Vertical passing game

[JoeKidd]

If our OL is solid, we should wear out teams all day long throwing (IF we rotate in receivers which we won't).

I would argue that our offense looked better later in the year because we were playing much lower quality competition. Go back and watch the Tech game. We were matching them step by step most of the game and were starting to pull away a little until the new "if you get tackled without the ball you will be called for holding" rule the refs implemented for that game only for that one play only.

I REALLY hope our OL is solid this year. If they are, maybe we pull out 4 wins. If not, it's going to be ugly . . . and I expect ugly.

That game still haunts me, it was ours until we got effed...oh how the season could have been different.

[JoeKidd]

Disappointed to see JJ say we're going to go back to more of a vertical passing game. Vertical passing/RNS = 50 yard bombs on 3rd and long/no ball control/wear out our defense/low percentage passes/one running play/"we'd score every play but our receivers and qb's on the different page" offense

Fortunately, we now have basketball!

High tempo offenses (regardless of whether they're vertical or horizontal passing schemes or runs for that matter) due wear out their own defenses simply because they have to also defend more plays....see the Oilers in the early 90's and how many leads they blew. Last year was was our worst defensive year statistically and so I don't think there is much of an argument to be made that the horizontal passing game was better for our defense.

I for one am looking forward to a more vertical game as it is the only way for us to get leads against the better competition early in the year. If you think about all of our big wins in the JJ era, Bowl Games, TCU, etc. they were because we scored on long vertical routes.

[ojaipony]

Disappointed to see JJ say we're going to go back to more of a vertical passing game. Vertical passing/RNS = 50 yard bombs on 3rd and long/no ball control/wear out our defense/low percentage passes/one running play/"we'd score every play but our receivers and qb's on the different page" offense

Fortunately, we now have basketball!

High tempo offenses (regardless of whether they're vertical or horizontal passing schemes or runs for that matter) due wear out their own defenses simply because they have to also defend more plays....see the Oilers in the early 90's and how many leads they blew. Last year was was our worst defensive year statistically and so I don't think there is much of an argument to be made that the horizontal passing game was better for our defense.

I for one am looking forward to a more vertical game as it is the only way for us to get leads against the better competition early in the year. If you think about all of our big wins in the JJ era, Bowl Games, TCU, etc. they were because we scored on long vertical routes.

Agreed. But you also have to have a solid OL and receivers who can get separation. That then opens up the running game as we've all said. There is definitely POTENTIAL this year (IF the OL plays solid, and folks like Thompson and Lancaster can get separation) then we pound it with Pope and Gresham. That will definitely wear out many of these AAC defenses. (I just don't think our OL and receivers will have that ability/skill set against the Wack-Os and aTms and maybe even the top teams in the AAC . .).

[JoeKidd]

O-Line is key and I have confidence in our receivers for me the ? is NB, he's gotta come out like the stud he was touted to be. With some blocking I think we got a fighting chance to have a winning season-not gonna count us out yet.

[PonyKris89]

I'm really excited for the "vertical passing game" to return. If nothing else, it stretches the field for the run. That horizontal game is non-sense. The reason we have to run that type of offense is because we usually don't have the athletes to get open down field with an O-line that gives our QB 2 seconds to throw...With the "best athletes" we've had here at SMU in coach Jones's tenture, I'd say that throwing deep to those guys is going to be a big reason why our running backs could have a huge year. (ypc average)

I Agree

[couch 'em]

I'm really excited for the "vertical passing game" to return. If nothing else, it stretches the field for the run. That horizontal game is non-sense. The reason we have to run that type of offense is because we usually don't have the athletes to get open down field with an O-line that gives our QB 2 seconds to throw...With the "best athletes" we've had here at SMU in coach Jones's tenture, I'd say that throwing deep to those guys is going to be a big reason why our running backs could have a huge year. (ypc average)

ridiculous post. There are successful teams at all levels who run a horizontal paying game including the teams that beat all the run n shoot passing records in the ncaa. It may not be the best for us but to call the entire offensive philosophy "non-sense" is either crazy ignorance or June propaganda

[Grant Carter]

I'm really excited for the "vertical passing game" to return. If nothing else, it stretches the field for the run. That horizontal game is non-sense. The reason we have to run that type of offense is because we usually don't have the athletes to get open down field with an O-line that gives our QB 2 seconds to throw...With the "best athletes" we've had here at SMU in coach Jones's tenture, I'd say that throwing deep to those guys is going to be a big reason why our running backs could have a huge year. (ypc average)

ridiculous post. There are successful teams at all levels who run a horizontal paying game including the teams that beat all the run n shoot passing records in the ncaa. It may not be the best for us but to call the entire offensive philosophy "non-sense" is either crazy ignorance or June propaganda

How do you know he did not mean nonsense for us rather than saying the entire philosophy is nonsense? Seemed like his post could have been read either way to me.

[couch 'em]

I'm really excited for the "vertical passing game" to return. If nothing else, it stretches the field for the run. That horizontal game is non-sense. The reason we have to run that type of offense is because we usually don't have the athletes to get open down field with an O-line that gives our QB 2 seconds to throw...With the "best athletes" we've had here at SMU in coach Jones's tenture, I'd say that throwing deep to those guys is going to be a big reason why our running backs could have a huge year. (ypc average)

ridiculous post. There are successful teams at all levels who run a horizontal paying game including the teams that beat all the run n shoot passing records in the ncaa. It may not be the best for us but to call the entire offensive philosophy "non-sense" is either crazy ignorance or June propaganda

How do you know he did not mean nonsense for us rather than saying the entire philosophy is nonsense? Seemed like his post could have been read either way to me.

could be. If so I retract my statement. I read it as the only reason to run it is if we don't have the athletes for vertical.

[Smu_rise]

I'm really excited for the "vertical passing game" to return. If nothing else, it stretches the field for the run. That horizontal game is non-sense. The reason we have to run that type of offense is because we usually don't have the athletes to get open down field with an O-line that gives our QB 2 seconds to throw...With the "best athletes" we've had here at SMU in coach Jones's tenture, I'd say that throwing deep to those guys is going to be a big reason why our running backs could have a huge year. (ypc average)

ridiculous post. There are successful teams at all levels who run a horizontal paying game including the teams that beat all the run n shoot passing records in the ncaa. It may not be the best for us but to call the entire offensive philosophy "non-sense" is either crazy ignorance or June propaganda

I can agree with that. I was refering to Smu specifically in this case. Obviously if we don't have a deep threat (which in my opinion we do), we're not going to be able to go over the top often, but even completing 2 for 5 stretches the field. Zach Line never did anything fancy, yet because of those seam routes and post to post corners and ocasionally running 3 verticals with a bubble or drag route...that allowed him to have a great ypc average. Not saying that's the only reason he succeeded, but definitely a contributing factor. Which in turn allowed for us to throw those 12 yard outs and 7 yard curls consistently. In most cases, safties will play 1 or 2 yards deeper and the linebackers would cheat in 1 or 2 steps (actually in the box). For example, when someone plays cover 2, the corners are responsible for the flats, so they will start to cheat up, anticipating the run. The safties will back off to cover the "deep ball". It just opens up the field so much more. Coach Jones's philosophy of "moving the chains" has worked for him and that may be what it's all about. But, my point is that I would rather have a lower completion percentage and more touchdowns (which is what the "vertical passing game" does for us IN MY OPINION, given our talent).

[jimhagle]

It may keep some of our guys from getting killed on quick slants so much if the Dbacks are playing farther off of them.

[Alaric]

It's back! Really miss Hal Mumme's quick dinks and dunks. For all you people who just remember the Hawaii Bolw success, this is a reminder of what the RNS looks like against great comp

[Charleston Pony]

Burcham actually tried to throw it downfield early, but with less than 2 seconds to unload, it was pretty much throwing the ball up into double coverage at times

[Alaric]

Burcham actually tried to throw it downfield early, but with less than 2 seconds to unload, it was pretty much throwing the ball up into double coverage at times

Yep - that's a glaring weakness when you're us and reliant upon the "vertical" game to open things up

[LakeHighlandsPony]

Lack of a running game screwed us again. 3 and outs means defense is on the field the whole game.

[Rebel10]

WR's dropped some passes as well.