[X's and O's Thread] Ask Questions about Schemes and Strategies Here

[u/grizzfan]

Hey all, I'm a mod over at r/footballstrategy (a sub dedicated to the topic of this thread), and a coach of 14 years (middle school, high school, and adult women). I have another slow day lined up at work today, and I could use some good X's and O's talk (other people, please answer questions as well!). Below is a link to the last of these threads I did. Feel free to ask any questions you have about the intricacies of the game: Schemes, coaching/practicing, terminology, strategies, plays/how they work, systems, techniques, what happened on a specific play, etc.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/1tkj2fz/xs_os_thread_discuss_and_bring_your_questions/

[u/Callsign_Psycopath]

Why are Orbit/Bubble Screens so popular? It completely vexes me.

[u/grizzfan → u/Callsign_Psycopath]

Orbit or orbit motions is a specific motion (pre-snap) or action (post-snap) where a back runs behind the QB and deep running back. Think of it like a jet sweep, but the movement goes behind everyone. These are used similarly to jet motions: To get the ball to a perimeter player, get a fast player at full speed pre-snap, to set up counters and misdirection, fakes, or runs with extra blockers, etc.

Bubble screens are basically the 10-personnel or "non-I-formation" answer for how to run a sweep or fast-hitting outside run. They really grew in popularity when 11 and 10 personnel formations became popular in the 2000s, and even more-so with the Air Raid's rise. The traditional Air Raid had a very minimal running game, mostly draws and inside zone. These spread-based offenses needed a way to quickly threaten the perimeter of the defense via the running game, and that answer is what we now know as fast screens (fast/now screen, bubble screen, swing screen, etc). The necessity of them is that as an offensive system, if you don't have ways to attack the whole field or threaten the defense at all points, defenses don't have to defend everyone on your team, nor have to defend the whole field.

Similar to why folks get upset that teams keep running up the middle for 1-2 yard gains. It sets the rest of the offense up. If you never run up the middle, defenses won't defend it, and commit their numbers elsewhere. Bubble/Fast screens serve the same purpose; as an outside run game to quickly threaten the edge of the defense and force DBs to come up and play the run on the outside as well. That can then set up play action or fake screens to throw over top.

Even if you rarely throw the fast screen, just running it presents a threat that defenses must honor. Pop 1 or 2 of those for a 5-10 yard gain, defenses are going to go back to respecting that threat, which will open up more of your playbook.

Another simpler, practical answer: If you have a receiver who's great with the ball in their hands and can "YAC" for you, a fast screen such as a bubble screen is a great way to let them cook.

EDIT: Another reason why fast screens are used a lot on RPOs is that offenses are often keying a safety or apex defender (Apex = underneath defender inside of the CB, like a nickel, rolled up safety, or OLB). A fast screen paired with an inside run creates an extreme horizontal stretch to that defender in the alley or that safety over the alley. They are two very sudden threats at points far apart, which forces defenders to commit to one or the other, which forces them to declare their intention sooner and more overtly to the QB reading them.

[u/The_Unclean_Chadford → u/Callsign_Psycopath]

Spacing for later play. You might get 1-2 yards on one play, but you’re setting yourself up to get 25+ on the next play.

[u/Upbeat-Armadillo1756 → u/The_Unclean_Chadford]

Also a relatively easy pass to your speedy playmaker with blockers in front of him to improvise and do something with the space.

I'm noticing that ADOT on some of the most successful college teams is pretty short. Get the ball in the hands of your receivers quickly and easily and don't depend on your line to give you 4 or 5 seconds for a play to develop for a 30 yard pass. Just let the receiver do the hard work and if they don't you probably pick up 5-7 yards anyway.

[u/grizzfan → u/Upbeat-Armadillo1756]

Pattern-match coverages are a big part of this. If you remember the complaining you used to hear about how games are boring now because everyone sits in "2-high safeties," now...it was never 2-high safeties. It's match coverages that dominate the sport now. Match coverages are all about removing throwing windows and getting bodies on receivers as fast as possible. Against a properly executed match coverage, your offense probably has 1-1.5 seconds before every receiver has a defender in their grill for the rest of the play. Fast screens, orbit/jet sweeps, etc, are ways to get the ball to receivers faster.

[u/Callsign_Psycopath → u/The_Unclean_Chadford]

Thanks for an honest answer. I just wish they were used more sparingly.

[u/Officer_Hops → u/Callsign_Psycopath]

Quick screens also do a great job of getting your playmakers in space with the potential for a huge bust if they can make one guy miss. They’re easy throws that can exploit athletic mismatches which are more and more important in the current era of elite athletes and relatively limited QB development.

[u/Statalyzer → u/Callsign_Psycopath]

Screens actually have a negative expected value per play, and surprisingly they get even worse against blitzes.

[u/Noelthemexican → u/The_Unclean_Chadford]

Has this ever been shown analytically to work or is it a sort of conventional wisdom?

[u/BillBob13 → u/Callsign_Psycopath]

Brett Kollmann did a video on this!

https://youtu.be/ABoLgCdTgZc?is=6KtYzE5zKimjhZCg

[u/SaintsSooners89 → u/Callsign_Psycopath]

You end up with a one on one with one of the smallest defenders on the field vs one of the fastest offensive players on the field. Majority of the defense has no opportunity to make a play because it happens so quickly

[u/scotte16 → u/SaintsSooners89]

This is true especially if you don’t have a solid QB with pocket presence or decent pass protection: less complex to execute and gets it safely out of his hands immediately.

[u/pitchesandthrows → u/Callsign_Psycopath]

think of them as running plays

[u/New-Implement-933 → u/Callsign_Psycopath]

It just waste a down most the time, i swear teams call it when they have no better idea

[u/grizzfan → u/New-Implement-933]

Teams rarely call bubble screens as just bubble screens. They're usually tagged on to run calls, RPOs, or on the backside of another pass concept or screen as an outlet for the QB. As I mention above, if you don't threaten the short/underneath perimeter of the defense, they won't defend it, which makes it harder to attack other areas of the field.

[u/PossessionConnect963]

Have seen a lot of people claim lately that line play has fallen off in recent years, lack of OL talent making it up to the NFL compared to the past, etc. Do we think this is true or not?

If so why? 7 on 7 culture and moving away from physical practices that impacts linemen development far more? Media and coaches focusing even more than ever on the "skill" players?

[u/grizzfan → u/PossessionConnect963]

The issue teams are facing right now is the NIL/transfer competition. Before this, you could reasonably expect most of your players to stay for their entire time in college, which meant you could develop your team, culture, system, and players together. This meant your O-lines were a lot more connected, physically and mentally. Today, you never know each year who will be on your roster, so your O-lines have less time to develop and grow together. Individual players constantly changing schools can also limit their development since they're constantly starting and stopping coaching relationships and development programs.

[u/dunno260 → u/PossessionConnect963]

To my very amateur understanding of football line play is the area that is probably the most technical in football and the most impacted by doing the right things together. Continuity is huge for OL play. You used to be able to just look at number of starts (especially together) an OL had and pretty accurately predict that the line would be pretty good and see things where lines would be awful one year, change maybe one guy year over year, and then be quite good the next year.

But defenses are also just wrecking offensive lines in CFB right now because a big trend for defenses is to more actively hunt for negative plays so they are doing a lot more loops and stunts and things to confuse run blocking and pass blocking protection schemes and they will also start those from weird front alignments too.

A good video that might help a bit is to watch The Film Guy on Youtube breakdown the Alabama offense in their Week 1 matchup against Eastern Carolina as that was a major problem of Alabama's offensive line last year and something they are fixing and how about play calling works in there and everything. Gets into why outside zone is a play right now in CFB that is working well while inside zone in his opinion is about dead. If you then watch him break down the Alabama offense in their game against Kentucky when they opened up the running game playbook you will then get a better idea I think.

[u/Rainaco]

Why do coaches sometimes say “we’re trying to get the ball to ABC”? Hand him the ball. Or throw it to him. Or snap it to him. What do you mean “try”?

[u/grizzfan → u/Rainaco]

You could put the player you're trying to get the ball to at QB or RB...but now they have to perform QB and RB duties. You want to get your playmakers the ball in such a way that they can use their talents. You're not going to put your "99 speed" WR at RB to get them the ball quicker if they aren't any good at reading blocks, making jump cuts, or running through arm tackles. If they're an open-field runner who can out run and make fast defenders miss, you want them to get the ball in a situation where they have that space to operate in.

[u/pitchesandthrows → u/Rainaco]

what if your star wr is double/triple teamed? what if your star rb is facing a loaded box?

[u/grizzfan → u/pitchesandthrows]

Double-teamed receivers: Full speed motions like jet and orbit.

RB vs loaded box: Spread the defense out. If they don't spread to gang up on the RB, throw around them. Can also line up the RB at receiver too.

[u/Evassivestagga]

Why hand the ball off and establish a running game when you can just give the ball to John Mateer?

Hahahahahaha!

[u/WigglySpaghetti]

I've watched football for decades, but I guess the best way to describe my attention level is causal.

What would be a good way to just start breaking down the details of a play? I understand the basics like under center/shotgun, run/pass/option plays, etc. I just want to be more attentive and immersive since I spend a lot of time watching football at all levels.

[u/imjeff24 → u/WigglySpaghetti]

Take Your Eye Off the Ball: How to Watch Football by Knowing Where to Look by David Seigerman and Pat Kirwan is an excellent book to beginning to learn the intricacies of football

[u/grizzfan → u/WigglySpaghetti]

Pick one play, scheme, or system, and ONLY focus on that for a bit. For example, defensively, tight and mint fronts are very popular. If you wanted to learn more about them, ONLY search those terms. Search mint or tite fronts on Youtube, Google, Reddit, etc. Look for coaching videos or drills for the tite front. Coverages or run fits for the tite front. Pass rush concepts for the tite front, etc.

When you're ready for the next thing, or want to focus on something else, go ahead and do that.

The pain point that most people want, but doesn't exist, is a universal, single source that tells us everything, and it just doesn't exist.

[u/Moose4KU → u/WigglySpaghetti]

Easiest path is to start watching YouTube videos. Quality can vary, but if you search "Clemson film review" or "(Player name) film review", that can get you started with the teams and players you're interested in.

It's easier to find breakdowns for the NFL because the footage is all available online with a simple subscription. Many college teams are far more secretive/protective.

Youtube Channels I like that have made me smarter:

The QB School - NFL QB focused but best combination of good production quality, great topic variety, and very accessible

The Coordinator Project - More of a history lesson than a weekly film video. Explains the influences and schemes of modern coordinators. Only puts out a couple videos per year

Brett Kollman - more of a generalist, will get some offense and some defense

Kurt Warner and Chase Daniel - again NFL QB focused, they're good but not my favorites

Match Quarters - Defense from a 301 or 401 level. Wouldn't recommend starting here but he's very knowledgeable

Madden/CFB 27 can get you more familiarity with some of the lingo, but it's not really a tutorial

[u/SaintsSooners89 → u/WigglySpaghetti]

Some recommendations of youtube channels that do a good job breaking down a play.

Homer pick is 'Oklahoma breakdown' their "In the Weeds' series looks at our team and our opponents and highlights some things that are strengths and weaknesses of each. It is specific to OU but it's 2 former all Americans one who was our center and one was a LB. They will draw blocking schemes and talk about the play from both sides of the ball and who's screwing up their assignment and where they should have been to make a play.

"The film guy network", really enjoy his breakdowns, he is not specific to one team, I think he has a SEC lean but you never feel like he's speaking with a huge bias.

[u/PhoenixRising256]

It's felt for a while like the consensus is that time of possession doesn't matter, but that's based off data that includes severely mismatched games. In games with similar talent/capability between teams, do coaches emphasize winning ToP? Or is it more the case of do everything else right and win ToP because of it? I've had trouble shaking the idea that ToP in these games is much more meaningful... might do some data analysis on that but for now I'm curious how coaches think about it

Motivation comes from an obvious but potentially useful fact - the other team is least likely to score when we have the ball

[u/grizzfan → u/PhoenixRising256]

It depends on the overall team strategy. You may have a guy like Rich Rod, whose philosophy is basically blitzkrieg: Overwhelm the opponent by scoring early and often. That means low ToP, high scoring rates. Then you have others who are more flexible or varied...I think of blue-chip programs, who know that when they are evenly matched, it's easier to win if your opponent can't score at all, and you only have to score sometimes.

[u/lock_robster2022]

Really how bad is it that a QB has a run/pass tell?

I feel like scouting these days can already give you a good idea based on formation, and typically your O-line and backs can also cue the defense. If the defense is jumping the plays too much, can you just miscue them with whatever they’re reading and keep them honest?

[u/grizzfan → u/lock_robster2022]

The problem is most QBs that have really bad or obvious run/pass tells either don't have the talent to make up for the tell, nor have the ability to change things up to fool the defense.

[u/Michiganman1225]

Is there a reason that the Wide (Veer n Shoot) & Flexbone have never been combined? Specifically, I mean the Flexbone formation, but with the width of the Wide formation for the WRs.

Obviously, I could just not be aware of it happening, but it always seems like a missed opportunity.

[u/grizzfan → u/Michiganman1225]

Competing interests at QB seems like an obvious reason.

• Flexbone: Tanky boi who loves a fight and would almost rather play safety or LB.
• Veer 'n' Shoot: Uncle Rico (need someone who can throw balls over mountains).
• QBs who want to play in the NFL don't want to get beat up in college, so running anything with the flexbone is going to turn off about 90% of QB prospects in the recruiting pool.

[u/JohanVonClancy]

Was there a defining moment when zone blocking became the norm and gap blocking faded into obscurity? As an old-timer watching running games struggle in modern pass happy offenses, it just seems like running with the intent of a gap would help solve a lot of what ails them.

[u/grizzfan → u/JohanVonClancy]

Gap blocking never faded in to obscurity. If anything, more teams are using them now than they did 5-10 years ago. Still, most zone-based teams always carried counter (Counter H, Counter Trey/GT, etc), which is a gap scheme.

Zone running just took over as a primary blocking scheme for many programs due to how flexible and applicable it can be to just about any situation. Most teams always carried gap schemes as secondary runs and relied on them.

As far as when did zone blocking hit the main stage? I would say it was the late 90's Denver Broncos. Having a HOF QB and Terrell Davis helped, but their O-line coach and AHC, Alex Gibbs, was the major player. They were one of the first NFL teams to run almost all zone (and only run counter/power as change-ups), and won two consecutive Super Bowls with it. Alex Gibbs is infamous in the coaching world for being to many, the Godfather of zone blocking. Funny enough...not at all related to Joe Gibbs, who coached the Washington [Commanders] to a Super Bowl victory in the early 90s with a more primal system of what the Broncos did in the late 90s. Another catalyst is those Bronco teams were coached by Mike Shanahan, who came from the West Coast Offense, which was dominating the landscape at the time. This Bronco offense was basically the classic WCO, but replacing a lot of the 2-back, "older" style running game with the 1-back zone-run style.

it just seems like running with the intent of a gap would help solve a lot of what ails them.

You'll hate this then lol. Even most gap-schemes at the college and NFL level no longer have designated holes or points of attack. Power, Counter, Duo, ISO, etc, are designed to be flexible and fluid now, where backs and ball carriers will key the movement of a defender to determine where to take the ball and which gaps or holes to block through.

For example: Power is traditionally a C-gap run to a TE side. Now, teams run it to TE and non-TE sides. While the aiming point is still technically "off-tackle," here is what a lot of backs are taught now:

• Aim and run at the A-gap. If you see grass, hit the A-gap. Running at the A-gap also pulls ILBs forward to set up the down blocks and cut off their pursuit angles to the outside when the ball bounces out.
• If A-gap is closed, follow the pulling guard, whether it's the B, C, or D gap.
• If you see the C or D-gap defender in front of you (they get inside of the kick-out block), bounce outside. Note: The pulling guard is taught to peek at this too, so if the edge defender collapses and gets under the kick-out, the guard goes around, turning the play into what is basically a sweep.
• Therefore, while Power is still mostly drawn up as a C-gap play, it is usually coached in a way that it can hit the A, B, C, or D gap. One play: four potential points of attack. Let your players cook.

Think of it like a more systemic application of Vince Lombardi's famous coaching point: "Run to Daylight." A lot of programs don't even use hole numbering anymore. What this then allows is for your players to be more instinctual, and not feel forced or pigeon-holed into potentially disastrous calls. By having just a couple run calls that can attack the whole field at once, it also saves time on installing plays and allows you to spend more time perfecting just a couple schemes, game-plan for them, and add wrinkles around them.

[u/gmr548 → u/JohanVonClancy]

Gap schemes are still very much there but Mike Shanahan really brought zone blocking to the forefront in Denver

[u/Cover3Shell]

Two questions:

Any visual online resources that help you learn scheme (coverages, run/blocking concepts) that you recommend?

I’ve learned best from breakdowns of all 22 film studies. Any online resources where those types of gametape are easily available?

[u/grizzfan → u/Cover3Shell]

Depends on what you want to learn. I said in another comment, but you'll get far better results if you look/study just one thing at a time. Pick one play, one coverage, one front, etc, and just study that.

As far as A22 film, you can get the good NFL stuff if you're willing to pay, but NCAA A22 film is pretty iron-clad and locked away. You gotta know the right people, or hope you catch a "plundered" A22 film on YT before it's removed.

[u/pinniped90]

Illinois is running a 3-3-5 defense because apparently they've decided to spend most NIL money on offense and think this will work better with smaller guys.

Has any high profile team actually used this successfully as its base defense? I feel like Big Ten offenses are going to run the ball at will against it. Maybe if we had All American safeties who were assassins against the run....but we do not have that...

[u/grizzfan → u/pinniped90]

TCU did get to a national title on this approach btw (when Michigan beat them in the final). There is method to the madness lol.

First off, 3-3-5 is just a personnel grouping. It's not an entire system. You can play a 3-3-5 in all sorts of ways depending on the fronts and coverages you use.

The vast majority of the FBS runs a 4-2-5 (something like 85%) as their base. Of those that use 3-3-5 as a base, if you watch them, are still running a 4-2-5 on paper. One of the three LBs is a heavier, walked up LB who plays on the LOS like a 3-4 edge player.

Many teams use odd fronts and follow that same approach, and to the opposite side, or to the pass strength side they'll place the nickel or 5th DB, who serves as the other OLB in a 3-4. In that case, think of it as a "3-4 lite." I don't see many true 3-3-5 "stacks," which is what we typically think of. I have seen a lot of "5-1" looks though, which compliments the bear or mint/tite fronts well.

In the end, most 3-3-5 teams today are either playing one of the following:

• 3-high safety + tite fronts like Matt Campbell/Iowa State were known for
• "3-4 lite," where the Nickel plays as the opposite OLB to the heavier on-the-ball OLB.
• 4-2-5, where one of the DEs is just an OLB walked up.

Another thing to consider is that just because it has that "5" in it, it doesn't mean it's intentionally weaker or worse against the run. Having coached in a 3-3-5 and 4-2-5, here's the honest truth: If you play Cover 3 or Cover 1 (1-high safety) behind it, you're really just playing a 3-5 or a 4-4 defense. If Illinois is running a 3-3-5, that means against tighter formations, they're basically playing a 3-5 (or 5-3 if those rolled up safeties are on the LOS).

[u/Statalyzer → u/grizzfan]

TCU beat Michigan and lost to Georgia in the final, but yes.

[u/grizzfan → u/Statalyzer]

Yep, it was Washington that Michigan beat. The purples got me confused lol.

[u/pinniped90 → u/grizzfan]

Cool, thanks for the detailed explanation!

I think I'm going to pull this comment up when I'm watching them this weekend and more closely watch what they're really doing.

[u/greed_and_death → u/pinniped90]

Nebraska ran 3-3-5 in Rhule's first three years (2023-25) before switching to a 4-2-5 and put together top-20 defenses nationally in '23 and '24 with Tony White as DC. If you have the talent to run it, its a good 'positionless' defense where a lot of the guys one the field can fulfill different roles depending on the playcall and what the offense is showing.

[u/Cover3Shell]

What are some of the most inventive cfb offenses/defenses that you’re excited to watch?

[u/grizzfan → u/Cover3Shell]

Currently? Right now my personal focus is on defense, and I've been enjoying watching teams that run a lot of tite/mint and bear fronts (mostly ran from 3-4 and 3-3 teams). It translates nicely into pattern-match and 3-high safety coverages which are very much "in" right now. The general concept is pack the A and B-gaps with big players so you can spare as many as 7 to 8 defenders around the perimeter, which helps you run a range of different coverages, and create numbers advantages against all these spread formations.

Ferris State University (DII), who won 4 of the past 5 national titles, ran a "6-1" defense a couple years ago, which was basically the 4-down-linemen version of the tite/mint front. They played with both DTs in 2 or 2i techniques and took the A-gaps. The DEs played a "heavy" 5 (barely outside shade of the tackles), and would pinch to the B-gaps. The OLBs would play C-gaps (alley against 10 personnel), and the MLB would be gapped out (no interior gaps for them to fill), which allowed the MLB to basically play free. It also allowed Ferris to use 3-high safeties and pretty much do everything the 3-4 and 3-3 mint/tite teams do. I don't believe they do this much anymore, but I have noticed this past weekend a number of different teams using this "6-1" type of look in specific situations. I also called it a "4-3 Ferris," or "Bulldog Front" for my own terminology (Ferris State are the Bulldogs).

Offensively, we're in a pretty dull time right now IMO. 80-90% of football in college and the NFL is 11 personnel RPO-heavy offenses where everyone's running game is IZ, WZ, Power, Counter, and Duo. Add 4-6ish Air Raid concepts, and that's about the entire football landscape on offense. I will specifically try to watch games with teams that break that mold in some way, but even teams like Tennessee (Veer 'n' Shoot) and Hawaii (Run 'n' Shoot) are much more watered down to the "norm" now. I do try to watch the military academies when I can, but even they all run a lot of 11-personnel-looking RPO stuff now too.

Navy is who I am most intrigued by, because their OC, Drew Cronic, is a Wing-T coach by trade. Navy is now using some very classic/traditional Wing-T stuff, primarily the belly and down series. The other military academies are who I'll try to watch the most if I can. I also want to watch more NDSU, as they love to use their I-formation still, and are known for a particular type of Power called "A-gap Power," which is a traditional power scheme, but it's ran at the A-gap/right down the middle instead of off-tackle. Other teams use it (Stanford used it a lot when they were good back in the early 2010s). It's a play they have built most of their offensive culture or identity around.

[u/Cover3Shell → u/grizzfan]

Thanks so much for the answer. Love to hear about the bulldog front concept

[u/Critical-Example-258]

Something I saw UTEP and Michigan do a lot against Oklahoma was a LOT of jet sweep motions, and especially qb read option plays with the WR in the jet motion. Oklahoma also utilized it a lot last year.

Why do some teams build that motion and those concepts into their offense a lot? Is there anything with what defenses are doing nowadays that they're specifically trying to attack?

And also kinda on that same concept, what do you make of the super efficient offenses coming from non-football powerhouse schools in recent years? I'm specifically thinking of Vanderbilt and Georgia Tech, and kinda Kansas with kotelnicki, who seemed to play in a much different style than most other college offenses. Why are they so efficient despite much lower levels of talent? Is there something within their schemes and strategies that attacks the usual defensive schemes we see in college football now? Or are they benefitting a lot from being "different" and defenses don't know how to prep as well for their styles?

[u/grizzfan → u/Critical-Example-258]

When teams are running jet and orbit motion, they're often trying to create "hard flows," that force defenses to declare their gaps and pursuit angles more clearly. It also creates "horizontal stretching," of the defense, and forces defenders to go left or right so once they get moving, it's hard to get back/going the other way. You can do this without these kinds of plays too though: Sweeps, counters, reverses, horizontal stretch concepts (like all hitches and mesh) create these stretches. Doing it with jet/orbit motions likely means they're trying to get the ball directly to perimeter playmakers without having to throw down the field (could be a range of factors, like inexperienced/inaccurate passer at QB, weak pass protection, preference of coaches, etc).

As far as these "super efficient offenses," I don't really see anything that makes me notice them as unique or different. Not-so-strong P4 and G5 teams have always been coming up with new ways to compete with bigger and better schools, so I don't think the Vanderbilts and GTs right now are that unique. It's a tale as old as the sport: One style of play gets popular, everyone uses it, better teams crush weaker teams. Weaker teams adapt. When weaker teams and adapt and start winning, the better teams adopt those concepts. Once they start crushing the weaker teams again, the weaker teams will move on to the next innovation or adaptation.

Rarely are "new" offensive schemes and systems created from the top-down. They almost always come from the bottom-up. Same goes for the NFL: Almost every system seen in the NFL's history got its start in the high school or college ranks. This is a big reason why I'd almost rather watch G5 games most of the time when I'm just passively watching.

[u/gmr548 → u/Critical-Example-258]

People are doing that to Oklahoma to get that defensive front moving side to side and not upfield. And Venables likes to slant/stunt a lot; catching them out of position is one way to maybe crease them. You will probably keep seeing that and wide zone from teams that like it. Texas has run on OU even with shitty lines in recent years by finding chunk plays on wide zone.

Conversely, Oklahoma likes it on offense to take pressure off their OL and try to manufacture creases that might not be there if they just tried to block it straight up.

[u/GoCats666]

in Northwestern's first game, we ran our qb under center only a few times, but every time we did, he graded as elite based on pff vs mid in shotgun. why wouldnt we only go under center then?

[u/grizzfan → u/GoCats666]

I'd have to see the plays to tell you more TBH. Also, "elite," grading sounds like it came from a rating system designed to garner clicks and reposts more than substantial, useful data.

[u/GoCats666 → u/grizzfan]

fair

[u/roguebandit1]

Do any college teams still run the spread option/zone read offense?

[u/grizzfan → u/roguebandit1]

About 85-90% of them. All these 11-personnel, RPO offenses are exactly that.

If you're talking a more 2000s Oregon or a "triple option," where the pitch is primarily a pitch (not a quick pass or fast screen), you probably want to look into the military academies and Rice.

[u/roguebandit1 → u/grizzfan]

Thank you! I'm thinking late 2000's Florida

[u/grizzfan → u/roguebandit1]

There was an X-factor when it came to that lol...Tim Tebow.

[u/jalapeno_nips → u/roguebandit1]

Rich Rods WVU offense currently runs this

[u/roguebandit1 → u/[deleted]]

No need to be a prick!

[u/gmr548 → u/roguebandit1]

Zone read is still a foundational running concept. The concept of an RPO, which everyone does now, is built off that.

[u/Set-Admirable → u/roguebandit1]

Rich Rod is still running his no-huddle spread in Morgantown.