Two Back Sets - B&B Show

[RiverCityDawg]

HD6 - You mentioned two back sets again on today's show and have been pretty persistent all offseason that you think we will see more of it this season. Just curious as to what gives you that impression?

We didn't run any two back stuff this spring and Penn State didn't run any while Joe was there. I've watched some YouTube clips of Joe and Briener breaking down the offense and they talk about how they only use a few different formations. The "innovative" reputation comes from the pre snap reads and post snap RPO tags with the occasional shift between the RB and QB. Otherwise it seems to be always 3 WR, TE and RB, with the occasional empty backfield or 2 TE depending on the situation. I'm not saying we will NEVER run two back sets, but I would be pretty surprised to see it and shocked if it's run outside of goal line. Would have been a good question to have asked Huff in your interview. I enjoy the show.

 

[HD6]

I could be wrong, but I have to think Moorhead is smart enough to realize Williams and Hill on the field gives you more explosive play possibilities than most of State's wide receivers. I never understood last year why Mullen didn't lean on that over putting the depleted wide receivers on the field. Would much rather see plays and sets designed for those two and Nick Gibson over Reggie Todd, Keith Mixon, and the rest of that group.

 

[aTotal360]

For sure. Our 2nd string RB was/is a much better option than our 5th string WR. You could argue that Kylin was a better option than any of our WRs.

When Dear and Mixon went down, Mullen plugged in our backup WRs into those positions and they were very average. Plus our WRs are pretty slow as a unit.

 

[T-TownDawgg]

I know my thinking is antiquated on this subject, what with everyone outside of GT going to spread offenses, but I'd love to see this happen. With a run oriented offense our personnel is primed for, I for one would love to see some throwback pro-style split and eye formations.

 

[RiverCityDawg]

I could be wrong, but I have to think Moorhead is smart enough to realize Williams and Hill on the field gives you more explosive play possibilities than most of State's wide receivers. I never understood last year why Mullen didn't lean on that over putting the depleted wide receivers on the field. Would much rather see plays and sets designed for those two and Nick Gibson over Reggie Todd, Keith Mixon, and the rest of that group.

Ok, that answers the question - It's just what you would do, so it must be what Joe will do. I actually don't disagree with you, but Joe strikes me as the type of coach that believes in his system and will be focused on running what he does best and what got him here. I can't think of very many guys with the "offensive guru" title that vary from what they have done that made them successful. I would like to see Kylin and Aeris on the field together, I just don't see any evidence to suggest it will happen, much less anything that makes me as confident as you have been about it so far. Was curious as to if you knew something we didn't.

You should make Bob do a little work and get us some intel on whether it's a possibility!

 

[Dawgzilla]

Moorhead ran two back sets at Fordham. I don't know how often he did it, but you can watch the 2015 Fordham @ Army game on Youtube and they definitely ran some 2 back sets. For all I know, that could be the ONLY time he ever did it, since I don't really follow Fordham sports, but they ran it in that game.

Moorhead's offense seems to be a constant work in progress. He originally developed it due to personnel issues at Fordham. He added all new packages based on his personnel at Penn State....and what I really like is that he wouldn't reveal the new packages until the bigger games, like Michigan or OSU. I agree with HD6 that two RB formations seem like a natural for this team, but I don't think we would even get a hint of it until the Florida game, or maybe even not till Auburn.

Bottom line is I trust Moorhead to adjust his offense to his personnel. I think there's a chance we will see some 2QB sets in 2019 or 2020, especially since Mayden is left-handed. But that is obviously just total daydreaming on my part. Got no idea if Moorhead would consider it, or if it would really make sense in his system.

 

[Bulldogg31]

Moorhead's offense is designed to get "speed in space".

I'm betting if he can use a two back set to get Hill the ball with green in front of him he'll use it.

 

[HumpDawgy]

The whole purpose of the "spread" offense is to get more players out on the perimeter and having one running back with the QB being your second run option. If you bring in 2 RBs or an RB and a FB, or you run a two TE set, you are no longer running a "spread" formation. The spread is meant to spread (or space) out the defense. I'm not saying that Moorhead runs a "spread only" offense, but if he puts 2 RBs on the field, it is no longer a spread formation, that's all I'm saying. If having 2 RBs on the field makes us a more potent and successful offense, then I'm all for it. Hell put 3 of them sumbitches out there. That worked for Bellard (at least for a while).

 

[BiscuitEater]

Bottom line is I trust Moorhead to adjust his offense to his personnel. I think there's a chance we will see some 2QB sets in 2019 or 2020, especially since Mayden is left-handed. But that is obviously just total daydreaming on my part. Got no idea if Moorhead would consider it, or if it would really make sense in his system.

Keyton hitting Fitz 'in Space' (or Fitz to Key) may cause more than a couple of DBs to seek cover!

 

[LilSebastian]

The whole purpose of the "spread" offense is to get more players out on the perimeter and having one running back with the QB being your second run option. If you bring in 2 RBs or an RB and a FB, or you run a two TE set, you are no longer running a "spread" formation. The spread is meant to spread (or space) out the defense. I'm not saying that Moorhead runs a "spread only" offense, but if he puts 2 RBs on the field, it is no longer a spread formation, that's all I'm saying. If having 2 RBs on the field makes us a more potent and successful offense, then I'm all for it. Hell put 3 of them sumbitches out there. That worked for Bellard (at least for a while).

OK State is about as “spread” as it gets and they’re swapping out slot receivers for TEs with some regularity. Swapping in TEs might spread the D even more because you’re forcing them to defend a more balanced attack; if you’re running 50% of the time, the D either has to have competent coverage LBs, or they need to bring in DBs. That’s a concession that will give you room in the running game. If they focus on the run too much you’ll be able to throw to TEs all day.

I think coaches never latched on to the two RB sets because Fitz being in there already gives you a second threat. If we had a true APB that could be a threat on the wheel route or be used on HB screens behind blocking WRs, then you might see more two back sets. Right now, Fitz keeps safeties still because they can’t commit against the inside or outside run. Throwing in an extra back wouldn’t give you much more than an extra blocker in the run game, and TEs give you that.

 

[fishwater99]

Moorhead ran two back sets at Fordham. I don't know how often he did it, but you can watch the 2015 Fordham @ Army game on Youtube and they definitely ran some 2 back sets. For all I know, that could be the ONLY time he ever did it, since I don't really follow Fordham sports, but they ran it in that game.

Moorhead's offense seems to be a constant work in progress. He originally developed it due to personnel issues at Fordham. He added all new packages based on his personnel at Penn State....and what I really like is that he wouldn't reveal the new packages until the bigger games, like Michigan or OSU. I agree with HD6 that two RB formations seem like a natural for this team, but I don't think we would even get a hint of it until the Florida game, or maybe even not till Auburn.

Bottom line is I trust Moorhead to adjust his offense to his personnel. I think there's a chance we will see some 2QB sets in 2019 or 2020, especially since Mayden is left-handed. But that is obviously just total daydreaming on my part. Got no idea if Moorhead would consider it, or if it would really make sense in his system.

Something Mullen didn't or couldn't do..

 

[Dawgzilla]

That seems kind of nitpicking as to what you can name your offensive scheme. Who cares, really? If Urban Meyer wants to put two RBs in his backfield, he can call the offense whatever he wants: (Meant to reply to Humpdawgy, if that wasn't obvious)

Ohio State's Two Back Offense

 

[MSUDawgFan86]

For sure. Our 2nd string RB was/is a much better option than our 5th string WR. You could argue that Kylin was a better option than any of our WRs.

When Dear and Mixon went down, Mullen plugged in our backup WRs into those positions and they were very average. Plus our WRs are pretty slow as a unit.

Considering the leading receiver on the team last year only had like 286 yards I think very average was being generous. I know you were probably just being nice.

 

[Dawgzilla]

Yeah, but that was on only 2 catches!

 

[Dawgzilla]

Don't get me started on Mullen's offense. I never liked it, and he wouldn't change it. Look at what Urban is running at OSU these days, and you almost cannot tell that Mullen is using the same base playbook. Some would say that Urban has better athletes, so he can run these different plays, but Mullen wouldn't even add wrinkles against inferior opponents.....other than those trick plays he always tried against bad teams.

I think there is a distinct advantage to having an OC/Head Coach who created his offense.

 

[RiverCityDawg]

Something Mullen didn't or couldn't do..

That's just not true. You can say you didn't like the scheme or thought it should have been done differently or he should have played different players, but if you can't recognize that the 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015 and 2017 offenses were all different based on the personnel at the time, I'm not sure what you were watching. Sure the base concepts were the same, like they would be for all coaches tweaking their scheme, but those offenses were all notably different based on the QB and skill personnel. I'm chalking this up as another case of Mullen bashing gone too far.

 

[HumpDawgy]

That seems kind of nitpicking as to what you can name your offensive scheme. Who cares, really? If Urban Meyer wants to put two RBs in his backfield, he can call the offense whatever he wants: (Meant to reply to Humpdawgy, if that wasn't obvious)

Zilla you can call it whatever you want.

 

[Dawgzilla]

I disagree.....he changed the plays he called, but he didn't change the offense. Yeah, we passed a bit more when Tyler Russell was the QB, and ran a bit more when Relf and Fitz were the QBs, but all of the plays he called were written up in Urban Meyer's 2004 Utah playbook (available online). Mullen rarely innovated in his 9 years at State, and when he did it was typically in games against weaker teams where he didn't really need to do anything unusual.

What we're talking about with Moorhead is making actual changes to the offensive scheme based on the personnel he has available. Granted, he has already experimented with 2 back sets in the past, so I guess those plays are already in the playbook, but he could expand on that or provide other tweaks as necessary.