Clemson Offense
McClatcher plays that position but he's not really known for his hands. He's a weapon, but he looked bad when he had to adjust or catch in traffic.
For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
Alabama played cover two and Watson hit the big TE in between the zone.
Alabama could play us straight up, get us in third and long and send pressure that the OL wouldn't pick up or Browning would simply crack. Clemson had Alabama winded but they also had them playing different defense that Watson was able to read and exploit.
Comments
-
Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
Mods, can we sticky this poast?!?1 @DerekJohnson @CheersWestDawg @ModsRoadDawg55 said:
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
We are also missing the great QB and most of the OL.
-
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
-
I've never seen a team with so many white guys and so many small people perform so well.
-
It's ok, no need to mention me as a mod. I know who appreciates my hard work on this bored.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Mods, can we sticky this poast?!?1 @DerekJohnson @CheersWestDawg @ModsRoadDawg55 said:
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
I like how Petersen doesn't play hurry up. I don't like what it does to defenses.AIRWOLF said:
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
A shitty offense is a shitty offense. Plenty of spreads are horrible dink and dunk bullshit.
Clemson and Auburn with Newton really had the only spread offenses I like. Oklahoma has a pretty good one too. Oregon's was good but didn't bring enough of the power element. -
The versions of Oregon's spread with LaMike and Darron Thomas brought the power. Those were good teams that went in and humiliated Stanford at home and ran the ball down everyone's throat. With the running stats those teams had, it's a huge stretch to dream that it was all finesse and smoke and mirrors. Early Chip was pretty solid.RoadDawg55 said:
I like how Petersen doesn't play hurry up. I don't like what it does to defenses.AIRWOLF said:
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
A shitty offense is a shitty offense. Plenty of spreads are horrible dink and dunk bullshit.
Clemson and Auburn with Newton really had the only spread offenses I like. Oklahoma has a pretty good one too. Oregon's was good but didn't bring enough of the power element. -
Their team speed beat Stanford more than power. Zone read and outside zone isn't really power football.creepycoug said:
The versions of Oregon's spread with LaMike and Darron Thomas brought the power. Those were good teams that went in and humiliated Stanford at home and ran the ball down everyone's throat. With the running stats those teams had, it's a huge stretch to dream that it was all finesse and smoke and mirrors. Early Chip was pretty solid.RoadDawg55 said:
I like how Petersen doesn't play hurry up. I don't like what it does to defenses.AIRWOLF said:
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
A shitty offense is a shitty offense. Plenty of spreads are horrible dink and dunk bullshit.
Clemson and Auburn with Newton really had the only spread offenses I like. Oklahoma has a pretty good one too. Oregon's was good but didn't bring enough of the power element.
They were really good. They weren't powerful. -
You can't gain yards off tackle with a pussy blocking for you, I don't care when or how the hand off happens.RoadDawg55 said:
Their team speed beat Stanford more than power. Zone read and outside zone isn't really power football.creepycoug said:
The versions of Oregon's spread with LaMike and Darron Thomas brought the power. Those were good teams that went in and humiliated Stanford at home and ran the ball down everyone's throat. With the running stats those teams had, it's a huge stretch to dream that it was all finesse and smoke and mirrors. Early Chip was pretty solid.RoadDawg55 said:
I like how Petersen doesn't play hurry up. I don't like what it does to defenses.AIRWOLF said:
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either.
A shitty offense is a shitty offense. Plenty of spreads are horrible dink and dunk bullshit.
Clemson and Auburn with Newton really had the only spread offenses I like. Oklahoma has a pretty good one too. Oregon's was good but didn't bring enough of the power element.
They were really good. They weren't powerful.
Oregon's O line was nails in the run game in those days. No they didn't run over you like Alabama does but it was purposeful inside running.
-
You don't say ...RoadDawg55 said:
I like how Petersen doesn't play hurry up. I don't like what it does to defenses.AIRWOLF said:
I know there are a bunch of spread haters on this board, but that is what a well-designed and executed hurry-up, no-huddle spread offense with a quality dual-threat QB does.RoadDawg55 said:For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
The combination of pace, personnel and formations forces the defense to play fairly vanilla. The spacing also allows reads and RPOs to be keyed off a single guy in space, which makes it that much easier for a QB to make pre-snap and post-snap decisions.
A shitty spread offense is no better than a shitty pro-style, wishbone or whatever. But a really good spread offense is very tough to beat, especially now that there have been enough tactical innovations in spread football to achieve a real downhill, power running game out of those personnel packages and formations.
Clearly Petersen's offense incorporates some of these things, but doesn't really commit to them either. -
The best way to not have something done is to request the mods to do it.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Mods, can we sticky this poast?!?1 @DerekJohnson @CheersWestDawg @ModsRoadDawg55 said:
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
People forget that I was the best mod in the history of the mod game. @Fenderbender123 a close 2nd.
-
I agree with most of this poast. But as to the bolded part:RoadDawg55 said:We are getting the big WR's and a playmaking TE, but we are missing the Wes Welker move the chains type like Renfrow is.
McClatcher plays that position but he's not really known for his hands. He's a weapon, but he looked bad when he had to adjust or catch in traffic.
For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
Alabama played cover two and Watson hit the big TE in between the zone.
Alabama could play us straight up, get us in third and long and send pressure that the OL wouldn't pick up or Browning would simply crack. Clemson had Alabama winded but they also had them playing different defense that Watson was able to read and exploit.
Hunter Renfrow (2016): 44 rec, 495 yds, 11.3 avg, long 35, 6 TDs
Dante Pettis (2016): 53 rec, 822 yds, 15.5 avg, long 61, 15 TDs
-
Pettis is probably better. That said, Renfrow has destroyed Alabama twice. Renforw also missed 5 games. Renfrow is a slot. Pettis plays outside. Pettis disappeared a little bit in the big games although it's tough to blame him for it too much.TTJ said:
I agree with most of this poast. But as to the bolded part:RoadDawg55 said:We are getting the big WR's and a playmaking TE, but we are missing the Wes Welker move the chains type like Renfrow is.
McClatcher plays that position but he's not really known for his hands. He's a weapon, but he looked bad when he had to adjust or catch in traffic.
For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
Alabama played cover two and Watson hit the big TE in between the zone.
Alabama could play us straight up, get us in third and long and send pressure that the OL wouldn't pick up or Browning would simply crack. Clemson had Alabama winded but they also had them playing different defense that Watson was able to read and exploit.
Hunter Renfrow (2016): 44 rec, 495 yds, 11.3 avg, long 35, 6 TDs
Dante Pettis (2016): 53 rec, 822 yds, 15.5 avg, long 61, 15 TDs -
Ok.CheersWestDawg said:
The best way to not have something done is to request the mods to do it.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Mods, can we sticky this poast?!?1 @DerekJohnson @CheersWestDawg @ModsRoadDawg55 said:
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that. -
Okay can someone who is not the mods sticky this?!?!? Thank you magicians of the internet!!RoadDawg55 said:
Yeah, they played down to their competition too often, but DDY was right about them.HuskyJW said:Clemson is better than UW.
Enough said about that.
-
RoadDawg55 said:
Pettis disappeared in the big games?TTJ said:
Pettis is probably better. That said, Renfrow has destroyed Alabama twice. Renforw also missed 5 games. Renfrow is a slot. Pettis plays outside. Pettis disappeared a little bit in the big games although it's tough to blame him for it too much.RoadDawg55 said:We are getting the big WR's and a playmaking TE, but we are missing the Wes Welker move the chains type like Renfrow is.
...
I agree with most of this poast. But as to the bolded part:
Hunter Renfrow (2016): 44 rec, 495 yds, 11.3 avg, long 35, 6 TDs
Dante Pettis (2016): 53 rec, 822 yds, 15.5 avg, long 61, 15 TDs
1. Made the game winning TD in OT against Arizona -- a pretty big game at the time as pointed by DDY: winning a road game when it mattered for UW in a long long time plus ending the long losing streak to Zona.
2. Punt returned the game winning TD against Utah. A big on the road game against a highly ranked Utah team at the time.
3. Grabbed the only UW TD against Bama in the biggest game of them all.
The two "big" games that he didn't do much -- USC and Colorado, Brownsocks couldn't deliver and in the case of Colorado, his service was not needed anyway as we! ran over the Buffs. On the other hand, he was clutch in the only two close wins of the season, but still ... -
Maybe Sean McGrew???RoadDawg55 said:We are getting the big WR's and a playmaking TE, but we are missing the Wes Welker move the chains type like Renfrow is.
McClatcher plays that position but he's not really known for his hands. He's a weapon, but he looked bad when he had to adjust or catch in traffic.
For all the talk about Browning's strengths pre snap, Watson was better. If Alabama played man, they went to a pick route or slant/drag for Renfrow or let Williams man up and make a play downfield. And water is wet but a running QB that is able to get a few yards by running under duress really fucking helps.
Alabama played cover two and Watson hit the big TE in between the zone.
Alabama could play us straight up, get us in third and long and send pressure that the OL wouldn't pick up or Browning would simply crack. Clemson had Alabama winded but they also had them playing different defense that Watson was able to read and exploit. -
I would read posts on Dawgboard that contained racism, Tubgirl, Goatse, revealing of personal information, and even bomb threats....but never deleted any of them. I felt like those posts made visiting the board an enjoyable, entertaining experience for the customer.PurpleJ said:People forget that I was the best mod in the history of the mod game. @Fenderbender123 a close 2nd.
-
Hello, my name is Aaron Fuller. -
I felt the same way. Unless I felt like fucking with IMALOSER and watching him send dave a bunch of PMs and getting one back from dave basically saying "lol what a homo"Fenderbender123 said:
I would read posts on Dawgboard that contained racism, Tubgirl, Goatse, revealing of personal information, and even bomb threats....but never deleted any of them. I felt like those posts made visiting the board an enjoyable, entertaining experience for the customer.PurpleJ said:People forget that I was the best mod in the history of the mod game. @Fenderbender123 a close 2nd.
-
Poeple forget that hondo ruined dogbored too. He was sucking Sark's dick daily
