In the same way that you can't be a little bit pregnant, many argue that you can't tweak much of the Air Raid without neutering its effectiveness. At the other end of the spectrum, many suggest a lot of tweaks. I think the answer is somewhere in between, and closer to the "don't tweak it much" group. Many of you may disagree, but here are some thoughts about "tweaking" the Air Raid, specific to what would (and probably would not) work in Pullman. The Air Raid is predicated on attacking space. Some of the "tweaks" that various coaches have tried have tried to trade some power for the ability to attack space. Many of those changes have not worked really well.
First, the key to any offense is a good O line. The Air Raid doesn't recruit TE's, because by omitting the TE from the game plan, that allows 5 OL recruits every year. I think you need to take that approach in order to be sure we have enough good OL, so if you are planning to keep the Air Raid, that doesn't mean adding TE's. If you are using a TE, then you pretty much need to recruit one every year. At this point if we are going to keep the Air Raid concept, I think that we are better off not using TE's and improving our odds in terms of OL recruiting.
FB's are another story. Not a lot of teams use a true FB, so good ones are more readily available, and if you just recruited one every other year you would probably be OK. And in goal line or other spots where you might want a TE, the right FB might be able to fill the need. Certainly that has worked at Wazzu before. After spring ball, I had hopes that we would see more of Markoff this season. Unfortunately, he got hurt. FB's are not explosive, but if they catch well and turn upfield quick, then get a yard or two after contact, there is a place on the roster and on the field for a FB, far more often than we ever saw one. I'd add more FB appearances to the Air Raid. Maybe even a FB wildcat, similar to what Hawaii does occasionally in short yardage situations.
There have been times in the past when our #2 RB was more explosive than most of our receivers. I was always surprised that we didn't see more 2 back sets, or times when one of the RB was lined up as an IR. If your personnel supports that choice, why not? That doesn't mean giving up attacks on open space.
CML wanted every OL to be 6'6" and 315 pounds. I'm not sure that would be optimum for an offense that decided to run 20% of the time. Might be more effective 10-15 pounds lighter and a bit more able to run block. That would require changes in the strength & conditioning program, which IMHO are overdue, anyway. We looked weaker the past 2 years. And our endurance was pretty good 2 years ago, but again maybe down a bit this year.
Finally, the QB. I think at this point it is painfully obvious that a mobile QB, who is at least a threat to run if he is left a pile of room, and who can evade a rusher or two is far more effective than a statue. And clearly there was no big pressure from CML for the QB to call run plays. If you either can't or won't run, then you have no effective answer to a rush 3/drop 8 defense if the 3 rushers are able to eventually get any pressure at all.
Long story short, no TE's if we keep the Air Raid in Pullman. The advantages of being able to recruit more OL, as well as the limited explosiveness of most TE's are the main reasons. But adding a regular FB presence and making more frequent use of the RB's on the roster...whether run or pass, and even if they don't line up as a RB...makes sense. Mobility as at least a partial criteria for recruiting QB's makes sense. And some changes in the strength & conditioning group seem important across the board, with some related modifications in our goals for the OL.
First, the key to any offense is a good O line. The Air Raid doesn't recruit TE's, because by omitting the TE from the game plan, that allows 5 OL recruits every year. I think you need to take that approach in order to be sure we have enough good OL, so if you are planning to keep the Air Raid, that doesn't mean adding TE's. If you are using a TE, then you pretty much need to recruit one every year. At this point if we are going to keep the Air Raid concept, I think that we are better off not using TE's and improving our odds in terms of OL recruiting.
FB's are another story. Not a lot of teams use a true FB, so good ones are more readily available, and if you just recruited one every other year you would probably be OK. And in goal line or other spots where you might want a TE, the right FB might be able to fill the need. Certainly that has worked at Wazzu before. After spring ball, I had hopes that we would see more of Markoff this season. Unfortunately, he got hurt. FB's are not explosive, but if they catch well and turn upfield quick, then get a yard or two after contact, there is a place on the roster and on the field for a FB, far more often than we ever saw one. I'd add more FB appearances to the Air Raid. Maybe even a FB wildcat, similar to what Hawaii does occasionally in short yardage situations.
There have been times in the past when our #2 RB was more explosive than most of our receivers. I was always surprised that we didn't see more 2 back sets, or times when one of the RB was lined up as an IR. If your personnel supports that choice, why not? That doesn't mean giving up attacks on open space.
CML wanted every OL to be 6'6" and 315 pounds. I'm not sure that would be optimum for an offense that decided to run 20% of the time. Might be more effective 10-15 pounds lighter and a bit more able to run block. That would require changes in the strength & conditioning program, which IMHO are overdue, anyway. We looked weaker the past 2 years. And our endurance was pretty good 2 years ago, but again maybe down a bit this year.
Finally, the QB. I think at this point it is painfully obvious that a mobile QB, who is at least a threat to run if he is left a pile of room, and who can evade a rusher or two is far more effective than a statue. And clearly there was no big pressure from CML for the QB to call run plays. If you either can't or won't run, then you have no effective answer to a rush 3/drop 8 defense if the 3 rushers are able to eventually get any pressure at all.
Long story short, no TE's if we keep the Air Raid in Pullman. The advantages of being able to recruit more OL, as well as the limited explosiveness of most TE's are the main reasons. But adding a regular FB presence and making more frequent use of the RB's on the roster...whether run or pass, and even if they don't line up as a RB...makes sense. Mobility as at least a partial criteria for recruiting QB's makes sense. And some changes in the strength & conditioning group seem important across the board, with some related modifications in our goals for the OL.
Last edited:
