn't seem to make much of a difference for Max Hall against TCU, Utah, or Florida State.