"We’re going to still have our traditional offense," Neuheisel said. "We’re devoting our time to learn what we’re trying to do new and then see what makes sense for our first game."
almost 2 years ago
Nestor
12 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
there were people on these very BN interwebs who also wondered whether the pistol was going to be the base set, after attending practice and seeing it being run exclusively
by britishbruin on Aug 20, 2010 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions
That may be true
but I think the consensus among the frontpagers was that it was going to be run in conjunction with our traditional offense.
Still
While I was thinking all along that the revolver was just a wrinkle put in as a formation, I thought it was odd that the media guide’s depth chart lists only an “F” position and not a “FB” position, and that the two true fullbacks we have, Allmond and Umodu, were listed as the bottom two on the “F” position, but nowhere else.
Couple that with Allmond’s move to the DL— although it has been said it might be only a temporary move — and I think there is enough for me to raise some questions. And this quote that appeared in a thread earlier this week:
“My first thought was, ‘Where am I going to go?’” Allmond said. “They moved me to F-back, then running back, then tight end. My mind is in different places. But I will do whatever I have to do to get on the field.”
I think if people are confused, there are enough varying signals floating out there that can allow for this.
But hey, I don’t always catch everything, so maybe I’m missing something. Certain lt wouldn’t be the first time.
And, for the record, while I am happy for Allmond to move wherever he will play more, I was really looking forward to seeing him at fullback. All the reports I had read was that he could be a heck of a blocking back.
meant to include...
that I’m cool with whatever Chow and Neuheisel roll out there. Just strikes me as odd that our #1 fullback, or at least #2 of 2, was moved to the other side of the ball.
Wait a minute
So you’re telling me we’re not scrapping our old offense altogether? Why didn’t anyone ever say this before?
For some reason I just dont believe it
IMHO I think its just talk as a ploy to keep K State off balance. Mainly because as far as I have noticed, the pistol is the only set I have seen them practice since the Spring. Now I havent been to every practice, so if anyone else has seen them run a QB under center outside of a goaline set please correct me. Also its not like our offense was so efficient last season that it didnt need to be worked on at all. Maybe Im wrong, but I dont think its out of line to mention.
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
If we really want to keep K State off balance, we should practice serpentining out of the huddle.
I can’t find any video of that, but I can tell you it looks very cool in my memory banks.
Raw unsubstantiated guess-work
This is just my unsourced opinion (my opinion is humbler than yours, believe me) premised on just what I think, but I think you right about saying things to keep KSU off balance. Talking about an offense a team will rarely run makes opposing defensive coaches spend time preparing for what turn out to be less consequential things. And CRN has done this sort of thing in the past, chatting up something that by gameday is not a factor. Nothing wrong with it.
by peggysue69 on Aug 21, 2010 9:06 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
