2015 Offensive Revamp

oleboy41

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,425
Reaction score
108
Points
63
So it looks like we're about to see a large shift in offensive philosophy. Part of this was planned as there was definitely an emphasis on the no huddle this offseason. However I do think part of this will be by necessity. With Plsek and Duke possibly out for the year our pure TEs are basically Lingen, Woz, Nick Hart and Witham. I don't know much about Hart but none of the other 3 are of the Plsek/Goodger mode of essentially being a 6th OL. At H-Back/FB we have Thomas, Gibson, Beebe and maybe Streveler. That's 2 true blocking back types and 2 receiving types. Plus we now have a ton of WRs. Combine the personnel with Kill's statements about the offense needing to put up 30 a game and I think we see a more aggressive offensive approach. We'll be more spread out, faster and hopefully more explosive. I know this isn't really new but with all the other talk about the offense its been kind of lost that we played much differently than we've played in 3 years against TCU. In addition to more 4 WR sets there was way more straight drop back stuff than in the past. As others on other sites have noted there was more drop back and less PA than we've ever really seen from this offense. If the trend continues it will be interesting to see how things progress.
 

Stuff

F.A.M.I.L.Y. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
1,157
Reaction score
299
Points
83
I think the next 3 games will show us which direction the offense is going.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
20,290
Reaction score
4,740
Points
113
I think we'll be fine. Broadening the play book could be a very good thing as I feel we are too one dimensional at times. We can still run power with the personnel we have. I don't see a problem unless we sustain more injuries. The biggest challenge is spreading the ball around to people other than Maxx, angd offensive like, particularly slow tackles. Lingen looks a little more athletic, Woz looked good. I'm excited to see the maturation of the offense this year as we move forward.
 

MaxyJR1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,960
Reaction score
2,092
Points
113
So it looks like we're about to see a large shift in offensive philosophy. Part of this was planned as there was definitely an emphasis on the no huddle this offseason. However I do think part of this will be by necessity. With Plsek and Duke possibly out for the year our pure TEs are basically Lingen, Woz, Nick Hart and Witham. I don't know much about Hart but none of the other 3 are of the Plsek/Goodger mode of essentially being a 6th OL. At H-Back/FB we have Thomas, Gibson, Beebe and maybe Streveler. That's 2 true blocking back types and 2 receiving types. Plus we now have a ton of WRs. Combine the personnel with Kill's statements about the offense needing to put up 30 a game and I think we see a more aggressive offensive approach. We'll be more spread out, faster and hopefully more explosive. I know this isn't really new but with all the other talk about the offense its been kind of lost that we played much differently than we've played in 3 years against TCU. In addition to more 4 WR sets there was way more straight drop back stuff than in the past. As others on other sites have noted there was more drop back and less PA than we've ever really seen from this offense. If the trend continues it will be interesting to see how things progress.

Will be interesting to see if a red-shirt gets pulled off an OT to get more depth and possibly put an eligible jersey number on them for some more blocking or some unbalanced attacks.
 



oleboy41

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,425
Reaction score
108
Points
63
I think we'll be fine. Broadening the play book could be a very good thing as I feel we are too one dimensional at times. We can still run power with the personnel we have. I don't see a problem unless we sustain more injuries. The biggest challenge is spreading the ball around to people other than Maxx, angd offensive like, particularly slow tackles. Lingen looks a little more athletic, Woz looked good. I'm excited to see the maturation of the offense this year as we move forward.

Can we still power run? Like we have in the past? Like I mentioned, we don't have the same personnel. We can't really line up in double tight and pound the rock like we have in the past as we don't have the horses to do so. And that's fine. You can still run the ball but it may look different than it has in the past
 

jaymil

Active member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
5,181
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Can we still power run? Like we have in the past? Like I mentioned, we don't have the same personnel. We can't really line up in double tight and pound the rock like we have in the past as we don't have the horses to do so. And that's fine. You can still run the ball but it may look different than it has in the past

I think Lingen and Wozniak are good enough blockers where we can still line up and play power football.
 

Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
836
Reaction score
0
Points
16
So it looks like we're about to see a large shift in offensive philosophy. Part of this was planned as there was definitely an emphasis on the no huddle this offseason. However I do think part of this will be by necessity. With Plsek and Duke possibly out for the year our pure TEs are basically Lingen, Woz, Nick Hart and Witham. I don't know much about Hart but none of the other 3 are of the Plsek/Goodger mode of essentially being a 6th OL. At H-Back/FB we have Thomas, Gibson, Beebe and maybe Streveler. That's 2 true blocking back types and 2 receiving types. Plus we now have a ton of WRs. Combine the personnel with Kill's statements about the offense needing to put up 30 a game and I think we see a more aggressive offensive approach. We'll be more spread out, faster and hopefully more explosive. I know this isn't really new but with all the other talk about the offense its been kind of lost that we played much differently than we've played in 3 years against TCU. In addition to more 4 WR sets there was way more straight drop back stuff than in the past. As others on other sites have noted there was more drop back and less PA than we've ever really seen from this offense. If the trend continues it will be interesting to see how things progress.

Given the speed of TCU's defense, I would guess that limited the PA calls and jet sweeps that was noted in another thread. Sometimes you have to adjust your offense based on the strengths of the team you are playing.
 

cjbfbp

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
10,341
Reaction score
4,737
Points
113
Broadening the play book could be a very good thing as I feel we are too one dimensional at times.

Agree, and since we no longer have last year's two offensive workhorses, doing that is probably as much a necessity as a generally desirable goal. Although the team didn't score a lot of points, the offense looked more diversified than usual in the first game. While the running game was underwhelming, it wasn't completely shut down like it was during most of last year's TCU game. Still, Minnesota had five more passing attempts than it had in last year's game and the team was hopelessly behind during most of last year's game. Running plays amounted for 52% of the plays from scrimmage in last week's game and 57% of those plays in last year's game.

My biggest concern is that no one right now, except for maybe Maye, appears to be a deep threat. Wish we still had Donovahn Jones.
 



oleboy41

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,425
Reaction score
108
Points
63
I think Lingen and Wozniak are good enough blockers where we can still line up and play power football.

Possibly. I think Lingen appears to be an adequate blocker and the jury is out on Woz. What I do know is that neither is likely to be as good as Goodger or Plsek in that area at this point. And even if they are, can you really base your gameplan around that when you only have those 2? That's like when Brew was determined to go to the spread but we didn't have any receivers and had to play Ralph Spry a ton. Sure you can mix it in but I don't think it can be this offense's identity at this point
 

jaymil

Active member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
5,181
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Possibly. I think Lingen appears to be an adequate blocker and the jury is out on Woz. What I do know is that neither is likely to be as good as Goodger or Plsek in that area at this point. And even if they are, can you really base your gameplan around that when you only have those 2? That's like when Brew was determined to go to the spread but we didn't have any receivers and had to play Ralph Spry a ton. Sure you can mix it in but I don't think it can be this offense's identity at this point

It's hard to say. They also have Miles Thomas. We don't know much about Hart, Beebe, Scarver, etc. I don't think we know enough yet to say for sure that they'll start to spread it out more. It's certainly possible but I wouldn't be surprised at all if we came out and ran out of power sets mixing in play action like we saw so much last year against CSU.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
25,622
Reaction score
3,765
Points
113
So it looks like we're about to see a large shift in offensive philosophy. Part of this was planned as there was definitely an emphasis on the no huddle this offseason. However I do think part of this will be by necessity. With Plsek and Duke possibly out for the year our pure TEs are basically Lingen, Woz, Nick Hart and Witham. I don't know much about Hart but none of the other 3 are of the Plsek/Goodger mode of essentially being a 6th OL. At H-Back/FB we have Thomas, Gibson, Beebe and maybe Streveler. That's 2 true blocking back types and 2 receiving types. Plus we now have a ton of WRs. Combine the personnel with Kill's statements about the offense needing to put up 30 a game and I think we see a more aggressive offensive approach. We'll be more spread out, faster and hopefully more explosive. I know this isn't really new but with all the other talk about the offense its been kind of lost that we played much differently than we've played in 3 years against TCU. In addition to more 4 WR sets there was way more straight drop back stuff than in the past. As others on other sites have noted there was more drop back and less PA than we've ever really seen from this offense. If the trend continues it will be interesting to see how things progress.

Interesting post. Lingen is a great blocker, but his body is not fully mature yet. I think he's generously listed at 247lbs, but guess would be closer to 240lb. Woz will never be a great blocker imo, partly due to his height making it hard to get low & get leverage. I think the one guy you may have missed was Noah Scarver who goes 6'5" 275lb & got plenty of snaps in camp. To be fair, I saw him make some impressive catches but never really noticed him blocking.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
31,216
Reaction score
9,187
Points
113
Interesting post. Lingen is a great blocker, but his body is not fully mature yet. I think he's generously listed at 247lbs, but guess would be closer to 240lb. Woz will never be a great blocker imo, partly due to his height making it hard to get low & get leverage. I think the one guy you may have missed was Noah Scarver who goes 6'5" 275lb & got plenty of snaps in camp. To be fair, I saw him make some impressive catches but never really noticed him blocking.

He's eligible this year, right?
 



Urbandale

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
1,871
Reaction score
1,266
Points
113
Very interesting. Another thing to consider: Perhaps a faster-pace, higher-risk type of offense (seems odd to type that about a Gopher team - perhaps it's a relative description) indicates a higher level of confidence in the defense. Playing slowly and eating up clock with the ground game reduces the number of possessions the defense faces. Maybe Kill now considers the defense up to the task of facing more possessions.
 


alchemy2u

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
5,430
Reaction score
1,946
Points
113
Kill has said the offense is the last piece to be installed and that had not yet done it last year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

killme

Active member
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
1,572
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Very interesting. Another thing to consider: Perhaps a faster-pace, higher-risk type of offense (seems odd to type that about a Gopher team - perhaps it's a relative description) indicates a higher level of confidence in the defense. Playing slowly and eating up clock with the ground game reduces the number of possessions the defense faces. Maybe Kill now considers the defense up to the task of facing more possessions.
I think this is a very good point. If the coaches think the experience Mitch, a good OL, and a few more weapons, we may be able take the reigns off a bit.
 

mkAz

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,013
Reaction score
1,370
Points
113
I hope they don't change too much, I think the system they run is fine, it just needs more consistent QB play. Grantland did a nice piece on the power run game here. I just love the toughness it builds, it also keeps your defense off the field and rested, and when going well it should also open up the passing game as you can make teams pay for stacking the line of scrimmage to stop the run. It's also a system that fits Minnesota well, there aren't a ton of great athletes to build a spread attack with but you can find big lineman who can open running lanes.
 

60's Guy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,622
Reaction score
1,708
Points
113
Given the speed of TCU's defense, I would guess that limited the PA calls and jet sweeps that was noted in another thread. Sometimes you have to adjust your offense based on the strengths of the team you are playing.

IMO this is the answer to your premise. Quoting another post you didn't like...we'll know much more after the first four games.
 

salzie

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
4,249
Reaction score
2,111
Points
113
I hope they don't change too much, I think the system they run is fine, it just needs more consistent QB play. Grantland did a nice piece on the power run game here. I just love the toughness it builds, it also keeps your defense off the field and rested, and when going well it should also open up the passing game as you can make teams pay for stacking the line of scrimmage to stop the run. It's also a system that fits Minnesota well, there aren't a ton of great athletes to build a spread attack with but you can find big lineman who can open running lanes.

nailed it

Our offense is geared to match our defense and overall style and shorten the game. It's by design

it's not sexy, but effective
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
20,290
Reaction score
4,740
Points
113
I think teams like Michigan State would take issue with not being considered a power run team. They have also developed a good passing attack and that creates versatility when necessary. Nobody is saying go to Air Raid and pass 60% of the time. Maybe 40% of the time, on average, is a good goal for us. We need a functional passing attack when playing teams that can load up to stop the run. Futhermore, it doesn't help recruiting if we rarely pass. It's hard to win championships without a serviceable pocket passing ability.
 




Top Bottom