ran the air raid still, but rushed the ball and used TE at a bit higher rate (like actually -not just talked about it) would you still be in on the air raid? We run about 55% of the time including Mateer scrambles, this team is just over 60% with their qb 25% of carries where Mateer is 40%. So a realistic decent chunk of extra workload to running backs. Mainly shotgun spread, but occasionally utilizes more compact formations near the goal line and is based around a mobile qb and not your old school air raid qb.
Hypothetical OC..
- Thread starter chugspig
- Start date
When you talk about the air raid, it’s not really around any more in its purest form, and most offenses have adopted some air raid concepts. So it’s honestly not worth getting bent out of shape about the air raid. 1. We didn’t run a pure air raid last year. 2. Any OC we bring in will have some air raid concepts.
It’s sort of like fretting about 4-3 vs 3-4. Most DCs run multiple fronts depending on opponent and situation now. Unless you are Alabama or Georgia and have a steady pipeline of NFL caliber interior D Lineman, you’re not going to be in one front 95% of the time.
On the topic, I just want an OC that can make some damn adjustments. Arbuckle clearly couldn’t.
It’s sort of like fretting about 4-3 vs 3-4. Most DCs run multiple fronts depending on opponent and situation now. Unless you are Alabama or Georgia and have a steady pipeline of NFL caliber interior D Lineman, you’re not going to be in one front 95% of the time.
On the topic, I just want an OC that can make some damn adjustments. Arbuckle clearly couldn’t.
Return to the veer.
Let Walden install the rump turn option.
Let Walden install the rump turn option.
I want an older, more experienced OC, not some new young hot shot.
Veteran play-callers are better at adjusting to the flow of the game. Anyone can design an offense but a seasoned one would have way more experience in their "tool box" to go to. They just simply would know more than a 29 year old. AND they wouldn't likely be looking for their next gig.
Parker caught 11...ELEVEN passes this season! Someone with quickness in the open field and with the explosive play-making ability of him should have been given the ball within the passing game more than fcking 11 times.
We also went more than half our games without scoring a touchdown in the third quarter. I blame that on the inexperienced of Arbuckle. That's all I have to say about that
Veteran play-callers are better at adjusting to the flow of the game. Anyone can design an offense but a seasoned one would have way more experience in their "tool box" to go to. They just simply would know more than a 29 year old. AND they wouldn't likely be looking for their next gig.
Parker caught 11...ELEVEN passes this season! Someone with quickness in the open field and with the explosive play-making ability of him should have been given the ball within the passing game more than fcking 11 times.
We also went more than half our games without scoring a touchdown in the third quarter. I blame that on the inexperienced of Arbuckle. That's all I have to say about that
So sounds like most people would be disappointed in a young air raid disciple who’s adapted it to be more multiple. I’m not really sold on the idea. This would be Dickert’s third try. I’d rather have Brian Smith or Stutzman back or something but sounds like it’s probable we’re going air raid. Make sure to watch the conference champ games today outside of the big dogs.
I laughed when Arbuckle got his new job. My assumption is that he will be shown up as a fraud at his new location. But time will tell.
Air raid? In its pure form it is still a good option for a team that has certain limitations. It is never going to win a natty, but it can deliver a minor bowl regularly. With no tight end, scholies can be reserved for 5 OL each year. Three (center and guards) can be slow but have to be the Leach 6'6", 300+ model. Any (literally any) P4 team can build that group, and most G5 could do so. Air raid QB's can be found. Are there limitations to the pure air raid? Sure! But when applied properly it will have some success.
Air raid hybrids? Now you are back to having to have a top 25-30% OC to make it work, and none of them look exactly alike.
Fun debate: is the run & shoot an air raid hybrid? I'd call it visually the closest to the air raid of the hybrids that I've seen. No TE. Lots of quick passes. But the passing routes are fundamentally different...
I loved Observer's rump turn option comment. Walden's veer worked pretty well for us, just like Leach's air raid worked pretty well for us, because the scheme and players were not a commodity. They were sufficiently different to enable us to differentiate ourselves...during recruiting, while scheming and on the field. The triple option is another offense that is differentiatable...but it has to be run properly. Its failure at OSU during the same time period that Walden's veer was relatively effective shows that coaching matters. Air Force has had some good seasons with the option, and Oklahoma won a natty with it (that success being what sent Aikman to UCLA). So it can work.
All the above to say that any system, properly coached, can be effective. At WSU there is definite benefit if it is not the same system that everyone else is running.
Personally, I'm suspecting that someone will resurrect an offense where the QB is under center 75%+ of the time. Using a FB/H back. The FB/H Back will do some of the traditional block and dive, sure, but in my speculative O the FB/H Back will also be a pass catcher over the middle and, coming from the H Back position, a middle screen blocker. Why do I like that? Because so few use a FB anymore, and so good ones are available to recruit. A program that used them would have no trouble getting some good ones. The main reason QB's have moved away from under center is to give them more time to check off receivers. But with a legit fullback threat the DL can't rush the QB full out. Add in a good halfback and some version of a modified I formation or pistol or even (ghost of Walden) veer option could be run. Long story short, any O can work. A differentiable O will be good for WSU. But it has to be a good coach, regardless of system.
Air raid? In its pure form it is still a good option for a team that has certain limitations. It is never going to win a natty, but it can deliver a minor bowl regularly. With no tight end, scholies can be reserved for 5 OL each year. Three (center and guards) can be slow but have to be the Leach 6'6", 300+ model. Any (literally any) P4 team can build that group, and most G5 could do so. Air raid QB's can be found. Are there limitations to the pure air raid? Sure! But when applied properly it will have some success.
Air raid hybrids? Now you are back to having to have a top 25-30% OC to make it work, and none of them look exactly alike.
Fun debate: is the run & shoot an air raid hybrid? I'd call it visually the closest to the air raid of the hybrids that I've seen. No TE. Lots of quick passes. But the passing routes are fundamentally different...
I loved Observer's rump turn option comment. Walden's veer worked pretty well for us, just like Leach's air raid worked pretty well for us, because the scheme and players were not a commodity. They were sufficiently different to enable us to differentiate ourselves...during recruiting, while scheming and on the field. The triple option is another offense that is differentiatable...but it has to be run properly. Its failure at OSU during the same time period that Walden's veer was relatively effective shows that coaching matters. Air Force has had some good seasons with the option, and Oklahoma won a natty with it (that success being what sent Aikman to UCLA). So it can work.
All the above to say that any system, properly coached, can be effective. At WSU there is definite benefit if it is not the same system that everyone else is running.
Personally, I'm suspecting that someone will resurrect an offense where the QB is under center 75%+ of the time. Using a FB/H back. The FB/H Back will do some of the traditional block and dive, sure, but in my speculative O the FB/H Back will also be a pass catcher over the middle and, coming from the H Back position, a middle screen blocker. Why do I like that? Because so few use a FB anymore, and so good ones are available to recruit. A program that used them would have no trouble getting some good ones. The main reason QB's have moved away from under center is to give them more time to check off receivers. But with a legit fullback threat the DL can't rush the QB full out. Add in a good halfback and some version of a modified I formation or pistol or even (ghost of Walden) veer option could be run. Long story short, any O can work. A differentiable O will be good for WSU. But it has to be a good coach, regardless of system.
If you’re gonna be an AR team you have to pay a big time passing qb and a left tackle. If you don’t have the $$$ for that, you either watch those kids leave after 1 good season or you muddy along running a scheme that you never have the talent to really run well.
Got it.
Looking at his resume, hard pass. Calling plays for 2 seasons isnt what WSU needs. They need a ball coach with 35 years under his belt. A been there, done that coach. Someone that recognizes they are getting a big check in a no income tax state and is looking to stick around to stack some chips before retirement. They need a no non sense ball coach. No more fcking dancing around in the locker room like a jackass. More Nick Saban than anything. The truth is not being told to players by coaches at WSU.
Last edited:
I say this without trying to belittle anyone, but if you had the best Oline in the country... the Air Raid would dominate.
I get tired of people bashing the air raid.
Get the right players... you could win with just about any offense.
I get tired of people bashing the air raid.
Get the right players... you could win with just about any offense.
I’m staying indifferent on it. I want to see him call a game live. I’d prefer a different approach. Morris and Arbuckle left bad taste for me, and Leach’s inability to beat drop 8 kind of sums up the systems weakness.
I dont think the system is at fault. I think the play calling is at fault. Dont tell me you’re making the defense defend the entire field when you REFUSE to attack between the tackles. Leach’s ego beat Leach.
So a burned out coach on his way down the coaching profession looking to latch onto a State pension on his way out.
Got it! Thanks!
That's my fear with that resume. Most coaches with that much time behind them are going to be stuck somewhere in that time. I'd be OK with the coach who has 10 or 15 years behind them and sees what the current evolution is. I'd go to one with 20 years if that guy has been an HC somewhere and decided that he didn't want those headaches and would rather be a coordinator.
I'm not really interested in the young, up-and-comer who can't adapt to personnel. It's fine for an OC to have a system he likes...but the OC has to be willing to trash the entire system and do something else if he doesn't have the right players. Gotta start with what you have, and then start finding what you want.
Most coaches with that much time behind them have been able to adapt to changing times to stay in the business. Maybe they’ve moved up and down the assistant - coordinator - head coach ladder, but they’ve always stayed relevant for a reason. The idea that they’re stale and haven’t budged and still have P4/5 jobs? Incorrect.
