In thinking about some of the most successful schools that employ a spread/read option/hurry-up offense, obviously Oregon and Baylor have to be 2 of the most successful of the past 5 years. A major portion of both teams' philosophies during their most successful years was to try to score touchdowns on as many possessions as possible and to maximize their number of possessions. Defensively, those teams have seemed to strive for turnovers, as a means of maximizing possessions.
Butch Jones' overall philosophy as a head coach has seemed to have a few major disconnects/cognitive dissonance from the above (proven-to-be-successful) philosophies.
1. Playing to run out the clock rather than trying to score on every offensive possession is contrary to the above philosophy (the UF game being a tough-to-relive example of this).
2. Playing more of a bend-but-don't break defense, rather than an aggressive defense trying to force mistakes/turnovers is contrary to the above philosophy. I must say that we have done a fair job of playing aggressively at times, particularly on 3rd downs, but obviously the 4th and 14 in Gainesville was a bit of an offender here.............and our overall tackling and angles taken against Arkansas were simply atrocious at times.
3. Running a hurry-up is obviously counter-intuitive to trying to run out the clock, and it is also counter-intuitive to allowing a defense to rest that will soon be playing a "bend-but-don't-break" style of defense. Quick 3-and-outs from a hurry-up offense are extremely devastating to a defense that needs rest.
4. Part of the advantage of a hurry-up offense is that the defense can't substitute......but when we rotate our receivers so much, that goes out the window. (Dissonance)
5. Part of the potential advantage of a hurry-up/no-huddle is that it allows longer pre-snap to read the defensive alignment.......but, we seem to give Dobbs no leeway to adjust based on what he sees. I don't know how much this is a lack of trust in Dobbs vs. simply a failure to recognize a possible advantage of being aligned with 15+ seconds remaining on the play clock, but either way, it is a major disconnect in the overall philosophy.
Overall, it seems that Butch's coaching philosophies are an amalgamation of several different philosophies, are not fully cohesive as a whole, and can be counter-productive to each other in multiple ways. It is not at all obvious that all of the aspects of the overall coaching philosophy are consistently well thought out.
Anyone else have further thoughts? Is Butch truly too hard-headed to not look at some of these philisophical/strategic issues?
Butch Jones' overall philosophy as a head coach has seemed to have a few major disconnects/cognitive dissonance from the above (proven-to-be-successful) philosophies.
1. Playing to run out the clock rather than trying to score on every offensive possession is contrary to the above philosophy (the UF game being a tough-to-relive example of this).
2. Playing more of a bend-but-don't break defense, rather than an aggressive defense trying to force mistakes/turnovers is contrary to the above philosophy. I must say that we have done a fair job of playing aggressively at times, particularly on 3rd downs, but obviously the 4th and 14 in Gainesville was a bit of an offender here.............and our overall tackling and angles taken against Arkansas were simply atrocious at times.
3. Running a hurry-up is obviously counter-intuitive to trying to run out the clock, and it is also counter-intuitive to allowing a defense to rest that will soon be playing a "bend-but-don't-break" style of defense. Quick 3-and-outs from a hurry-up offense are extremely devastating to a defense that needs rest.
4. Part of the advantage of a hurry-up offense is that the defense can't substitute......but when we rotate our receivers so much, that goes out the window. (Dissonance)
5. Part of the potential advantage of a hurry-up/no-huddle is that it allows longer pre-snap to read the defensive alignment.......but, we seem to give Dobbs no leeway to adjust based on what he sees. I don't know how much this is a lack of trust in Dobbs vs. simply a failure to recognize a possible advantage of being aligned with 15+ seconds remaining on the play clock, but either way, it is a major disconnect in the overall philosophy.
Overall, it seems that Butch's coaching philosophies are an amalgamation of several different philosophies, are not fully cohesive as a whole, and can be counter-productive to each other in multiple ways. It is not at all obvious that all of the aspects of the overall coaching philosophy are consistently well thought out.
Anyone else have further thoughts? Is Butch truly too hard-headed to not look at some of these philisophical/strategic issues?
Last edited:
