Is it Dickey's offense or Ramon Flanigan's?

KingDL1 · October 26, 2005

I find it fascinating that many are pointing their fingers at Ramon Flanigan. I do not know the man nor do I know what his abilities as a OC are. But this is my fifth year of really watching Dickey ball and it sure seems to be what DD wants. Everything I have seen on the field seems to meet with Dickey's approval or he would have changed the OC long ago.

We have been slipping for the last two and half years, how long has it been since we beat even a bad OOC opponent? I know we have been to four straight bowl games, yup, so we have had no real improvement since we beat Cinni. I not pulling some knee-jerk reaction. The way we have been losing lately just adds to my frustration in Dickey, I still think DeLoach had more to do with getting us to those bowl games than Dickey did.

But back to the orginal question everything I have seen points to the Offense as being Dickey's plan and no one elses.

Edited October 26, 2005 by KingDL1

FirefightnRick · October 26, 2005

I asked this very same question to one of our lettermen who I greatly respect and admire for his hard work and accomplishments he gained on the field for the Mean Green and all he's done off of it since. After I asked the question,

He asked: "When was RF made OC?".

I said, " in '02".

He then asked: "And has any of the play calling changed since '01?".

I acknowledge no................thus, end of the lesson.

Rick

Edited October 26, 2005 by FirefightnRick

Monkeypox · October 26, 2005

If there's one difference, it's that we don't run the option as much. I attributed initially to it being removed due to Hall's injury, but it may actually be a Flanigan thing.

We used to run the option a lot more.

eulesseagle · October 26, 2005

DD is ULTIMATELY responsible.........

However:

1. we dont have a line that can pop open the runners.

2. we dont have a line that can pass protect.

3. we dont have a QB that can pass the ball "down field" without it being a jump ball most of the time.

4. we dont have a strong D-Line like we have had in the past.

5. to me, imho, that does not leave many options.

ok, so some of you will say, "more innovative plays."

1. triple option?

2. screen plays?

3. half back passes?

4. run and gun?

5. use no QB but have 4 running backs in the backfield?

ok, this is a time for all you Sunday morning QB's to tell me what sort of offensive plays you would run/gun with the team that we have today!!?? just curious.

Eagle-96 · October 26, 2005

ok, this is a time for all you Sunday morning QB's to tell me what sort of offensive plays you would run/gun with the team that we have today!!?? just curious.
←

First of all, we need to simplify the blocking scheme. We need to use less zone blocking and go with more straight-up man blocking. I am not saying that we should forget about using double teams but we need to get away from the zone scheme. Zone blocking gives more resonsibilities to the O-Line and many more variables as to who your first second and third blocking options are. On any given play, a lineman may be asked to block or help block 3 or 4 defenders depending on how the defense sets up. I think we need to simplify it for the line so they can concentrate on lining up and knocking the snot out of the other team.

The zone scheme also forces the running back to wait on the biggest hole to open up before he makes a decision on where to run. This isn't allowing our backs to use their speed to hit the hole fast. Why do you think we are constantly getting hit 4-5 yards in the backfield. Let the back take the ball and hit the line with a head of steam.

We need to mix in a little mis-direction into the running game. Where are the trap plays? Where are the counter plays? Where are the naked bootlegs. I am tired of 20-base and 38-toss.

DD does not allow audibles. We need to use the simplified audible system the Cowboys use. We need to call 2 plays in the huddle. 1A and 1B. Watch Drew Bledsoe on gameday. The Cowboys call a play in the huddle and they also have a 1B play. You wll see Bledsoe come to the line and look at the defense. If he doesn't like the set-up then he calls the play off with a simple waive of his hands and they go to a base play. It is simple in that it doesn't make Bledsoe think about what new play to run thereby wasting time and the playclock. He simply waives off play number one and moves to number 2. I can't tell you how many times we come to the line with a play and the defense has it pegged. We run the play anyway and lose yardage. Using this simplified version would not force Meager to think too much and allow him to use his athletic abilities while still allowing him to use his judgement.

Edited October 26, 2005 by Eagle-96

DallasGreen · October 26, 2005

Hire Todd Dodge and adopt the SL-C al la TT offense which is exciting to watch and lets you compete with more talented opponnets by quick short passes, wide line splits, and a check off to the run when everyone anticipates the quick throw. Also QB stays in shot gun and has a quick release. Recruits are schooled in the offense from day 1 as redshirts. QB's continually groomed to take over, i.e. Cody Hodges( 5th year senior just now a starter but takes up easily where others before him left off). Dodge would like to stay in the area since his son is only a soph @ SL-C, but would likely consider as he was an assistant earlier under Dennis Parker. He could be hired as OC with the understanding that he would get utmost consideration for HC should DD depart for any reason. Theory is great but DD/ BR would KO the idea in a New York minute. Many OCs in major programs such as Chuck Long @ OU would consider a HC offer for the salary we pay DD. Even take a shot at a young coach such as Major Applewhite as OC with the same deal you offer to Dodge. There are creative things that can be done but the salary increases and buy out clause to reward proving we were the " best of the worst" for 4 years has handcuffed the program unless a private buy out campaign can be mounted.I'll pony up the first 1K to get it started but we need 200 to match it.

I thoroughly agree that this has been a 2 1/2 year demise, but we are now hitting rock bottom with no upturn in sight for the future, waiting longer to make a move only exacerbates an already serious problem. We are an AD away from being below where we were when we rose back to 1-A. Keep the faith? With Dr. Pohl leaving the ONLY faith I have in anyone is RV. In RV we trust!!!!!

Edited October 26, 2005 by DallasGreen

pollock · October 26, 2005

we are now hitting rock bottom with no upturn in sight for the future
←

That's what worries me most. I hope we're wrong.

UNTLifer · October 26, 2005

DD is ULTIMATELY responsible.........
However:
1. we dont have a line that can pop open the runners.
2. we dont have a line that can pass protect.
3. we dont have a QB that can pass the ball "down field" without it being a jump ball most of the time.
4. we dont have a strong D-Line like we have had in the past.
5. to me, imho, that does not leave many options.
←

All of the above are the responsibility of Dickey.

greendog · October 26, 2005

All of the above are the responsibility of Dickey.
←

DD is probably one of the very best coaches available that can be hired for

around $200,000. That is also about what he is worth. Here are my reasons:

1. He may be the nicest most wonderful man in the world but to many of us he

is a p---k. Perhaps he is a private person or introvert, but a head coach

can't be like that.

2. You don't have to have a 140 IQ to coach but you do have to be creative,

likeable and exciting in order to recruit and to motivate. He is not.

3. Most of us on this board give money to the school and attend the games.

The problem I have is that you can run into him and he almost turns away

as if we, the fans and donors, are the enemies.

4. Coaches that believe in their program sell a "dream" to their recruits and

aren't afraid of other schools knowing who they are recruiting. We can't

grow and compete with the big boys with kids that the big schools aren't

interested in. You build a following by getting your fan base excited about

the kids and the kids get excited about a fan base that follows them. This

all equates into winning.

As bad as it is to watch a DD coached team, we don,t really have a choice.

One of these days with a new stadium we will have to belly up to the bar and

go after a big name coach or an exciting assistant who sees being a head coach

as more than X's and O's. That will require quality assistants and a coach who

sees it big. Until then we are only going to compete with Sun Belt schools.

(Hopefully that new coach will be like the TT coach and actually go after QB's

that can throw the ball and lineman that can run 40 yard dashes in less than

6 seconds!)

Got5onIt · October 27, 2005

First of all, we need to simplify the blocking scheme. We need to use less zone blocking and go with more straight-up man blocking. I am not saying that we should forget about using double teams but we need to get away from the zone scheme. Zone blocking gives more resonsibilities to the O-Line and many more variables as to who your first second and third blocking options are. On any given play, a lineman may be asked to block or help block 3 or 4 defenders depending on how the defense sets up. I think we need to simplify it for the line so they can concentrate on lining up and knocking the snot out of the other team.
The zone scheme also forces the running back to wait on the biggest hole to open up before he makes a decision on where to run. This isn't allowing our backs to use their speed to hit the hole fast. Why do you think we are constantly getting hit 4-5 yards in the backfield. Let the back take the ball and hit the line with a head of steam.
←

As a former Offensive Lineman in college and high school I can give a little insight on these blocking schemes:

Zone blocking is the best scheme for quick, smaller lines. Lots of combo blocks & cutoff blocks are used. To run Man-on-Man schemes you have to have strength, power, and size. Also, in Man-on-Man schemes it is VERY VERY important to have offensive tackles that are talented enough to consistantly block smaller & faster defensive ends.

Personally, I loved using the zone blocking scheme. Made my life easier. Just to clear things up, teams don't zone block every single play. Some plays require man-on-man and some do not. But the different schemes are used as base blocking schemes from one team to the next.

It's hard to say which scheme NT should use. IMO, they should stick with Zone blocking primarily due to their OT's. The offensive tackle on one side is way undersized(unless he's been permantly replaced) and the other is average at best. NT's best lineman are both gaurds. Regardless of blocking style, NT won't have success running when the opposing D has ZERO respect for the passing game. I can't stress this enough. The pathetic play at QB is the main cause for the anemic running game.

Edited October 27, 2005 by Got5onIt