Joe Yearby

[LuCane]

I think we desperately needed a player like him last year. I think he'll provide something we desperately need this year: an alternative to Duke or supplement when Duke's in the game who can play in space. We didn't have that last year. Whenever Duke was out of the game, we ran zone running plays sparingly with Dallas - almost to keep the defense honest - and mostly ran power running plays.

We have to get to a point where a defense can't accurately predict our run/pass action and narrow down our play calls based on personnel. I think Yearby helps with that, so depending on injuries, I can see him picking up 6 carries a game and possibly a couple pass targets and give us what we hoped Clements would last year.

Wouldn't be surprised to see him used with Duke (in the slot, jet sweeps, end arounds, etc.) as the season progresses.

 

[Boarcane]

TP801
do you live in Tally? Do you work for Jimbo?


:ibisroflmao: come on shun...... Yearby is a great player and there's a very good chance he plays in the league, but just lol.....



why do you post on a Canes forum? We all know you are a Gator or Nole. Stop trolling and go to your team's site. Stop the garbage. Get a life.

 

[ghost2]

Stick to the topic please.

 

[WestEndZone]

I think we desperately needed a player like him last year. I think he'll provide something we desperately need this year: an alternative to Duke or supplement when Duke's in the game who can play in space. We didn't have that last year. Whenever Duke was out of the game, we ran zone running plays sparingly with Dallas - almost to keep the defense honest - and mostly ran power running plays.

We have to get to a point where a defense can't accurately predict our run/pass action and narrow down our play calls based on personnel. I think Yearby helps with that, so depending on injuries, I can see him picking up 6 carries a game and possibly a couple pass targets and give us what we hoped Clements would last year.

Wouldn't be surprised to see him used with Duke (in the slot, jet sweeps, end arounds, etc.) as the season progresses.

Those are great points. I agree with all of it. I talked a bit about the same things a few days ago on a different thread

"Spread" is such a vague and overused term these days. In our context I like to use it to describe our one back concepts. We're a one back team, we're a two back team -- but we can do it with two tight ends. I like it.

You can tell that we're trying to load our roster with versatile tight ends. Playing with versatile tight ends allow us to disguise our intentions. Normally, in a pro style offense, you try to platoon various personnel groupings that are each specialized for different parts of your game plan. Versatile tight ends allow you to be a one back team, a two back team, and a "spread" team all in the same personnel group.

An H-TE can serve as a FB, which allows the offense to run power/counter [double-down, kick, lead] and isolation [on] concepts. An H-TE can also serve as a wing or another TE, which allows him to reach on the perimeter [O-zone] or kick out the backside end [I-zone]. And of course they can play in the slot.

Ever noticed the defensive staff holding up cards with two numbers on them? (21,12,20,etc.). Pre-snap, the defense gets an opportunity to see the offense's personnel grouping, and they're able to get themselves into a favorable play/personnel (an offense's playbook is limited to personnel groupings). Flexible TE's ***** everything up

It allows an offense to have nearly unlimited formation and scheme possibilities. It's very hard to game plan for, and it forces the defense to install a ton of checks. If you're going to play base, then you almost need your players to call their own game. You need to give them front and coverage call rules, and they make their own calls based on what they see after the huddle is broken (theoretical huddle). You really need to be able to trust your F$ and MLB.

That's all fine and dandy, but I just want us to be a running team first. I want us to be able to pick up a first down on a 3rd and 3, like it was mentioned earlier. The worst death is a death on the ground. You physically feel a loss like that for two weeks. In the 90's and early 2000's we ran everything. We were a two back team, that was able to run one back concepts like outsize and inside zone. A while back I went one of the old school coach's clinics at the U and I remember asking Don Soldinger if we were a team that ran only a few plays well or if we were a team that ran everything OK. He look at me with a grin and said, "we run everything, and we run it well."

Also

I had a big problem last year in how we handled Duke's injury. If we Duke is healthy, then I have no problem being an outside zone or "stretch" team. That guy will pretty much always get a yard for us. When he went down, we didn't have a back on the roster with his skill set. We should have converted to a "power" (referring to man blocking schemes: double-down, kick, lead) team, like how we finished the UNC game. It made sense that we continued having success with our counter game (with Crawford). Counter is under power blocking principles.

I'm sure they have a logical reason why they never made a shift. Maybe they were too invested already. I know that power teams spend a tremendous amount of time teaching complex line calls. A team like Stanford--the quintessential power team right now--runs power to almost any gap they want, based on the defense's front. You almost need that kind of complexity to survive as a power team right now.

But that problem would have been solved with one more legit RB on the roster.

The answer always lies in recruiting.

I think we're on the same page with a lot of stuff.

 

[LuCane]

I think we desperately needed a player like him last year. I think he'll provide something we desperately need this year: an alternative to Duke or supplement when Duke's in the game who can play in space. We didn't have that last year. Whenever Duke was out of the game, we ran zone running plays sparingly with Dallas - almost to keep the defense honest - and mostly ran power running plays.

We have to get to a point where a defense can't accurately predict our run/pass action and narrow down our play calls based on personnel. I think Yearby helps with that, so depending on injuries, I can see him picking up 6 carries a game and possibly a couple pass targets and give us what we hoped Clements would last year.

Wouldn't be surprised to see him used with Duke (in the slot, jet sweeps, end arounds, etc.) as the season progresses.

Those are great points. I agree with all of it. I talked a bit about the same things a few days ago on a different thread

"Spread" is such a vague and overused term these days. In our context I like to use it to describe our one back concepts. We're a one back team, we're a two back team -- but we can do it with two tight ends. I like it.

You can tell that we're trying to load our roster with versatile tight ends. Playing with versatile tight ends allow us to disguise our intentions. Normally, in a pro style offense, you try to platoon various personnel groupings that are each specialized for different parts of your game plan. Versatile tight ends allow you to be a one back team, a two back team, and a "spread" team all in the same personnel group.

An H-TE can serve as a FB, which allows the offense to run power/counter [double-down, kick, lead] and isolation [on] concepts. An H-TE can also serve as a wing or another TE, which allows him to reach on the perimeter [O-zone] or kick out the backside end [I-zone]. And of course they can play in the slot.

Ever noticed the defensive staff holding up cards with two numbers on them? (21,12,20,etc.). Pre-snap, the defense gets an opportunity to see the offense's personnel grouping, and they're able to get themselves into a favorable play/personnel (an offense's playbook is limited to personnel groupings). Flexible TE's ***** everything up

It allows an offense to have nearly unlimited formation and scheme possibilities. It's very hard to game plan for, and it forces the defense to install a ton of checks. If you're going to play base, then you almost need your players to call their own game. You need to give them front and coverage call rules, and they make their own calls based on what they see after the huddle is broken (theoretical huddle). You really need to be able to trust your F$ and MLB.

That's all fine and dandy, but I just want us to be a running team first. I want us to be able to pick up a first down on a 3rd and 3, like it was mentioned earlier. The worst death is a death on the ground. You physically feel a loss like that for two weeks. In the 90's and early 2000's we ran everything. We were a two back team, that was able to run one back concepts like outsize and inside zone. A while back I went one of the old school coach's clinics at the U and I remember asking Don Soldinger if we were a team that ran only a few plays well or if we were a team that ran everything OK. He look at me with a grin and said, "we run everything, and we run it well."

Also

I had a big problem last year in how we handled Duke's injury. If we Duke is healthy, then I have no problem being an outside zone or "stretch" team. That guy will pretty much always get a yard for us. When he went down, we didn't have a back on the roster with his skill set. We should have converted to a "power" (referring to man blocking schemes: double-down, kick, lead) team, like how we finished the UNC game. It made sense that we continued having success with our counter game (with Crawford). Counter is under power blocking principles.

I'm sure they have a logical reason why they never made a shift. Maybe they were too invested already. I know that power teams spend a tremendous amount of time teaching complex line calls. A team like Stanford--the quintessential power team right now--runs power to almost any gap they want, based on the defense's front. You almost need that kind of complexity to survive as a power team right now.

But that problem would have been solved with one more legit RB on the roster.

The answer always lies in recruiting.

I think we're on the same page with a lot of stuff.

Really good stuff. What thread was that in? I didn't see it and would like to see the context of the discussion and just the discussion itself.

 

[jerzeycane]

I think we desperately needed a player like him last year. I think he'll provide something we desperately need this year: an alternative to Duke or supplement when Duke's in the game who can play in space. We didn't have that last year. Whenever Duke was out of the game, we ran zone running plays sparingly with Dallas - almost to keep the defense honest - and mostly ran power running plays.

We have to get to a point where a defense can't accurately predict our run/pass action and narrow down our play calls based on personnel. I think Yearby helps with that, so depending on injuries, I can see him picking up 6 carries a game and possibly a couple pass targets and give us what we hoped Clements would last year.

Wouldn't be surprised to see him used with Duke (in the slot, jet sweeps, end arounds, etc.) as the season progresses.

You mean that running Malcolm Lewis and two tight ends on to the football might key the defense to the fact that we might be running the football?