Slow week.... Thoughts on BF's comments on the 12 offensive set?

[paladinhawk]

I thought this was the most interesting part of Brian's press conference last week:

Q. Your 12 personnel was your most productive grouping last year. How much of that is because you have two tight ends who produced at a high, high level last year, and what is -- I assume because it's a neutral formation that people can't automatically expect run-pass; how good can it be and also the tight ends?

BRIAN FERENTZ: Sure, I'm only kidding you. 12 personnel is a very unique set from this standpoint offensively. Regardless of personnel, 12 personnel can play as 11 personnel, it can play as 21 personnel. In some ways, it can play as other things. You could be empty, you can be in a split gun. You can do all kinds of things from one personnel grouping. So I think when you look at it, if you talked to Phil, he would probably tell you the same thing. What you have to do defensively is immediately kind of identify who the people are, who the players are, because if Noah Fant is the second tight end, you probably need to be aware of that, and you may want to play it more like you would play a three-receiver set.

Regardless of how we may line up, you probably don't want to get too crazy in some of the coverage things, put guys in bad spots.

If we have two bigger tight ends in there, you're probably going to treat it a little differently. I always think the key is this, and I've been around guys in the National Football League that would not block, that refuse to block, and it always seemed like such a silly thing to me because it really limits your production as a tight end.

If Noah Fant can go in there and be an in-line guy and be a serious blocker where they have to respect closing down both C-gaps or putting him in a wing or bringing him out of the backfield, then it's going to limit what they can do defensively, and certainly it's going to make for more opportunity for him.

It's one of those personnel groupings where if you have the right pieces, boy, you'd like to spend some time in it because it puts a little more pressure on the defense. You can be slotted, you can be pro, you can be three open, you can do a lot of things that are kind of challenging for them.

The flipside of that, the last part of that equation is how much can you realistically expect your personnel to be able to handle within all those things, because we can go in a room and we can all draw a bunch of stuff up and it looks great, but it goes back to what we were talking about earlier: Game day, here's me, here's all the coaches, here's everybody else. There are the 11 guys that have to do it, and if they don't understand it and they don't know it, then it's not going to matter how great the system or the scheme is. I've seen a lot of really bad calls look really good because guys were executing and understood what to do, and I've seen a lot of great calls look terrible because the only guy that understood it was the guy that called it. That's not going to work.

......


I hope the receivers have great success early in the season, but I also want to see a lot of plays with two, and even three tight ends on the field together.

 

[hexumhawk]

He is right.

Its a very hard set to defend because of the fact that both TE's can beat you vertically and in space and ALSO block. So as a defensive coach, you have to choose, do I give up some size to try and stop the pass or bring in LBs to stop the run but are more vulnerable in the pass.

I think you will see it a lot this year but in more mixed variations. Of course our offense will make them stop the run first. If we are popping 7-8 yards a clip on the outside...goodnight.

 

[hexumhawk]

Also...

forgot to add that our backup TEs are going to be really good as well. Beyer and Cook look to have similar skill set. Weiting and Vejoda can contribute and Coons looks to be legit as a Frosh.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

One of the interesting "wrinkles" that the offensive staff implemented last year was also using the TE like an H-back (essentially like what Northwestern refers to as a "superback"). That's immediately how you can go from 12 personnel to 21 personnel ... from "twins" to using an offset power-I formation. As Brian said ... you can then split the TE out (say in the slot) ... and then you're working with 11 personnel (3-wides). However, as Brian points out ... a significant key to everything is the ability of the TE to block. Suppose the QB recognizes a look by the D (say a blitz) ... the QB then can check the play to have the TEs stay back in max-pro ... then all of a sudden, the D is bringing heat but still may have trouble getting pressure on the QB ... that then puts a lot more pressure on the DBs to cover (because usually at least 1 will be in man-coverage).

The significance of the above is that defenses often make decisions based on the personnel they see on the field. The offense's choice of personnel typically dictates which formations they execute out of ... and what plays they call. When you have a single personnel group that can be used in so many different formations ... it tips your hand less to the D. It is what Greg Davis would refer to as being more "multiple" on O.

Suppose that Beyer or Cook enter the picture ... and they prove that they can both run and block. That then could allow for even more personnel games to be played. Suppose the Hawks go with 13 personnel ... typically viewed by opposing Ds as "jumbo" personnel. It's typically perceived as a run-heavy personnel group. With guys like Fant and Beyer ... who can reputedly run ... they'd tear up run-oriented defensive personnel trying to cover them. If 2 guys can split wide (and be effective) ... that means that the guys comprising 13 personnel COULD also be used to implement 11 personnel. That's going from run-heavy look to more of a pass-heavy look. To make matters more interesting, Brian can also break tendency ... and call pass-plays out of 13 personnel and call run-plays out of 11 personnel (without changing who is on the field). This obviously gives defenses a lot more to think about.

To make things even more interesting, when you break down film ... you get to see how opposing Ds utilize their personnel in coverage. Suppose that you discern that a slow ILB is always responsible for picking up the FB ... maybe that is what they always do in coverage. All of a sudden, it makes a lot of sense to line up Noah Fant as the H-back ... because the opposing D is most likely going to cover him with somebody who's not up to the challenge. Similarly, suppose that an opposing Ds base set is more akin to a nickel-D (4-2 front). Then maybe a small DB gets caught defending the slot. In that scenario ... a bigger TE who really knows how to use body to shield defenders ... that can lead to valuable 3rd down receptions. Thus, the idea then is to not only teach the TEs all of the responsibilities of guys in the different personnel-groups (and there is a concern that you're overwhelming the player with an information overload) ... but you also ideally would like for EACH of the TEs to be pretty interchangeable at each of the spots ... that way you can exploit all the mismatches that you can find against the opposing D.

Lastly, a parting thought .... Iowa already likes to run out of 11 personnel. Suppose we have 2 or 3 TEs on the field but they're executing 11 personnel. Furthermore, imagine that the TEs have also developed as blockers to the point where they're capable of blocking at a pretty elite level. All of a sudden, the 11 personnel becomes an even more devastating set to run out of ... because then you even have elite blocking on the edges!

 

[bumpstock]

Maybe BF is saying that communication is the key to executing either a play called from the sidelines; or an audible.

QB and TEs:usually on the same page;
QB and WRs: not so much.

QBs/WRs should (1) watch film together; (2) stop the film, and breakdown/diagnose/debate/discuss what they saw; and (3) come to a consensus. Maybe, do the same with the play book.

Plenty of free time between now and August to communicate face-to-face (turn the phones off) ~ who wants it, and how bad do you want to win.

 

[The Sleeping Dog]

Good thinking bumpstock. Stanley ought to be sending film study invites to the receivers and reserve QBs. He should make a note of who comes and who doesn't. The guys that really want it would attend.

 

[Crazy Hawk]

I said it in another thread but it is worth repeating here. With the talent that Iowa has in Stanley and the tight ends...paired with the OL that has some nice potential....Iowa could really punish teams that have spent the last 10 years recruiting a defensive front seven geared towards stopping "basketball on turf" instead of a "street fight" offense.