Why dont we run the TRIPLE OPTION?

[BrownBullsFan]

 

 

 

 

I hope we run a lot of Read Option.

 

It was very effective for us with Daniels and grothe running it 10-12 times per game. I hope Flowers runs it 20+ times per game this year.

 

I hope we run a lot of read option as well, but triple option is a completely different story.

 

didn't say anything about triple option. and they really aren't all that different. QB makes his read and either keeps it or gives it to a RB. triple option incorporates a FB.

 

 

Triple has many versions with most running the Wishbone approach and mostly taking snap under center.

 

Would never work here with our personnel.

 

I remember watching Devine and Washington play for N FT Myers when they ran the Wing T version.

 

Was very successful when you play teams that have a tough time tackling or lineman that can't move laterally.

 

Excited to see this new spread attack live and at game seed against the Rattlers.

 

not neccessarily a great source but from wiki

 

In recent years, as spread offenses have become popular, many teams have begun to run variations of the triple option with the quarterback in the shotgun.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_option

 

honestly a triple option just means a QB can either keep the ball or hand it to one of two other options. doesn't matter the formation or personnel.

 

the read option we used in the past had generally one option but sometimes two.

 

I'm not suggesting we run it out of the wishbone or even the i-formation(from beneath center). Just that we run the read option a lot this year (out of the shotgun with a single back)

 

 

The triple option he is referring to is the Ga Southern offense which is the most common triple option.  It's run out of a wishbone or full house set.

[bullsbucsfan426]

If we're going to argue the lineman stuff, we have the guys to run it.

 

We didn't recruit Knox, Gibbons (i'll say it since we did get him eventually), Bethel, Ruff, Galati, Hall, gudmundsson, and Jozwiak for no reason. They were brought here to run a power run game.

 

Of our 2-deep, Hall, Jozwiak, Ruff, and Dominique Threatt are all over 300. The rest are in the 280s. It can be done, though our OTs are a bit undersized. 

[Bull94]

 

 

 

I hope we run a lot of Read Option.

 

It was very effective for us with Daniels and grothe running it 10-12 times per game. I hope Flowers runs it 20+ times per game this year.

 

I hope we run a lot of read option as well, but triple option is a completely different story.

 

didn't say anything about triple option. and they really aren't all that different. QB makes his read and either keeps it or gives it to a RB. triple option incorporates a FB.

 

 

I was agreeing with you and was referencing the title of the thread, not saying that you said anything about the triple option.  

 

Oh and the read option and triple option are very different.  One is a play incorporated into a spread playbook and the other is philosophy that encompasses an entire playbook.

 

no they aren't that different. a triple option is just a play where a QB can either keep the ball or hand it to one of two options. you can run it out of shotgun. hell you can run it with one RB and a WR out of the shotgun formation if you want. you're talking about the wishbone offense. a read option is in shotgun with one back. you only have two options generally but you cn sometimes have a third option.

[BrownBullsFan]

If we're going to argue the lineman stuff, we have the guys to run it.

 

We didn't recruit Knox, Gibbons (i'll say it since we did get him eventually), Bethel, Ruff, Galati, Hall, gudmundsson, and Jozwiak for no reason. They were brought here to run a power run game.

 

Of our 2-deep, Hall, Jozwiak, Ruff, and Dominique Threatt are all over 300. The rest are in the 280s. It can be done, though our OTs are a bit undersized. 

 

The title of the thread is 'Why don't we run the triple option?', I'm just trying to point out why it's easier said than done.  Our current starting right tackle is a former walk-on converted from the D-line lol.

[BrownBullsFan]

 

 

 

 

I hope we run a lot of Read Option.

 

It was very effective for us with Daniels and grothe running it 10-12 times per game. I hope Flowers runs it 20+ times per game this year.

 

I hope we run a lot of read option as well, but triple option is a completely different story.

 

didn't say anything about triple option. and they really aren't all that different. QB makes his read and either keeps it or gives it to a RB. triple option incorporates a FB.

 

 

I was agreeing with you and was referencing the title of the thread, not saying that you said anything about the triple option.  

 

Oh and the read option and triple option are very different.  One is a play incorporated into a spread playbook and the other is philosophy that encompasses an entire playbook.

 

no they aren't that different. a triple option is just a play where a QB can either keep the ball or hand it to one of two options. you can run it out of shotgun. hell you can run it with one RB and a WR out of the shotgun formation if you want. you're talking about the wishbone offense. a read option is in shotgun with one back. you only have two options generally but you cn sometimes have a third option.

 

 

I understand that you can run it as a play, but the thread wants to know why we can't switch to a triple option offense (like Ga Southern).  This would be a change in philosophy that would most likely require a change in offensive staff to run it effectively.

[WWMJD]

I wonder if most of the people in this thread have ever actually watched Georgia Tech or Navy play. It's not just calling a play, it's an entirely different offensive philosophy.

[Bull94]

 

 

 

 

 

I hope we run a lot of Read Option.

 

It was very effective for us with Daniels and grothe running it 10-12 times per game. I hope Flowers runs it 20+ times per game this year.

 

I hope we run a lot of read option as well, but triple option is a completely different story.

 

didn't say anything about triple option. and they really aren't all that different. QB makes his read and either keeps it or gives it to a RB. triple option incorporates a FB.

 

 

I was agreeing with you and was referencing the title of the thread, not saying that you said anything about the triple option.  

 

Oh and the read option and triple option are very different.  One is a play incorporated into a spread playbook and the other is philosophy that encompasses an entire playbook.

 

no they aren't that different. a triple option is just a play where a QB can either keep the ball or hand it to one of two options. you can run it out of shotgun. hell you can run it with one RB and a WR out of the shotgun formation if you want. you're talking about the wishbone offense. a read option is in shotgun with one back. you only have two options generally but you cn sometimes have a third option.

 

 

I understand that you can run it as a play, but the thread wants to know why we can't switch to a triple option offense (like Ga Southern).  This would be a change in philosophy that would most likely require a change in offensive staff to run it effectively.

 

oh I agree we would need not only specialist coaches but also players to run a wishbone/veer offense.

 

 

 

I want to see a lot of the read option that we used in the past (maybe even incoporate a 3rd option in there ). spread the defense and throw short quick passes out of the same formation. we have the coaches and the personnel to run it. i thought Holtz was a genius the first half against UF until the stupid play call inside our own 20. he called like 15 option run plays in a row.

Edited July 31, 2015 by Bull94

[BULLZ]

 

If we're going to argue the lineman stuff, we have the guys to run it.

 

We didn't recruit Knox, Gibbons (i'll say it since we did get him eventually), Bethel, Ruff, Galati, Hall, gudmundsson, and Jozwiak for no reason. They were brought here to run a power run game.

 

Of our 2-deep, Hall, Jozwiak, Ruff, and Dominique Threatt are all over 300. The rest are in the 280s. It can be done, though our OTs are a bit undersized. 

 

The title of the thread is 'Why don't we run the triple option?', I'm just trying to point out why it's easier said than done.  Our current starting right tackle is a former walk-on converted from the D-line lol.

 

 

 

If we're going to argue the lineman stuff, we have the guys to run it.

 

We didn't recruit Knox, Gibbons (i'll say it since we did get him eventually), Bethel, Ruff, Galati, Hall, gudmundsson, and Jozwiak for no reason. They were brought here to run a power run game.

 

Of our 2-deep, Hall, Jozwiak, Ruff, and Dominique Threatt are all over 300. The rest are in the 280s. It can be done, though our OTs are a bit undersized. 

Absolutely I agree 100% we have the guys to run it. Weve been recruiting for a power run system so while we may not have the absolute top lineman we have decent enough lineman to create a push between Bethel, Gibbons, Thor, and the other guys. 

 

The whole "we have a starting D Lineman walkon" as our starter is crap, that oline hasnt been updated since spring where Thor was out, and we didnt have Gibbons or Bethel.....

 

Guys Im not talking about creating an all world offense Im talking about using the players that we have WHICH WE DO, in the most effective way. Between Flowers, Mack, Johnson, Tice, Swanson, and a few of these solid lineman we got, and this up paced no huddle offense were implementing if we ran the triple option I think we could see some success tiring out defenses and keeping them on the field not allowing them to adjust personnel. Big defensive front guys get tired quick, and if they get tired, there goes the line.

[Triple B]

 

 

If we're going to argue the lineman stuff, we have the guys to run it.

 

We didn't recruit Knox, Gibbons (i'll say it since we did get him eventually), Bethel, Ruff, Galati, Hall, gudmundsson, and Jozwiak for no reason. They were brought here to run a power run game.

 

Of our 2-deep, Hall, Jozwiak, Ruff, and Dominique Threatt are all over 300. The rest are in the 280s. It can be done, though our OTs are a bit undersized. 

 

The title of the thread is 'Why don't we run the triple option?', I'm just trying to point out why it's easier said than done.  Our current starting right tackle is a former walk-on converted from the D-line lol.

 

 

 

If we're going to argue the lineman stuff, we have the guys to run it.

 

We didn't recruit Knox, Gibbons (i'll say it since we did get him eventually), Bethel, Ruff, Galati, Hall, gudmundsson, and Jozwiak for no reason. They were brought here to run a power run game.

 

Of our 2-deep, Hall, Jozwiak, Ruff, and Dominique Threatt are all over 300. The rest are in the 280s. It can be done, though our OTs are a bit undersized. 

Absolutely I agree 100% we have the guys to run it. Weve been recruiting for a power run system so while we may not have the absolute top lineman we have decent enough lineman to create a push between Bethel, Gibbons, Thor, and the other guys. 

 

The whole "we have a starting D Lineman walkon" as our starter is crap, that oline hasnt been updated since spring where Thor was out, and we didnt have Gibbons or Bethel.....

 

Guys Im not talking about creating an all world offense Im talking about using the players that we have WHICH WE DO, in the most effective way. Between Flowers, Mack, Johnson, Tice, Swanson, and a few of these solid lineman we got, and this up paced no huddle offense were implementing if we ran the triple option I think we could see some success tiring out defenses and keeping them on the field not allowing them to adjust personnel. Big defensive front guys get tired quick, and if they get tired, there goes the line.

 

 

I think the point most are trying to make is that we start football next Thursday and changing to a triple option philosophy now is an impossibility ... for a myriad of reasons.

[BrownBullsFan]

I wonder if most of the people in this thread have ever actually watched Georgia Tech or Navy play. It's not just calling a play, it's an entirely different offensive philosophy.

 

+1