Story Poster
Baylor Football

New Baylor staff in no hurry to forget old Baylor offense

August 7, 2017
25,427

Matt Rhule has shown he isn't stubborn when it comes to adjusting the way things are done on the field to make sure his team has what it takes to win. That's a fortunate thing for Baylor fans who have been cautious about what exactly the offense will look like in Waco this fall and for the foreseeable future.

Who would want to forget arguably the most innovative offense in the new millennium because of pride or ego? That would be quite the foolish thing to do.

Todd Nickle Zach Smith (2016) was the final quarterback signed by Baylor's previous staff.

Baylor offensive coordinator Glenn Thomas recently "spilled the beans" when it came to Baylor possibly keeping some of the previous offense intact when discussing Baylor sophomore quarterback Zach Smith.

Smith, who spent a spring, summer and fall at Baylor under the previous offensive scheme, has been able to share insights on the of the offense for potential use in the coming years.



“We’ve probably leaned on him a little bit, like, hey, how did you guys do this in the years past?" Thomas said. "Obviously there’s been a lot of success in that way so we’ve leaned on him like, hey, what did you see here? What was your progression? What was the corner — what was the receiver reading here? So we’ve leaned on him in that way."

In college programs around the country, offensive coordinators use the simple understanding of the Art Briles' offense: take what is given. The breakneck pace which Briles' used was unique and the packages with receivers outside the numbers on both sides weren't easy to replicate. But, despite how "simple" those aspects were on paper, actually stopping the offense was a lot tougher.

"First and foremost you’re going to get what the defense takes — what they’re giving you," Thomas said. "That’s what you want to do. I think we’re multiple enough that we can be big if we need to, but we’re athletic enough obviously with the personnel that we have that we can spread people out and create some space."

Outside of Smith, Baylor has the talent on the offensive line receivers as well as the skill position to spread the ball all around the field. That's the personnel that Thomas is referencing, something that other programs don't always have when trying to implement the system.

But it's not just that. It's that same personnel with multiple years of experience in an offensive scheme that was considered the best offense in the country dating back to Robert Griffin III's Heisman winning campaign in 2011.

Why not take advantage of it even if it's only for one or two or three drives per game?

“I think we have the functionality and capability of doing both.
Discussion from...

New Baylor staff in no hurry to forget old Baylor offense

20,762 Views | 50 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by historian
JumboShrimper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Art wasn't a bull****ter. He didn't kiss the brass ring as they say nor was he a politician. Maybe it pissed some of them off. I support Rhule 100% and hope he gets us to where briles was gonna take us.
McCavebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
historian said:

I don't mind if they mix things up a bit. I do look forward to the explosive offense that we've grown accustomed to--because it was so exciting to watch & it was so successful. We should not think of Briles as doing only the up tempo, quick strike attacks. While that certainly was his forte, there were plenty of times in which the offense moved more deliberately--and thus more slowly. This usually happened when we had a sizable lead & CAB was trying to run out the clock. That made perfect sense.

As I see it, one of the big problems with a team that cannot score quickly is that if they are behind by a sizable amount but regain momentum late, they may not be able to capitalize unless they can score quickly. One reason we beat TCU in 2014 is that scoring fast was normal for us. One of the TV announcers even said as much right before one of those 3 TDs. I also recall how often we beat K State, whose offense tended to be slow most of the time, for that very reason: even if they had gained some momentum & made some late scores, it was not enough to take the lead (i.e. 2014 & 2015). They demonstrated in last year's bowl game that they had learned the lesson & could be more flexible by striking fast from the start. No doubt that surprised the Aggies quite a bit!!

Best to be nimble and use whatever method suits the situation. When speed is called for--strike like lightning.

There are times when it is best to run clock and grind it out on the ground--resting the D. We saw U Conn do that to us a few years ago in Waco...


"Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it flows; the soldier works out his victory in relation to the foe whom he is facing."

-- Sun Tzu
The Art of War
McCavebear Lives!
Russell Gym
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All tempos have their uses. If Rhule can get our guys to master them all and deploy them when needed, it will be a huge advantage.
Ghostrider
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MilliVanilli said:

wuzzy bear said:

I don't see how you mix and match a moderate pace with a fast pace. Briles was so successful because he has one speed and he recruited that way. Defenses are not going to be fooled by our fast pace anymore. But if you have the players to do it then by all means do it and do it the whole game. I'm afraid we are about to see a standard set with two RB packages.

What made our O click time after time is that we were so fast their D could not get off the field and we just gassed them. That won't happen now so you have to play almost a pro style game.
Briles also couldn't play ball control in some key games to keep a lead, the Cotton Bowl comes to mind, you have to be able to slow down and grind the clock in some grudge matches, and Briles' teams never could, it was live or die by boat racing.
You pick like 1 game in 8 years. Maybe it wasn't the offensive philosophy but our players did not execute?
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agreed, mostly. The Cotton Bowl loss was not because of the scheme so much as failure to execute. Maybe the coaches let up on the gas a bit, but I think much of it can be laid at stupid mistakes. Another way to look at it: once Sparty regained momentum we could not get it back. One more stop or one more score by the Bears in the 4th quarter would have won us the game. That game, like the Fiesta Bowl, was definitely an exception. There were a few others but not many.

It's a new season with new coaches & a new scheme. I'm pumped with optimism.

Sic 'em Bears!!!
McCavebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
historian said:

Agreed, mostly. The Cotton Bowl loss was not because of the scheme so much as failure to execute. Maybe the coaches let up on the gas a bit, but I think much of it can be laid at stupid mistakes. Another way to look at it: once Sparty regained momentum we could not get it back. One more stop or one more score by the Bears in the 4th quarter would have won us the game. That game, like the Fiesta Bowl, was definitely an exception. There were a few others but not many.

It's a new season with new coaches & a new scheme. I'm pumped with optimism.

Sic 'em Bears!!!
Baylor lost to Sparty because our D couldn't stop them when it needed to stop them. Our D WILL improve .
McCavebear Lives!
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
True. But it would not have mattered much if our offense could have gotten a spark & scored again. Even a FG would have been enough.
wuzzy bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Seriously, the Cotton Bowl? Some of you look to that as Briles fault...wow. If only 1 FG is good in the 4th its over. If Billings and Oak hadn't blocked in the back way away from the play on TY's INT. If only Corey doesn't grab a facemask and hold it for 5 yards on his way to the EZ. I could go on and on but I am tired of typing "If only..."
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And because our offense could not score in the 4th quarter. Like I said, momentum was a key factor. I recently watched a clip from an old game in which the TV announcer quoted CAB as saying momentum was the most important coach & player on the field. Sounds like a Brilesism.
McCavebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wuzzy bear said:

Seriously, the Cotton Bowl? Some of you look to that as Briles fault...wow. If only 1 FG is good in the 4th its over. If Billings and Oak hadn't blocked in the back way away from the play on TY's INT. If only Corey doesn't grab a facemask and hold it for 5 yards on his way to the EZ. I could go on and on but I am tired of typing "If only..."
And, if only our D then could have stopped sparty.
McCavebear Lives!
wuzzy bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thats my point McCave... we didn't need to stop Sparty. Actually, when they blocked the FG I had already thought ahead and said to myself like you see if some games: "Just let him return it cuz we ain't gettin it back." With 1:00 and 3 TO's we'd have found a way to get into FG range for a final shot.

I know that goes against all instincts, but that is what should have happened. Of course, I doubt Callahan could have kicked the side of a barn after being knocked out.
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
historian said:

I don't mind if they mix things up a bit. I do look forward to the explosive offense that we've grown accustomed to--because it was so exciting to watch & it was so successful. We should not think of Briles as doing only the up tempo, quick strike attacks. While that certainly was his forte, there were plenty of times in which the offense moved more deliberately--and thus more slowly. This usually happened when we had a sizable lead & CAB was trying to run out the clock. That made perfect sense.

As I see it, one of the big problems with a team that cannot score quickly is that if they are behind by a sizable amount but regain momentum late, they may not be able to capitalize unless they can score quickly. One reason we beat TCU in 2014 is that scoring fast was normal for us. One of the TV announcers even said as much right before one of those 3 TDs. I also recall how often we beat K State, whose offense tended to be slow most of the time, for that very reason: even if they had gained some momentum & made some late scores, it was not enough to take the lead (i.e. 2014 & 2015). They demonstrated in last year's bowl game that they had learned the lesson & could be more flexible by striking fast from the start. No doubt that surprised the Aggies quite a bit!!
I agree, except that Briles' slow tempo was inconsistent when it counted the most (Ala Cotton Bowl), we have the weapons to be quick strike, but can be even more dangerous if we prove we can control the ball for 40 minutes, basically proving pick your poison, we have a plan to beat you.
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ghostrider said:

MilliVanilli said:

wuzzy bear said:

I don't see how you mix and match a moderate pace with a fast pace. Briles was so successful because he has one speed and he recruited that way. Defenses are not going to be fooled by our fast pace anymore. But if you have the players to do it then by all means do it and do it the whole game. I'm afraid we are about to see a standard set with two RB packages.

What made our O click time after time is that we were so fast their D could not get off the field and we just gassed them. That won't happen now so you have to play almost a pro style game.
Briles also couldn't play ball control in some key games to keep a lead, the Cotton Bowl comes to mind, you have to be able to slow down and grind the clock in some grudge matches, and Briles' teams never could, it was live or die by boat racing.
You pick like 1 game in 8 years. Maybe it wasn't the offensive philosophy but our players did not execute?
The biggest game of his Baylor career and most embarrassing loss is kind of a big deal...loss dropped us out of a top 4 finish, made the committee snub of Baylor from the playoff look justified, and handed TCU the best ranking in the Big 12 on the year.

The fact he didn't have his player's ready to play in the Cotton Bowl (especially after humiliating themselves in the Fiesta Bowl for lack of prep the year before against UCF), speaks volumes about the discipline he had over that team.

Whether it was scheme or attitude, it did Baylor in when it mattered most.

Little KB also called a craptastic fourth quarter.
McCavebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wuzzy bear said:

Thats my point McCave... we didn't need to stop Sparty. Actually, when they blocked the FG I had already thought ahead and said to myself like you see if some games: "Just let him return it cuz we ain't gettin it back." With 1:00 and 3 TO's we'd have found a way to get into FG range for a final shot.

I know that goes against all instincts, but that is what should have happened. Of course, I doubt Callahan could have kicked the side of a barn after being knocked out.

Yes we did need to stop sparty. A good team preserves a 20pt lead-or at least preserves the win after obtaining a 20 point lead. Our D failed that day.
McCavebear Lives!
RegentCoverup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Can't prove this. It was told today that the previous coaching staff left behind materials that someone at Baylor copied and provided to the coaches. Legally, it was created at Baylor so.....

Briles was an innovator and a risk taker. The plays he ran At Stephenville were even wilder and flashier.

Every major HS team in Texas runs some variation of the spread. These guys will innovate or they will get waxed.

David Wetzel alone could write a halfway decent spread playbook.
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
After Saturday, I hope the coaches start going back to the old schemes more. I remember reading repeatedly that they mined Zach's memory about those schemes to incorporate them into the new plays. I'm not sure how much of that we saw against Liberty (at times, it seemed they were using some of it), but we certainly could have used more of that explosive offense. It was so much fun to see the Bears scoring quick & fast, taking a 1-2 score lead during the first quarter & then working to maintain it (& add to it) for the rest of the game. Those days should not become a distant memory.

ODB has a nice article about how Anu played really well despite other problems that were pretty apparent--especially the defense.
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.